PERSONAL & CONFIDENTIAL
Our reference: 5/20
Your reference:
A Stuart Esq
BRITISH TRADE COMMISSION IN HONG KONG
7th Floor, Shell House, Queen's Road, Central, Hong Kong Mail Address: P.O. Box No. 528, Hong Kong Cable Address: "Uktrade Hongkong”
Telephone- 230176
100
كسوسه لله
م يسعد
Now
clearance with
Tsy. t
+
GERD TBY.
"Dr. Crowson
Dir reply: 4
I shall char
HKI OD
Foreign & Commonwealth Office
London SW1
Dear Andrew.
8 August 1973
LAST
capace If with FRD
REF.
NEX.
REF.
(102)
t
13.
Before I came here I resolved that I would not get into the same position as my pre- decessors (virtually every one of them) of continually complaining about not being kept informed of important negotiations and exchanges butting on to the primary trade promotion task. I resolved also not to take the alternative (as some have) of opting out from anything but the narrowest interpretation of the trade task. Instead I set about trying to ensure that one way or another I got the information and that Whitehall (at least) accepted the need to keep me briefed.
The talks that I had in November with most of the "commercial" (as well es "trade") departments in Thitehall encouraged me to think that we had reached "modus vivendi” on this on the lines that, without attempting to alter the terms of reference, the Post would be treated "as if" it were a Commission for the purposes of background briefing.
...
I think you can imagine therefore with what regret, frustration, disappointment almost despair - I find that I am being forced back into my predecessors shoes, and that almost every communication I have with you by letter of discussion turns out to be a "complaint". The latest example that prompts this (yet another) crie de cover is Phillip Haddon-Caves current visit to UK for talks on Sterling. The first I knew of this was when it appeared in the late edition of the press yesterday, as he was leaving. Despite promises made to me in November to keep me generally informed over the progress of the dialogue over Sterling, I have had no background briefing on the subject, nor (as yet anyway) on the purpose of the visit. The only briefing" I have had on it has been the references in your monthly news letter and since the last of those was nearly three months ago even that source has (I hope temporarily)
died.
I realise that this is a very delicate subject and that both the fact of his visit and the detailed background to it may have had to be kept under wraps. But I do not understand why I could not have been given some warning and broad background on a personal and confidential (even secret) basis after all we have the channels to pass it and I have the facilities to keep (or destroy) it. And I was present at and was riven a copy of the record of the talks in November.
There are three (to my mind good) reasons why it would have been helpful for me to
know- end is embarrassing/
Every effort is made to ensure that the information given herein is accurate, but no legal responsibility is accepted for any errors or omis- sions in that information and no responsibility is accepted in regard to the standing of any firms, companies, or individuals mentioned.
ellow