XN000022-1993-04-02 — Page 8

7

FRIDAY, APRIL 2, 1993

Responses during the discussion period

1.

too,

Chinese officials have said again and again, not just in that they wish to recent weeks, but well before that, cooperate to secure the well-being and the prosperity of Hong DVAI issues like the Kong. They've said again and again,

airport, over other capital investment issues, over grants of franchises and contracts, they've said repeatedly that they want to see linkage between to cooperate, that they don't want to

So, I guess political matters and economia and trade matters. that if there were to be any linkage, there would be questions for those officials to answer. If there is a disagreement, which I would like to see us resolve over political matters, I can't for the life of me see how it's best pursued by attempting to undermine the well-being, che livelihood of the people in Hong Kong. After all, in 1997, everyone knows that China resumés Let me give you a very practical sovereignty of Hong Kong. example we're doing our best to fulfil our side of the bargain in a memorandum of understanding to complete the airport, the new airport which everybody knows is necessary and everybody knows will be built before 1997. Now, if the completion of the airport is delayed, what it will mean is some impact on the future” GNP of Hong Kong and SOME- diminution of the revenues which will come in future to Hong Kong. It doesn't particularly the hit the British governor of Hong Kong today, except that the British governor of Hong Kong would like to see the airport completed as soon as possible. So, I don't think, to borrow a phrase, "That there is much to be said in life FOR going around dropping boulders on one's own foot."

-

I'11

I have argued, There is one other matter that I must address.

against the and

passionately, will continue to argue, politicisation of trade, the politicisation of international I would find it curious if, with me making investment decisions. that point and United Kingdom government Ministers making that point, Chinese officials were to take the contrary point of view. After all, there is a huge Chinese surplus in its trade balance with.the United Kingdom. As I recall, à trade surplus in China's favoux of about half a billion pounds. Further than that, in two or three weeks time, I'll be in Washington, arguing the case, as strongly as I can, for the continuation of most favoured nation status for China in its dealings with the United States. be arguing that Congress and the new administration, whatever their concerns, should not politicise that trading relationship with China. It may be a little more difficult to put that argument, if while I'm putting that argument about US-China trade, some Chinese officials are putting a different argumant We know very well about trade with other parts of the world. what the obligations are, of membership, of international fora which seek to regulate free and fair trade in a sensible way. We know, for example, what is required of all those who are members of GATT, and the requirements of membership of GATT certainly do not include the politicisation of trade.

2. I don't think that Sir David Akers-Jones' views have changed much down the years,

and I think those who know him would concede that point. What I hops, is that when he, or others, and I saw a picture of

/HIM IN