TNAG-2736-FCO40-3944-Hong-Kong-role-of-the-Legislative-Council-(LEGCO)-1994 — Page 21

CONFIDENTIAL

161371

MDHIAN 7247

'

consequencies''. This statement, as with the fact of the introduction of the Bill, was reported with equanimity by most independent media today.

LegCo Questions

5. As reported in our Telnos 1866 and 1848, two oral questions related to the Talks were raised at yesterday's LegCo sitting by Hon Eric Li on disclosure of content of talks, and by Hon Emily Lau on the transfer of sovereignty. SCA replied along the lines proposed in TURS.

6.

In the supplementaries to Eric Li's question there was a bit

We more pressure for disclosing details of the 17 rounds of talks. resisted, on the grounds that we

the grounds that we remained keen to continue with the talks and must therefore continue to abide by the confidentiality. understanding. We repeated the Governor's public statement that we will give a full account when there is an agreement, or when it is clear that there can be no agreement.

7.

Likewise, SCA deflected most of the supplementaries to Emily Lau's question, most of which are about whether the Chinese had breached the JD and if so whether HKG would recommend to the UKG that we should review our obligations concerning the JD.

Constitutional Development Panel

8.

SCA also attended the meeting of the LegCo Constitutional Development Panel today (16 December). There were questions arguing against our insistence on including LegCo voting method in an interim agreement, and our timing for introducing the partial Bill. The Liberals sought to continue pressure for immediate disclosure of the content of the talks and, failing that, pressed for an assurance that details would be disclosed when the talks had formally concluded one way or the other. They also sought to pin us down on when exactly do we plan to introduce the remaining Bill and whether it would be based on the 1992 package or our concessions in the Talks. We gave the standard replies.

PATTEN

PAGE

2

CONFIDENTIAL