TNAG-0138-FCO40-174-Conduct-of-Hong-Kong-commercial-relations-1969 — Page 104

FCO40 Hong Kong Department Records 聯邦事務部香港部檔案 All

(1E)

(b) Competence:

the argument that free from UK interference

Hong Kong can manage trade relations more efficiently.

(c) Political: the argument that it is politically

intolerable for the Colony's commercial interests to be

subordinated to the UK's when they may be frequently in

conflict.

Each of these arvensen to woexamined in the following notro,

Historical

The Governor apparently used to Mr. Hughes the argument that

until two years ago Hong Kong had the right to conduct its own

commercial relations. Sir L. Monson has asked whether this "right"

ever formally agreed and then formally rescinded.

heither

¡

The answer is that it was not. In June 1968, at a time when

Sweden and Norway were demanding voluntary export restraint in certain

non-cottons from Hong Kong, and the Industries Division, Board of Trade,

were strongly opposed to Hong Kong agreeing, Mr. Hadden-Cave, who was

The negotiating for Hong Kong, wrote an informal note on, management of the

Colony's external commercial relations. The first five paragraphs of

Which

that note (it has no status as a Hong Kong Government paper but which

the Director of Commerce and Industry subsequently agreed was a fair

summary) make it clear that Hong Kong's claim to manage certain areas

of their bilateral commercial relations rested on "practical conven-

ience". Mr. Hadden-Cave's note was in fact a first attempt at reducing

the position to writing and was taken no further, Mr. Sorby subsequently

agreeing that it would be untimely to thrash these issues out. The

August agreed statement to ExCo and the TAB is thus the first and only

attempt to formalise the position.

By itself the historical argument is not strong.

The only area

/ of

Comments

Approved members can add comments, bookmarks, and private notes.

No comments yet.

Private Research Note

Private notes are available after approval.