Tag: Li Peng

Below is the transcript of Mr Major’s Press Conference in Hong Kong on Thursday 5th September 1991.

---

PRIME MINISTER:

It is very good to be back in Hong Kong, it is many years since I have worked here and I have been fascinated to see the very remarkable changes that there have been during that period.

Last evening we had the opportunity to fly by helicopter over Hong Kong and the development of Hong Kong is perhaps the most visible evidence of its success as a commercial centre and above all as a place where human enterprise and all other forms of enterprise and ingenuity have flourished in recent years. The people of Hong Kong can justly and rightly be proud of their achievements.

Hong Kong’s continued success is one of my government’s first priorities, we want to see Hong Kong prosper as a centre of freedom and enterprise up to and beyond 1997, that was why I went to Peking and I should like to report on my discussions there.

I went to China essentially for the sake of Hong Kong and I would like to remind you of what that visit achieved.

First, we have the Memorandum of Understanding on the airport, work can now go ahead on the airport core projects, all of them. The Memorandum opens the way to significantly improved cooperation with China in the interests of Hong Kong.

Second, we have secured clear cut public Chinese reaffirmation of their commitment to honour the Joint Declaration in letter and in spirit.

Thirdly, we have established a mechanism to end the blockage on productive discussions in the Joint Liaison Group.

Fourthly, we have obtained an extremely important agreement in principle on Hong Kong’s Court of Final Appeal.

And fifthly, we have confirmation of the right of Hong Kong to make its own investment promotion and protection agreements.

And sixthly, we have cleared the way for a new Consulate General, we intend to build such a Consulate and not just to lease premises.

I was accompanied to Peking by the Governor and other officials from the Hong Kong Government. Today I was able to brief EXCO on the outcome and I believe it is fair to say that all the members of EXCO expressed great satisfaction at what had been achieved. I was able to tell them that all the Chinese leaders I had met had volunteered their gratitude for the tremendously generous help which Hong Kong had provided for the victims of the recent floods.

Yesterday I also visited High Island Detention Centre, reading about it is not the same as seeing it. What you realise above all when you go to a camp is that these are not just statistics but fellow human beings, this is a human problem which requires a humane solution.

The influx of Vietnamese boat people has posed enormous problems for Hong Kong. Hong Kong has coped efficiently and above all humanely. It has not been easy for Hong Kong to preserve the policy of first asylum but one of the reasons why so many countries around the world are prepared to speak up for Hong Kong and what it stands for is because of Hong Kong’s record on this and on other issues. It is an indictment of the policies of the Vietnamese government that the boat people left their country in the first place, it is a credit to Hong Kong that you have provided accommodation, health care and education for so many people.

A substantial minority of the Vietnamese boat people are refugees. Under the comprehensive plan of action those who are refugees have a right to be resettled elsewhere in the world, and they are. But for most economic migrants Hong Kong does not have the capacity to accommodate them forever, they will have to return home.

But they must be able to return home without fear of reprisals. We are negotiating with the new Vietnamese government for the establishment of centres that would be internationally managed and under the control of United Nations agencies. Those who are screened out as non-refugees will be able to return to those centres in the first instance, that is the best way forward.

Next week there will be elections in Hong Kong. For the first time there will be directly elected members of LEGCO. Also for the first time the new LEGCO will have a majority of elected members. This is the first point in a rising curve of directly elected seats which will, with agreement with the Chinese, continue up to and beyond 1997.

Of course we need to discuss this matter with the Chinese if progress is to be sustained. We shall want to discuss with them at the right time and in the light of the experience gained this year the arrangements for the elections in 1995.

No visitor can fully share the challenge which Hong Kong faces as we approach 1997. The people of Hong Kong have to live with that reality every day, sovereignty will revert to China in 1997 and it is Hong Kong and China who will have to make a reality of the concept of one country and two systems.

