TNAG-0304-FCO40-340-Effects-of-tariffs-on-imports-of-cotton-textiles-to-UK-from--1971 — Page 117

Mr Hale (Commodities)

COTTON TEXTILES: HONG KONG

1.

-

149)

Thank you for your minutes of 13 and 14 December. I managed to have a quick word with Mr Wilford about this before lunch. I have also spoken to Sir Leslie Monson. I think that as we have just agreed on the telephone what we should aim at now is a submission to Mr Royle through Mr Keeble and Sir Leslie Konson and copied to the Private Office, Lord Lothian, Mr Bottomley, Mr Wilford and myself. The submission would cover a reply to Sir John Eden's letter to Mr Royle of 10 December in support of the case for doing something for Hong Kong. It would have attached copies of Mr Ham's letter to Sir Leslie Monson of 9 December (with a copy of the statement issued by the Chairman of the Hong Kong General Chamber of Commerce) and of the telegram sent by the varicas Hong Kong associations to the "Linister of Trade and Industry".

2. The draft reply to Sir John Eden would be based on the draft attached to your minute to me of 13 December. Paragraph 2 might run as follows -

"You will have seen the views of the Governor that the loss and resentment in the Colony could be rectified to some extent if concessions were made in the next round of talks alon the lines suggested by the Hong Kong delegation last week. I know that you think it is unlikely to be practicaole for us to make concessions to one major supplier without makin corresponding concessions to other major suppliers. It is a fact however that HG have as much responsibility for Hong Kong as for Lancashire and it would be most difficult for us to accept that nothing could be done by way of transitional arrangements to help Hong Kong simply because corresponding concessions would have to be made to other major suppliers.

Paragraph 3 might be amended as follows

"We consider it extremely important that, whatever British Government view we arrive at for the resumed talks, these will be both serious and meaningful and that where we are unable to accept any of the Hong Kong proposals we should be able to demonstrate, with as much factual information as we can, why those proposals would present a serious erosion of the intent behind the Government's decision."

3. We fully agree with the line you have taken in the rest of your draft.

15 December 1971

E O Laird

Hong Kong Department