- 2 -
3.
He reminded the delegation that now that the UK was a member of the EEC, HMG's position on the MFA must accord with that of the Community.
Nevertheless, HMG would continue to represent the interests of Hong Kong as far as this was possible. He could not accept the suggestion that HMG were taking the lead in policies in the EEC which would have serious consequences for Hong Kong. He pointed out that the EEC had not yet defined its position but that it was hoped that this would be done this week, for negotiations were due to start in Geneva on 4 July. So far as he knew, the EEC desire was not to have a major renegotiation of the MFA.
4. Mr Stern pointed out that the French announcement of its action under Article 19 came as much as a surprise to the British as to the delegation. Mr Stern then explained the details of the French announce- ment. He pointed out that it was not yet known how the EEC would deal with the French action, nor was it known how the action would affect outside producers.
5. Mr Murray said that the delegation could be satisfied that the FCO understood their case completely, and that Hong Kong's interests would not be overlooked. On the question of clarification of HMG's policies, he hoped the delegation appreciated that this could not be giver whilst negotiations were still continuing with our partners in the EEC on a mandate for the Commission. On the request that HMG would not pursue policies which would be harmful to Hong Kong, Mr Murray asked for the delegation's understanding. HMG had to take note of the pressing concerns of other members of the EEC and it also had to take account of the long term future of the British textile and apparel industries. The British negotiators would do the best that they could and he was glad that the delegation had come at this juncture before negotiations were completed, for they would thus be able to remind the Departments responsible of Hong Kong's concern over the MFA. He hoped that the delegation would look on the FCO officials as their friends and advocates.
6.
Mr Tien said that he had discussed the future of the MFA with Mr Murray and Mr Stewart when they were in Hong Kong earlier this year. They had promised to raise the matter with other Government Departments and wondered if there were any results from their approach. Mr Murray said that the information given earlier by Mr Tien had enabled the FCO to present the Hong Kong case fully to other Government Departments. Mr Stewart said he understood from Mr Tien in Hong Kong that the Hong Kong industries did not want a major renegotiation of the MFA. This had not occurred, and that it had not occurred was due in part to the efforts of the FCO. Mr Stewart repeated what he had said in Hong Kong, namely that the FCO would do all it could but this did not change matters on the bilateral. This would have to be renegotiated and the negotiations would be difficult for Hong Kong. Mr Lam said that the main Hong Kong concern was whether the bilateral agreement between the EEC and Hong Kong was to be renegotiated or modified. He hoped that HMG would not, in any discussions, forget Hong Kong's position. Mr Murray gave the assurance requested. Mr Lam stressed the concern of Hong Kong over the question of renegotiation of the bilateral, pointing out the importance of textile exports for Hong Kong, and that if the textile industries were severely damaged, then this could lead to serious social problems. Mr Murray asked Mr Stewart to inform the DOT of what had transpired at the meeting and asked the delegation to let him have some indication, in due course, of how they thought they had
/fared