TNAG-0149-FCO40-185-Cotton-textiles-to-France-1969 — Page 147

CONFIDENTIAL

a little displeased with both HMG and Hong Kong were we to do so. On

the other hand, we could hardly accept that a discussion of French import

restrictions should take place in the GATT without any reference being made

to these extremely restrictive and discriminatory restrictions on Hong Kong.

The fact is that we are now in a situation where the French are restricting

their imports from Hong Kong more severely than those from any other

country in the world, whether these be developed or developing countries

and this does not exclude Japan, the Soviet bloc or mainland China.

5. There is also the question of whether the omission from the French

submission of any reference to their quotas on Hong Kong should be raised

separately with the French delegation so that they could be given the

opportunity to circulate a supplementary or revised paper to draw attention

to them. This might also annoy the French to some extent but certainly

not as much as raising the issue out of the blue during the course of a

GATT meeting. If, however, the French delegation are to be approached

6.

in this sense I do not think that the approach should be delayed too long.

A further question of timing also arises in that it would be

preferable not to confront the French on this issue in a multilateral

forum such as the GATT until

(a) bilateral talks on the 1969 quota levels for Hong Kong, if there

are to be talks, have been held (which will give the French the

opportunity to relax their restrictions at that stage) and also

(b) until we have exhausted all our efforts in trying to persuade the

EBC not to exclude Hong Kong completely from any preferences they

may establish in favour of developing countries.

1

when.

On the other hand, we cannot avoid the decision on what to do if there is

any early GATT meeting in which French restrictions are to be discussed.

7. Frankly, I find it difficult to recommend what to do in this instance.

It would, in my view, be better if the question were to come up first in

the Industrial Products Committee or under any procedure arising out of

further consideration of the New Zealand proposals rather than in the

Residual Restrictions Group of the CTD. This is partly because Hong Kong

CONFIDENTIAL

/has