SECRET
Flag
رود
Flag R
Mr Cortazzi PS/PVS
HONG KONG: PLANNING PAPER
1.
Mr Kerr's minute of yesterday's date asks how we propose to react to the Governor's comments on the revised Planning Paper (the Governor's letter of 2 July to Mr Cortazzi).
2. The essential point about the Governor's letter is that he agrees that the plan of action for the next five years is feasible. This is good news, and should, incidentally, make discussions with the Governor from 19 to 23 July reasonably harmonious. I have prepared a draft Steering Brief for the discussions which will be finalized in the light of any comments the PUS may have on the
Planning Paper.
3. I would, of course, dispute the general criticisms of the original Paper contained in paragraphs 2 and 3 of the Governor's letter; but, as we are in sight of agreement on the essentials, I suggest we should regard these as irrelevant. I shall, however, prepare a defensive brief for use by officials should the Governor wish to take the opportunity of his visit to London to criticize the content, or the handling, of the original Paper.
4. I have the following comments on the specific points raised in the Governor's paragraph 4:
(a)
Differentiation of the functions of the Executive and Legislative Councils
Here, the Governor stands by his thesis that the best system in the circumstances of Hong Kong is the present one where the Councils form a closely integrated body, with the Unofficials even more cohesive through their own organisation (UMELCO) with its own offices and procedures for consultation. The arguments for and against this proposition are, as I see it, set out in sufficient detail in paragraph 30 of the Paper where we conclude that there may well be advantage, in terms of more open discussion of public issues, in a return to the former constitutional position whereby the functions of the two bodies are separate. This is not a point on which we would wish to die in the last ditch but it certainly
SECRET
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.