TNAG-0341-FCO40-377-Effects-on-Hong-Kong-of-long-term-policy-for-textiles-in-int-1972 — Page 72

G.F. 323 0003230

CONFIDENTIAL

20

(a)

the Juridical Position, and

(b)

the Practical Implications.

44.

As regards (a): I said the first question here

concerned the relationship, in terms of established G.A.T.T.

doctrine, between Hong Kong and the U.K. and between

Hong Kong and the enlarged E.E.C. (given British entry into

the latter). In discussion, it was agreed that there need

be no alteration in these two G.A.T.T. relationships until

and unless the enlarged E.E.C. became a single contracting

party. Thus the likely juridical position after entry would

be: a non-G.A.T.T. relationship between the U.K. and

Hong Kong because of the proviso to Article XXIV (1) and a G.A.T.T. relationship between Hong Kong and each of the other

members of the E.E.C. individually, because of the original

acceptance by H.M.G. of the Protocol of Provisional

Application in respect of Hong Kong. However, should the

E.E.C. become a single contracting party the position would

then be obscure in terms of established G.A.T.T. doctrine.

It was not clear whether the E.E.C. would assume, as it were,

the non-G.A.T.T. relationship which currently existed between

the U.K. and Hong Kong or, alternatively, whether the U.K.

would assume the G.A.T.T. relationship existing between the

Six (latterly each of the Six) and Hong Kong. It was agreed

that the D.T.I. would now formally put the question in

writing to the F.C.0's legal advisers for an opinion.

CONFIDENTIAL

45.