TNAG-0194-FCO40-230-Emergency-legislation-and-Public-Order-ordinance-discussions-1969 — Page 44

CONFIDENTIAL

HONG KONG TELEGRAM NO. 897 TO FCO

-3-

RAISED AND HAS TO BE ANSWERED, I HOPE THAT YOU WILL BE ABLE

TO EMPHASISE THAT CONSULTATION WITH THESE BODIES IS BUT A

PRELIMINARY TO PUBLICATION FOR GENERAL INFORMATION AND TAKES

ACCOUNT OF THE FACT THAT IT WAS THESE BODIES THAT MADE SPECIFIC

AND DETAILED CRITICISMS OF THE PRESENT ORDINANCE, SO THAT IT IS PROPER THAT THEY SHOULD FIRST BE AFFORDED AN OPPORTUNITY TÓ

COMMENT ON THE BILL.

5. IF THE MORE GENERAL POINT IS TAKEN THAT THE LICENSING PROVIS-

IONS SHOULD BE ABOLISHED ALTOGETHER I SUGGEST THAT YOU SHOULD

REPLY TO THE EFFECT THAT NO RESPONSIBLE BODY IN HONG KONG HAS

DENIED THE NEED FOR SUCH PROVISIONS, REASONABLY DEFINED, AND THAT, IN VIEW OF THE EVENTS OF 1967, IT IS CERTAIN THAT PUBLIC OPINION

IN HONG KONG WOULD OPPOSE ABOLITION.

I CANNOT INDICATE A DATE FOR INTRODUCTION OF THE BILL INTO

LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL. THERE HAS SO FAR BEEN NO RESPONSE FROM THE

BODIES TO WHOM THE BILL WAS REFERRED, AND THEY MUST CLEARLY BE

ALLOWED SUFFICIENT TIME TO FORMULATE THEIR VIEWS. THERE IS NO

INDICATION WHATEVER OF PUBLIC INTEREST HERE IN THIS MATTER AT

THE PRESENT TIME.

SIR H. NORMAN WALKER

FILES

H.K.D.

PARL. UNIT

P.S. TO LORD SHEPHERD

CONFIDENTIAL