14:42
FCO E.S.E.D.
071 210 0447
P.03
included.
5. The London Amendment to the Protocol expanded the area of differentiated obligations by establishing a financial mechanism to provide financial and technical assistance to "Parties operating under Article 5(1)". This is to be financed by contributions from "Parties not operating under Article 5(1)" on the basis of the UN scale of assessments. The UK has ratified the Amendment and is about to extend the ratification to Hong Kong.
Hong Kong's position prior to 1997
6.
Hong Kong is not itself a Party to the Protocol, which is only open to States and REIOS. The UK's obligations under the Protocol are those of a developed country Party, and they apply in respect of Hong Kong (and all other DTS to which our ratification has been extended). The UK's obligation under the Protocol is to comply with the control measures in respect of the whole of the territory to which the Protocol applies. means that levels of consumption etc calculated on an aggregate basis must meet the Protocol requirements. How the burdens are shared between the UK and the DTS is an internal matter for HMG to decide. Controls on trade with non- Parties must of course
This
DOE/HKD/ODA be applied by each territory. But the obligation to contribute
Grateful you expect DTS to contribute is a matter of policy. Presumably
to the financial mechanism is that of the UK, and whether we
NPOMA
UND/HRD днакозия
comments
this question ariges regularly in the context of the UN and other international organisations where members contribute on the basis of the UN scale, UND or HKD should be able to tell us whether we normally, or ever, expect a contribution from HKG. I presume that the UN scale takes account of the DTs in calculating the UK's contributions.
If so, can we expect it to be revised downwards after 1997? If there is to be such a revision, the amount of the reduction might give us some indication as to the proportion of the UK bill which could reasonably be attributed to Hong Kong in the meantime.
7. The Protocol obligations on reporting of data (Article 7 as amended) do not make any provision for the case of Parties with overseas territories. It is therefore for the UK to decide.
JOE (NS Good) whether to present the data for each of our DTS separately or as prevent whether to send in one aggregate report for the UK and DTS I believe
'together.In the case of Hong Kong it would obviously make sense
There are dala
for a completely separate report to be submitted. submilled precedents for this;
our obligations under the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights to report to the Human repanately Rights Committee are fulfilled separately for Hong Kong.
Presumably data for Hong Kong has already been sent to the 60€ Protocol Secretariat. Was this done by us or by HKG?
Hong Kong's position after 1997
смо
(No Godfrey) By Us I
8. Hong Kong will still not be a Party to the Protocol. It will be part of a developing country Party. In the absence of any other arrangement or commitment made by China, it would follow that after 1997, only the obligations of a developing country Party would apply in respect of Hong Kong. The question of international agreements is covered by the Sino-British Joint Declaration, which provides:
believe
"The application to the HKSAR of international agreements to which the PRC is or becomes a party shall be decided by the CPG, in accordance with the circumstances and needs of the Hong