CONFIDENTIAL
Sevetem of State
29
Pivate lease by
нич
PS/Lord Caithness
onta
1990
FROM:
DATE:
co
CC
CISTRY Action: Teken
ANNUAL REPORT ON HONG KONG 1990
PS/Mr Lennox-Boyd
31 October 1990
PS
Mr McLaren
Mr Burns
Mr Lidington, Special
Advisers
PRU
Mr Paul, HKD
I agree option
1 Mr Lennox-Boyd has studied Mr Paul's submission of 26 October. He is firmly of the view that we do not want an annual debate on Hong Kong. On the question of the Report, he agrees with Mr Paul's view that option (iii) is the best, providing it incorporates the comments offered by
Mr Lidington about cross-referencing. Mr Lennox-Boyd feels it is essential that the Governor's address to LegCo must be available if requested. Our new Annual Report should therefore state that the Governor's address is available in the library of the House and that Members can refer to it.
111
Mattel
Martin Hatfull
CONFIDENTIAL
CONFIDENTIAL
MAD all
DISTTRY
3. 007 1990
30 OCT 1990
FROM:
A R Paul
Hong Kong Department
26 October 1990
INDEX
PA
REGISTRY Action Taken
DATE:
CC:
Mr McLaren
PRU
Mr Burns
Special Advisers
PS/M: Lennox Bora Mighter. (Minute).
Berá
PS/Lord Caithness
Private Secretary
ANNUAL REPORT ON HONG KONG, 1990
Problem
1. Should we continue to produce an annual report on Hong
Kong for Parliament? If so, what format should we adopt?
Recommendation
A
2. I recommend that we should continue to produce an Annual
Report. But the present format leaves much to be desired
and we should try to make the report more compact and readable. I should be grateful for a steer from Ministers.
Background
3.
Ministers agreed in December 1984 to produce an Annual
Report on Hong Kong to Parliament in response to pressure from Mr Denis Healey (then the Opposition spokesman for Foreign Affairs) during a debate on the Joint Declaration,
which was signed later that month (19 December 1984).
relevant Hansard extract is attached.
The
BUGADM/1
CONFIDENTIAL
てる
CONFIDENTIAL
B
4.
The idea behind the report appears to have been that, by
focussing the attention of Parliament on Hong Kong, it would help to reassure the people of the territory about the UK's commitment to safeguard their future. The idea received broad support, including that of Mr David Howell and
Sir Peter Blaker. Following a certain amount of pressure,
Mr Richard Luce, then Minister of State at the Foreign
Office, undertook, during the Committee Stage of the Hong Kong Bill, to produce an Annual Report and to lay it before
the House.
C
5.
Five Reports for the years 1985-1989, similar in format
to the attached copy, have now been duly produced. None has
occasioned a debate, and there is every reason to believe
that they have for the most part remained unread both in
London and in Hong Kong. They are dull and turgid. Most of
the material they contain can be found elsewhere, eg in the
Governor's annual address to LegCo, or in the Hong Kong
Handbook, which is published annually in Hong Kong and which
contains comprehensive and detailed information on all aspects of Hong Kong. Last year, in an effort to spice the Report up a little, we added a foreword by the Secretary of
State.
6. The bulk of these Annual Reports is drafted in Hong Kong; this is then redrafted in London, where additional paragraphs on subjects of particular political concern to HMG are added. Altogether they represent a considerable investment of man hours, both in Hong Kong and in London.
Argument
7.
There is a case for considering whether this annual
exercise is the most effective way of serving the purpose for which it was originally conceived in 1984, ie to keep
the House informed of important developments relating to
BUGADM/2
CONFIDENTIAL