TNAG-1325-FCO40-1737-Future-of-Hong-Kong-Parliamentary-debates-1984 — Page 137

- 2

It is very important that these worries should be met, whether

by us, by the Chinese Government, by the Hong Kong Government or by an adjustment in attitudes of Hong Kong people. I suggest that for

our part:-

me

eschi

File --

Сайс

Suplementary ~18.

J

Firstly, we can do our best to ensure that the International Agreement contains sufficient detail

for future arrangements to be clear - or at least

as clear as anybody's future can be in this uncertain

world. I feel sure that this is exactly what we

are doing.

Secondly, people in Hong Kong want to be sure that the

arrangements will last. Chinese leaders have said that they will last for at least fifty years from 1997. It

is very important that this should be included in the

Agreement. But additionally people in Hong Kong are concerned that the basic law which will eventually define

Hong Kong's administration under the Constitution of

China may detract from the arrangements in the Internationa

Agreement. But the Secretary of State has spoken of a

binding International Agreement. It would be helpful if

the Noble Lady, the Minister of State, would confirm that

we have no reason whatever to anticipate that the provision of the basic law will breach the provisions of the Agreemen

Many people in Hong Kong are anxious to obtain every sort

of assurance about their future and assurance piled on assurance.

This is for historical reasons which are well known. But I am afraid

that no International Agreement or assurance can be cast iron, whether in this case or in any other. However, one can say, firstly

that for a wide variety of reasons well put in the Debate in Another Place, there is every prospect of this Agreement holding up, and secondly, that a chorus of distrust from Hong Kong would be the worst possible approach to a future whose success is inescapably

bound to a close, positive and productive relationship with the

Chinese Government.

"All very..