TNAG-0170-FCO40-206-British-Trade-Commissioner-1969 — Page 119

i

Miss Satterly (IPD)

i ave

iss 21/ü

to Reference...

Mr. Curson (IPD) / 20)2

HKK 6/548/2

Mr. Littlejohn Cook (Gużange Dept.)

Mr. Bedford (EPD)

der Stewark (HKD)

27

M272812

Mr. Graften &

The dilemma we find over the Trade Commission in Hong Kong is surely one that most posts have adequately solved years ago: it really only arises now from the peculiar status of the post, and the uncertainty of the new I.0. at the post on how the Information Departments of FCO work.

2.

The responsibility for informing an overseas post about matters of bilateral concern lies surely with the ministry or department directly concerned in Whitehall - e.g. Hong Kong Department FCO, the Hong Kong desk officer in C.R.E.D. or E.C.G.D. The information the post should receive should be all that they need to know, and what they need to know includes (and may go beyond) all that the organs of public information in their territory need to know, for our purposes.

3. It is up to the I.0. at the post to decide what to tell the local press, etc. If he wishes to tell them something that he has only been told about in correspondence subject to security or privacy classifications, then he must normally ask the originator's permission to do so.

4.

HMG's information services in UK only come into the act when

5.

(1) the post asks for specially tailored

(ii)

(iii)

material for the local press, etc. to be produced to deal with this bilateral question (IPD and COI), although a competent 1.0. should write his own copy;

correspondents of the overseas territory in UK require briefing (News Departments or Information Divisions of e.g. Board of Trade)

it becomes necessary to explain HMG's attitude to the bilateral question in third countries (Guidance Department and COI)

Desk officers dealing with overseas territories in FCO political departments, C.R.E.D, etc. ought to know about the state of public opinion on matters of bilateral concern in those territories and in UK, and therefore know what facts the whole post (not only the 1.0.) needs to have. If they do not, then they can always surely, ask the post to tell them? If in doubt they can consult the regional adviser in IPD on what kind of information 1.0.'s in the field need to have. But it is surely far beyond the scope of FCO Information Departments to feed information instructions on every bilateral case to each 1.0. in the field?

6. I ought to add, however, that the Board of Trade Information Division (Mr. Tuite) is, in fact, very unhappy about the publicity-consciousness of desk officers in the Board of Trade, and of Commercial officers in the field who, when reporting on specific

/export