TNAG-0278-FCO40-314-Visit-of-Secretary-of-State-for-Foreign-and-Commonwealth-Aff-1970 — Page 24

CONFIDENTIAL

21

Mr. Tilley: We have had a visit by Mr. Heath who said the Conservative Party would reverse the Labour policy of disengagement from the Far East and set up a special commission to look into the problems of Hong Kong. It seems the Conservative Party has placed far more importance on Hong Kong than the Labour Party.

Mr. Stewart: It is not usual when one travels abroad to pursue arguments between two British political parties abroad-but if Mr. Heath said that, I can only say in comment that I think some of the pronouncements that have been made, about restoring British military presence in this part of the world, have been said unrealistically and without counting either what can be afforded or whether it is possible.

Mr. Ma: Will you give us an indication what proposals you will be making to the Japanese Government?

Mr. Stewart: Well, the talks I am going to have in Tokyo are part of a regular series of talks we have with the Japanese Government at yearly intervals. The Japanese Foreign Minister was in London in May of last year. This year I am in Tokyo, and the pattern usually is that we discuss most of the major world problems and then there are always a certain amount of bilateral matters that we have to attend to. This is part of a regular series of consultations.

Mr. Rajagopal: I understand that the Japanese are likely to be asked particularly to cut down their tariff on Scotch whisky.

Mr. Stewart: Well, forgive me, I think I had better wait till I get to Tokyo before I answer that one.

Mr. Ma: Did the question of the ombudsman come up in your talks here? Mr. Stewart: I knew before I came here that this was a matter on which some interest had been expressed. Now giving purely a personal opinion, because as I say so much of the conversations I have had here are confidential, and I do not want to attempt to describe what other people may have said to me, but expressing simply my own opinion on this, I would have said that it is a very valuable part of any Government that the simplest and least sophisticated citizen should feel that if he thinks an injustice has been done to him, there is somebody to whom he can go and who will study his grievance, see whether there is substance in it, and try to put it right. Now that is a general principle. You have already, of course, as I understand it, several channels to that end. You have the office of the unofficial members of the Executive and Legislative Councils, you have the City District Offices. It is, I think, a matter for consideration whether you should first of all see whether you are making the fullest possible use of these. You see the idea of the ombudsman is not necessarily the only way of realising the principle that I expressed. My purely personal opinion is: have a look first at what channels you have already, whereby, as I said, the ordinary citizen can feel that his case, if there has been injustice, will be considered.

Mr. Port: Will it be true to say, Sir, from what you have just said that you personally do not feel an ombudsman would be necessary for Hong Kong at this time?

Mr. Stewart: I would want further consideration before deciding that it was necessary.

Mr. Strauss: While you are speaking of your own personal opinion. . . . In Hong Kong, we know now there is only one of our departments that is administered by a man of Chinese ancestry of all the departments here. What is your personal opinion about this matter?

CONFIDENTIAL