TNAG-2731-FCO40-3937-Future-of-Hong-Kong-constitutional-development-1993 — Page 146

ERMENT HOUSE HONG KONG.

12

ERI 29 JAN 93 08:02

SECRET 高度機密

PG.08

(b) It would

demonstrate to the community, and the wider

audience (incl. China) that we meant what we said,

i.e. the proposals are just proposals, and we are

prepared to listen to contrary views.

The

case

for по

amendment before introducing

our proposals to LegCo can be stated thus :

(a) No amendment that we would be prepared to introduce

is likely to satisfy the Chinese demands.

Indeed,

past experience had shown that concession on our part

whets the Chinese appetite for further concessions,

thus forcing us step by step into a position which

departs substantially from our basic premise,

i.e. that the 1994-95 election arrangements must be

fair, open and acceptable to the community.

be

(b) Given the support by the LegCo and the community for

our proposals (see para. 9 above), it would

difficult for us to explain why we had amended our

proposals substantially before introducing them into

the LegCo. In particular, an amendment at this stage

would be widely regarded by "liberal supporters" of

the

Government's

proposals in the LegCo as the firs

sign

of backing down.

This could lead to