CONFIDENTIAL
our relations with the Hong Kong Government, it would not help Hong Kong in practice. At the same time it would put HMG in very considerable difficulties, both domestically and internationally. Domestically, because the Opposition would be quick to say that if the terms of our Accession could be varied for Hong Kong they could be varied for the United Kingdom. Internationally because other Commonwealth countries would take the same line, and in the first place India, Bangladesh, Sri Lanka and perhaps Malaysia. We avoided difficulty with India, Bangladesh and Sri Lanka in Ottawa only by holding firmly to the line (on the Secretary of State's instructions) that on 1 January 1974 we had no alternative but to apply the Community's GSP scheme as it stood.
люблю
5. Course C (otherwise seeking to reduce discrimination against Hong Kong's textiles and footwear) is not open to the same objections. We can feel no confidence about achieving anything
very significant for Hong Kong in this way, and I cannot see results coming in the course of this year. But if there are technical adaptations which we could seek on Hong Kong's behalf - lower butoirs are the obvious device there would be no objection from the point of view of our European policy, provided always that it is accepted:
a)
b)
-
that we should apply the Community's GSP as
agreed in the Accession Treaty on 1 January
1974.
We do not seek amendment of the formal terms
of our entry.
We would be able to try to do this either in the context of the
annual reappraisal of the GSP, due to take place between now and the end of the year, when the quotas etc are fixed for the following year, or in the context of the work on improving the GSP as called for by the Paris Summit (although it is questionable whether lower butoirs for Hong Kong's principal competitors could be said to be an improvement in the GSP.)
6 September 1973
Copy to:
Mr Stuart
Mr Butler
112 HAZLE TRAD
-2- CONFIDENTIAL
пирить
J A Robinson
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.