CONFIDENTIAL
HKB 011/3
RECEIVED I!
MY
03 MAR 1989
Mr Paul, HKD
SK
CER
(107,
Fotic
Secretary of State's Breakfast Meeting with Mr David Howell
with
At his breakfast with Mr Howell on 28 February the Secretary of State covered all the points in the briefing you provided. Mr Howell is sensitive and understanding on all these issues. He agreed that the Governor should give his formal evidence in London and then see the FAC informally when they visit Hong Kong. He fully understood the problems of the Hong Kong press and the need to try to explain to them that the FAC do not represent the Government. Mr Howell seemed generally to know Hong Kong very well and have a good idea of the various vested interests involved; he knew for example the Keswicks.
The Secretary of State thinks it would be helpful
to let Mr Howell have notes on undertakings and on the question of passports for businessmen. He has not taken a view of whether these notes should be for Mr Howell alone or for the Committee as a whole.
In general the Secretary of State thinks that we should err on the side of giving the FAC too much in the way of written material rather than too little.
I have spoken to the Secretary of State about the format for the informal briefing on 8 March. He envisages a short opening statement of perhaps 15 minutes followed by a question and answer session. He would like to deliver his statement from notes, not from a full text. It should concentrate on four or five main points. These might be:
a)
The fallacy in the Economist article. The Secretary of State would like to demonstrate with chapter and verse just how hard we pushed the Chinese in 1983 and how clearly they demonstrated that if they could not have sovereignty through negotiation they were prepared to see the Hong Kong economy destroyed.
Democracy and instability.
Citizenship/passports.
b)
cl
d)
Basic Law.
e)
Vietnamese Boat People.
CONFIDENTIAL
/Mr Howell
116