TNAG-1632-FCO40-2248-Ministerial-visits-from-the-UK-to-Hong-Kong--including-visit-1987 — Page 196

BENAAS

Mr Battiscombe Deputy Head

PUSD

Нив

CONFIDENTIAL

Hub 027/7

03 SEP 1987

Reference......

PA

3/a

$

LORD GLENARTHUR'S VISIT TO HONG KONG, 16

1.

SEPTEMBER

As I mentioned to you on the telephone, we are submitting for the weekend box briefing for Lord Glenarthur's visit. Part of that briefing must cover current concerns in Hong Kong about freedom of speech in the 1997 context. One of the questions I anticipate at

the press conference which Lord Glenarthur will give prior to his departure from Hong Kong will be on the lines of: "in seeking to prevent publication of "Spycatcher'

'Spycatcher" is not HMG attacking press freedom in Hong Kong and thus setting a poor example for after 1997?"

2.

This is primarily a Hong Kong related question but obviously the answer will contain elements of our general line on Spycatcher. With this in mind (but conscious as I am that things may have moved on by 16 September) I have drafted the following rough line for the Minister:

"HMG's action against publication of Spycatcher nothing to do with freedom of speech, here or elsewhere. A matter of obligations of confidentiality which a civil servant owes to his employer".

I think this would be a defensible line on Spycatcher itself, even if the Minister is pressed. If he is pressed on the future of press freedom etc in Hong Kong he would respond on strictly Hong Kong-related lines, referring to guarantees in Hong Kong law, the Joint Declaration etc etc.

3.

But I do not of course know if the suggested line is acceptable in non-Hong Kong terms. Grateful for your advice by noon on 2 September (as I have to submit all our briefing for the visit to Robin McLaren by close of play on the 2nd).

Leeks

Hong Kong Department WH 312

270 2651

1 September 1987

Metal HKB

I think it would be Jeeferable to stick to the general live

W

ham taken themfund this

Care

CONFIDENTIAL

and may

ray something.

The

a