CONFIDENTIAL
7
e.
f.
circulate freely within it, while at the same time imports from other sources were effectively limited by country shares of a quota. It is difficult to see what disadvantages this would entail for any but those whose real objective was to block free circulation for as long as possible. As for concessions, apart from simply not being difficult about new Community agreements with minor suppliers, there is the possibility of liberalising the whole range of marginal suppliers against whom the Community and 3 or 4 of the Member States now maintain no restrictions. If we seemed to be making any progress on free circulation, it would at least be possible to match country for country against the French and Italians, ie we would say that we would liberalise Patagonia if the French and Italians liberalised Patagonia.
GSP Difficult discussions lie ahead about how we harmonise in 1974 to arrangements of the Six as regards textiles. It remains unsettled whether textiles should continue to enjoy preferences in the enlarged Community (though it seems fairly likely they will), and if so what base-performance should be applied for the UK. If we are to take a measure of duty-free textiles it is reasonable to insist on a quid pro quo in free circulation.
*Oddments. On a number of other issues connected with
textiles we are being or will be pressured by the Community into doing things we would prefer not to. Examples include certain technical and standards regulations and directives, tariff quotas for associated states and ceilings for temporary imports. A general disposition to trade concessions in these areas against gains in free circulation could be incorporated in the briefs of our delegates to Brussels, and might have a cumulative effect.
The bargaining value of this small change should not be
exaggerated. Mostly we should be resisting moves towards one
7
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.