Mr. Laird
CONFIDENTIAL
Reference.
will
يل
Leong Fook Kee
You will recall that Lord Shepherd asked that inquirey be made as to why Mr. Leong had not been permitted to accompany Mr. Gibson and other U.K. trade unionists on factory visits in Hong Kong. We were not aware at the meeting on 17 March that the Hong Kong Government had already explained the reasons why the Commissioner of Labour had declined a suggestion made at admittedly short notice, during the visit. Their explanation is at para. 5 of H.K. Tel. No. 889 of 28 November (Flag N:HKK6/548/7).
2.
The explanation they gave was related to a general complaint made by Mr. Gibson in a letter (folio 45 HKK6/548/7) to the then President of the Board of Trade, that insufficient support was forthcoming from the Hong Kong Government for Mr. Leong in the process of stimulating right wing trade union development. In dealing with this broader issue the Hong Kong Government volunteered the detail to which Mr. Gibson referred during the meeting with Lord Shepherd on 17 March, but I have seen no evidence on the file that Mr. Gibson specifically complained of the point since made to Lord Shepherd.
3. In my opinion it is now too late to go back to the H.K. Government on the ground that this explanation is insufficient even if we believe it may be. I think Mr. Gibson intended to demon- strate his broad complaint by reference to the incident and rightly or wrongly they will simply say they were exercising a perfectly normal disction, and the proper forum for Mr. Leong in the context of the visit, was the meeting to which reference is made in the final paragraph of para. 5 of Tel. No. 889, (if indeed a meeting in fact took place.)
CONFIDENTIAL