Brussels, 4 June 1971
EEC Discussions
Australia’s Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Trade and Industry, Mr Anthony, said in Brussels today that some agricultural products could be excluded from the British market from the day that Britain joined the European Economic Community.
He said this would result from the acceptance by Britain of the application of the Community preferences immediately on her entry.
Mr Anthony said that it had become clear in the course of his talks with the EEC Commissioners that despite repeated strong representations over a period of years of the problems for Australia, Britain had made little, if any, reference in their recent negotiations to these problems.
‘I was disappointed to have confirmed my earlier apprehension that in their preoccupation to achieve a successful enlargement of the EEC, the negotiating parties have failed to take into account the trade problems raised for Australia and other third countries.
‘In my discussions this week I sought clarification of the terms relating to trade which are emerging as the basis for the enlargement. These have never been clearly stated.
‘We and others had been assured that the proposed transitional period—which we were led to believe would be five years—would give third countries time to adjust to the quite radical changes in trading conditions. In fact, it is now clear for the first time from these discussions in Brussels that the transitional period would be essentially a period for Britain to make its own adjustments rather than to allow time for third countries to be phased out of their current positions in the British market.
‘Despite the considerable diversion of our trade to other markets which has already been achieved, Britain remains the only commercial outlet of significant size for many products of major importance to Australia.
‘The present proposal would mean that on Britain’s entry—possibly on 1st January, 1973—butter quotas would be abolished, a levy against butter from third countries would be introduced and a new preference given to Community suppliers.
‘This would give an immediate advantage to all member countries of the Community, including Ireland, Denmark and Norway if they also become members.
‘The present Commonwealth preference for both goods such as canned fruit, fresh fruit, dried fruits, zinc, wine, leather, and many other products would be replaced by.a levy or duty which must have an adverse effect on all third country producers’returns. They would be at a distinct disadvantage in the British market in competing with the countries of the enlarged Community.
‘If Britain joined the Common Market in 1973 it would mean that Australian producers of some products may be faced with the disappearance of their largest market which they have traditionally supplied.’
Mr Anthony said the enlargement of the EEC to include Britain would bring momentous changes for world trade particularly in the field of agriculture. Britain was the largest single market for many foodstuffs and the application of the Common Agricultural Policy to that market would affect every agricultural exporting country.
It had been suggested that there should be some diversion of trade but in many cases Britain was the only available market of sufficient size to absorb the commodities and in any case the quantity likely to be diverted was such that it could only cause chaotic conditions in the residual markets of the world.
Mr Anthony said: ‘It seems anomalous that countries which for so long have taken a leading role in freeing world trade and establishing fair rules for international trading should be prepared now to take action which can cause very severe damage to the economies of smaller countries including the developing countries.
‘The clear implication of this for countries like Australia is a major readjustment of their whole agricultural production involving severe hardship on particular producers and on all agricultural producing areas.
‘It seems paradoxical that what is regarded as a major advance in international co-operation—the formation of a united Europe—should carry a threat of untold damage to small agricultural countries which are amongst the most efficient producers.’
Mr Anthony said it was clear that these problems were not problems for Australia alone. They were problems for all countries trading in agricultural products.
‘The largest world trading bloc has a responsibility which it has not yet publicly acknowledged to ensure that its actions do not bring the chaotic marketing conditions which will occur if entry of the United Kingdom takes place on the currently proposed basis,’ he said.
Mr Anthony said that in further discussions in Common Market capitals and in London he would continue to press the view that the present attitude of both Britain and the Six was quite unsatisfactory in its lack of recognition of the position of third countries and its lack of responsibility towards world agricultural trade.
He said that he would be impressing on Britain and the EEC countries that they must work actively with others for a solution to the problems of world agricultural trade even if this meant that they had to accept disciplines comparable to those accepted by other agricultural trading countries
[NAA: A1838, 727/4/2 PART 12]