CO537-6046 — Page 142

NOTE ON DISCUSSIONS IN MR.PASKIN'S ROOM ON WEDNESDAY, 21st JUNE 1950.

25

Present:

CONSTITUTIONAL REFORM

Sir Alexander Grantham

Mr. Paskin

Mr. Sidebotham

Mr. Hall.

Mr. Paskin enquired whether the Governor could give the reasons which had led to the revision of his original proposals. Sir A. Grantham said that he felt that we were committed to some form of Constitutional Reform in view of the announcements made in 1946 at the time of the "Young Flan" and that we would have to go ahead with them. In August 1949 the Unofficial Members of the Legislative Council produced their alternative proposals (referred to in the despatch at (58) on the 1949 papers). He agreed that these proposals had an element of risk in that there would be an unofficial majority, some of whom would be elected. He had subsequently had further discussions with the Official and Unofficial Members of the Executive Council and felt that the "liberal" elements had got "cold feet", and that the wind was now blowing against constitutional advance to the extent envisaged in the 1949 proposals. He had also discussed the question with Mr. Nicoll who had recently returned from the United Kingdom. As a result of these discussions the new proposals were made and these had, in fact, been discussed briefly with the Unofficial Members at one meeting. The day before the Governor left Hong Kong he had sent a copy to Mr. Nicoll with the request that they should be circulated to the Executive Council. Just before his departure Sir Arthur Morse had suggested that xxx Social Welfare Associations should also have a member. The details of how he was to be elected would have to be worked out and might be difficult, but it had the advantage of giving the submerged one-tenth representation. The member might be a European, but not necessarily so. The proposal was worth pursuing even though it may have to be abandoned.

Mr. Paskin said that if these new proposals were to be accepted it would be difficult to draft a despatch in reply to the open despatch at (57) on the 1949 file as this correspondence would have to be published. In the reply we could not very well say that we were not proceeding with the original proposals because of the conditions in China. He also enquired what the reaction to the turning down of the 1949 proposals would be. Sir A. Grantham replied that the Left Wing Chinese Reform Association would probably protest against doing away with direct elections. He thought, however, that this would only be "a flash in the pan" and that responsible opinion would accept it. Periodically he had meetings with the editors of the British newspapers in the Colony. The Governor had tried these new proposals out on them and they were ex well received.

Mr. Sidebotham enquired whether people in Hong Kong were not likely to refer to the constitutional developments in Singapore. Sir A. Grantham replied that the position was not quite the same and that the reform in Singapore was the result of "historical action". It had been agreed that in Hong Kong the franchise must be restricted to British subjects. If this was so it was limited to 20% of the population and of this 20% only a small percentage would register as British subjects. The new proposals were therefore more liberal as the electorate was not limited to British subjects. The new proposals were, in fact, a compromise between the "Young Plan" and the latter proposals in 1949. Sir A. Grantham suggested that the reply to the 1949 despatch should be on the lines that the Secretary of State considers, in view of the narrowness of the franchise under those proposals because it is limited to British subjects who form a very small percentage of the Colony - that it would be better if the members of the Legislative Council were elected by indirect election. He could then ask the Governor for his suggestions on how this should be done. Sir A. Grantham suggested, however, that before doing this we should send a secret despatch or savingram to Hong Kong saying

-

/how