198

A

GRS 600

SECRET

FM CANBERRA 14084OZ JUL 83

TO IMMEDIATE FCO

TELEGRAM NUMBER 356 OF 14 JULY

SECRET

AND TO IMMEDIATE HONG KONG (PERSONAL FOR COVERNOR), PEKING

-YOUR TELNO 225: FUTURE OF HONG KONG,

FOLLOWING PERSONAL FOR DONALD.

1. SUMMARY

:

Į SPOKE AS INSTRUCTED TO MR HAYDEN ON 14 JULY. HE SAID THAT HE

ACCEPTED MY REBUKE AND EXPRESSED HIS CONTRITITION.

2. DETAIL

MKK040/5

2 1 JULK93

AFTER SOME FALSE STARTS, NOT HIS FAULT, I FINALLY CAUGHT UP WITH MR HAYDEN AT HIS HOME BASE IN BRISBANE, AT 0030 YOUR TIME ON 14 JULY. I KNEW, FROM A CHANCE REMARK TO MY DEPUTY AT A COCKTAIL PARTY IN CANBERRA ON 13 JULY, THAT YOU HAD REMONSTRATED WITH AN UNNAMED

AUSTRALIAN INTERLOCUTOR, BUT OF COURSE DID NOT KNOW WHAT YOU HAD SAID. IT WOULD HAVE BEEN HELPFUL IF I HAD.

3. I TOLD MR HAYDEN THAT I WAS INSTRUCTED TO EXPRESS MINISTERS'

CONCERN LEST OUR VIEWS ON THE FUTURE OF HONG KONG MIGHT BE MOVING

APART, AND IN PARTICULAR THEIR ''GRAVE DISAPPOINTMENT'' AT SOME

OF HIS REMARKS AT HIS HONG KONG PRESS CONFERENCE. I ADDED THAT I PERSONALLY COULD UNDERSTAND THAT HE MIGHT HAVE BEEN DISAPPOINTED

HIMSELF AT THE QUALITY AND EXTENT OF THE BRIEFING WHICH I HAD

BEEN AUTHORISED TO PROVIDE, BUT THAT I WAS ALSO TAKEN ABACK

TO HAVE BEEN APPARENTLY MISLED BY HIS OFFICIALS OVER THE NATURE

OF HIS TALKS WITH THE CHINESE FOREIGN MINISTER IN CANBERRA (PARA

5 OF MY TEL 344).

4. TURNING TO THE PRESS CONFERENCE, I SPOKE AS SUGGESTED IN PARA 1 OF TUR. MR HAYDEN IMMEDIATELY REPLIED THAT HE ACCEPTED MY REBUKE.

HE REGRETTED HIS USE OF THE WORD TRANSITION. HE WAS DISCOMFITED

AND CONTRITE. HE ASKED ME TO CONVEY HIS PERSONAL APOLOGY TO

SIR P HADDON-CAVE FOR ANY EMBARRASSSMENT HE MIGHT HAVE CAUSED HIM.

HE WAS ABOVE ALL ANXIOUS NOT TO BE THE CAUSE OF ANY PROBLEMS IN

RESPECT OF THIS DIFFICULT AND IMPORTANT ISSUE.

5. AS TO HIS CONVERSATION WITH THE CHINESE FOREIGN MINISTER,

HE SAID THAT, AS I SUSPECTED, HIS DEPARTMENT WERE **MIFFED AT WHAT THEY SAW AS MY INADEQUATE BRIEFING OF THEM. THEY HAD THEREFORE

NOT TOLD ME OF HIS CONVERSATION, BUT HE THOUGHT THAT THEIR CLAIM

THAT HONG KONG HAD ONLY BEEN BRIEFLY MENTIONED DURING THE OFFICIAL

TALKS WAS NOT TOO WIDE OF THE MARK, HE HAD RAISED THE SUBJECT AT

THE END OF AN HOUR-LONG MONOLOGUE BY WU

99

n unsti 4

See 200

See 15

THIS IS A COPY

THE ORIGINAL HAS BEEN 40 YEARS UNDER FOI CLOSED FOR EXEMPTION No. 27(9)

SECRET

16.

Share This Page