-
1997. AND IT WAS FOR THAT REASON THAT A VERY LONG PERIOD OF NEGOTIATIONS TOOK PLACE TWO YEARS' OF NEGOTIATIONS BETWEEN 1982-1984 - TO WORK OUT AN ARRANGEMENT BY WHICH THE WHOLE OF HONG KONG, THAT IS THE LEASED TERRITORY AND THE ISLAND WHICH WASN'T LEASED, WOULD RETURN TO CHINESE SOVEREIGNTY BUT UNDER ARRANGEMENTS WHICH GUARANTEED THAT ALL THE ESSENTIAL PARTS OF HONG KONG'S LIFESTYLE, THE ECONOMY, THE LAW, ALL THOSE THINGS, THEY WOULD GO ON FOR A FULL 50 YEARS AFTER 1997. SO THE BACKGROUND IS VERY DIFFERENT INDEED FROM GIBRALTAR AND THEREFORE THE WAY IN WHICH IT HAD TO BE TACKLED IS, OF COURSE, VERY DIFFERENT INDEED FROM GIBRALTAR.
OLIVER SCOTT:
IT IS JUST WORTH PUTTING IN THERE, SIR DAVID, ISN'T IT, THAT NOT EVERYBODY, BY A VERY LARGE MARGIN, AGREES OR IS WILLING TO GO ALONG WITH THE CONCEPT THAT EVERYTHING WILL INDEED STAY UNCHANGED FOR ANOTHER 50 YEARS? PEOPLE SIMPLY DON'T ACCEPT THAT.
SIR DAVID: WELL, THERE ARE GREAT WORRIES ABOUT IT. I THINK IT IS ALSO FAIR TO SAY TO MISS GOFFES THAT THERE ARE MANY PEOPLE ORIGINALLY WHO WOULD HAVE HOPED THAT THERE COULD HAVE BEEN SOME OTHER ARRANGEMENT AND FOR A WHOLE YEAR OF THE NEGOTIATIONS WITH CHINA THE BRITISH TEAM WERE TRYING TO MAKE ARRANGEMENTS FOR BRITISH ADMINISTRATION TO GO ON AND WHEN THAT CLEARLY WAS NOT POSSIBLE, THEN THE AGREEMENT WE NOW HAVE WAS HAMMERED OUT OVER A FURTHER YEAR. NOW, ALTHOUGH IT IS A VERY, VERY DETAILED AGREEMENT IT RUNS TO MANY, MANY PAGES OF DETAILED ARRANGEMENTS FOR ALL THE KEY PARTS OF HONG KONG TO GO ON AFTER THE CHANGE OF SOVEREIGNTY YOU ARE QUITE RIGHT, OF COURSE THERE ARE PEOPLE WHO DOUBT: IS IT GOING TO WORK OUT PRECISELY IN PRACTICE AS IT IS ALL LAID DOWN? IT IS VERY NATURAL THAT PEOPLE SHOULD HAVE THOSE SORT OF DOUBTS.
-
—
OLIVER SCOTT: WELL, OUR NEXT CALLER, MICHAEL ROCHFORD, WHO IS ON THE LINE NOW FROM ST. WINIFRED'S IN SOUTH AFRICA I BELIEVE, WOULD LIKE TO EXPLORE THAT ISSUE A LITTLE BIT FURTHER. MR ROCHFORD.
CALLER: YES, I'M HERE. GOOD AFTERNOON, SIR DAVID.
SIR DAVID: GOOD AFTERNOON, MR ROCHFORD.
CALLER : GOOD AFTERNOON. I WOULD LIKE TO ASK WHETHER BRITAIN RETAINS THE RIGHT, IN TERMS OF THE AGREEMENT WITH CHINA, TO ABROGATE THE AGREEMENT CLOSER TO THE DATE OF THE HANDOVER OF HONG KONG, SHOULD CHINA AT THAT TIME BE IN A STATE OF TURMOIL OR FOLLOWING WHAT BRITAIN REGARDS AS UNACCEPTABLE POLICIES? OR DID THE HANDOVER BECOME FAIT ACCOMPLI AT THE TIME IT WAS SIGNED?
SIR DAVID: WELL, I SUPPOSE IN A MANNER OF SPEAKING, ANYBODY WHO SIGNS A TREATY HAS A RIGHT TO ABROGATE IT BUT THEN YOU'VE GOT A VERY GOOD QUESTION: WHAT HAPPENS THEN? BECAUSE, AS I WAS SAYING JUST A MOMENT AGO, THERE IS A LEASE ON THE MAJOR PART OF HONG KONG; IF THERE IS NO AGREEMENT ABOUT THE FUTURE, BRITISH ADMINISTRATION SIMPLY COMES TO AN END, SO ABROGATING THE ARRANGEMENTS WOULD REALLY BE A BIT OF A NONSENSE BECAUSE INSTEAD OF VERY DETAILED PROVISIONS FOR WHAT HAPPENS REGARDLESS OF WHAT IS HAPPENING IN CHINA ITSELF, THOSE PROVISIONS ARE THERE YOU WOULD HAVE ABSOLUTELY NOTHING, SO YOU WOULD HAVE A BLANK. YOU WOULDN'T BE IN A BETTER SITUATION, YOU WOULD BE IN A FAR, FAR WORSE SITUATION. I KNOW, OCCASIONALLY, PEOPLE HAVE TALKED ABOUT WHY DOESN'T BRITAIN RE-NEGOTIATE, DO SOMETHING TOTALLY DIFFERENT, BUT
·
2