TNAG-1356-FCO40-1797-Constitutional-development-in-Hong-Kong-1985 — Page 238

GRS 500

CONFIDENTIAL

FM HONG KONG

TO PRIORITY FCO

TELNO 2291

CONFIDENTIAL

OF 231045Z OCTOBER 85

INFO PRIORITY PEKING

нки ош

RECEIVED, REGISTRY

29 OCT 1985

DESK OFFICER

INDEX

Y

Auton Taken

(235

PA

92

YOUR TELNO 1574 AND PEKING TELNO 1491 : DEBATE ON BASIC LAW IN

LEGCO.

1. FURTHER COMMENTS BY UNOFFICIALS ON THE QUESTION OF WHETHER LEGCO SHOULD DEBATE THE BASIC LAW HAVE BEEN MIXED. EVEN SO I WOULD GUESS THAT IF THERE IS A REASONABLE BODY OF MEMBERS IN FAVOUR OF DEBATING IT THE REST WILL NOT OPPOSE.

2. WE AGREE THAT THERE ARE NO FIRM PROCEDURAL GROUNDS ON WHICH THE PRESIDENT COULD RULE A DEBATE OUT OF ORDER. WE ALSO AGREE THAT IT WOULD BE POLITICALLY IMPRUDENT TO TRY TO DO SO. IT WOULD BE CONTRARY TO OUR POLICY OF ENCOURAGING FREE DEBATE ON ISSUES OF IMPORTANCE TO THE FUTURE OF HONG KONG.

3. WE SHARE ALSO THE VIEW THAT THE CHINESE MAY COMPLAIN. SINCE THEY HAVE SAID THAT THEY PROPOSE TO CONSULT WIDELY ON THE BASIC LAW THE ONLY OBJECTION THEY COULD RAISE WOULD BE A FORMALISTIC ONE, IN THE HOPE OF MAINTAINING THE PURITY OF THEIR POLICY OF NOT TAKING OFFICIAL COGNISANCE OF LEGCO'S EXISTENCE AND ITS RIGHT TO SPEAK FOR HONG KONG. THEY WILL BE IN A DIFFICULT POSITION BECAUSE THE PRIME MOVER IS A MEMBER OF THE BASIC LAW DRAFTING COMMITTEE APPOINTED BY PEKING.

4. AS REGARDS THE COURSE OF ACTION TO BE FOLLOWED, I AGREE WITH PARA

6 OF YOUR TELNO 1574 SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING:

(1) IT WOULD NOT NEED SUBSTANTIAL PRESSURE FOR A DEBATE.

A DEBATE WOULD HAVE TO BE ALLOWED IF THE MOTION WERE MOVED AND NO

UNOFFICIAL ROSE TO OPPOSE IT.

(11) WE SHOULD RESERVE JUDGMENT ON WHETHER OTHER OFFICIALS SHOULD SPEAK. IT COULD WELL BE IN ORDER FOR EXAMPLE FOR THE AG TO REPLY ON POINTS RAISED BY REMINDING MEMBERS ON THE CONTENT OF THE JOINT DECLARATION AND ITS RELATIONSHIP TO THE BASIC LAW.

(111) IN SPEAKING TO THE CHINESE THERE WOULD BE NO NEED TO BE APOLOGETIC. TO THE POINTS YOU MAKE COULD BE ADDED THE POINT THAT IN OUR VIEW IT IS PROPER (SUBJECT TO THE TERMS OF THE MOTION) FOR THE COUNCIL TO DEBATE A MOTION RELATING TO THE BASIC LAW BECAUSE OF THE CLOSE CONNECTION WITH THE JOINT DECLARATION. THE CHINESE THEMSELVES HAVE CALLED FOR WIDE CONSULTATION. NOR WOULD ANYONE BE LIKELY TO SUGGEST THAT ENACTMENT OF THE LAW WAS A MATTER FOR ANYBODY OTHER THAN THE NPC.

CONFIDENTIAL

15