FOREIGN ECONOMIC AND COMMERCIAL POLICY


   3. We'would prefer formal presentation to CP's IMF report since
 maintenance of proper relationship Fund and GATT assisted by
 Fund giving written answer to GATT request. However, do not object
 to oral presentation providing Fund reports including conclusions
 read verbatim and complete reports appear in records of Session,
   4. We retain preference for some indication that majority CP's
 consider that time for beginning progressive relaxation by certain
 of sterling area countries has come. As minimum would like to see
 Working Party report state that majority Working Party agrees
 with Fund findings. Since substance of Fund reports has already
 reached public press, becomes difficult for US to avoid pressing for
 vote in GATT after doing so in Fund. Do not consider Annecy con-
 sultation parallel case since Fund report still not complete at termi-
 nation Annecy consultations and US took position at Geneva that
 consultations were not completed at Annecy. May not be desirable
 that Annecy WP report be established as satisfactory prototype for
 GATT consultations. Appreciate your numbered para 5 indicates
 awareness this point. However, will leave to discretion Del extent to
 which wise press for indication in WP report majority support for
 US and Fund position.
 5. Do not consider Brit view indicated your numbered para 3 re
 purpose consultations entirely consistent language Article 12 para
 4(a) particularly proposition that such consultations should explore
 "alternative practical measures which may be available land the pos-
 sible effect of such measures on the economies of other Working
 Parties".
 6. Assume re your numbered para 6 you will maintain principle
 of separate reports for iindividual countries and separate statements
 re individual countries. We note that IMF conclusions vary for
 different countries.
 7. Uncertain what may be implied Brit proposal that Contracting
 Parties "take note" sterling area membership consulting countries.
 Would see no objection factual statement re sterling area arrange-
 ments along lines Fund report on Australia providing language neu-
 tral on question validity such arrangements but language suggested
 ur fourth unnumbered para appears dangerously close to acceptance
 common criterion principle. Might wish to include language similar
 to that of Fund report relating to importance of convertibility of
 sterling holdings of these countries but consider this is as far as US
 should go in recognizing relationship individual countries to sterling
 area. Statement of this nature may in ýfact be preferable to explicit
statement in Working Party report that no effort is made to deal
with question of common criterion principle, since latter statement
might focus too much attention on this question.


765