But I believe the Joint Declaration agreed in 1984 is the best basis for Hong Kong’s future. There will be difficulties, as there are in any relationship, let alone one that requires two different political and economic systems to work together.

But we are not saying to the people of Hong Kong: here is the Joint Declaration, now it is up to you to make it work. Making it work is top priority for me and for my government. That was why we have agreed to intensify our contacts with Peking and raise the level at which they are regularly conducted, that was why going to Peking was necessary and worthwhile.

A week ago I left the world’s largest free enterprise economy. Today I shall be leaving a somewhat smaller but equally enterprising market economy. In between I visited Moscow and Peking. One country is exploring the path of political reform, the other is concentrating on economic reform. The fact is that both are necessary and I doubt that one can develop fully without the other.

It is fitting that I should end this eventful week here in Hong Kong where your economy is booming and where you are about to take a first momentous step in the process of representative government. I have found it a most useful and worthwhile visit and am delighted I was able to come. I am now happy to take your questions.

 

QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS

QUESTION (South China Morning Post):

Prime Minister, you said that you went to China for the sake of Hong Kong and for two fundamental issues – human rights and democracy in Hong Kong – bearing in mind China’s repeated warning that it may repeal Hong Kong’s [Indistinct] up to 1997 and China’s persistent refusal to recognise the Hong Kong Executive and Legislative Council, did you take up these issues with Li Peng?

PRIME MINISTER:

I spoke specifically to Mr Li Peng about the desirability of meeting EXCO and about meeting OMELCO and the fact that there would need to be a direct relationship between them and I hoped that would come about. This is a matter we have raised with them and a matter we will continue to raise with them.

On other matters, insofar as democracy in Hong Kong is concerned, we are starting off with the first directly elected members in just a week or so. That is a tremendous advance, it is part of a rising curve, I think we will get through those elections, we will see how they are sustained, how they develop, and I think nobody should under-estimate the impact that these elections will make even though on this occasion it is only 18 seats out of the full total of 60.

QUESTION:

What about human rights given that it has been about 7 years now since we signed the Joint Declaration that China has yet to become a signatory to the international Conference on Human Rights, have you actually asked the Chinese leader to take action and if not why not?

PRIME MINISTER:

I think most people will have known from reading the press over the last few days that I certainly did discuss the question of human rights with the Chinese, they are well aware of my view, I doubt they have ever been made so well aware of anyone’s views on human rights in the past before. So they are very well aware of my concern in human rights and they are equally well aware in terms of their responsibilities at home and abroad that this is a matter of rising interest around the world, not just in the case of China, but in the case of countries all around the world where human rights are not at the standard that we believe they should be. There is a searchlight of public and international opinion upon the question of human rights, the Chinese are absolutely aware of that and yes I did discuss the matter with them.

QUESTION (Mike Brunson, ITN):

I wonder if I could tempt you to break all the conventions and to discuss British politics while you are on an overseas trip and to say whether after a successful week you are tempted to call an early election when you get back home?

PRIME MINISTER:

You can tempt but I may not rise to the temptation, Michael. I think speculation like that at this stage of a Parliament is always inevitable, I just hope not too many people will take that almost inevitable day to day speculation too seriously. We still have work to do, when I judge it right we will have a General Election. But I do not think it would be in anyone’s interest for me to respond to day to day speculation.

QUESTION:

Do you still want to make it your intention to see the intergovernmental conferences through to the end of December as you have said in the past?

PRIME MINISTER:

I have always made it clear that I think the negotiations that we shall have in the two intergovernmental conferences are vitally important for the future of the United Kingdom. I want to be certain that I am in a position to negotiate for my country in those conferences.

QUESTION (Hong Kong Economic Times):

My question is in two parts, first since your visit to China was quite successful and in the Soviet Union, but can I say that you are failing to deliver the G7 message in which the most important and subtle message to China, that is that socialism has no future?

