2.
asked the Secretary of State for Trade what resolution he expects to the general agreement on tariffs and trade multilateral negotiations by mid-December; and what part he is playing in those negotiations.
I hope that the negotiators will be able substantially to complete their work next month, although ratification of the results by the EEC Council must wait on a satisfactory resolution of the United States countervailing duty waiver problem. I represented the United Kingdom at the Council discussion on 21st November of the EEC approach to the final stages of the negotiations and expect to play a full part in any further such discussion or other important but less formal discussions.
Hon. Members on both sides of the House will wish the Secretary of State well in his difficult role at the talks, bearing in mind the United Kingdom's dependence on the growth and increasing liberalisation of world trade. When does the right hon. Gentleman think the United States will pass a new Bill waiving the imposition of countervailing duties? Does the right hon. Gentleman think that the talks can be meaningfully concluded in Geneva before such a Bill is passed?
I thank the hon. Gentleman for his good wishes. These are indeed extremely complex and complicated negotiations, involving a wide variety of interests. They pose problems for every country. But we are seized of the great difficulty that there would be for world trade if there were a failure in the current round of negotiations.
As for the United States' internal position, we accept the assurances of the United States Administration that they will do what they can to try to resolve the problem. In line with, I think, the majority of Community countries, we are happy to see it make such progress as it can. I cannot remember the hon. Gentleman's other point.
I asked whether the talks could be concluded before such a Bill was passed.
In this connection the United Kingdom and, I think, the majority of Community countries draw a distinction between the completion of negotiations and the conclusion of an agreement. It is the settled view of the Community that there is no question of our concluding an agreement until the Congressional problem has been solved.
I wish my right hon. Friend well in the multilateral trade negotiations, but is he aware that there is another set of trade negotiations in danger of breaking down today? Will he use his best offices to make sure that the commodity negotiations are brought to a successful conclusion?
We have been following the negotiations in Geneva very closely. Indeed, I received reports about them over the weekend. I do not think that the danger of a breakdown is quite as serious as was reported in some of the newspapers today. But, clearly, they are very difficult negotiations. They have been going on for a very long time. There requires to be flexibility on both sides of the argument, but we very much believe that it is important not only for international trade but for the maintenance of a meaningful North-South dialogue that the negotiations be brought to a conclusion.
As one of the main difficulties in these long-running negotiations concerns national subsidies to ailing or vulnerable industries, can the Secretary of State give us any guidance as to how much of the trade between developed countries is now affected by those subsidies, and what are the prospects of multilaterally reducing them?
This is an extremely difficult area of the negotiations, because it is extremely difficult to detect just what subsidies are in operation and how they affect trade. Such things as the movements of currency can be regarded as affecting world trade just as much as overt actions by Governments to support their industries. I can go no further than to say that we are examining the matter carefully. There are some actions that the United Kingdom Government take in connection with the regeneration of our industry and the development of our regional development policy that we regard as very important.