10
and the USA are expected to do the same. Most other donors will follow
them and there is no reason why we should not, now that the ELC
have made the first move. Our imports of cligible goods, about £13 m.,
are not very large but include some products, especially chemicals
of concern to British producers.
Other UNCTAD Members
21.
Economically Israel falls into the same category as, say, Spain
Cunill have hoy this and Portugal. She is excluded by both the ERC and USA and, on burden-
sharing grounds, it would be difficult to justify granting preferences
to the (210 million) eligible goods we import. Israel should therefore
receive the same treatment as the four OECD developing members, and
on the same grounds.
22. Cuba and Mongolia are in a different category. Although both
Soviet bloc countries they are certainly among the poorer members of
UNCTAD. From Cuba some £250,000 of goods would be eligible, which
does not impinge much on the aim of burden-sharing. Commercial
relations with Cuba are quite good and there may be some advantage
in granting this further concession, when the EEC and the USA will
not. Either way, the inclusion of Cuba does not make much difference.
Our imports from longolia are nil, and their inclusion matters even less.
In their case there is unlikely to be any advantage in includin them,
but as in the case of Cuba, there is no reason why we should match
the EBC position to the extent of excluding them.
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.