weakest link in the chain. We need therefore to review regularly, it seems to me, whether the initiatives which are being taken are likely to cover all the aspects on which concern can be expected. For instance, I understand that the proposed AEA visit to China has now been dropped in favour of an invitation to Chinese experts to visit the UK and France. Without wishing to ignore the Department of Energy's concerns for the UK AEA's role, it does seem to us that particularly in the light of recent press comment the Hong Kong Government will wish to have some source of expert advice on the adequacy of the regulatory procedures and safety systems currently proposed by the Chinese. We have also heard that the French may be willing to take additional measures eg by plugging in the Chinese to their early warning system in the event of a nuclear incident - and there will certainly need to be continuing close links with the French if we are to have the full picture. I would have thought it a necessary part of the process for some competent body (the IAEA?) to attempt to bring together these strands and produce a more comprehensive account of what the Chinese intend.
-
I therefore look forward to seeing the outline the FCO are preparing on what our response should be to Zhou Ping's most recent message to the Ambassador, and, if we can receive it in time, Hong Kong's own latest thoughts. Without wishing to formalise arrangements too much, it does seem to me that it may be useful to have a group meeting somewhat more regularly than hitherto, perhaps under FCO chairmanship, to ensure that the interested Departments are all pulling in the same direction. This is something else we could discuss at our meeting on Friday.
I am copying this letter to David Morphet, and to Thorold Masefield and Christopher Hum at FCO.
Yours
pp
&
Aidendace
C B BENJAMIN
999-80
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.