RESTRICTED
C
well-respected.
His allegations (which match those made by
conservation NGOs in the UK at the time we entered the Reservation)
may well cause us problems.
4.
[Insert]
There are two sentences in the standard reply which refer to the
alleged connection between the Reservation and poaching. The first
is the sentence at the end of paragraph 2 which reads 'Enforcement
is strict and there should be no opportunity for poachers'. This
sentence was added to the original draft at the request of the
Secretary of State and has been used in all replies from him and the
Prime Minister. The use of the word 'should', however, renders this
sentence sufficiently vague to pass muster. More difficult is the first sentence of paragraph 7 which reads 'Allowing Hong Kong to
trade its legally-acquired ivory will not create a threat to living
elephants because imports are already banned'. There is clearly a case in present circumstances for replacing the words 'will not' by
'should not'.
5. However, the Prime Minister, Secretary of State and Mr
Waldegrave have between them used this wording in answering nearly
200 letters from Members of Parliament. And MAED have used the same
line in replying to the first 300 of 1,200 letters from members of
the public. If we were to alter the sentence in para 7 there is a risk that this will be noticed by the conservation groups who we know read these replies very carefully. They could then claim that
we are admitting that there is some grain of truth in what Dr
Leakey, and they, have been saying. And since we do not believe
that the Leakey case is proved conclusively it would seem more
appropriate to hold to our standard reply for the present.
C42ADC/SLK
معد
E. J. Hughes
E J Hughes
Maritime, Aviation and
Environment Department
RESTRICTED