14:47
FCO E.S.E.D.
071 210 0447
P.04
HKD
ong SAR, and after seeking the views of the HKSAR Government. International agreements to which the PRC is not a party but which are implemented in Hong Kong may remain implemented in the HKSAR." (JD 137-8)
Since China is a party to the Protocol (and will probably also become a party to all the amendments extended to HK). first sentence (JD 137) applies. This means that it is for China to decide whether to apply only the standards applicable to developing countries in relation to Hong Kong, or whether Hong Kong should continue to meet the standards required of developed countries.
9. Since China has apparently agreed that both the Protocol and London Amendment may be applied to HK, there must have been some discussion of these questions in the IRO Sub-Group on the basis of a proposal prepared by HKG. I have raised the question several times before as to how the Protocol burdens are to be divided between the UK and HK, and how HK proposes to continue after 1997, but do not recall ever having received a reply. (See for example my minute to Mr Lodge of 6 December 1991 - copy attached).
copy attached). It would be helpful of paper if you or HKG could find the HKG paper and the records of the
agreement reached in the IRO Sub-Group on these matters (and any legal advice on this point. I do not recall being consulted, but one of my colleagues may have been in my absence.)
Mac
any inace
DOVE
(Min Dykins) Стакерия
views
CLIMATE CHANGE CONVENTION
DOE / HKD / ODA
Graceful
yals
vieves
Before 1997
10. The text of the Convention refers to "developing country Parties", "developed country parties and other parties included in annex I", and "developed country Parties and other developed Parties included in annex II". "Developing country Parties" are not defined but are by implication all those not included in annex II. (Whether those included in annex I but not annex II could claim to be treated as developing country Parties is left ambiguous). The UK is included in both annexes and China in neither. Clearly therefore the obligations of annex I and II Parties apply in relation to Hong Kong up to 1997.
11. Mr Dykins is correct to suggest (in para 3 of his letter of 6 August) that in terms of controlling emissions of greenhouse gases, the total emissions of those DTS to which our ratification extends must be added to the UK's total and taken into account in our commitment to return emissions to 1990 levels by 2000. It is for the UK to decide what contribution each DT must make to the achievement of the UK's target. In the case of Hong Kong, I presume that in policy terms it would make sense to require them to take measures aimed at returning their own emissions to 1990 levels by 2000, and to disaggregate their emissions from the overall UK total from the outset. It would also make sense for HKG to compile a separate report. This way the disengagement of Hong Kong will cause the minimum disruption to the UK's calculations.
12. The question whether HKG should be expected to contribute to the UK's obligations under Article 2, paras 3-5 (provision of financial resources and facilitation of technology transfer) is one of policy. Much the same considerations apply as for the Montreal Protocol, except that under this Convention the