SECRET
comment contained in the documents distributed in Hong Kong could be
framed in one of two ways:
(i) There could be an invitation to comment in general terms on the
acceptability of the arrangements set out in the agreement; or
(ii)
The invitation could be couched in the form of a specific
question, such as:
(a)
Do you agree that HMG should sign the draft agreement?
:
(b)
Do you consider the draft agreement acceptable?
(c) Do you consider the arrangements negotiated between HMG and the
Chinese Government for Hong Kong to be, as a whole, acceptable
against the background described in the White Paper?
9.
Whatever question, was posed, the second approach would have
severe disadvanta ages. Responses would lend themselves to
statistical analysis with yes votes counted against no votes. LThe
Chinese could choose to interpret this as a form of referendum, an
approach to which they are explicitly opposed. An invitation to
comment in general terms (Option (i)) might encourage unrealistic
hopes that if part of the agreement was judged unsuitable it might
be improved through resumed negotiations with the Chinese. It would need to be made absolutely clear that the agreement must be judged
as a whole, and that a resumption of negotiations to improve any
particular aspect was out of the question. Nevertheless, it is considered that this option would involve fewer risks and should therefore be adopted.
It
10. The views expressed in response to the invitation for comments
would need to be carefully assessed and presented to Parliament.
is expected that, in most cases, respondents will find the draft
agreement neither completely acceptable nor completely
unacceptable. There will be qualifications and reservations on
some or other of the many aspects of the arrangements. It will be important to ascertain what these qualifications and reservations
are SO as to be able to gauge how they affect the general verdict.
SECRET
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.