.........
Restricted
Miller concluded that he wondered whether we could provide any Whitehall, as opposed to HKG, comment on Mr Cha's paper.
paper
4. I said that we should not be able to comment on the
which had been submitted to
the Basic Law Drafting Committee and was
therefore a matter for the Chinese. That said, our aim
just as much as Mr Cha's was stability. We were implementing
the agreed proposals in the White Paper with due care and
prudence. Mr Miller pressed me to comment on how ideas such as
Mr Cha's would be taken in to account in the 1987 review.
said that all ideas expressed in Hong Kong were naturally noted
and would no doubt be considered in 1987.
I
5. Mr Miller asked how Chinese ideas, set out in the Basic
Law, and British ideas, resulting from the 1987 review, could
be made compatible. We could not both go Our separate ways.
Was the Joint Liaison Group a vehicle for discussion of such
matters? I pointed to the terms of reference of the Joint
Liaison Group, underlining that it was tasked to concentrate in
its early years on matters such as
GATT, etc.
international agreements,
The 1987 review would, of course, precede the
Basic Law in Hong Kong.
present adopting a wait
one way ог the other on
circulation of a detailed text of the
I hoped that the Chinese, who were at
and see
attitude and commenting neither
Our moves on constitutional development, might be persuaded
that the measures we we re implementing would be right for Hong Kong in the future. They might then incorporate them in the Basic Law. Mr Miller asked how Chinese views would eventually
be made known to us.
I said that I was sure that if they
wished to give us their views they would find no difficulty in
doing so.
b.e. Eummerca
W G Ehrman
14 August
Restricted