Mr Szell
P3/106
HONK KONG AND THE MONTREAL PROTOCOL
-3283
Mu hodge
12
%
We have recently received the attached telegramme from Hong Kong via FCO and are in need of your advice.
We believe Hong Kong are right in their paragraph 3, that their quota is part of UK's and that asking them to stick to a schedule based on their 1986 consumption is for the sake of administrative convenience. I would be grateful for your confirmation of this.
We think that paragraph 4, on formalising their position, is for FCO lawyers rather than for you, are we correct?
For paragraph 5 on the shorter EC timetable for phase out, we understand that EC acceleration of phase out beyond the Protocol dates comes into effect through EC legislation, and therefore does not apply Hong Kong. It is not formalised under the Protocol and thus has effect on Hong Kong. However we should recognise that Hong Kong has no voice-in Protocol negotiations, except as we represent them. We have made no attempt so far to do so. With Amendments to the Protocol Hong Kong can choose whether to ratify or not, but with
but with adjustments they have no such choice. Miss McConnell may wish to advise whether we should be doing something about this. Under the circumstances, Hong Kong's suggestion in, paragraph 7, that they attend meetings with observer status seems modest, although we would be reluctant to invite them to participate as part of UK delegation.
Paragraph 6, on the presentation of a clear picture to the Chinese, also seems to us to be a matter for FCO.
I understand that FCO have already issued a holding reply to this telegramme.
Ann
Galiy
Ann Godfrey
GA3
B260 RH
276 8621
31 October 1991
cc Mr Davis
Mr Smith FCO Mrs Nolan
Miss McConnell Mr Lee-Bapty
Can Farren
There are
carscendenti
IRKOS? Rastofunction
100%