CONFIDENTIAL
HKK 340/1
RECEIVED IN REGISTRY NO. 51 19 JUN 1980
DESK OFFICER
REGINTRY
(64)
Perhaps an
NEW NATIONALITY LAW: DEPENDENT TERRITORIES
1.
58
INDEX
-
PA
Action liken
My minute of 9 June. NTD and we have been trying clearance from the Home Office for the draft telegram to Hong Kong. I spoke to Mr Woodfield about this today.
2. He said that they could not agree to the despatch of any telegram at this stage, ie before the Home Affairs Committee had considered the draft White Paper. He do not know what other Cabinet colleagues, in particular the Prime Minister, would think although he expected that the Home Secretary and the LPS would be able to make their joint view prevail. He also said that he was unhappy at our describing in any detail the different positions taken by two Cabinet Ministers.
see (66
3. I said that we owed the Governor a telegram before too long but would of course wait until after the Home Affairs Committee. Mr Woodfield agreed that a telegram should be sent then. I said that we had not intended that the Governor should tell EXCO in any details about the exchange between the LPS and Mr Whitelaw and we would make this clear in redrafting. What was important, however, was that the Governor should be able to assure EXCO that Foreign Office Ministers had taken Hong Kong's views into account and had given them as much support as possible.
4.
Mr Woodfield then asked about the undertaking in the final paragraph of the draft telegram to send copies of the White Paper to Dependent Territories in advance. Would this be physically possible? I said that I understood that arrangements could be made as part of a general exercise to brief FCO posts. Mr Woodfield said that he was not happy at the idea of Executive Councils, Ministers, etc being shown the White Paper before MPs at Westminster had it. There could be a leak and grave political embarrassment. I said that we appreciated this point but there was a need to give advance warning to Dependent Territories, particularly on those sections which directly affected them, in order to counter any accusation that they were simply being bounced. We agreed that the matter would have to be discussed further.
oral aderanc Wanning is brough
It
His is all
we have done
5. I think that the Home Office are not being unreasonable on the the telegram although we may have to argue about the amount which the Governor can tell EXCO about Ministers' activities on Hong Kong's behalf. It is important that EXCO should realise that the
Ministers, have been taken seriously.
in olles cases representations which they have made, in some cases personally to
M= Patridge
gM + V Seft.
has caridhable
6.
I have considered whether we need to send a personal telegram to the Governor explaining how matters stand. However, since the Hong Kong Secretary for Security, Mr Davies, (who is responsible
experience of briefing
Gwealth Gov's in advance
of disagreeable amoreets.
uz.
CONFIDENTIAL
/for