SECRET
the absence of any other independent audit, either UMELCO or some
Unofficial group would set itself up in this role. This could be very divisive.
12. It would be difficult for the auditors to operate from the UK. They would not be able to form any impression of whether the comments were in any way representative of the mood of the community
or whether they had been organised to any exntent. It would be more difficult for them to persuade the people of Hong Kong that they were independent of HMG, and there might be criticism that they
demonstrated further evidence of a colonial mentality. In
practise any UK-based auditors would almost certainly wish to visit
Hong Kong.
13.
The auditors would also need to remain totally impartial.
They
would be the focus of considerable publicity and might receive a
large amount of correspondence sent direct to them, which would have to be passed to the appropriate recipients. In such circumstances, and bearing in mind that it would not be theer job to collect
comments or to compile an assessment (although they might disagree with the assessment they recieved from the Hong Kong Government), it
is probable that auditors with a judicial rather than a political
background would operate best.
14.
In conclusion, it is likely that a small Hong Kong based team
consisting of members of the judiciary, some at least of whom were from Hong Kong (and preferably Chinese), would be most effective and open to the least criticism.
15.
With regard to timing, the Governor has commented that it is impossible to foresee what will happen in September and some very tough bargaining may be required at the last minute. As for the
Parliamentary debate, the Secretary of State himself told Ji Pengfei
that it would take place in November.
16. As requested, I attach both earlier submissions.
13 June 1984
Bui
R D Clift
Hong Kong Department
SECRET
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.