TNAG-1039-FCO40-1289-Future-of-Hong-Kong-1981 — Page 26

FCO40 Hong Kong Department Records 聯邦事務部香港部檔案 All

SECRET

-7-

would take no surprise action over Hong Kong.

DSR 11C

Might

be possible to build on this. Private hints on length

of warning easier for the Chinese than public statements.

(ii) Problems for HMG. Almost certainly would be

combined with Chinese demand that HMG concede Chinese

sovereignty. Still, better than (C), as it guarantees

length of tenure. Powers of continuing administration

could be tied to Chinese declaration. So could land

leases. Both require Chinese assurances about the

period of warning to be made public in some firms.

for continued British administration would have to be

Chief drawback lies in the fact

negotiated with Chinese.

that the assurance is only effective so long as the

Chinese do not institute a period of warning.

Basis

As soon

as that happened we would face weakening confidence in

Hong Kong, although certainly firms and others would have time to make their plans.

(iii)

Effect. Major boost to confidence.

Sufficient

to halt slide of confidence. But only provided it was quickly followed by UK legislation to bring B ritish

jurisdiction and powers of administration into line with

new concept of validity of 15 years constantly rolled forward until notice given by CPG. The legal mechanics

would need to be worked out.

E) Unilateral action by HMG to take powers to issue land

leases beyond 1997; assurance of tacit Chinese approval

(i) Likelihood. Possible, particularly if done in the

form of automatically renewable periodic leases and with

no mention of 1997. Chinese might see it as a necessary way of preserving investor confidence. Has advantage of

requiring little action on their part.

Comments

Approved members can add comments, bookmarks, and private notes.

No comments yet.

Private Research Note

Private notes are available after approval.