Foreign and Commonwealth Office
London S.W.1
16 May, 1969
Dear Roberts.
I am replying to your letter of 1 May to McPetrie (who is on leave) in which you raise the question of the delays encountered in obtaining the comments of the F.C.O. on Bills and other legal matters sent to us from Hong Kong.
The items that you list in your letter range far beyond the purely legal field and are the responsibility of a number of different departments in the Office. I therefore thought it best to bring your letter to the notice of those departments and this I have done.
In your letter you mention the dates on which the different communications relating to the various matters raised were sent to us; and the implication seems to be that Hong Kong are still awaiting replies to those communications. However, I understand that in certain cases replies have already been sent although finality may not necessarily have been reached. For example, in the case of the Hong Kong (Non-Domiciled Parties) Divorce (Amendment) Rules, a reply was sent to
in this particular case Hong Kong in our Saving Despatch No. 122 of 24 March 1969; the necessary statutory instruments are now being printed and the matter should soon be concluded. So far as the Consular Relations Bill is concerned, I gather that Russell of our Consular Department commented at length in a letter to Maddocks at the beginning of this month. You sent us your Illegal Strikes and Lockouts (Amendment) Bill as long ago as last November, but Foggon, the Overseas Labour Adviser, has since visited Hong Kong and has discussed with your Labour Department the difficulties presented by the proposed legislation. The latest communication on this subject is our telegram No. 315 of 12 May.
As regards the Extension of Merchant Shipping (Load Lines) Act 1967, this has involved protracted consultations with the Board of Trade and it is proving difficult to reach agreement with them. The department concerned have expressed their regret for failing to send an interim reply to Hong Kong, but they cannot hold out any hope that an early conclusion will be reached in this matter.
The Application of Copyright Act 1956 Bill and the Public Order (Amendment) Bill both have strong political implications which require consideration at Ministerial level. In addition, the Copyright Act has raised issues of policy which have been the subject of protracted correspondence with the Secretariat. cannot say how long it will be before you receive a reply on this particular matter, but I understand that a saving despatch dealing with the Public Order (Amendment) Bill is expected to issue within the next week or two.
I
or
The truth of the matter is that none of the issues which you mention in your letter is straightforward: they are all either fairly complex in themselves; they have a very strong political content; or they have necessitated prolonged consultations with other Departments of H.M.G. I am sorry if the delays in reaching finality are causing you inconvenience but they are not, as you will appreciate, due to lack of activity here.
The Honourable D.T.E. Roberts, 0.B.E., Q.C.
Your sincerely,
LAST
RE
Humphrey
(H.L.M. Oxley)
Daley
2
Page 90Page 91
(118281) Dd. 391599 1,500M 2/69 Hw.
NOTHING TO BE WRITTEN IN THIS MARGIN
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.