TNAG-1956-FCO40-2785-Trade-of-rare-and-endangered-species-in-Hong-Kong-1989 — Page 117

237 A

ijo

B

C

238 D

1440

PJZANE

226/4

RESTRICTED

239

Reference...

HKC151

re call by Economic Services Branch)

Mr Stone Miss Marsden 29

Mr Paul

HONG KONG: IVORY

1.

The first sentence of Hong Kong Tel 3137 is not true, although we did overlook the question in para 6 of Tel 2399 (US influence on CITES parties).

2. FCO tel 1649 pointed to the need for further information (to convince DOE) before our position on possible exceptions could be formulated. This received no response from Hong Kong. However Dr Lee and Mr Cheung (Hong Kong Department of Agriculture and Fisheries) were able to convince DOE officials during their visit on 31 August that DOE should support. Given Lord Caithness' position in proposing a total ban we expected this to be difficult.

3.

In his

DOE have in fact been more supportive than we expected. letter of 22 September Mr Trippier proposes that we support Hong Kong's case to continue trade in legal ivory. If the Community vote against the CITES Secretariat's compromise resolution that would allow such trade to continue Mr Trippier proposes that the UK should abstain.

4. MAED are putting up the attached submission which I have agreed as amended at paragraph 7. They hope to have a Ministerial decision by the end of the week.

CODE 18-77

5.

FB Holroyd

26

19/89

Not get

IM TELNO 3137 is juite unjustified HKG did not

their act together

properly until wre

met Dr Lee.

RESTRICTED

2619