- 5-
Hong Kong. But what about the third leg? The Prime Minister said that the presentation to LegCo would be the beginning of a period of discussion and debate. There would be a lot of time for discussion and for contacts with the Chinese. He could not yet tell how a way through would be found but politics and commonsense would do it.
Mr Chow said that the legislators would need to be sensitive but the problem was that the Governor's proposal represented a decision. Our proposals looked like an irreversible decision. The Group was suggesting the proposals that had been put forward should be subject to change. It would help if people were prepared to talk on the basis of shiftable positions.
The Prime Minister said that if matters had been cast in iron then we would have put them forward as a decision not as a proposal. These were matters for LegCo to determine. There would be time for debate and amendment. That was one of the reasons for the gap between the proposals first being put forward and their submission to LegCo. In China there was not a tradition of consulting the Opposition. Our system was different. We did put forward proposals for consultation.
Mr Cheong said that the Governor had not done anything wrong but the Group were here to present a different assessment. Three issues had got solved in the past but they did not suffer from a time constraint. Putting our proposals to LegCo did impose a time constraint. This was the most severe difference in Sino-British relations that he had ever seen. He took comfort from what the Prime Minister had said about the ingenuity of the British and about breaking the impasse but he asked the Prime Minister not to take the past as a guide. China saw this as a sovereignty issue. The SAR would be part of China and it was not, in China's perception, the Hong Kong LegCo which had the final say. Without acquiescence from the two governments, any LegCo proposal which was adopted would not survive beyond 1997. Of course Britain could do what it wanted until 1997 but was it wise to push through a system which would not allow for continuity?
The Prime Minister said he understood the importance of the through train. We wanted to see uncertainty resolved. We had allowed enough time for that to happen.
The Foreign Secretary said that there were indeed three legs to the tripod. The agreement of China was essential but the days when Britain and China could reach agreement without considering the acceptability of what they