The various sectors of the bextile lobby are closely connee Abrupt termination of the quots epston would precites political protest which. becange it would tend to anxi by miut the textile ontlook generally, would be disproportionate to the direct damage to those turtiles concerns in practice at rich (he weaker, less integrated and more old-fashioned fimar). succeeded up to now in currying the indusing with un in the advocacy of a textile trade policy for the endamped. Comunni ba is more liberal towards the developing countries, men co curautair and more likely to encourage real competitive efficiency in the U textile sector than anything which Lancashire has traditionally been prepared to accept. This is largely because the industry sees a good prospect of fairer sharing of the burden of low-cost imports between ourselves and the rest of Europe which reinforces the confidence with which it approaches its investment plann. However our partners have as yet taken no substantial steps towards opening their markets and sharing this burden in any other sectors of the textile trade. We would risk losing our precorions solidarity with the United Kingdom industry if we were to immediately abrogate our restraints in the one area where the Un is more restrictive than the average and that for no obvions benefit to the Community as a whole.
Community considerations
It is most unlikely that we could, without a considerable strugele, again postpone the implementation of our obligation to end quotas. Derogations from the EEC's common liberalisation list unier Regulation 1025 have previously only been given rarely and on a temporary basis. The language of the safeguard clause in the Regulation is definite in that imports must "cause or thresten to cause substantial injury to Community producers" in order to justify restraints. But the Regulation is framed only to cover products which are liberalised and has no provisions for phosing out restrictions that conflict with it. The Community could argue (though it has never done so) that our present derogation was design. designed to co-incide with the period during which the US's textile import regime co-exists with the Community's regine.
But it is recognised that full unification of the textile trade policies of the Member States can only be achieved over a period of several more years. Our own application for a derogation was open-ended, and we have never undertaken not to request an extension beyond the date now agreed. In short, the legal grounds for an extension are
•
المال المعد
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.