TNAG-2456-FCO40-3577-Future-of-Hong-Kong-constitutional-development-presentation-1992 — Page 38

RESTRICTED

Chinese reactions to the constitutional proposals have so far concentrated on procedure (lack of consultation and

need for convergence in 1997) rather than substance. In particular they have not tried to claim that any specific proposal by the Governor is contrary to the Basic Law. Their tactics seem to be to unsettle Hong Kong opinion with vague threats about the consequences if proposals are

introduced without consultation with China. There is the implicit threat that the Chinese might (but only might) have to make dispositions of their own for the formation of a new LegCo in 1997. But they have left themselves room

for manoeuvre in their discussions with the Governor and have not foreclosed any options.

These Chinese criticisms, replayed by the pro-China press in Hong Kong, are having some effect on the mass circulation Chinese language press, which is showing signs of nervousness about a row with China over the

constitutional proposals. But otherwise the Hong Kong press have given a warm reception to the speech, as the enclosed telegram shows. The English-language press have been particularly supportive. The Governor's activities to

promote his proposals (including a 90 minute radio

phone-in, 90 minute appearance before LegCo and two public meetings) have met with an enthusiastic public response. Questions have ranged widely; there has been much support

for the increased spending on social welfare, health and education (with some LegCo members wanting more, and a few worrying about profligacy). On the constitutional

proposals, interest has centred on what the Governor will

do if China rejects them; some have asked about a

referendum. The Governor's line has been that he will

discuss his proposals seriously with China, and is open to views from Hong Kong; by next Spring it will be necessary

RESTRICTED