TNAG-2451-FCO40-3568-Future-of-Hong-Kong-constitutional-development-1992 — Page 8

SoStoPM.SA.bern

CONFIDENTIAL

I therefore believe that we should continue to encourage

the Chinese to enter serious discussions with us. We have

already asked them through the Joint Liaison Group how they envisaged taking discussions forward. We got a predictably negative reaction. But there would be tactical value in being

seen by Hong Kong opinion to have made every effort to consult

with China. And if we could bring about a serious discussion,

for example at the next meeting of the Joint Liaison Group (6 8 December), it would give us the chance to explore whether there is any possible basis for an agreed way forward.

As for the content of any discussion with the Chinese, we

have little room for manoeuvre. It would not be right for the

British or Hong Kong Governments to take the initiative in

proposing amendments to the Governor's proposals. That would

look in Hong Kong as if the Governor was on the run. But a

number of groups in Hong Kong have begun to put forward

alternative proposals for the functional constituencies and

the Election Committee. To be acceptable, they would need to meet the Governor's criteria that electoral arrangements should be fair, open and command widespread support in Hong

Kong. But if any proposals did emerge which met that test,

and addressed issues of concern to the Chinese, the JLG

meeting would be an opportunity to explore them.

Agreement with the Chinese on any aspect of the 1995 elections is a very remote possibility. But some amendment of

the proposals for the Election Committee and/or the Functional Constituencies on the basis of ideas from Hong Kong groups,

could help to get the package through LegCo. It might also mute the Chinese opposition to the 1995 elections somewhat,

although we should not overestimate the chances of that.

CONFIDENTIAL