London, 23 June 1971
Australia Dissatisfied with Luxembourg Decisions
The Australian Deputy Prime Minister, Mr J. D. Anthony, said in London today, 23rd June, that Australia would not regard the agreement reached in Luxembourg on British EEC entry as satisfactory unless there was some provision made to ensure some access for Australian agricultural products during the transitional period.
He said Britain had undertaken quite firmly to obtain for Australia arrangements which would allow an orderly reduction of the market in Britain for Australian products over the longest possible transitional period.
It had only become clear following the negotiations in May this year that Britain had not adopted this approach, but had settled for a generalised provision relating to disruption of the market for third countries.
Mr Anthony said he had not yet seen the precise terms of this provision although they had been explained by Mr Rippon and others.
He said: ‘A generalised provision does not give any security to outside suppliers to the British market.
‘Market conditions could be such on the first day of the transition period that Australian butter would be completely excluded from the market.
‘Then Australia would need to make a plea under the disruption provision for action to meet the situation.
‘Nobody in Britain or Europe is prepared to say in what circumstances action would be taken, or what that action could be.’
Mr Anthony said he would continue to press to have instituted the arrangements which Britain had undertaken would be available to ease the problems caused for Australian agriculture.
He said the one encouraging feature of the outcome of Luxembourg was the conclusion of specific arrangements to help meet the position of New Zealand.
Although New Zealand would still face quite serious problems, the action taken was welcomed by the Australian Government as some recognition of the responsibilities which an expanded EEC had to third countries.
[NAA: Al838, 727/4/2 PART 13]