Радой,
سه
I agree
M
Hong Kong would pick up more on the foreign swings than she
would lose on the U.K. round-abouts. But would she in fact
lose anything?
4.
It may be Mr. Carey's point is that his Department should
be exempt from any obligation to consider whether action they
took here would have effects on other H.M.G. interests in
Hong Kong, i.e. from our point of view economic and political
stability, or perhaps from the Treasury's point of view on
Hong Kong's sterling balances. I agree that on the plan
outlined in Mr. Carey's minute there would be an onus on other
Departments to prove that action proposed by the Ministry of
Technology would have such a deleterious effect on other U.K.
interests that it should be modified to take account of them.
But,so long as Ministers are responsible to Parliament for
everything that goes on in Hong Kong,I don't see how in the
last resort this could be granted and we should have to reserve
our position on this, though in practical terms it may not be
very meaningful at the moment so long as Hong Kong's present
shortage of labour exists.
5.
complete freedom of action for Mintech
Though Mr. Hughes has pointed out that if this
arrangement were proceeded with we would have to extend it
beyond textiles, I would hope that, if examination of the
full consequences took a long time, it would be possible to
deal with textiles on its own. After all, they are the main
point of difficulty in political terms with Hong Kong at the
moment.
Любрат
(L. Monson)
12 June, 1970.
c.c.
Mr. Gallagher
Mr. Heath
Mr. Laird
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.