TNAG-1239-FCO40-1552-Future-of-Hong-Kong-1983 — Page 51

as the Chairman, adopt them 100 percent. Indeed, I note,

more recently, even the Governor has spoken more or less

along similar lines on some of the points.

However the proposals deliberately leave vague

the second stage. Obviously to have a stable Government i in

Hong Kong ensuring these rights agreed to the 1st part, is

very difficult in reality. Is there to be some form of

international guarantee as to the future of the local

administration? Would China ever accept such a prosposal?

There has been an indication from Chinese sources that Hong

Kong people should govern themselves, but what does this

mean? Except for some seats on the Urban Council and the

District Boards whose role is only advisory, th present

administration of Hong Kong is by civil servants, and some

unofficials appointed by the Governor. Is this what is

envisaged in this proposal, i.e. a continuation of the

appointed system? By that time, appointed members would mean

appointed by the new administration, would that mean,

indirectly, appointed by the Chinese Govenment? Or, on the

other hand, does it mean that in these 13 odd years that are

left, Hong Kong may embark upon an altered constitution and

have elected members, at least to the Legislative Council

(which the Reform Club has been fighting for over the past 30

years without much success). If Hong Kong is no longer to be

a Colony, and Chinese sovereignty is to be recognised,

at

least in theory, would the Chinese Government accept elected

members who were not members of the communist party, or at

least fellow travellers? Even if so, surely they would not

tolerate for a moment any system which makes it possible for

a nationalist Chinese to be elected to the Legislative

Alternatively, is the unfortunate reality to be

Council!