RESTRICTED AND PERSONAL
HONG KONG'S GATT RELATIONSHIP WITH THE ENLARGED EEC
Paragraph 2: add final sentence:
It therefore appears that there are no means by which Hong Kong can
be given de jure independent representation in the GATT.
New paragraph 3: In their talks with us Hong Kong officials make it
clear that in considering the question of future representation they
were hoping to secure a greater degree of de facto independence than
they have had hitherto. This or course raises a number of policy
issues on which an interdepartmental view will need to be formed in
the course of the next few months. But sime this is an issue on
which the views of the Nine and the Commis si on,and even the mechanics of
how Hong Kong views are to be expressed in Geneva, may well significantly
affect the conclusion we come to on the policy issue:
how-much
-autonomy Hong Kong should exercise in future in GATT, I will be
grateful for your preliminary views on the following points:
02. Can we guess at the likely view of the Commission and the Nine
to the question of Hong Kong representation? Would they prefer the
Colony to enjoy a de facto independent status? Or at the other
extreme be against any separate Hong Kong preseme at GATT meetings
on the grounds that there is no reason why the Colony should not
be represented by the official UK delegate?
#2.
Are the Commission likely to see this as primarily a legal or
policy issue?
3. Should we talk to the Commission and the representatives of the
Member States in Brussels soon on the grounds that they are likely
to make such a meal of this issue that,if we wanted it to be
resolved before the end of the year, it would be better to turn
their minds to it now? Or would it be better to defer an approach
until after our further talks in September with Hong Kong officials
RESTRICTED
AND PERSONAL
1
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.