TNAG-2716-FCO40-3922-House-of-Commons-Select-Committee-on-Foreign-Affairs-enquiry-1993 — Page 20

SECRET

Ε.

F.

to

Chinese had proposed for the last two years that we should discuss the 1995 elections. We had used every avoid discussion and had said we were not Now we were rushing to introduce a Bill in (Chen Ziving - McLaren 4 February).

pretext ready. LegCo.

Rebuttal

E.1

E.2

The Governor's proposals were not crystallised until late September. As soon as they were, we gave an account of them to the Chinese side. Previously we had on numerous occasions told the Chinese that we would prefer to have a greater number of directly elected seats in the Basic

Law.

We have been willing since October 1992 to hold discussions with the Chinese on specific electoral arrangements. The fact that there have been no discussions cannot be attributed to any unwillingness on the British side.

Discussion not a matter of democracy, it is one of good faith. 'Cannot therefore

Governor's proposals.

9 January ... )

Rebuttal

discuss on the basis of the (Ta Kung Pao Editorial

F.1

Cannot faith

F.2

accept that there has been any breach of on the British side. - Britain has carefully respected its obligations under the Joint Declaration.

The

Governor's proposals are modest and he has all along made it plain that they would need to be discussed with China as well as in Hong Kong. China has not demonstrated that the Governor's proposals violate any specific section of the Basic

Where is the bad faith?

Law.