?
it not encourage the Textile Advisory Board always to consider that they can obtain more by sticking out and, as an extension of this point, will we not be making greater difficulties for ourselves when the time comes to negotiate à Dix with Hong Kong on cotton textiles if they believe that we then will significantly be able to, as they clearly think we can now, to act as referees?
3. You may be right in saying that the Governor is being optimistic in hoping that we can give an improved offer "within a week" but there is clearly every advantage from our point of view in such optimism and perhaps the best way of achieving this is by saying in any letter that Mr Royle signs that, because of the forthcoming visit of the Secretary of State to Hong Kong, we wish to get matters resolved quickly and that he (Mr Royle) would therefore be prepared to discuss it with Sir John Eden at a mutually (and early) convenient date.
4. Finally the Secretary of State's speech. I have already suggested amendments to an earlier draft of the speech but find difficulty in relating these earlier amendments to the draft of the speech attached to your minute. There seems no point in further tinkering with the draft until the outcome of Mr Royle's initiative with Sir John Eden is clear. However, whatever that outcome, I am not sure that I accept the Governor's thesis that paragraph 3 of the draft should be focussed in the way Sir M. McLehose wishes. This is more a point for you than me but I would have thought the (rather fluffy) existing text is as far as we want to go, when combined with the sharper text in paragraph 13. relevance of paragraph 10.)
25 January 1972
(I cannot see the
Shan
HE J Hale
ми
Commodities Department
CONFIDENTIAL
i