worthington18.3
18 March 1993
IN CONFIDENCE
File
Foreign & Commonwealth
Office
Pels, w Parl
(52)
BY FAX
071-259 5366
London SW1A 2AH
Telephone: 071-
Mr Mark Worthington
Baroness Thatcher's Office
HKB 011/6
RECEIVED IN REGISTRY
Dear
Mark
PEOK OFFICER "INDEX
REGISTRY
PA
Action Taken
HONG KONG
You asked us to check whether Baroness Thatcher received further representations over the question of the OMELCO consensus, following the call on her by Baroness Dunn, representing the Executive Council, and Mr Allen Lee, representing the Legislative Council, on 23 January 1990.
We have done some research. At the meeting on 23 January 1990, the OMELCO visitors said their main objective was to convey the strength of feeling in Hong Kong on the issue of constitutional reform, and the very widespread support for the "OMELCO consensus" (ie that there should be 30
directly-elected seats in the Legislative Council in 1995). They argued that the Chinese paid no attention to Hong Kong opinion, and seemed to be moving away from their earlier agreement on the development of democracy for Hong Kong, and that although everyone wanted to see continuity through 1997 if possible, it was difficult to see how the British Government could achieve convergence given the views of the Chinese leadership on democracy. Convergence was not an end in itself. Baroness Thatcher pointed out to them the risks to Hong Kong of confrontation with China, and the desirability of continuity through 1997 (the "through train"). But she made it clear we had not reached any final conclusions and that we remained in negotiation with the Chinese Government. Baroness Dunn offered to send the Prime Minister an assessment in writing of the likely consequences in Hong Kong of failure to adopt the OMELCO consensus. She did so on 25 January: I enclose a copy.
As far as we can tell, there were no further representations made direct to Baroness Thatcher following this meeting, apart from the paper.
シ
IN CONFIDENCE
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.