continues to develop, therefore, it is likely that Hong Kong would seek to negotiate an ASA with Vietnam well before 1997 and that the Chinese could be consulted on that. Thus the question of disclosing a Hong Kong/Vietnam arrangement to the Chinese may become academic.
7.
However, with some other partners, Hong Kong might prefer to maintain air services after 1997 on the basis of arrangements other than ASAS. This flexibility to judge the needs of the market is something that Hong Kong has now. Its removal may raise questions of principle over the degree of autonomy to be exercised by Hong Kong in the management of its air services and indeed its ability to continue implementing domestic legislation, such as the AT(LAS) Regulations.
8.
As things stand now, therefore, I see the implication of UKRep's initiative as being that the UK would also need to seek Chinese consent to the informal basis on which services by the likes of Air Nauru, Air Niugini and Air Mauritius currently operate to Hong Kong if they are to continue on that basis after 1997. Any arrangements for services to Cambodia would also come into this category. For the reasons given above this would set unfortunate precedents for other arrangements. From discussions with colleagues last month in Hong Kong, I believe some confusion has arisen over the different meanings of "arrangements" in JD 121 and JD 124. In the Chinese language version, the word used in JD 121 covers the situation when an ASA has been signed and is being implemented administratively pending ratification; while that in JD 124 can mean the less formal arrangements discussed above. Clearly, no specific authorisation can or should be issued in respect of the latter, and they are not an appropriate subject for consultation with the Chinese. Nevertheless they are not at the moment consistent with JD 122.
9.
The conclusion that can be drawn from all this is that between now and 1997, notwithstanding the points
points made in paragraph 7 above, Hong Kong should be seeking actively to put its non ASA arrangements on a more formal footing, so that in all cases we have a suitable basis for consulting the Chinese, whilst keeping the implementing arrangements separate. I am not sure whether the provisional arrangements referred to in JD 121 can mean anything other than unratified ASAS: if not, Hong Kong would clearly be well-advised to go for ASAS in all cases. If you are in agreement with this analysis, we might then discuss it with the FCO with a view to sharing it with Hong Kong and UKRep JLG to ensure that we are on the same wavelength.
Martin Clan
JÈGUE THETTONO NURTULK
MM GLASS
IA1C S6/01
Tel: 276 0533
"
ཙ