8.
CONFIDENTIAL
5
Why 1995 and not earlier? Apart from the fact that it might then be easier to establish an overt Office and develop direct liaison with those CPG bodies which will have determinant roles for Hong Kong after 1997, we do not in fact see a pressing need for a new body to carry out the other functions listed in paragraph 6 before then, although we would lose the opportunities for training and contacts for Administrative Officers in the interim. In terms of information work, a combination of contact with the Chinese in Hong Kong, visits in both directions, and the work of the Embassy and the TDC in Peking broadly meet the bill at present in the unclassified domain and can be developed before 1995 as necessary. In the more sensitive areas, contacts between the JLG Offices and the HKG and NCNA, and visits by the Governor to Peking and senior Chinese to Hong Kong, will remain our preferred means of educating the Chinese about Hong Kong before 1997, with or without a Peking Office. Logistic support to visitors and businessmen is provided at present by the Embassy and the TDC: a Peking office might be able to do a bit more, and more Hong Kong people might go to it, but there is no great deficiency with present arrangements. Reporting is adequately covered by the Embassy at present. A combination of visits from Hong Kong and the TDC work in Peking cover the commercial side. Much of our effort in this field is in any case directed at Guangdong, which can best be managed from Hong Kong. There is no need for Hong Kong itself to process visa applications before 1997, although in the last year or two it would be desirable that it starts to deal with permits for the Chinese visiting Hong Kong, which it would then carry on processing after 1997.
9.
There is one other factor which has also led us to see advantages in a later start date: land. Giving ourselves longer might help us negotiate a better swap deal for an Office site. We will put down this marker with the Chinese when discussing their requirement for an MFA Office.
10.
We would be interested in your comments on the above, and those of copy addressees. Tony Galsworthy has been involved in the discussions on this issue and is content with our conclusions.
Yours sincerely,
Likian
(W G Ehrman) Political Adviser
C.C.:
David Coates Esq, BE Peking
Anthony Galsworthy Esq CMG, UKREP JLG HK Peter Heap Esq CMG, SBTC HK
CONFIDENTIAL