PRIME MINISTER:

I think that since we have just been talking about a British General Election I should take you over to Britain and you can explain to the British electorate that socialism has no future, a point that I most assuredly agree with in terms of the United Kingdom.

As I indicated a moment or so ago, I think economic and political reform are inevitable around the world and that they will go hand in hand together. It is for each country to work out its own salvation in that event but that there is a worldwide movement for people to have greater political and economic freedoms I am in no doubt, it is a movement that I welcome, it is a movement the G7 collectively welcomes, it is a movement that we are seeing in all parts of the globe, I think it is irreversible.

QUESTION:

The second part of my question is that the people in Hong Kong are quite concerned about who is the next Governor of Hong Kong, can you confirm that the present Governor, Sir David Wilson, will leave next year and if that is the case who is the best possible candidate for this job?

PRIME MINISTER:

Was that an application? I can confirm to you that there is no vacancy for the Governorship of Hong Kong. Sir David Wilson has done and is doing and will continue to do an excellent job for the people of Hong Kong. Again it is a matter, I know speculation arises from time to time and no doubt whatever is said it will arise again, but I believe he has done an excellent job and is doing an excellent job for the people of Hong Kong and anything beyond that is pure speculation.

QUESTION (Sally Blyth, RTHK)

I wonder if you could reaffirm your government’s assurance that you will go back to China to try and increase the number of directly elected seats to the Legislative Council if these elections this year prove to be a success? And secondly, can you define what you mean when the government means a success or whether elections are satisfactory, what do you mean by this, how are you going to judge whether they have been a success?

PRIME MINISTER:

One of the difficulties of judging the future is you have to see what happens and then for a judgment upon it when it has happened. So I think it is impossible to provide a hypothetical answer to that particular question. I think on both parts of your question we have to see what happens in the elections, we have to review what happens, we then have to consider the views of those people who have been elected, their views are very important, and I do not think it is for me to make judgments that are judgments that are properly to be made after people have been elected when I have had the opportunity of hearing their views after that election. That after all is what democracy is about. And I think if I was to say well whatever happens in the election I have made up my mind I am going to do this, that or the other thing after the election, I might legitimately be asked whether I was not going to consult the people who are elected, and I am. So I will have to defer my answer until I have had those discussions.

QUESTION:

Can I follow that up?

PRIME MINISTER:

I think Sally there is nothing more I can say, I think I have covered both parts of those questions and I will have to see what happens in the election and hear the views of the people who are elected.

QUESTION (Brian Barron):

What is wrong with having full elections, full democracy in this colony before 1997, is that a path that you yourself personally would really like to follow, would that not safeguard Hong Kong before Peking’s takeover?

PRIME MINISTER:

We have had those discussions previously and we have reached an agreement with the Chinese on the number of people who are elected. I am not going to go back over past discussions, I do not think that is productive. What we actually need to do is to make sure we are on a democratic path and it is sustainable and will be sustained amid general agreement up to the period in 1997 and beyond the period in 1997. It is always an attractive thought to say: what if and could we not have a little bit more? But we have had an agreement that has been determined some time ago, we can look at the matter again after we have had the elections in the way I described a moment or so again.

The Foreign Secretary recalls to my mind that I did not respond to an earlier question on the Bill of Rights, I apologise for that, it was in a welter if I may say of a number of questions under the guise of one.

Hong Kong has persisted with its Bill of Rights and I think that is absolutely right. That has not been questioned or criticised by China during my visit at all and they are well aware of what has actually happened.. And the whole thrust of my discussions in Peking is that the Chinese government are going to have to take great care over human rights generally and respect them, respect them everywhere, but of course that most certainly means respect them in Hong Kong in all their aspects. I am sorry I missed that point earlier.

QUESTION:

Mr. Prime Minister, I believe you have seen the political party protests outside the CGO this morning and I would like to know if you think those radical democracy movements will affect the stability of Hong Kong and also, do you think that the stability of Hong Kong is the most important issue during the transition period?

