GRS500 SECRET
SECRET
FM HONG KONG 2010452 MAR 84
TO IMMEDIATE FCO
TELEGRAM NUMBER 746 OF 20 MARCH
INFO IMMEDIATE PEKING
23
-NR
.MKKO40/31
USTRY TUAR 1734
14
8. Kunk
YOUR TELNOS 233 AND 234: FUTURE OF HONG KONG: FOREIGN AFFAIRS DEBATE.
1. I SHOWED THE DRAFT IN YOUR SECOND TEL UNDER REF TO EXCO AT A
PART II MEETING THIS MORNING, MAKING IT CLEAR THAT IT WAS NOT THE
FINAL VERSION. IN DOING SO I SAID THAT THE STATEMENT COULD BE
REGARDED AS THE FIRST STEP IN THE UNVEILING PROCESS WHICH WOULD
BE CARRIED FURTHER IN THE PUBLIC STATEMENT WHICH YOU PROPOSED TO MAKE DURING YOUR VISIT TO HONG KONG. SINCE THAT VISIT WOULD TAKE
PLACE WHILE PARLIAMENT WAS IN RECESS IT WAS IMPORTANT THAT
PARLIAMENT SHOULD BE GIVEN SOME INDICATION OF THE DIRECTION IN
WHICH WE WERE MOVING BEFOREHAND.
2. AS I HAD ANTICIPATED, THERE WAS NO DISPOSITION TO ARGUE THAT A
STATEMENT ON THE LINES PROPOSED WOULD PREEMPT WHAT YOU MIGHT SAY
IN HONG KONG. THERE WERE ONLY TWO SUBSTANTIVE COMMENTS ON THE TEXT:
(A) SIR S.Y. CHUNG SUGGESTED THAT THE SENTENCE IN PARA 4 WHICH
READS FOR THE FUTURE IT IS POSSIBLE TO VISUALISE OTHER WAYS
IN WHICH CONTINUITY CAN BE ASSURED'' MIGHT BE AMENDED TO BEGIN
''FOR THE FUTURE IT IS (NEXT WORD UNDERLINED) NECESSARY TO
VISUALISE OTHER WAYS...'' HE ARGUED THAT THIS WOULD MAKE THE
MEANING CLEARER TO THOSE WHO COULD NOT READ BETWEEN THE LINES.
I SAID THAT I DID NOT THINK THE PRESS WOULD BE SLOW TO SEE THE
SIGNIFICANCE OF YOUR INTENDED REMARKS.
(B) ANOTHER SENIOR UNOFFICIAL THOUGHT THAT THERE WAS AN IMPORTANT
OMISSION IN THAT THERE WAS NO MENTION IN THE DRAFT OF HMG'S
OBLIGATIONS TOWARDS THE THREE MILLION BDTC'S, AND INDEED TO
ALL THOSE NOW LIVING IN HONG KONG. I SAID THAT I WOULD PUT THIS
POINT TO LONDON BUT THE VIEW THERE MIGHT WELL BE THAT IT WOULD
BE MORE APPROPRIATELY COVERED IN YOUR SECOND STATEMENT IN HONG
KONG RATHER THAN IN THE ONE TO BE MADE ON 22 MARCH.
SECRET
/c.
see
40
27