- 2 -
The position
the narrowest of margins. When the list is published, as I believe it will be by the HK Administration, I think it very likely that we will get considerable criticism from companies narrowly rejected who see little difference between themselves Our answer will have to be that
under the Act and firms which were accepted.
the Committee discharged its duties to the best of its ability in difficult circumstances. It looked at each and every application carefully and sympathetically and whenever possible erred on the side of generosity. It would be wrong I suggest to
is simpleri the final decision on which Cos (Undertakings is at the Governor's
are British get into a debate over individual judgements.
discretion
and discretionary staffed by Americans and reports to New York?
decisions do dut have to justified.
be
5. To illustrate some of the difficult decisions we faced, let me give examples. Should Ogilvy & Mather, the US advertising agency, be classified as British because they were bought a few years ago by WPP of the UK, although their office here is
Should Total, the French oil company, have their Hong Kong Company classified as British because it is a direct subsidiary of Total UK? Should the whole Hutchison empire be classified as British because Li Ka Shing and his family who own the Group have British passports (Li Ka Shing' s own passport only having been given under the passport scheme itself)? Or should the whole Wharf group qualify because the late ir Y K Pao, and now all his daughters and sons in law, have British passports? Should Leyland Bus be disqualified because they are now a subsidiary of Volvo of Sweden? Or should Coates Bros, an old British company with branches world wide, and a presence in Hong Kong headed by British expatriates, be disqualified because they were recently bought by a French Group? And when looking at companies that have changed their national identity because of a take over, do you count the time employees worked while it was British owned, and not the time when it changed, even though it is the same job at the same premises working for the same management? And if you are looking at ultimate ownership how far do you go back? How could our committee know who owned a given company ten or twenty years ago. In nearly all these cases we decided to err on the side of generosity and grant them British status, but you see the scale of the problems.
6. Behind the work of the Committee itself, the resources of the Trade Commission were often stretched to near breaking point. We were responsible for obtaining sufficient information on every company to enable the Committee to reach its decisions. Thousands of small and little known companies had to be contacted with great speed and persuaded to respond in writing with the same urgency. At times a significant part of this post's manpower was devoted to the exercise to the exclusion of much of our normal commercial work. Contacting companies, badgering them for replies, preparing for Committee meetings and transmitting their recommendations back to London often meant working late, and David Smith (DS7) and several of our LE staff are to be particularly commended for the work they put in.
RESTRICTED