B)
C)
SECRET
64061 1
-
WE NEED OF COURSE TO AVOID GIVING ANY APPEARANCE OF HAVING
PREJUDGED THE 1987 REVIEW (ESPECIALLY ON DIRECT ELECTIONS)
AND TAKEN FIRM DECISIONS ON THE NECESSITY OF FURTHER CHANGES
IN THE POLITICAL SYSTEM.
WE FEEL WE SHOULD BE CAUTIOUS IN OUR POINTS ABOUT THE GRAND
ELECTORAL COLLEGE (GEC) CONCEPT. AS YOU RIGHTLY SAY IN PARA
11 OF YOUR TELNO 2487, IT IS NOT YET POSSIBLE TO SAY HOW THE
GEC IDEA WILL BE RECEIVED IN HONG KONG (CF THE 1987 REVIEW
AND PARA 2 (B) ABOVE). SOME REFERENCES IN YOUR TEXTS MIGHT
BE TAKEN TO SUGGEST THAT WE HAVE ALREADY DECIDED TO PURSUE
THE GEC OPTION COME WHAT MAY.
D)
3.
AT SOME POINTS WE FEEL THAT THE PAPERS PERHAPS GO FURTHER
THAN NECESSARY INTO POINTS OF DETAIL, THUS TYING OUR OWN
HANDS WHERE THIS MAY NOT BE NECESSARY OR DESIRABLE AT THIS
STAGE.
OUR COMMENTS IN IFTS ARE BASED ON INITIAL DISCUSSIONS
INVOLVING MCLAREN AND FIFOOT. WE NOTE YOUR PROPOSED TIMETABLE IN
PARA 4 OF YOUR TELNO 2486 AND OF COURSE AGREE THAT WE MUST AIM TO
GET THESE PAPERS TO THE CHINESE BEFORE END JULY. BUT THE
TIMETABLE WILL NEED TO BE MORE FLEXIBLE THAN THAT SUGGESTED:
BECAUSE OF JLG VII COMMITMENTS WE SEE NO REALISTIC PROSPECT OF
SUBMITTING TO MINISTERS BY 10 JULY. BUT WE SHALL AIM TO SUBMIT
EARLY THE FOLLOWING WEEKS, CONSULTING MINISTERS ALSO ON THE
DEGREE OF COLLECTIVE MINISTERIAL CLEARANCE WHICH THEY CONSIDER
NECESSARY.
4.
WE AGREE WITH COMMENTS IN PEKING TUR EXCEPT WHERE THEY
ARE OVERTAKEN BY OUR OWN AMENDMENTS.
5.
WE HAVE NOW RECEIVED YOUR TELNO 2606. WE DEAL WITH
EXCO'S COMMENTS SERIATIM IN THE COURSE OF IFTS.
HOWE
OCMIAN 4061
HONG KONG AGREEMENT: RESTRICTED
LIMITED
HD/HKD
HD/FED
RESEARCH DEPT.(FE)
DEP/HD PUSD
PS/LORD GLENARTHUR
PS/MR EGGAR
MR MCLAREN
MR GILLMORE
COPIES TO:
MR FIFOOT, LEGAL ADVISERS
-2-
Secret