•
4.
ALMITTEDLY THERE HAS, SINCE THE NEGOTIATIONS WERE RESUMED,
BEEN SOME IMPROVEMENT IN THE COMMUNITY'S 'OFFER' (IT IS REALLY A
DEMAND) BUT IT CANNOT REALLY BE REGARDED (THOUGH IT MAY HAVE TO BE
PRESENTED) AS 'COMPENSATION FOR THE CUTBACKS SINCE THE COMMISSION
HAS PRESENTED US WITH NO OBJECTIVE JUSTIFICATION IN MFA TERMS FOR
ANY OF THE LIMITS IT HAS PROPOSED. INDEED IT HAS ADMITTED
PRIVATELY THAT IT IS UNABLE TO BECAUSE SOME MEMBER STATES CANNOT
OR WILL NOT SUPPLY PRODUCTION FIGURES. ONE CANNOT THEREFORE SAY
THAT SUCH-AND-SUCH A LIMIT IS, TO COMPENSATE FOR SOMETHING ELSE,
HIGHER THAN IT SHOULD OTHERWISE HAVE BEEN.
5. WE ARE, AS YOU KNOW, WITH GOOD REASON CONCERNED ABOUT THE
EFFECT ON OUR OTHER TEXTILE NEGOTIATIONS OF AN EXCESSIVELY
RESTRICTIVE AGREEMENT WITH THE COMMUNITY. IN ORDER TO MITIGATE
THIS AND TO LEAVE OURSELVES FREE TO EXPLAIN OUR ACTION AND TO
EXPRESS OUR CONTINUING DISSATISFACTION WITH THE COMMUNITY'S
ATTITUDE AND DEMANDS WE HAVE MADE IT CLEAR TO THE COMMISSION (AND
THEY HAVE UNDERSTOOD AND ACCEPTED) THAT AT THE FINAL FORMAL
SESSION WE SHALL BE OBLIGED TO REPEAT OUR INABILITY TO AGREE TO
THE CUTBACKS BELOW 1976 LEVELS. IF THE COMMUNITY RESPONDS WITH A
THREAT THAT UNLESS WE ACCEPT THEM THEY, OR SOMETHING WORSE, WILL
BE IMPOSED ON US BY UNILATERAL ACTION, THEN WE SHALL SAY THAT WE
ARE PREPARED TO SIGN UP SUT WISH TO ATTACH A NOTE TO THE AGREEMENT
OR OTHERWISE FORMALLY TO RECORD OUR VIEWS IN WRITING.
6.
THE TOTAL CUTBACKS
ww
Ic. FROM 1977 QUOTAS TO BELOW 1976
IMPORTS ARE IN THE THREE CATEGORIES REFERRED TO IN PARA 2 SO HUGE
THAT, QUITE APART FROM OUR INTERNATIONAL POSITION, WE SHOULD BE
(AND MAY IN ANY CASE BE) IN TROUBLE IN HONG KONG ITSELF IF WE
PRESENTED THIS AGREEMENT AS FREELY NEGOTIATED.
7.
THE TOTAL CUTBACKS ARE OF THIS ORDER:
CATEGORY
WHERE THERE IS NO
FROM 1977 LIMIT OR
RELEVANT LIMIT
1976 EXPORTS
TO STAGE 1
STAGE 2
(OFFERED BY HK
ON 4 NOV.)
(EEC'S CURRENT
DEMAND)
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.