17.
The suggestion is made that the British burden of low-cost imports of cotton textiles has been brought about by the unreasonable use of the CTA by ther importing countries. In Hong Kong's experience only a small number of countries could be said to have used the LTA in a very protectionist way (real protectionists (e.g. Australia) use other means) and only the U.S.A. could be said to have unmued the LTA to impose an Article 4 agreement for which there was no real case.
18.
The real reason for Britian having this "Burden" is the existence of Commonwealth Preference
Badm
and I commonwealth having links. Hong Kong, India and Pakistan are the biggest suppliers and were established in the Biritish market long before any comprehensive agreements were made under Act. 4 of
the CTA.
19.
from
There is, we believe, no substance in the zlaim that unreasonable use of the LTA of others has defected have firm them to Britain on that Hong Kong's limited non-cotton restraints have so deflected
have either.
20.
We feel that the paper exaggerates the extent of effect of protectionist attitudes. We
do not for instance feel that the EEC as a whole is strongly protectionist. We have noted how until kkm Mr. Stans started his rounds successive American administrations have opposed quota legislation. But we do believe that none of the trading partners is likely to propose in support the abandonment of the ITA or even to commit itself to the future abandonment of the arrangement.
21.
The rest of the developing countries will surely see that there is little hope of the LTA being abandoned because if it was that will be sure that the developed countries would not in practice permit them the access to markets that this and
theorethically open them. Is not the most realistic
policy therefore to go along with an extension of the LEA but supporting proposals if its improvement?
And to keep quiet about non-cotton textiles because any mention of them, and if the unrealistic
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.