to prod the Hong Kong authorities if it appeared that they

were reluctant to impose controls or to apply them with

vigour. For this reason it is important that there

should be close contacts with the Hong Kong administration

and indeed early consultations with Hong Kong about the

action which might be needed to prevent capital flight.

4. Given adequate control in Hong Kong, it ought not to be

necessary to have to use U.K. powers because banks in the

U.K. would not be allowed, under the normal rules, to make

payments from Hong Kong sterling accounts to the non-

Scheduled Territories, unless they had evidence of Hong Kong

approval. However, if Hong Kong failed to exercise what

the U.K. considered to be an adequate control, U.K. powers

might have to be brought into use. For example, if it was

clear that a large volume of Hong Kong-owned sterling was

being transferred from the U.K. with the knowledge and

approval of the Hong Kong authorities, it would be necessary

to decide whether it was desirable to contain such

transfers, either wholly or selectively; and whether the

decision would be the same in respect of transfers to the

0.5.A. as for transfers to the N.S.A.

5. The two main considerations would be, first, the

effect on world wide confidence in sterling and, second,

the desirability of retaining, under U.K. control, assets belonging to residents of Hong Kong which might ultimately be used as a bargaining weapon in a settlement with a

Chinese occupying authority.

6. A similar problem could arise in respect of sterling balances belonging directly to China.

Page 150Page 151

Share This Page