6. ON PARAGRAPH 2 THE CHINESE HAVE INSERTED THE WORDS

CERTIFICATES SUBSTITUTING PASSPORTS'. THEY CALIMED THAT

THEY HAD BEEN ASKING FOR THIS FROM THE BEGINNING, AND THAT WE HAD LEFT IT OUT, POSSIBLY ACCIDENTALLY. THIS MAY BE TRUE. LIN REF- ERRED ORALLY TO TWO CATEGORIES OF DOCUMENTS, TRAVEL PERMITS

AND REPATRIATION CERTIFICATES.

7. MORE SERIOUSLY THE CHINESE HAVE REMOVED THE REQUIREMENT THAT

THE VISA OFFICE SHOULD REPORT TO THE IMMIGRATION DEPARTMENT ALL REPLACEMENT DOCUMENTS ISSUED, AND INSERTED INSTEAD A REQUIRE- MENT THAT CHINESE CITIZENS WHO RECEIVE THEM SHOULD CLEAR FORM- ALIGIES WITH THE HONG KONG AUTHORITIES. GALSWORTHY SAID THAT

HE WAS DISAPPOINTED THAT THE CHINESE HAD REMOVED THE REQUIRE- MENT TO REPPORT REPLACEMENT DOCUMENTS ISSUED TO THE HONG KONG AUTHORITIES. THIS WAS A PINT OF NORMAL PRACTICAL COOPERATION. IF THE HONG KONG AUTHORITIES WERE NOT INFORMED OF SUCH REPLACE- MENTS IT WOULD CAUSE GREAT CONFUSION, PARTICULARLY GIVEN THE COMPUTERISED METHODS USED BY THE IMMIGRATION DEPARTMENT. UNDER PRESSURE, LIN SAID THAT HE WOULD CONSIDER FURTHER THE PRACTICAL IMPLICATIONS, BUT HE GAVE NO HINT OF ANY FLEXIBILITY ON THE POINT.

8. LIN THEN SAID THAT SINCE WE WERE INTENDING TO LEGISLATE, THE CHINESE SIDE WOULD LIKE THE LEGISLATION ALSO TO DEAL WITH THE IMUNITIES FOR DIPLOMATIC COURIERS GOING TO THE VISA OFFICE. HE RECALLED THAT IN 1981 WE HAD SAID THAT SUCH IMMUNITIES COULD NOT BE EXTENDED FORMALLY, BECAUSE THE LAW DID NOT ALLOW IT, BUT HAD SAID THAT THEY WOULD BE EXTENDED IN PRACTICE. COULD WE NOW PER- HAPS EXTEND THEM FORMALLY BY MEANS OF THE NEW LAW. WE AGREED TO LOOK INTO THIS. (YOU WILL RECALL THAT PARA 11, 3 OF THE MEMORANDUM OF 23.9.81 STATED AN RESERVATIONS ON THIS POINT).

9. FINALLY LIN SAA

L THAT PARA 11, 3 OF THE MEMORANDUM

OF 23.9.81 STATED AN RESERVATIONS ON THIS POINT).

9. FINALLY LIN SAID THAT THE VISA OFFICE AGREEMENT AND THE CONSULAR AGREEMENT SHOULD ENTER INTO FORCE TOGETHER. SINCE

LEGISLATION WOULD BE NECESSARY THE CHINESE WOULD EXPECT NEITHER

AGREEMENT TO ENTER INTO FORCE UNTIL THE LEGISLATION HAD BEEN

COMPLETED. GALSWORTHY SAID THAT WE ACCEPTED THAT THE TWO AGREEMENTS SHOULD ENTER INTO FORCE TOGETHER, BUT THOUGHT

IT WOULD BE UNREASONABLE OF THE CHINESE TO INSIST THAT NO

CONCRETE PREPARATIONS FOR THE OPENING OF OUR CONSUBCOQO IN

SHANGHAI COULD TAKE PLACE UNTIL THE FORMAL ENTRY INTO FORCE

OF THE AGREEMENTS. LIN INDICATED THAT THE CHINESE WOULD IMPOSE

SUCH A REQUIREMENT. GALSWORTHY SPOKE FORCEFULLY ABOUT THIS, BUT RECEIVED NO CHANGE.

2

CONFIDENTIAL

| COMMENT

Share This Page