TNAG-2168-FCO40-3105-House-of-Commons-Foreign-Affairs-Committee-inquiry-into-Hong-1990 — Page 274

CONFIDENTIAL

[HONG KONG AND PARLIAM

then 011/

RECEIVED IN PEGISTRY

27 APR 1990

*STRY

FAC report.

Enter

1. In my view, we are daikely to have material for two public documents on Hong Kong A the next few months, but not

three.

Lude

2. The Annual Report is a largely descriptive and backward-looking paper, which is published for the record. It is unlikely to stimulate much interest in Parliament (as Mr Paul notes, previous reports have attracted little attention), but we can scarcely abandon the practice now. have been going through the draft over the weekend and have made a number of amendments. A clean version is now being produced and will shortly be submitted.

3. The only good reason for a further response to the FAC is that the Chairman has asked for one. If Ministers wished to produce such a second response, a possible time would be shortly after Easter, when the Basic Law will have been promulgated and the Nationality Bill introduced in the House of Commons. An alternative would be in July, after (one hopes) the nationality legislation has been passed. As the enclosure to Mr Paul's submission makes clear, there would be quite a lot to say, even though most of it will have been said earlier.

4.

I am uneasy about giving a commitment to the Chairman of the FAC to produce a White Paper before we are clear that there will be something substantially new to say.

THIS IS A COPY

THE ORIGINAL HAS BEEN

CLOSED UNDER

FOI EXEMPTION NO...27(1)

*

CONFIDENTIAL

/5.