COVERING RESTRICTED
I syness
Good thought, but I don't think a move here wd be enough to block the awport impasse at this stage, and I am swe Munsters will want to see if it is unblocked, before
more taxpayer! FROM: (HLI Davies trowing more taxpayer!
почему
Mr Coke
China! Let's
suk back for now.
M DATE:
2875
A dificilt stick
CC:
and carrot job. Last year consessional Financiry was on issue. But I think the cement ceuport problems M. Sana
Mr Bone are
ON a differnt
political, level.
ATP REVIEW
из 4/5
Ke
Burn's
Mr Cox
122/2 29/5.
Wewens
Far Eastern Department
12 May 1992
Sir J Coles (o/r)
Mr Burns
Mr Hewitt,
SEAD
Mr Williams, SAD Mr Ricketts, HKD
M2115
4. Perhops and
wid thie
15 Chira might unblock the
asa.
My Tyrners
our airport? should we
current impasse
Chiriere our
weigh in
1. Mr Burns invited me to feed you any thoughts on Mr Ireton's draft submission on the ATP Review. I have not seen any recent papers on this, so I come to it fresh.
2.
There
The conclusions of the interdepartmental report (as summarised by Mr Ireton) strike me as pretty one-sided. They concentrate almost exclusively on the pure economic case for or against ATP, and find against. This is an entirely respectable position and one which our Economic Advisers, ODA Economists and HMT are quite right to advocate. I am not sure that we should necessarily expect the Foreign Secretary to go along with it undiluted. are after all other potential (if not necessarily fully realised) benefits from ATP, including the admittedly intangible political goodwill engendered in the recipient country, goodwill which can flow across into other parts of the bilateral relationship eg willingness to be helpful to HMG's interests in international fora. I see absolutely no reference to these "other" factors in Mr Ireton's
drafts, which if they are to reflect Diplomatic Wing input must surely be amended. Alternatively, the Diplomatic Wing may need to inject a separate comment.
3.
From an FED viewpoint, I cannot
cannot really quarrel with Mr Ireton's recommendation that China (with Indonesia) should be one of the few future recipients of ATP. The Chinese would certainly read a political message into any UK decision to cease ATP arrangements for China; particularly when all our major OECD partners (except the US) offer them. But I am not convinced that Mr Ireton has argued the case through. Why aid China? The Secretary of State asked that
HD 2 AL V
COVERING RESTRICTED
24