CONFIDENTIAL
10.
The Secretary of State said that was the way he had put it to
Wu in Brussels. His line had been "please do not oblige us to give
the impression that what emerges from the 1987 Review or the Basic Law is predetermined and not susceptible to change". If the Basic
Law framework was to last 60 years there must be
be some ability to change built into it. The part not set in concrete should include the direct elections provisions.
11.
Dr Wilson noted that our point that we would have to conduct
the 1987 Review, which would have to include direct elections, had
eventually been accepted by the Chinese.
12.
Mr Renton asked how we should respond if the Chinese asked us
how we proposed to conduct the 1987 Review SO as to obtain a
genuine, fair opinion as to what the majority of Hong Kong people wanted. The Secretary of State added that the Hong Kong press would ask this question also.
13.
The Governor said the answer was that the Hong Kong
Government had carried out similar and successful exercises in the
past, for example on the last green paper on administration, on
elections to district boards, on the introduction of regional
councils and on indirect elections. The difficulty of the 1987 Review would be that direct elections were not just another possible reform of the administrative structure, but a symbol of whether Hong
Kong people could have what they wanted without
without this being turned
down by China. If it seemed to people that
that the Chinese were not
listening to their views on Daya Bay, they would say the more strongly that they needed direct elections.
14.
The Secretary of State said the Governor's scenario on
consultation about the 1987 Review seemed correct. This would not
be an exercise like the test of acceptability of the Joint
Declaration, but a question for the Hong Kong Government to deal with, as they had dealt with previous questions about the reform of
the administration. The 1987 Review would be a touchstone of
confidence. He wondered whether, for confidence to be maintained,
all that was necessary was that direct elections should clearly be
seen to have been a question open for consideration by the jury, or
CONFIDENTIAL