2.
CONFIDENTIAL
which I should raise, and I hope may still result in further amendment:-
12?
a)
b)
c)
Differentiation of the functions of Ex. Co. and Leg. Co. (References are: the end of para. 3 of Summary, para. 30 of the paper and para. 23 (iv) (d) of Annex C). This has been allowed to pass hitherto because the re- commendation is to do no more than consider. However we are not at all sure what the author of this passage really had in mind. As seen from here the present situation is healthy, does not result in more decisions being taken in secret than would otherwise be the case, and enables the Legislative Council to understand the reasons why Executive Council decisions on policy or legislation have been taken though not to block or influence such decisions since they are only informed after the event. Moreover the actions necessary to achieve total separation would be inimicable not only to confidence between the two bodies but to the development of the 'Ombudsman' function and eventually of a 'Member' system. On re- consideration it seems to me a pity that such a questionable proposition should be given such comparative prominence in the paper even in a tentative form.
-
The 'selling' of the programmes (para 36 of the main paper). This strikes us as much too negative and pessimistic. We are agreed on and welcome the specifics and I am confident they can be carried out within the time-scale en- visaged and without friction, provided the Hong Kong press and public continue to believe that the thrust of Government policies comes from the conviction of their own Government as to where the broad interest of Hong Kong lies and not from an external source. I attach a suggested redraft by Denys Roberts.
Reference to 'unemployment benefits'. Those in para. 26 of the paper are rather different from those in paras. 1 and 23(iii)(b) of Annex C, and the former are out of line with the
CONFIDENTIAL·
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.