TNAG-1599-FCO40-2192-Hong-Kong-1987-Review-of-Representative-Government-1987 — Page 35

B

CONFIDENTIAL

Background and argument

3. Mr Culshaw wrote to Mr Powell on 8 December, describing the

aborted meeting with Lord Glenarthur and enclosing a copy of

Mr Lee's letter.

4. The letter is a superficially persuasive piece of advocacy,

which has been published by the press in Hong Kong. Our response will no doubt be given similar publicity. It would be consistent

with the level on which we have handled this unofficial delegation,

on the advice of the Governor, for the reply to be sent by

Lord Glenarthur.

5.

We have considered with Hong Kong the main points to be made by

Lord Glenarthur in response to Mr Lee, and we are in the process of

clearing a complete draft with them. We shall submit it as soon as

the Prime Minister has indicated that she is content with this

procedure. On timing, I agreed with Mr Culshaw that a response

could best issue after the delegation had left London and the

immediate political controversy surrounding the visit had died down. I suggest that it should be sent just before Christmas.

6. On the reception of any further delegation sent to London, the

draft concludes that exactly the same considerations apply as to

Mr Lee's first delegation. It is certainly on the cards that he

will return to London in order to lobby shortly before next month's

Parliamentary debate. But he has put himself in something of a weak

position by declining the offer that was made to him during his

first visit of a discussion with Lord Glenarthur. We do not want

to give any further visit a higher profile than the last: and it

would be undesirable for Ministers to be seen to back down under

pressure from Mr Lee.

7.

We shall respond separately to your minute of 16 December, asking for a comprehensive refutation of the case set out in

Mr Lee's letter.

Собаки

CO Hum

CONFIDENTIAL