PERSONAL AND CONFIDENTIAL
:3]
of the Opposition. Clearly there are important differences in the case of Hong Kong, but it would be interesting to know whether you already operate some system on these lines, whether something like it would be feasible.
The 1995 LegCo elections
We took the Secretary of State through the main problem areas: the pressure for more directly elected seats in 1995; Chinese pressure for convergence between the arrangements for the 1995 elections and the Basic Law; and the current review of electoral arrangements including Chinese opposition to lowering the voting age and to a boundary/electoral commission. The Secretary of State showed interest in the timetable for decision-making on these issues. We said (recalling earlier correspondence with you) that we thought that the latest time for decisions here would be the end of 1993, and that some points would have to be decidede earlier, to allow arrangements to be in place in time for the District Board elections in September 1994. The Secretary of State was inclined to think that this timetable could be pushed back if necessary and we undertook to check the point with you. I suspect (having now looked back at the papers, eg your telno 3450 of 1991) that in fact you will need decisions from us well before the end of 1993 if arrangements such as boundaries and electoral registers are to be in place for the September 1994 DB elections, but I would welcome your thoughts on that.
On the specific question of when Ministers should fulfil their commitment to go back to the Chinese on increasing the number of directly-elected seats in 1995, the Secretary of State was clear that now was not the right time to do this. But he concluded that he should tell the Prime Minister that the issue would have to come to Cabinet for the first time probably around the end of 1992, to allow time for an approach to the Chinese to be made and decisions to be taken during 1993. We noted that there were two main options. First, we could discuss the possibility of increasing the number of seats with the Chinese, having decided in our own minds that our top priority would be to preserve the LegCo through train in 1995. Second we could decide that, having discussed the issue with the Chinese, we would increase the number of directly-elected seats in 1995 even in the face of Chinese objections. We pointed out all the risks of abondoning the through train. The Secretary of State noted that, to some extent, a final decision would depend on what was happening in China at the time. But you will be interested to know that he saw some attractions in going for an increase in the number of directly-elected seats, and if necessary facing the Chinese down on this issue. He commented that one would be on strong ground politically in doing so. (This is clearly an issue on which a lot of further work will be required before a paper can be put to Cabinet.)
MAIAAS
PERSONAL AND CONFIDENTIAL
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.