TNAG-0630-FCO40-778-Effect-of-GATT-Multi-Fibre-Arrangement-on-Hong-Kong-negotiat-1988 — Page 109

PA.

2014

ungen recultul woman

The Qugatill.

_HKK 124/616/, RIDE)

MINISTRY OF OVERSEAŘ DEVELOPMENT

ELAND HOUSE

-

5 OCT

་་

STAG PLACE LONDON SWIE 5DH

I have now asked

Telephone of

13/10 Ecornists Dept.(Mark Hull/

بت

true?

From the Minister

INDEX

o the can establish the

Fruth of The Hart's statement.

Dear Davis,

MULTIFIBRE ARRANGEMENT

عل هيد

3/10

PA

JRY Actio › Vakan

for ip

197

13/M/ Juck

kord G. Rebuts

27 September 1977

IPUS i'r Hibbut SAV hetwell Mr Coriazzi Mr Mig HIGD.

I agree with the doubts expressed by Eric Varley and Edmund Dell in their letter and minute of 23 September about the weight which you suggest we should place upon the needs of Hong Kong in the Brussels discussion on quotas for the proposed bilateral agreements.

I recognise the importance of ensuring that Hong Kong does indeed agree at the end of the day to sign an arrangement with the Community, but I am not so pessimistic as some about her readiness to do so even if access is significantly cut back. What concerns me is that to pursue energetically the Hong Kong case would seriously undermine the aim which we have all agreed of ensuring that the position and prospects of the poorest developing countries, notably India and Pakistan, are as far as possible protected and improved as a result of the forthcoming negotiations. As you know, I do not regard

Hong Kong as in this sense one of the neediest countries and I see no reason why the Commission should not take a firm stance with them. I understand from an analysis of the Commission's proposals that Hong Kong would in any case be given significantly better treatment than either Taiwan or South Korea, which are its main trading rivals, and I am sure we should emphasise this point in discussion with the Governor.

I am copying this letter to the Prime Minister, members of EI and Sir John Hunt.

Tours ever,

Ja má

you

N Stewart heelt

on the

It is impossible to say figues we have seen (see annexes to Dol's brief below) whether is Hart is correct or not although the brief itself doessay (para 6 c) that Tauran and Korea we treated equally severely, is so full of questionable statement, the paper is so

that one cannot put much trust in W. Chantillze

The Rt Hon Dr David Owen MP

it.