CONFIDENTIAL
process. In reply to a further question from Mr McGrath, I said that there was no reason why the authorities in Hong Kong should not seek our views in advance of the introduction of amending legislation if that is what they wished to do, and that it was indeed their practice to consult us frequently over a wide range of subjects. Mr McGrath thanked me in conclusion and said that he quite understood that the next move rested with Hong Kong.
5.
I found Mr McGrath's whole manner and approach brash and presumptious to a degree and the claim that he was approaching the FCO for an informal assurance, as described in the preceding paragraph, at the alleged suggestion of Mr Blye somewhat disturbing. Though I know from a previous telephone call that Mr McGrath was trying to contact Mr Blye, who is at present on leave in this country, it seems strange to say the least, if Mr McGrath's statement is to be believed, that Mr Blye should have suggested to Mr McGrath that it should be the latter who should attempt to sound us out, when it would have been quite possible and in no way improper for Mr Blye to raise the point with us himself.
31 October 1974
K Hanna
Hong Kong & Indian Ocean Dept
CONFIDENTIAL
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.