A
CONFIDENTIAL
UKB 011/6/2
NU -8 MUT 1993
125
FROM: RAJ Bunten
Hong Kong Dept
DATE: 9 November 1993
CC:
Mr Chamberlain Ms Barrett
Mr Ricketts
Mr Hum
PS/Mr Goodlad
mihisar
CH AS 9/1.
TRANSCRIPT OF MR HUM'S AND MR CHAMBERLAIN'S EVIDENCE
FAC
Problem
1. How to respond to the transcript of recent evidence to the Foreign Affairs Committee (FAC).
Recommendation
2.
That the Deputy Legal Adviser should write to the Chairman of the FAC correcting his evidence on one point and that other questions of fact be corrected on the draft transcript. We have consulted Mr Chamberlain who agrees with this approach.
Background and Argument
3.
At the FAC's request Mr Hum and Mr Chamberlain gave evidence on 3 November. I have been through the transcript of the evidence of the hearing. Apart from a few transcription errors, which I have corrected on the attached master, there is only one significant problem.
4. In paragraph 81 on page 22 Mr Chamberlain is quoted as saying that China's record of abiding by International agreements to date has been 'very mixed'. In the past we have claimed, in answer to questions whether the Chinese will ignore the Joint Declaration after 1997, that the Chinese record in this area is good. I have consulted Mr Wye in RAD (FE). He believes that it is possible that the Chinese may have breached international agreements with the Vietnamese during the Sino-Vietnamese conflict in the seventies. So we cannot state that their record in this area is perfect, but it would seem that it is better than Mr Chamberlain's answer might imply. Neither Mr Chamberlain's recollection, nor
support
the use of the word 'very' and we will ask PRU to ask for this word to be deleted among the other minor changes we are proposing.
5. However, if we leave the record as it stands then we will leave the danger that at any time in future a critic of our Hong Kong policy based on the Joint Declaration, or any other
CONFIDENTIAL
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.