CONFIDENTIAL

167156

MDHIA 66

ENTIRELY A MATTER FOR THE HKG. HE REPEATED THAT THE NCNA STATEMENT COULD ONLY BE CONSTRUED AS AN ATTEMPT TO INTERFERE IN THE ADMINISTRATION OF HONG KONG. HE ADDED THAT JI'S REMARK ON NO CONSULTATION WAS EXTREMELY SURPRISING. THIS WAS A MATTER FOR THE HONG KONG GOVERNMENT. BUT IF THE CHINESE HAD VIEWS, WHY HAD THEY NOT ASKED US FOR AN EXPLANATION OF THE BILL'S TERMS? IT HAD BEEN PUBLISHED FOR A LONG TIME NOW.

6. JI SAID OPINIONS EXPRESSED IN PRIVATE WERE NOT ENOUGH. HE REPEATED THAT IT WAS NOT INTERFERENCE. NCNA HAD NEVER MADE A PUBLIC STATEMENT ON A MATTER SUCH AS THIS BEFORE. IT WAS BECAUSE OF THE STRENGTH OF FEELINGS OF THE NEW TERRITORIES RESIDENTS THAT THEY HAD FELT THEY MUST DO SO THIS TIME.

7. EHRMAN SAID THAT JI'S LAST REMARKS ONLY UNDERLINED THE FACT THAT NCNA ACCEPTED THAT IT WAS NOT NORMAL TO SEEK TO INTERFERE WITH OUR ADMINISTRATION ON SUCH MATTERS. JI'S REMARKS WERE NOT IN THE LEAST CONVINCING. MANY PEOPLE HAD VIEWS ON MANY ISSUES IN HONG KONG BUT MATTERS OF HONG KONG'S INTERNAL ADMINISTRATION WERE FOR US TO DEAL WITH.

JI UNDERTOOK TO REPORT OUR STATEMENT AND VIEWS.

8 *

FORD

YYYY

ΜΑΙΝ

58

.HONG KONG AGREEMENT

.(RESTRICTED)

LIMITED

HKD

HD/FED

NEWS D

ADDITIONAL

3

MS FOAKES LEGAL ADVISERS

MS BARRETT LEGAL ADVISERS

NNNN

DISTRIBUTION

61

PUSD

RAD

PS/LORD CAITHNESS

PS/MR LENNOX-BOYD

MR MCLAREN

MR BURNS

MR FIFOOT LEGAL ADVISERS

PAGE

2

CONFIDENTIAL

Share This Page