XN000022-1990-01-16 — Page 29

14

TUESDAY, JANUARY 16, 1990

CHRISTOPHER LOCKWOOD

A LOT MUCH

(DAILY TELEGRAPHY: WE'VE HEARD ABOUT THE POLITICAL STRUCTURE SIDE OF THE BASIC LAW BUT NOT VERY ABOUT THE REST OF IT. AND I AM REFERRING TO THINGS LIKE THE FACT THAT AN ARTICLE AGAINST SUBVERSION HAS BEEN WRITTEN IN: THAT CHINA RETAINS THE RIGHT TO INTERPRET AND AMEND THE BASIC LAW. IS BRITAIN HAPPY WITH THE DRAFT BASIC LAW AS IT EXISTS? AND AS IT 15 VIRTUALLY NOW COMPLETE. IT WOULD BE VERY DIFFICULT TO REVISE IT SUBSTANTIALLY NOW. AND WHAT IS BRITAIN DOING TO TRY TO CALM THE FEARS OF PEOPLE TRAT SAY THAT' THIS BASIC LAW ACTUALLY GIVES TOO MUCH POWER TO CHINA AND TOO LITTLE TO HONG KONG?

BUT

THE

MR HURD; WELL. OF COURSE WE DON'T HAVE A SEAT AT THE DRAFTING TABLE. WHEREAS THERE ARE REPRESENTATIVES FROM HONG KONG WHO DO. WE HAVE TAKEN OPPORTUNITIES OPEN TO US TO MAKE REPRESENTATIONS TO CHINESE ABOUT THE COURSE THE DRAFTING OF THE BASIC LAW WAS TAKING. FOR EXAMPLE. WE DID PASS TO THE CHINESE THE OMELCO PAPER ON THE DRAFT BASIC LAW WHICH COVERED SOME OF THE POINTS WHICH ARE MENTIONED. AND WE THOUGHT THAT WAS A GOOD PAPER.

CHRISTOPHER LOCKWOOD: SO ARE YOU SAYING THAT THE DRAFT BASIC LAW IS BASICALLY NOW IN CONFORMITY WITH THE JOINT DECLARATION?

MR HURD:

NO.

I'M NOT.

I'M SAYING WE'VE TAKEN THE OPPORTUNITIES OPEN TO US TO MAKE REPRESENTATIONS ABOUT IT. I THINK 1 ALSO SAID. IN ANSWER TO AN EARLIER QUESTION. THAT WE AGREED THAT WE SHOULD NOT PUBLISH THOSE REPRESENTATIONS, BUT WE'VE TAKEN THE OPPORTUNITIES OPEN TO US TO INFLUENCE THE DRAFT BASIC LAW. EVEN THOUGH UNDER THE TERMS OF THE AGREEMENT WE ARE NOT. AS IT WERE. A NEGOTIATING PARTY TO THAT.

MIMI YEUNG (TVB) : MR FOREIGN SECRETARY. CHINA HAS REPEATEDLY ATTACKED THE HONG KONG ALLIANCE IN SUPPORT OF THE PRO-DEMOCRACY MOVEMENT IN CHINA WHICH IS BASED IN HONG KONG AS BEING SUBVERSIVE. NOW HAS THERE BEEN ANY PRESSURE EXERTED ON TO YOU TO DISBAND THIS ORGANISATION? AND DO YOU THINK THE EXISTENCE OF THIS ORGANISATION

WILL STAND IN THE WAY OF GOOD SINO-HONG KONG-BRITISH RELATIONS?

MR HURD: WHEN THIS KIND OF POINT HAS BEEN RAISED. WE'VE HAD TO EXPLAIN TO THE CHINESE GOVERNMENT. AND WHE WILL HAVE TO GO ON EXPLAINING TO IT. THAT A FUNDAMENTAL POINT ABOUT HONG KONG

IS THAT PEOPLE ARE ALLOWED TO EXPRESS THESE OPINIONS AND THAT THAT IS NOT SUBVERSION. THAT IS EXPRESSION OF FREE OPINION. AND WE SHALL GO ON HAVING TO MAKE THAT POINT. IT IS A PUNDAMENTAL POINT.

MIMI YEUNG: BUT DO YOU THINK THAT IT WILL STAND IN THE WAY GOOD SINO-HONG KONG-BRITISH RELATIONS?

OF

MR HURD: I CAN'T REALLY HELP THE CHINESE ON THAT MEAN. THIS IS AN ABSOLUTELY BASIC POINT. WHETHER IT STANDS DEPENDS ON THEM. I HAVE NO POWER. AND THE GOVERNOR HAS NO AND THANK GOD TO SUPPRESS SUCH ORGANISATIONS; THAT'S NOT KONG IS ABOUT.

I

POINT. IN THE WAY

POWER. WHAT HONG

/CHARLES WALLACE