THURSDAY, OCTOBER 27, 1994
ON THE
THERE IS, AS I UNDERSTAND IT, A PRINCIPAL POSITION CHINESE SIDE THAT WE SHOULD NOT, BEFORE 1997, APPEAR TO BE PUTTING OURSELVES IN THE POSITION IN WHICH WE ARE MAKING LAWS FOR GOVERNMENT AFTER 1997. THAT IS WHY WE PROPOSED ONE LEGAL WHICH WOULD BE APPLIED AT MIDNIGHT ON 30TH JUNE AND WHICH WE WOULD DEAL WITH THAT POINT.
THE SAR TRIGGER, BELIEVE
AMBASSADOR GUO HAS EVIDENTLY SAID, AND HE HAS SAID IT IN PRIVATE AS WELL, THAT THIS IS NOT ADEQUATE AS FAR AS THE CHINESE ARE CONCERNED, SO OUR POSITION IS THAT WE HAD BETTER DISCUSS WAYS IN WHICH WE CAN COPE WITH IT DIFFERENTLY. IT HAS BEEN AGREED BETWEEN BOTH SIDES THAT THE ADAPTATION SHOULD BE CONSIDERED IN THE JLG. I KNOW IT WILL BE ONE OF THE SUBJECTS TO BE CONSIDERED AT THE NEXT JOINT LIAISON GROUP MEETING. IT DOES, I REPEAT, COVER ISSUES WHICH SHOULD BE MERELY TECHNICAL AS WELL AS COVERING ISSUES IN WHICH THERE IS A SUBSTANTIAL POLICY CONTENT, SUCH AS IMMIGRATION AND RIGHT OF ABODE.
THERE IS THEN THE QUESTION OF WHETHER IT MATTERS TO HAVE A SMOOTH TRANSITION FOR OUR LAWS.
} THE EXPRESSION LEGAL VACUUM' IS NOT NECESSARILY VERY HELPFUL, BUT IT IS PRETTY CLEAR THAT IF SOME IMPORTANT LAWS HAVE QUESTION MARKS OVER THEM, IF SOME AREAS OF POLICY DO NOT APPEAR TO HAVE LEGISLATIVE BACKING, THEN IT DOES RAISE UNCERTAINTIES AND DOUBTS IN THE MINDS OF BUSINESSMEN AND IN THE MINDS OF OTHERS. PERHAPS IT WOULD BE FAIRER TO SAY THAT THERE WOULD NOT BE ONE LARGE HOLE IN THE ROAD, BUT THAT THE ROAD WOULD BE QUITE BADLY POT-HOLED.
IN
OR
IF BUSINESSMEN START TO BECOME ANXIOUS ABOUT THE LEGAL POSITION HONG KONG, AND I AM NOT MAKING UP THESE CONCERNS, THEN ONE INEVITABLE CONSEQUENCE IS THAT THEY WILL SIGN CONTRACTS ELSEWHERE, THEY WILL WANT TO WRITE INTO CONTRACTS AGREEMENTS FOR ARBITRATION IN OTHER JURISDICTIONS. THAT DOES NOT COME AS A GREAT SURPRISE BECAUSE IT IS WHAT BUSINESSMEN THEMSELVES SAY. IT GOES BACK TO THE POINT MADE BY THE GOVERNOR SO WELL LAST NIGHT THAT A REPUTATION WHICH YOU BUILD UP CAREFULLY OVER THE YEARS, AND IN OUR CASE A REPUTATION FOR A LEVEL PLAYING FIELD FOR BUSINESS, CAN BE LOST RATHER RAPIDLY.
I DO NOT SAY ANY OF THAT IN A CONFRONTATIONAL OR PROVOCATIVE SPIRIT, BUT I BELIEVE THAT WE NEED TO SORT THESE MATTERS OUT IF WE POSSIBLY CAN IN GOOD TIME BEFORE 30 JUNE 1997.
NEXT QUESTION?
QUESTION:
YOU MENTIONED YESTERDAY IN DOWNING STREET THAT YOU HOPED THAT THERE WOULD BE A SIGNING OF THE AIRPORT MINUTE 'SOON' I THINK THAT WAS YOUR WORD. LAST NIGHT IT WAS 'A FEW DAYS' ARE WE TALKING ABOUT POSSIBLY THE FIRST WEEK IN NOVEMBER? COULD YOU PUT A LITTLE MORE FLESH ON THE BONES THERE?
GOVERNOR:
I COULD USE EITHER 'SOON' OR 'IN A FEW DAYS' OR I COULD TURN THEM ROUND THE OTHER WAY, BUT NEITHER YOU NOR I WOULD REGARD THAT AS A PARTICULARLY HELPFUL WAY OF DISCUSSING A SERIOUS ISSUE. I WOULD LIKE TO BE ABLE TO GIVE YOU A DATE THIS MORNING BUT THE FACT THAT I CANNOT DOES NOT MEAN THAT I AM BEING AWKWARD. WE ARE IN THE POSITION OF HAVING CONTACTS WITH CHINESE IN ORDER TO AGREE THE MOST SUITABLE DATE FOR FORMALISING THE ARRANGEMENT. I GUESS THAT CHINESE OFFICIALS WANT TO SORT THAT OUT AS RAPIDLY AS WE DO, BECAUSE WE ARE BOTH IN THE POSITION AT THE MOMENT OF FINDING DIFFERENT WAYS OF SAYING "SOON' OR 'IN A FEW DAYS'.
/I CAN