TNAG-0088-FCO40-124-Social-welfare-working-conditions-in-Hong-Kong-1967 — Page 93

CODE 18-75

1. leid

Church House)

Mr. Ress

HWB 15/6

Reference......

36

With reference to Hong Kong Savingram No. 538, the Executive Council decision represents a useful advance but I do not think we should allow Hong Kong to be complacent about what is after all no more than legislative recognition of the position which already exists. What we are looking for is an improvement in the hours of work for those women and young persons who at present are employed for the maximum of ten hours per day for six days per week.

2.

We

A copy of my report on my most recent visit with notes has been submitted to Mrs. Judith Hart and we have under consideration, as you know, the possibility of sending a comprehensive despatch covering the whole labour question to the Governor and perhaps this point could be taken up in that despatch. But if the despatch is to be long delayed, or if there is any doubt whether it will go at all, then I think we should respond now to this Savingram, taking note of the Executive Council decision and asking that consideration of the matter by the Labour Advisory Board be expedited as much as possible. should also ask to be kept informed of progress and I think conclude by pointing out that what is proposed holds out no inmmediate promise of any early improvement in the conditions of employment for women and young persons, and that if the psychological effect of orders governing an eight-hour day is to be relied upon for further progress, then the sooner such orders are made and put into effect the better. I think it would also be well to enquire whether the principle embodied in the final sentence of the Savingram can be put into effect without further reference to Exco since this would be a welcome extension of the Commissioner of Labour's powers.

At

When

3. As regards the telegram at (27) about the Labour Advisory Board, this seems to me unsatisfactory in a number of ways. In the first place the telegram is silent on the suggestion I made that the reconstitution of the L.A.B. should be used to bring in one or more independent members, e.g. from the University. In the second place, the arguments which are used for failing to reconstitute the Labour Advisory Board (paragraph 3) seem to derive from events which have occurred in the closing months of 1966; my proposals for change were made at the end of 1965. no time has it seemed practical politics that the Left-wing Unions would co-operate with the Labour Department, much less with the L.A.B. on which the Right-wing Unions already sit. I discussed the reconstitution in Hong Kong this was clearly accepted and I find it a little disingenuous that this argument should now be proposed as a reason for not raising the membership of the L.A.B. Unless this point also is to be taken up shortly in an appropriate context, then I think we ought to reply on lines of this minute to the telegram at (27), stressing in particular the value of bringing into the L.A.B. independent persons of a liberal outlook who could do something to compensate for the comparative ineffectiveness of the Right-wing Union representatives.

(G. Foggon)

31 March, 1967