CONFIDENTIAL
that time is needed to give a fair opportunity to the Chinese-speaking journalists. Is this really necessary?
They rarely ask questions and will surely make adequate use of the replies to questions in English?
A more serious problem is that of the UK-based
journalists or those primarily reporting for London outlets.
They do not usually seem to be in evidence at the outside
sites for doorstep interviews. They will expect an opportunity to quiz the Minister at the end of his visit. There seems little point in doing this separately, eg, over
a drink at Government House, since this will either
duplicate or deny access for the locals (there may of course
be times when an additional backgrounder will make sense).
The usual interviews with RTHK, local television and BBC
Radio provide good coverage. Mr Maude's meeting with editors after his visit to China was very well received, and we see value in repeating this formula when Lord Caithness
next visits Hong Kong.
But there will still be a need for some encounter with
the local and British press corps towards the end of a
visit, and at a time of day that makes sense for Hong Kong
and London deadlines. A speech and questions at lunch or an impromptu but reasonably extended doorstep at the end of say a factory visit could fit the bill. The problem with an
airport session before departure is that this would be late
at night (bad for deadlines); after dinner (and drink), when
the Minister has wound down; after radio/TV interviews which
would have undermined the value of what was being repeated;
and it would have to be done without interpretation or
decent audibility. It would also have to be done without
notes.
2
CONFIDENTIAL
/In