TNAG-0151-FCO40-187-Exports-of-cotton-textiles-to-Canada-1969 — Page 105

CONFIDENTIAL

2

(D) THE JAPANESE WERE NOT LARGE SUPPLIERS BUT AS PART OF THE

PACKAGE ON TRADE STILL UNDER DISCUSSION WITH JAPAN IT APPEARED THAT

RESTRAINTS ON POLYESTER/POLYNOSIC SHIRTS WERE BEING SOUGHT. (IT

ALSO APPEARED THAT SOME INCREASE IN THE LEVEL FOR JAPAN MIGHT BE

CONCEDED PARTLY BECAUSE IMPORTS FROM JAPAN WERE SMALL AND PARTLY

BECAUSE JAPAN WAS IMPORTANT TO CANADA: AS PART OF THE PACKAGE THE

JAPANESE HAD BEEN OFFERED THE REMOVAL OF THE QUOTA ON COTTON CLOTH). (E) COMING BACK TO HONG KONG, THE FINANCE OFFICIALS UTTERED A MIXTURE OF HOPES, THREATS AND CARROTS. THE THREATS WERE THAT, POLITICALLY, ACTION HAD TO BE TAKEN: MR BENSON (MINISTER OF FINANCE) WAS QUOTE NOT OPPOSED TO ACTION AGAINST HONG KONG UNQUOTE. (I MIGHT

NOTE THAT THIS ON EXAMINATION DID NOT APPEAR TO MEAN MUCH MORE THAN

THAT MR. BENSON HAD NOT SHRUNK FROM THE IDEA.) SOME WAY OF TAKING

ACTION COULD BE FOUND. ARTICLE XIX OF THE G.A.T.T. WAS ONE POSSIB- ILITY (GREY HAS BEEN TOYING WITH THE IDEA OF THE DISCRIMINATORY

USE OF THIS ARTICLE FOR SOME TIME. THE HOPES WERE THAT HONG KONG

WOULD SEE THE CANADIAN PROBLEM AND MOVE QUIETLY TO MEET IT FOR THIS WAS NO TIME, INTERNATIONALLY, TO HAVE A ROW ON SYNTHETIC TEXTILES. IT WAS IN THE COMMON INTEREST TO FIND AN AMICAELE SOLUTION. THE

CARROTS WERE THAT THERE MIGHT BE SOME SCOPE, NOT MUCH, FOR SOMETHING ON POLYESTER/POLYNOSIC SHIRTS AND THE REMOVAL OF RESTRAINT ON COTTON

CLOTH WHICH, INTERNATIONALLY, WAS THE KEY QUOTA.

(F) ALL OF THIS WAS MIXED WITH STATEMENTS ABOUT THE PREDICAMENT OF

THE CANADIAN SHIRT INDUSTRY, THAT A SHIRT WAS A SHIRT ESPECIALLY IF

IT WERE PERMA PRESS.

3. I NEED NOT TELL YOU ALL THAT I SAID BUT MY POSE WAS A MIXTURE

OF RELAXATION IN THE FACE OF THREATS AND BLANDISHMENTS AND OF

CONCERN TO REASSURE THE SERIOUSNESS OF THE CANADIAN PROELEM. MY

POINTS INCLUDED THESE:-

(A) IF DRASTIC ACTION HAD BEEN TAKEN TO REDUCE IMPORTS FROM KOREA

ETC., WAS THE PROBLEM OF HONG KONG IMPORTS SO SERIOUS AS ALLEGED? (B) NO MENTION HAD BEEN MADE OF PROVIDING FOR CUTSTANDING CONTRACTS.

/ FREEING

CONFIDENTIAL

Page 105Page 106