31
parliamentary process would rectify any injustices which might arise locally. We were sadly wrong.
Given this I hope that you will understand and appreciate the reasons for any hostility which you may notice in my dealings with the Foreign and Commonwealth Office and parliamentarians. Both had a duty to protect myself and the people of Hongkong from the abuses of corruption and both have a great deal to answer for in their neglect of the Hongkong graft problem. It is not enough to be, as you described, a "transient MP" or "itinerant MP". As British colonial policemen we put our trust in the parliamentary process, in MPs whose duty it is to protect the Constitution and the principle of public accountability, not to subvert it. Your own speeches and other defences of the Hongkong Government over the years, because of their apparent partisan nature even in Opposition, apparently admitting of no other possibility than that graft was restricted to "limited pockets" and that the Hongkong Government was dealing "vigorously" with graft, have been a source of great suspicion and resentment. For years, as others were going through considerable hardships and disappointments in their efforts to have the truth admitted and acted upon by the British Government (a truth now, ten years later recognised by Blair-Kerr with thanks to an honest Police Commissioner, Charles Sutcliffe, and the cunning Godber), you were defending the indefensible. Now, in spite of the fact that you admit that I know Hongkong better than do you, in spite of the fact that those of us who maintained the truth of the graft problem for a decade to much personal cost have now been accepted as being right in our main thrust, all that the big-hearted British Government might appear to be willing to offer is the opportunity for me and anyone in the same situation to place our humble petitions before those who have not been seen to openly oppose graft and jeopardise their careers, who have lived comfortably for the decade while the non-careerists lost what little they had and more besides. I am sorry if my reaction to your news that you intended to refer the graft aspects of my case to the ACC was one of disappointing nature but I am afraid you will not know the extent and depth of disappointment in the past. For the future I hope that all interested parties in these matters will be able to work more closely together.
May I ask you, as my MP, to take up two other matters with regard to Hongkong.? Would you please obtain from the British Government answers to the following questions:-
(1) Is the British Government aware of the ultimate destination and use of millions of pounds worth of gold bullion purchased on the London market, exported with Bank of England approval and transported on the national flag carrier to Hongkong in transit, with Hongkong Government approval, to Macau, in which Portuguese territory it officially disappears? Does the British Government have any evidence indicating that such legitimate bullion traffick- ing is financing illegal international narcotics trafficking, as has been suggested in a number of published works during the past decade? Will the British Government initiate an inquiry into these matters and suggestions?
(2) Will the British Government state its specific reasons for not introducing into the Legislative Council of Hongkong an elected minority of councillors who might table questions and move debates and give life to the British constitutional principle of public accountability?
In conclusion, my thanks for offering to refer my case to the ACC, my apologies for my lack of enthusiasm, my hopes that we will be able to work together to sort this mess out. I look forward to hearing from you in the near future and meanwhile take this opportunity to wish you a Happy Christmas and a Prosperous New Year.
Yours sincerely
сей
ALAN ELLIS