UNCLASSIFIED
055121 MDLOAN 7296
(ii) In the Schedule to the Agreement setting out the routes to be served by the airlines of the United Kingdom and of Australia, Routes II and III in Section A and in Section B shall be deleted.
If the foregoing proposal is acceptable to the Government of the Commonwealth of Australia I have the honour to suggest that this Note and Your Excellency's reply shall constitute an Agreement between our two Governments which shall enter into force on the date on which an Air Services Agreement between the Government of the Commonwealth of Australia and the Government of Hong Kong enters into force.
I avail myself etc unquote. Unquote
The reply to be as follows:
Quote:
I have the honour to acknowledge Your Excellency's Note of today's date which reads as follows:-
(Text of UK Note)
In reply, I have the honour to inform you that the foregoing proposal is acceptable to the Government of the Commonwealth of Australia who therefore agree that your Note together with this reply shall constitute an Agreement between the two Governments which shall enter into force on the date on which an Air Services Agreement between the Government of the Commonwealth of Australia and the government of Hong Kong enters into force.
I avail etc. Unquote.
3. FTC then suggested that, since Routes may change number with any rewriting of the Route Schedule when agreement between the UK' and Australia is reached on trunk routes, it would avoid any risk of confusion if a new Route Schedule was written and attached to the Exchange of Notes. David Moss' letter of 17 June 1992 to David Buckingham suggested minor amendments to the Australian proposal but pointed out that if no agreement was reached on trunk routes we would need to revert to the UK version of the Exchange of Notes with a new Exchange of Notes being drafted as and when a new deal was struck.
4.
On 13 October 1992 Vanessa Fanning, who replaced David
2
PAGE UNCLASSIFIED