SECRET
ALTERNATIVE APPROACHES
Option A: The Retention of a British Governor appointed by London up
to 1997
5.
Under this system the reforms of LEGCO and EXCO envisaged in
the Green Paper would presumably have been put into effect by 1991
but there would be no major change to the position of the Governor,
except possibly for some minor differences, such as ending his
presidency of LEGCO. Moreover the present system of administration through senior appointed officials would continue.
Advantages
(a) HMG would have and would be seen to retain the powers necessary
to fulfil their responsibility for Hong Kong up to 1997.
(b)
The Chinese Government would be unlikely to object. Their
interest is to oblige us to retain control of Hong Kong and to hand it over in good order.
Disadvantages
(i) The system of locally generated autonomous institutions in Hong
Kong before 1997 would not be complete. We would not have put
in place an official who might quasi-automatically become Chief
Executive under the SAR system after 1997, thereby providing continuity.
(ii) The arrangement could appear unacceptably colonialist and might
not meet Hong Kong aspirations.
Option B: A locally elected Governor taking over the Adminstrative
Powers of the Present Office but without the ability to countermand
EXCO's and LEGCO's Recommendations.
6. He would retain reserve powers relating to foreign affairs and
defence but he would exercise these on the instructions of the
Secretary of State.
Advantages
(a)
(b)
(c)
A complete system of local autonomy would be established
providing a stepping stone for continuity after 1997.
The system would go some way to meet the demands for greater
democracy.
If there were no top post appointed from outside Hong Kong, it would be more difficult for the Chinese to argue that they
should put their own man in after 1997.
Disadvantages
(i) Although theoretically the Governor would retain powers to act
SECRET
/in
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.