TNAG-2716-FCO40-3922-House-of-Commons-Select-Committee-on-Foreign-Affairs-enquiry-1993 — Page 41

From The Rt Hon Lord Shawcross GBE OC

vét prived.

16 December 1992

The Editor

The Times

via fax (071) 782 5046

HOUSE

Of

LORDS

If any problems please call Mrs Greta Kinder (071) 325 5127 Secretary to Lord Shawcross

Dear Sir:

in my

-

Mr Ala stair Goodlad one of the four Ministers of State at the Foreign Office has done his best as a layman to defend the proposals made by the Governor of Hong Kong for

constitutional reform" in the colony. Although as I indicated

earlier letter 1 am loath to pursue

am loath to pursue legalistic points, Mr Googlad's best is not good enough. It is really unarquable that the fivefold increase in the electorate, virtually introducing universal suffrage which was only contemplated by the 1984 Agreement and the Basic Law as an "ultimate" dim to be achieved after the establishment of the Special Administrative Region, the elimination both of the element of expertise which was so important a feature of the functional const! tencies and of the "elite" committee for electing 10 members of special standing and responsibility, do not involve significant changes in the law. If indeed they did not, why were they introduced with such an unprecedented flourish of trumpets, overriding completely the principle of "gradual and orderly progress" enshrined in the Joint Declaration of 1984 and in the Basic Law.

But I adhere to the view that if these matters had been discussed in the Joint Liaison Group as the Joint Declaration expressly required or in Beijing, they might have been amicably resolved and that the matter should not now rest upon any narrow legalistic point. The proposals were not discussed: they word simply proclaimed.

The bald statement that it would not have been politically possible to discuss them first confidentially before making any megaphone pronouncements is flatly contradictory to the experience with the Joint Declaration, the confidentiality of the negotiations preceding which were, as the White Paper states, essential to its success. Is the Joint Liaison Group procedure now being pursued as laid down. If not why not?

Yours faithfully,