RESTRICTED
attached showing the amendments which the Hong Kong side are prepared to accept) which spells out the conditions for "resumption" (in effect expropriation) by the HKG/SAR of the
site.
3. SC 14 causes us problems.
We do not dispute the right to
expropriate but we maintain that the provisions for
compensation are inadequate. These are at the discretion of the Director of the Buildings and Lands Administration (rather than an independant arbitrator) and OED are not convinced that these are sufficiently comprehensive to cover the potential financial damange HMG could suffer should the SAR exercise its
rights. After the latest round of exchanges between BTC and
Buildings and land, the Hong Kong side have agreed to spell
out that HMG would also be covered by international law
(provision in Vienna Convention on Consular Relations, 1963 Article 31(3)) which provides for "prompt, adequate and
effective compensation" but which leaves open the method of
calculating that compensation.
4.
BTC reckon that they will get no further with the Buildings and Lands Administration than what is on offer now.
(Attempts to put our own revised draft for SC 14 to Buildings and Lands were rebuffed). The Lands Administration are guided essentially by standard rules and by how these rules have been applied in the past they see what is on offer as a good compromise and one more in a long line of adjustments they have been prepared to make on the terms of the PTG. Buildings and Land have told BTC that if we cannot accept what is on offer, they will have to go to Exco for further instructions.
5.
The reasoning given by Buildings and Land for retaining SC
14 is that it gives the Hong Kong Administration protection from paying compensation for land which was granted free of
btc.sc14.dbj
RESTRICTED
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.