TNAG-2716-FCO40-3922-House-of-Commons-Select-Committee-on-Foreign-Affairs-enquiry-1993 — Page 139

(Mr Chamberlain)

Could I consult my colleagues on this?

Chairman

74.

Yes, please do. It is a very technical question.

(Mr Chamberlain) The first point I would like to make is the

reference to "previous" means prior to 1997, because clearly the Basic Law

does not take effect until 1 July 1997, but it also means that the

situation is not frozen as of that date, and that there is dynamic

development.

Mr Gapes

75.

What about the word "current" in the 1984 Joint Declaration?

Does that refer to current 1984 or the period after 1984?

this.

(Mr Chamberlain)

I am not sure that too much should be read into

"Current" I think must have meant at the time 1984, but when the

Basic Law was promulgated the reference is to the situation as of 1997, so

I do not think there is any inconsistency between the two.

76.

Hypothetically then, changes introduced after the adoption of

the Basic Law between 1990 and 1997 could therefore be defined from your

perspective as part of the previous system, which would then be adopted for

the next 50 years. Is that correct?

(Mr Chamberlain) Yes, that is right.

77.

Chairman

Not accepting them would really be flouting the Declaration

and the Basic Law itself?

(Mr Chamberlain) Yes, indeed that would be so.

Chairman:

We would like to put a few more questions to you on a

slightly broader basis, although they relate back to this whole matter, but

20