Page
Reference...
23
نما
Mr Carler
Economic Information for
Hong Kong's Export Credit themance Corporation The B.O.T.'s refusal to provide the information requested is at 22 on file. I do not think it requires acknowledgement, do I think any useful purpose would be served by going back to B.O.T. Suice I am convinced that nothing will now persuade their to change their minds
2.
While I think that both Hong Kong and the B.O.T. have magiified out of all proportion the importance attached to Une provision of this information, I am inclined to take the side of B.O.T.
3.
their
It seems that there has been a marked lack of liaison betweeen the Hong Kong Insurance Corporation, Commerce & Industry Departiment and theis London Office. Nearly ally tand- (except the confidential country reports) the information that the H.K. Export Insurance Corporation has been seeking, seeme already to have been made
available
to the H.K. Commerce & Industry
in the form its London office Dept. or of B.O.I journale, E.S.B's and Quasterly World Economie commente
་
and more
detailed information in particular cases could, I am sure, have been sought from
O.T. (by London
4.
B
While
عبيتا
Office).
قبل
the B.O.T's refural means failure to make a comparatively cheap
that would have made a good gee time дея political impression in HK., I think we hist now face up to this, and Haddon -Cave that the
hinted to
S.
be we
you
have
anewer might
I suggest that a paraphrase of the argumente in Lord Browie letter be conveyed to Haddon: Cave, though there doesn't seem to be any real objection to sending them a copy of it thr
thrower
28.3.68..
Page
Page
Mr. Brown
It seems to me that there are passages in the letter at (22) on which we could argue that the B.O.T. have not given due weight to our special responsibilities towards Hong Kong. In paragraph 3 their requests for information about overseas regulations are equated with "any other British enquiries" and in paragraph 4 comes the admission that it is the commentaries (which they decline to supply) that are valuable to the credit insurance underwriter. It is by supplying reports in this latter field that we would be discharging a special responsibility. I can see little disposition on their part to accept any such responsibility in the sentence marked X in paragraph 5.
2. I agree that this looks like the end of the road in which case it remains to convey the position to Hong Kong. Since the Governor has raised this matter twice with Ministers - in the Hong Kong Ministerial Committee and with Lord Shepherd in Hong Kong - it would be better, I think, if Lord Shepherd wrote to him.
3. But before we draft, I would like to clear up a point in the last paragraph of Lord Brown's letter which puzzles me. Are the Board of Trade arguing that if the credit insurance scheme had been directly controlled by the D.C. & I. (i.e. it had been set up as a department of government, as in this country), the question of making information available would not have been so difficult, but that its decision to establish a Corporation raises the present difficulties? I think we ought to look at the passages in the Report on the scheme, a copy of which is available on our papers, dealing with the question of information.
3 April, 1968
(W. S. Carter)
X
FLD 1400/2
age 9
age 9
13
RE OF
·PRIV
COUNCIL
TRADE
From the
Minister of State
Dear Malcolm,
RECEIVED IN ARCHIVES No. 63 28 MAR1958
HWB6/20
Mr Brown For 2 advice please.
BOARD OF TRADE
1 VICTORIA STREET
LONDON S.W.1
ABBEY 7877
Am Mechan
20 March, 1968.
77/3
I am replying to your letter of 20th December, 1967, to Gwyneth Dunwoody in which you asked us to consider further a proposal that we should supply certain information to the Hong Kong Export Credit Insurance Corporation. I am sorry it has taken us so long to
let you have an answer.
We fully accept that H.M.G. has special responsibilities to Hong Kong and we have given due weight to this aspect. However, as regards any obligation to keep the Hong Kong Government or the Export Credit Insurance Corporation supplied with information about changes
in overseas countries' regulations or to give them copies of correspondence with our overseas Posts on economic matters, I am afraid we have not changed our view.
I think I should remind you that the Corporation has been operating for a year apparently satisfactorily. Much of the routine information on exchange control, import licensing and tariff regulations will already be available to it through the Hong Kong Commerce and Industry Department or the local banks. There are a number of publications, including the Board of Trade Journal, which contain the sort of factual information required. The Hong Kong Government office in London has since 1964 been on the free mailing list for our daily Export Service Bulletin, posts' quarterly World Economic Comments and special supplements. There is a Hong Kong Trade Development Council based in London. Any of these are free to consult our Export Services Branch and requests for information related to overseas regulations would be dealt with in the same way as any other British enquiries. I think you will agree that there is a great deal of information already available to Hong Kong in this field.
In practice, of course, it is the informed commentary on events rather than the bald statement of fact which a credit insurance underwriter would find valuable and many of the reports we receive are confidential on this account. Assessments by our overseas officers of the probable effects on trade and other policies are made from a U.K. standpoint and with the object of supporting our own export drive and we cannot disguise the fact that in some cases Hong Kong is our competitor in overseas markets.
The Rt. Hon. The Lord Shepherd,
Minister of State for Commonwealth Affairs,
Downing Street,
S.W.1.
/I do not