TNAG-0660-FCO40-809-Implications-for-Hong-Kong-of-changes-in-British-nationality-1977 — Page 47

DC Bray Esq CVO JP

Secretary for Home Affairs

Government Secretariat HONG KONG

CONFIDENTIAL

LAST

R".

30

NEXT

REF.

17 May 1977

(32)

DISCUSSION DOCUMENT ON NATIONALITY LAW

1. Thank you for your letter of 29 April. I am sorry indeed that your careful arrangements for safeguarding the confidentiality of the Green Paper until the deadline for publication were frustrated in the way you describe. For your information, a number of Indian newspapers also jumped the gun. But this is cold comfort and I well understand your annoyance.

2. If you think it worthwhile, we could have a word with Reuters' here and ask them to give the television company in question a mild telling off. This would reinforce the message in your own letter to the company. Would you like this? If so, could you perhaps let me know which television company it was and, if possible, the terms of Reuters' embargo as it reached them?

3. I am afraid that I cannot promise much help on your suggestion that in future you should be told of the times of the release of embargoed material to the media. The difficulty here is not doing it once but being certain of doing it every time. While there is only one department in Whitehall (Overseas Information Department here in the FCO) responsible for releasing information to posts worldwide, all Government Departments are individually responsible (on the matters in which they lead) for releasing information locally; even if it is to the local representatives of international agencies such as Reuters'. It would require too great an effort of co-ordination to ensure that you were told every time what you wanted to know. The scope for loopholes is simply too wide. I think the best thing is for us in Hong Kong & General Department (and eventually you in Hong Kong Government Office) to try to take account of your point each time embargoed information is to be issued on a "Hong Kong- sensitive" issue. I would hope that there would not be many such instances. We would have to leave it to your successor to decide how best to use advance information about embargoes to ensure that they are respected by the local media. As you say, it seems to be largely a matter of education.

cc: Mr Attewell (News Dept)

Mr Peaston (OID) Mr Kidd (HKGO)

J A B Stewart

Hong Kong & General Dept