TNAG-2731-FCO40-3937-Future-of-Hong-Kong-constitutional-development-1993 — Page 124

*

SECRET

SECRET

BY

HiB 012/1 -3 FEB 199TOP COPY

Q DIST?

p.z. Conshi

Derpy So 124462

MDHOAN 8199

RECEN

FM FCO

TO DESKBY 020030Z HONG K

TELNO 89

OF 011718Z FEB 93

INFO DESKBY 01200OZ UKREP BRUSSELS

INFO IMMEDIATE PEKING, UKREP JLG HONG KONG, TOKYO

PERSONAL FOR GOVERNOR FROM RICKETTS, HKD

UKREP BRUSSELS PERSONAL FOR PRIVATE SECRETARY FOR FOREIGN SECRETARY

TOKYO PERSONAL

OR HUM CAUSS) VISITING

S

YOUR TELNO 139 (NOW REPEATED TO UKREP BRUSSELS AND TOKYO): HONG KONG: EXCO DISCUSSION ON CONSTITUTIONAL DEVELOPMENT

1. Thank you for this account of your thinking on tactics for what could be an important ExCo meeting on 2 February.

2. We had ourselves been mulling over the tactics for this meeting, particularly in relation to our efforts to get a dialogue going with the Chinese. We sent you our thoughts in our telno 84 which you should have received on Saturday 30 January. I understand that this was never distributed in Hong Kong (although Sir R McLaren has seen and commented on it: his telno 135 (not to all)). I have asked for our telegram to be retransmitted to you.

3.

As you will see, our main concern was that, if there was to be an announcement following ExCo on 2 February that your proposals would be introduced unamended into LegCo, this could pre-empt a Chinese response to Sir R McLaren's approach on 14 January. We suggested that you might consider whether to allow the ExCo discussion to string out, perhaps for another two weeks, to allow the Chinese maximum opportunity to respond to Sir R McLaren's renewed offer of talks.

4.

I have now discussed these points further with William Ehrman and Martin Dinham, and I understand that they have consulted you again. Mr Ehrman tells me that you saw some force in the argument that it would be better not to announce a clear cut decision from ExCo on 2 February, and that you were now thinking in terms of a statement on the following lines:

PAGE

SECRET

1