TNAG-1954-FCO40-2783-Trade-of-rare-and-endangered-species-in-Hong-Kong-1989 — Page 71

Mr Foogan

Ni4/6 Mr Holmge 1466

RM1%

109

Foreign and Commonwealth Office

London SW1A 2AH

13 June 1989

RJ Green Esq Room N19/19

DRA

DOE

2 Marsham Street

LONDON SW1

Dear Bob,

IVORY AND SEALS

1.

HKCISI

We spoke last week about the FCO being placed in the embarrassing position of not telling Hong Kong that our policy on ivory had changed to encompass a ban on all ivory, including worked ivory from Hong Kong. I appreciate that this was a decision made by your Ministers at the last moment before they left for the Environment Council. But if, at official level, you had let us know straightaway we would have had time to at least provide Hong Kong with the courtesy of advance notice of our change in policy.

2.

On the question of the EC banning the import of seal skins indefinitely, you kindly consulted us on the substance and we said that we had no objection to the UK supporting such a ban. Unfortunately we were not told that DOE Ministers took a decision in mid-May on the policy.

3. This has also proved embarrassing. The Norwegian Embassy from my contacts with them were in no doubt as to the likely drift of UK policy. And Mrs Chalker told a visiting Norwegian Minister in late May of public, parliamentary and government concern about seals. She did not however tell the Norwegians that we had already taken a decision to support an EC ban because we did not know that. Had we known we might well have wished to have done this, since Norway is after all a friendly country with whom we have close contacts. The Norwegian Embassy are not surprised by the decision, but they are surprised that we were unable to tell them of our decision and warn them of the EC taking action in June rather than in the autumn.