CONFIDENTIAL #
- 2 -
licensing and legal requirements. Assuming CRC agreed them,
the proposals would then go to ExCo for information. CS
wondered whether the ExCo paper should be for decision as the
subject appeared to concern a major policy. However, C for T
explained that this was not such a major step, but was simply a reciprocal arrangement which was in accordance with the
relevant international conventions.
4.
It was confirmed that all departments with an interest
had agreed the proposals. CS asked whether there would be pressure for an increase beyond the initial limit of 300 PRC vehicles (100/year). C for T said that the Chinese authorities
appeared content for the present, although there might be pressure for a gradual increase over time. The Chinese authorities appeared content to accept the conditions laid down by Hong Kong. SES envisaged an inevitable increase in
pressure. S for T thought that the longer-term implications,
especially for Hong Kong's economy, should be explained to
ExCo. DS(ES)2 said that the haulage trade was not a major
contributor to the economy, and, given the controls envisaged
in the paper, the impact would not be significant. C for T noted that Shenzhen had made the proposal because they were being squeezed by Hong Kong hauliers.
5.
In response to CS, C for T explained that holders of PRC driving licences could obtain Hong Kong driving licences without a further test. However, for goods vehicles over 5 tonnes (as was proposed) they had to take a Hong Kong driving
test. The Chinese authorities accepted this. Arrangements
were being considered for the Hong Kong School of Motoring to
provide suitable courses. In response to DS (ES)2, C for T explained that law enforcement matters were provided for by
insisting that the PRC drivers had an affiliation to a Hong
Kong-based company.
G.F. 326
CONFIDENTIAL #