1992-12-04 19:13 COMMS OFFICE (GOVT HOUSE)
852 526 0995
P.30
POSITION CLEAR.
I HAVE THE DISTINCT IMPRESSION BEFORE
VISITS THAT CHINESE OFFICIALS, AS IS DOUBTLESS THEIR JOB,
DOING THAT VERY VIGOROUSLY. LAST QUESTION.
EACH OF MY
HAVE BEEN
SZETO WAH: MR GOVERNOR, WHEN YOU WERE IN LONDON YOU SAID, YOU TALKED ABOUT EMPTY THREATS AND IT LED TO SOME MISUNDERSTANDING.
AT THAT
TIME, WHY DID YOU USE THE TERM EMPTY THREATS, BECAUSE IN THE LAST TWO DAYS IF YOU WERE TO USE ANOTHER ADJECTIVE, WOULD YOU USE ANOTHER
ADJECTIVE? IF SO, WHAT WILL THAT NEW ADJECTIVE BE?
THINK
I
USED
IT
IN
THE
UNITED
A
THAT
ABOUT
GOVERNOR: THE CONFUSION TO WHICH THE HONOURABLE MEMBER REFERS IS
SOMETHING THAT PERHAPS I COULD EXPLAIN TO THOSE MEMBERS OF THE COUNCIL
WHO AREN'T AWARE OF IT. I USED THE WORD EMPTY THREATS, ACTUALLY I'
KINGDOM, AFTER IN CANADA, NOT IN
STATEMENT HAD BEEN MADE DENOUNCING THIS LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL FOR HAVING
THE TEMERITY TO DO WHAT IT'S SUPPOSED TO DO UNDER THE BASIC LAW.
IS, TO VOTE ON LEGISLATIVE ARRANGEMENTS. I USED THE WORD EMPTY THREATS
RELATION TO THE STATEMENT THAT WAS MADE I THINK BY THE NCNA
THAT VOTE AND IT WAS TRANSLATED BY ONE OF THE AGENCIES,
SURE A RARE ERROR, AS BEING EMPTY-HEADED RATHER THAN EMPTY THREATS.
UNDER EMPTY-HEADED WOULDN'T OF COURSE ACCUSE ANYONE FOR BEING
CONCEIVABLE CIRCUMSTANCES, BECAUSE AS THE HONOURABLE MEMBER WILL KNOW,
I AM A MAN OF GREAT FORBEARANCE. THAT WAS THE
THOUGH THERE WAS THE REACTION TO WHICH THE HONOURABLE MEMBER REFERRED,
IT WAS ROOTED IN WHAT THE AGENCY SAID RATHER THAN WHAT THE GOVERNOR OF
LOT OF HONG KONG SAID. I DON'T WANT TO USE ADJECTIVES, THERE ARE A
MAKING I'M
I
ANY
CONFUSION AND EVEN
BY THE
ADJECTIVES BEING USED AT THE MOMENT, THEY ARE NOT BEING USED
GOVERNMENT OF HONG KONG. WHAT I WILL SAY IS JUST THIS. THOSE WHO TALK,
AS WE ALL DO, ABOUT SECURING THE PROSPERITY AND STABILITY OF HONG KONG
SHOULD IN MY JUDGEMENT MAKE EVERY EFFORT TO ACHIEVE THAT OBJECTIVE AND
24