TNAG-2350-FCO40-3419-Political-relations-between-Hong-Kong--China-and-the-USA-1991 — Page 12

15-NOV-1991

15:17

POLITICAL ADVISOR OFFICE

+852 521 8702

P.02

Comments on the draft US/Hong Kong Policy Act 1991

"1.

Unclear if bill is with respect to post-1997 only: some provisions, e.g. Section 101, appear to deal with Hong Kong now as well as post-1997. For the sake of clarity, should post-1997 Hong Kong be described as the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region (e.g. in 103(3)?

Where the bill says.

'after 1 July 1997', should this not be 30 June 1997?

2. Section 2: Findings

Although using much of the JD, the bill does not reproduce all its provisions (e.g. JD19 and 20: free port, separate customs territory, international financial centre, or JD85, 86, 88 on autonomy of economic/trade policy and relations with states and regions). Is the selection deliberate?

3. Section 101: Bilateral US/Hong Kong ties

101(1): Hong Kong's autonomy now in the economic and other

fields mentioned does not derive from the Joint

Declaration. Does it mean "to the extent that the

HKSAR will be entitled to exercise autonomy" under

the JD and BL after 1997? This reoccurs, e.g. 105(1).

101(3): Same point on HK's autonomy

now. Also, specifying name of offices "Hong Kong China" is a restriction not

in JD.

101(4): Ref. here suddenly to HKSAR. Does this imply US

should wait until 1997 before concluding such agreements? Surely the aim should be to conclude agreements now which can go beyond 1997?

and "HK" in lines 15/16 and 17 respectively?

Swap "EKSAR"