TNAG-0383-FCO40-429-Trade-unions-and-industrial-relations-in-Hong-Kong-1973 — Page 12

- 2 -

2(4)?

I

5.

It is on this particular point that I seek your advice. know by a study of the actual legislation that Malaysia and Singapore take into account only paragraph 2(b) of Article 1, despite their ratificatio of this convention. I know, of course, which countries have ratified this convention but I do not know of any document which tells me, article by article, of the degree of compliance by individual countries with conventions they have ratified. Therefore, any specific information which you can give me will be most appreciated. I am anxious to go back to Ex Co as soon as possible on this subject, particularly as the Cable & Wireless dispute has now been finally resolved. This was one of the excuses made for not moving now.

6.

As I have said earlier we never intended to meet all our obligations under this convention but it would appear to me that if we went ahead as planned we would meet our obligations under the following articles :-

7.

Article 2.

8.

Article 1, paragraphs 1 and 2(b)

Article 3

Article 5 and Article 6.

I have never seen any need in Hong Kong to move towards

It could be said that by administrative action we already complied with Article 4 in the sense that Hong Kong encourages the full development and utilisation of machinery for voluntary negotiations between employers and workers. It is not Hong Kong's fault that only some 11 percent of the work force is unionised.

9.

I am sorry to bother you with this query but I do not know of any other source from which I am likely to obtain the kind of informa- tion which might help to get me out of the present impasse. Finally, I would ask for your opinion as to whether or not my proposals as they now stand would go a long way towards silencing criticism of Hong Kong's attitude towards trade unions by politicians, the ILO, and trade unionists both internationally and British.

Yours ever

Jan

(I. R. Price)