Hong Kong and the E.E.C.
Note of a Meeting: 25th June
R/E
Mr. Dunnett (CRE 1), Mr. Ingram (CRE 3) and I saw Mr. Jordan (Hong Kong Govt.) and Mr. Sellers (Hong Kong Govt.in London) on 25th June for a brief discussion about the conversations which took place recently in Hong Kong with Mr. Ernst of the E.E.C. Commission.
2.
3.
The following points arose:-
a) Mr. Ernst's point of view does not represent that of the Community or even of the Commission. He seems in his Hong Kong talks to have been speaking simply for himself.
b) Mr. Dunnett pointed out that the adoption by the E.E.C. of a "Common Commercial Policy" might mean that restrictions imposed by one member could be adopted by all members. This could be damaging to Hong Kong - e.g. if all Six adopted the discriminatory restrictions on Hong Kong textiles at present imposed by France alone: (the Germans have now formally notified their intention of abandoning the informal restraint arrangement with Hong Kong, and though Italy does not import Hong Kong textiles, this is more likely to be a result of the structure of the Italians buying industry than of any restraints on imports). The spread of individual quantita- tive restrictions to all Six would have less effect on the U.K., since only a few minor restrictions are imposed by France on the U.K., but it would be a pity if each member of the Six had to adopt all the non-tariff barriers affecting imports imposed by each of the others: İxþin¤μkax in principle, thus, the U.K. faced a similar problem to Hong Kong's and we could usefully pool our experience in handling it.
Mr. Ingram said that, as far as quantitative restric- tions (the most obvious area for a Common Commercial Policy) were concerned it seemed unlikely that there would be any harmonisation in the near future. The Germans had said that they were not prepared to accept community quotas for imports from Eastern Europe, and the Italians had refused to accept the Commission's recommendation for restrictions on ceramics.
c) Mr. Ernst had talked in Hong Kong about the possibility of Hong Kong accepting a "more flexible" interpretation of Article XIX. Hong Kong had properly expressed an unfavourable reaction, arguing that Article XIX was not relevant.
d) Mr. Dunnett asked whether Hong Kong had obtained compen- sation from Australia for any of the Article XIX restrictions imposed on various occasions by the latter. Mr. Jordan said that he did not know (this not being his territory), although he thought there was one occasion on which they had missed the boat by not asking in time. A copy of the latest Australian notification (L/3217) was handed to Mr. Sellers.
e) In answer to a question, Mr. Jordan said that Hong Kong's developing industries, as well as textiles, included toys, electrical and electronics, and human hair wigs.
It was agreed in general that the informal exchange of views between Hong Kong and a member of the E.E.C. Commission had been useful; Hong Kong was sometimes in a position to make valuable points about GATT and commercial policy more forcibly than the U.K. could do.
(Miss J.E. Elliott)
CRE 1
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.