a
bit too defailed for Westminister?
(i)
SECRET
8
Directly-Elected Seats
Page 3: a major consideration in our preference for the single-seat, single-vote system was to enhance fairness to all parties by reducing "coat-tailing". This might be mentioned because it shows we are not biased in favour of the UDHK. (Head, CPU)
Election Committee
(i)
Pages 3-6: the section does not say whether, under the revised British proposal, the members of the Election Committee are only able to elect themselves or, as the Governor proposed, may nominate any qualified candidate. It is also not clear who will be elected to the fourth sector of the Committee, although the last paragraph of the section implies that they will be DB members. (Head, CPU)
Functional Constituencies
(i)
Pages 6-9: in the first paragraph, last line do we mean "for" rather than "four"? We might indicate how voting would be conducted in our revised proposals for functional constituencies and what would be the total size of the electorate. (Head, CPU)
Nationality Provision (page 9)
(i)
BL67 states that "the proportion of such members does not exceed 20 per cent of the total membership of the Council". It would appear, therefore, that the SARG will have no choice about taking action if the proportion exceeds 20 per cent. Hence, the conditionality of the last sentence must be incorrect.
The sentence effectively appears to say that the BL will have to be amended because no fair basis of selection can be made. The section implies that the problem will not arise until 1999, but may it not be an issue in 1997? If so, how can the community have confidence in the "through-train" unless this difficulty is resolved? At present, HMG appears to be exposed to criticism for having no proposal to make. (Head, CPU)
SECRET