1
31 March 1992
Foreign & Commonwealth
Office
BY FAX
P Fifoot Esq 0372 723755
HKA 233 |
RECEIVER
3 1 MAR 1992
DESK DEFICER
Dear Paul,
NLEA
London SWIA 2AH
Telephone: 071-
HMOCS
A couple of points arising from discussions today.
David Fish can now make it by about 9.30 am tomorrow, so it would be very helpful if you could also come in around that time.
He
-
At the meeting with Lord Caithness, he expanded further on why he did not like the word "incentive" or "inducement". thought that this would give us trouble with the Chinese who would view it as a bribe to stay on. His concern is that they will point to the provisions in the Joint Declaration, say these are quite adequate, and that they therefore take exception to our bribing officers to stay on. I pointed out to him that the provisions in the Joint Declaration did not go as far as the provisions normally found in POAS. Lord Caithness remains keen on having "compensation" in the scheme of things. He is content for us to pay compensation ie to make a payment on or before the change of sovereignty. He wants us to keep the Treasury informed and I plan to write to the Treasury for information at the same time as submitting to Lord Caithness, hopefully, tomorrow evening. Andrew Burns wondered whether we might be able to use the words "encouragement to stay" instead of incentive or inducement. The scheme would therefore be one with elements of compensation and encouragement to stay. I do not know whether you think this might run. I note that Lord Caithness has already said to the Association that it would be a scheme "with elements incentive and compensation". So perhaps the pass has already been sold. We have also told the Chinese that it would be a "compensation scheme" "phased over a period from 1997 in a way which provides an inducement to stay".
You, aye
M V Stone
Hong Kong Department
MVSAEY
194
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.