weren't worried about the precise wording if it producted the right result. I don't know what words will appear in the revised draft now being prepared, but I understand from Mark Pulvermacher that there will be something.
5.
As regards separate votes in the Committee for dependent territories, we agreed this wasn't on. As regards leaving dependent territories free not to accept amendments which the metropolitan power may accept (para 8.of your first letter), there is no provision for this in article XXX of GATT itself, and it doesn't therefore seem possible to suggest such a provision in the Code.
6. As I said above this letter is based on the discussions during the first week only of the Working Party's activities, but I understand that there was no significant points raised later about dependent territories, except that the basic proposal to cover them was not unanimously accepted.
Elliott
Miss J E Elliott
co
D C Hartridge Esq
UK Mission Geneva
G T Rogers Esq &
SWM
ME Pulvermacher Esq 7 SWM
G L Simmons FCU (TPD)
M A Goodfellow Esq
FCU (Hong Kong & Indian Ocean Dept)' W Nicoll Esq UKDEL, Brussels
2.
*
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.