TNAG-2119-FCO40-3025-Future-of-Hong-Kong-general-1990 — Page 308

Speaking Note

These amendments would have two principal effects: they would place an obligation on the Secretary of State to demonstrate that his actions and those of the Governor under the Bill were in compliance with the 1984 Sino British Joint Declaration on the Question of Hong Kong; and, by requiring evidence that the Chinese Government accepted that this was so, they would give the Chinese Government an effective veto over the implementation of the Scheme.

- The Government is satisfied that the Bill is entirely consistent with the terms of the Joint Declaration and indeed that it is designed expressly to give effect to our obligation under paragraph 4 of that agreement to maintain and preserve the economic prosperity and social stability of the territory. Such provision as proposed would therefore neither be necessary nor justified.

- To require the agreement of the Chinese Government before the scheme can be implemented would not promote the improvement in confidence in Hong Kong that the scheme is designed to achieve. On the contrary it would have the opposite effect.

Paragraph 4 of the Joint Declaration places an obligation on the British Government until 30 June 1997 to administer Hong Kong and I quote "with the object of maintaining and preserving its economic prosperity and social stability;" it also places an obligation on the Chinese Government to give its cooperation in this connection. But it must be for us to administer Hong Kong in the way that we consider best meets our obligations. In seeking to do that it cannot be right for us to hand over to another Government the power to operate this Bill.

DAWADU