о
General Chamber of Commerce's paper on which they were based. I need not, therefore, spend much time elaborating this side of the equation. But like all equations there is another side to it and my main regret about all of the reports so far is that they give virtually no hint of the other side. I understand this; if you ask a loaded question you get a loaded answer. But the resulting imbalance is unfortunate:
Even more unfortunate is that some commentators have
inferred from this that Britain is "milking" Hong Kong.
I would like first to try to get the perspective straight on this. Unfortunately I cannot deal with the argument in detail because time is too short. But I would like to make two general points.
INVESTMENT
First I absolutely reject suggestions that there
was official connivance or assistance in the flow of. funds from Britain to Hong Kong for investment in your Stock Exchange boom or in their subsequent withdrawal. There is no basis whatever for such an allegation and I cannot imagine the motives in making it.
The fact is that money from UK, and many other countries, was attracted to your market because the
market was highly attractive to any investor and particular- ly to any investor who was looking for a safe haven for his capital while the money markets were (as they regret- ably remain) in turmoil. Hong Kong investors were only too glad to have this money coming in to boost the share market. Certainly it helped create the boom which with cause - has been quoted as a sign of the confidence and of the resilience of the Hong Kong economy. Some of the money was Sterling perhaps a great deal of it was (I don't know how one can really estimate this) but certainly not all. Much must have also come from Japan and USA and Europe. And since Sterling is an
/international
2.