TNAG-0088-FCO40-124-Social-welfare-working-conditions-in-Hong-Kong-1967 — Page 35

Code 18-75

Mr. Gaminara

Hong Kong

Sa

CONFIDENTIAL

+

47

Reference.....

International Textile Workers

Է

I had a long talk today with Mr. Greenhalgh in an attempt to convince him that although there might have been a misunder- standing at the last meeting which he had with Mrs. Judith Hart about hours of work and pending legislation in Hong Kong, there was certainly no intention of giving a wrong impression about the speed with which any change might take place. At the meeting on 16 February he had been told that proposals of a compromise character for legislation on the Hours of Work of Women and Young Persons was to be put before Executive Council within about two weeks and the Governor was hopeful for a favourable decision. In fact the proposals had gone before Executive Council on 7 March, slightly more than two weeks, and had been approved. Moreover, at the meeting I had personally explained the limited scope of the new legislation and that in the first stages at least the new regulations would probably do little more than confirm the existing situation, i.e. they would apply to such industries and occupations as were already predominantly observing an eight-hour day. Extension to other industries the eight-hour day as observed by a minority would take time. I further explained that we had perhaps ourselves not fully appreciated the time lag that might result from a further reference of the Executive Council decision to the Labour Advisory Board, and I told him in confidence that the Minister of State was herself perturbed at the possibility of a further delay of a procedural kind and was therefore seeking to establish a firm decision in a very short time. We had not yet received the views of the Government of Hong Kong on this.

2.

Mr. Greenhalgh was friendly enough but bitter. He said that although he had occupied every official position in his ward party machinery he had not voted in the G.L.C. elections. As far back as last June he said Mr. Lee had told him that "something would be done" quickly. In December similar assurances were again given, and once more in February, 1967, and now we were in April and still there was nothing positive he could tell his members except a story of one promise after another which had come to nothing.

3. I assured him that both the Secretary of State and the Minister of State were concerned at labour conditions in Hong Kong and that he could be assured that strong pressure for a change was going to be exerted. This was clearly not something which he could report to his members but I felt it would be unfair if he conveyed to his members or rather to the Lancashire textile workers that there was no serious intention of dealing with the problem and that he had been fobbed off with a lot of insincere promises. I mentioned that last year we had been much preoccupied with extracting a defence contri- bution from Hong Kong and that after a good deal of difficulty a substantial amount had been forthcoming. Mr. Lee was clearly not in a very strong position at that time, certainly during and immediately after these negotiations, to apply pressure about labour standards.

4. In the end Mr. Greenhalgh was to some extent mollified. But he is to speak to the United Textile Workers in Blackpool on 27 April and if he is not to take a severely critical line he would like a helpful answer to his letter of 10 April. I told him that this would not be easy since we could make no announcement about pressure being exerted on the Hong Kong Government as this might make the Chinese employers more rather

/than

CONFIDENTIAL