CONFIDENTIAL
(1/3), on the grounds that some of those buried there are civilians. I think that we would have to make this clear to this Chinese, since the costs will fall to the SAR Government in future. We should also establish whether there are similar considerations for the other public cemetaries.
(c) there remains the question of the management of the cemetaries. Currently the Director of Urban Services is both responsible for the general management of Hong Kong cemetaries and, in his capacity as CWGC agent in Hong Kong, protects the CWGC interests in the cemetaries and takes care of their day-to-day running. Evidently, there is potential for conflict between these two roles, and the CWGC may wish to appoint an alternative agent. Again we should tell the Chinese if the SAR Government is to take on responsibilities, whether for the CWGC cemetaries and/or for other public cemetaries.
(d) we need to establish whether the vesting of the land in the Crown under the Deeds of Appropriation is in "the Crown in right of UK" or "in right of Hong Kong". If the former, the potential for difficulties is greater.
(e) the draft ExCo paper suggests (para 9) that the question should be raised because of commitments given by Mr Luce in 1984. It seems the issue should be raised on its own merits.
(f) there might be a case for tackling the issue in the JLG in the context of Hong Kong's future links with the Commonwealth as a whole, (including the continuation or otherwise of the Commonwealth Committee in Hong Kong referred to in para 12 of the draft Exco paper). But that is likely to delay matters further and be more
difficult for the Chinese.
5.
If you are content with the general approach and the specific points identified above, I shall seek Legal Advisers' views before drafting a reply for Mr Paul to send to Mr Tsang.
→ now moved. Mr Darwin Chen
is the new bs(w).
AGREE
AGREE
DOESN'T
MATTER
NO
YES
16 February 1989
Nicholas Gumen
N Cannon
Hong Kong Department
CONFIDENTIAL