CONFIDENTIAL
Questions Arising from Notes on Management Committee Meeting held on 30th June, 1980
3
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
(8
19
£0.
Further to my memorandum dated July 2 1980 (Concepts and Comments) I have given much thought to the Minutes of the Management Committee Meeting held on 30th June,
1980. These give rise to the following questions :
Why has China departed from its stated policy on non-nuclear power station development in the case of KEC/CLP?
Why this insistence by the KEC on equity participation with CLP on a 60/40 basis?
Why do they (KEC) continually mention that the top PRC officials favour this? (They have given
the names of senior Government officials who are interested in this project, which is unusual.)
Why have they hinted that our neutrality in the negotiations with suppliers is not of primary importance?
Why have they stated that they think we would naturally favour purchasing British plant and that they would agree to this - even if such plant were marginally more expensive?
Why is it agreed that the contract period suggested for CLP to purchase power from KEC 25 years?
Why the reference to Hong Kong as British Territory and that they would not object to participation in the project by the British Government?
Am I (LK) wrong in looking at a N.P.S. from the more mundane view of economics rather than from the higher altitude of political strategy?
. If Ping Pong diplomacy can bring about a rapprochement
between the PRC and the US, then why cannot a N.P.S., jointly owned by the British and Hong Kong Governments and the PRC, be a major factor in solving the problem of PRC/British relations over the lease of the New Territories?
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.