A meeting of officials was held on April 5th, 1946, in Room 123, East Block to consider what should be done in the way of preparation for the international discussion. The following were present:

A. Robertson, in the chair
Dr. W. C. Clark
Dr. Barton David Sim
M. W. Mackenzie
Graham Towers
H. B. McKinnon
W. A. Mackintosh
R. B. Bryce
L. Rasminsky J. E. Coyne
S. D. Pierce H. R. Kemp
F. A. MacGregor
D. Harvey
J. Deutsch
J. A. Chapdelaine
G. Glassco

Mr. Robertson stated that the preliminary meeting of the participating countries was expected to be held in England starting September 1st, 1946. The number of participating countries had been increased by the addition of Norway, Chile, and Lebanon. The United Kingdom authorities had pro­posed a pre-preliminary conference of Commonwealth countries to start about six weeks before September 1st and the New Zealand government was most anxious to have Mr. Nash take part in these earlier discussions. The attendance of Mr. Nash at these Commonwealth talks was awkward because (1) the starting date had had to be moved forward to July 1st to accommodate him, and (2) courtesy would compel the presence at these meetings of United Kingdom ministers; this in its turn would affect the character of Canada's participating delegation. Furthermore, if the Commonwealth dis­cussions were held at a ministerial level the wider preliminary discussions would probably follow on as ministerial discussions.

It was the feeling of the meeting that Canada should indicate at the out­set that, even though New Zealand wished to be represented by a minister, these pre-preliminary discussions should really take place at the official level.

Mr. Sim felt that the Commonwealth talks would inevitably develop into very wide discussions, and in the eyes of other nations these talks would have the appearance of a caucus.

Mr. Kemp wondered whether it would be appropriate to consider how large a reduction in the United States tariff would be necessary to balance the advantages gained by a reduction of a given amount in the British pref­erence. Mr. Robertson pointed out that since the United States under their existing legislation cannot put articles on the free list nor can they reduce their tariff by more than 50 per cent, it would follow that the United States could not expect to have preferences completely wiped out.

Mr. Towers suggested that Canada might be prepared to make broad multilateral tariff concessions, but since the United States was not able, without legislative action, to make very substantial concessions in return, it might be advisable or necessary to make a special Canada-United States sup­plementary agreement. Mr. McKinnon agreed with this view. Mr. Robert­son felt that this question might better be brought up after a certain stage in the multilateral negotiations had been reached.

Mr. Sim was worried by the experience of Canadian exporters in their at­tempts to export goods to the United States. There were many procedural and administrative barriers to the easy flow of Canadian goods. Mr. Robert­son felt it was important to have a full and complete dossier on the short­comings of the United States tariff administration. Mr. Kemp believed that most of these shortcomings were legislative in character rather than administrative.

Mention was made of the preparatory work being done by the Depart­ment of Trade and Commerce in preparing lists of commodities on which Canada wished to secure concessions. In reply to a query by Mr. Bryce as to whether or not there was any indication as to the manner in which Canada might alter her economy, Mr. Robertson stated that if the United States did not go further in making concessions than they were now permitted by legislation to do, then it was not probable that Canada would make any radical changes in her economy. Dr. Mackintosh suggested that there must be many industries in Canada which could not adapt themselves to any appreciable tariff concession without a fairly drastic reorientation. Mr. Mc­Kinnon stated that to judge from the briefs which had been submitted to the Trade and Tariff committee practically all industries were willing to have a regime of free trade, provided they were given three years in which to make necessary changes in their industries. On the other hand reciprocal reduction in tariffs was felt to be of little value because of limitations on what the United States could offer along these lines.

Mr. McKinnon felt that the delegation to the preparatory talks should have as its chairman a "neutral" person and indicated that he could not really be so described.

It was decided that those present should consult together in order to establish six or seven small committees to collect material having reference to each of the committees which will probably be established at the-prelim­inary international meeting.

M. G. GLASSCO