PRIME MINISTER:

I think the stability of Hong Kong is vitally important, stability in the sense of continued investment, stability in the sense of security of mind of the people who live here, stability in the sense of a belief by people both in Hong Kong and beyond Hong Kong that the future prosperity of the Territory is assured. I think that is absolutely critical.

As to the demonstrators who were outside the meeting I had with EXCO this morning, we are in the middle of an election in Hong Kong. I understand that. I have lived through elections before in my own country and all sorts of demonstrations are held during elections and people express all sorts of views in elections. It is very prudent for people who are not part of that particular election and who are not resident in the territory in which the election is taking place not to offer comment on it and I don’t propose to comment on the demonstration or on the comments of individual people facing election next week.

RICHARD BESTICK (SKY NEWS):

In very broad terms, do you believe in your stop over here in Hong Kong you have been successful in calming the very real fears about 1997?

PRIME MINISTER:

I think we will have to wait and see how events settle down over the last few days. I can only say in the discussions I have had with people that there has been a very genuine welcome indeed for the fact that I went to Peking and for the outcome of that meeting in Peking; not just the outcome that I mentioned a few moments ago but of course the points that were set out in the joint communique that I signed and Li Peng signed on behalf of the Chinese Government; that reaffirmed the Joint Declaration, it reaffirmed the points that people in Hong Kong are concerned about and we advanced beyond that of course with the Court of Final Appeal which I know from my correspondence in England and discussions and advice I have had from the Governor and others in Hong Kong was a matter of huge concern to people here. I think there is a very warm welcome for the fact that we are now going to proceed with the Consulate and it will be built; it is an indication of the commitment that we have to Hong Kong up to 1997 and beyond 1997 and more than that, it is an indication of the confidence as well as the commitment that we have in Hong Kong.

There are other matters still to be determined; there were expert discussions this morning, as you may know, on defence lands and they will continue; there are other matters like air service agreements which are still to be determined but there is now a continuing debate upon these issues and I believe it fair to say that there has been a very warm welcome for what was achieved in the period up to Peking and at Peking and I think there is enormous relief that we now have a continuing mechanism that will deal with those matters that are currently outstanding and those others matters that are bound to arise and that are not at the moment foreseen between now and 1997.

QUESTION:

[Inaudible] on the one hand but they, also feel in Hong Kong that it might give the Chinese more opportunity to get involved with Hong Kong internal matters between now and the hand-over, i.e. some kind of unofficial joint administration. Do you agree?

PRIME MINISTER:

I made the point quite specifically in the speech that I made when we signed the Memorandum when the Chinese Government were there that there is no question of matters like condominium this side of 1997; that point was clearly made in the Report; it was of course originally in the Joint Declaration – that has been reaffirmed and I said that, not hidden away in a corner but actually there with the Chinese leaders beside me.

But there are areas where decisions taken straddle 1997 and are very important and I think people will regard it as wise to consult on some of those issues. That was always foreseen in the Joint Declaration and that is what we are doing. It is in the interests of Hong Kong to make sure there is – to go back to the earlier question – that stability. Everything doesn’t suddenly stop and start again in 1997; many things straddle 1997 and we must ensure that stability is genuine and real and that means a degree of consultation. It doesn’t mean that the responsibilities have moved away; it means one consults in a practical and pragmatic way.

ANGUS FOSTER (FINANCIAL TIMES):

Prime Minister, can you explain why you seem prepared to stand up to China on human rights but you are not prepared to stand up to them on democracy for Hong Kong and can you or can you not re-state the previous UK policy which was to go to Peking after these elections to negotiate an increase from upwards of 20 seats for 1995?

PRIME MINISTER:

The premise of your question is provocative and wrong. When the agreement with China was reached over 18 seats, you can’t sit there in your seat and say China was offering 18 seats for direct elections; that was a matter that we negotiated with China and we got a good deal better negotiation than the Chinese originally expected or that most people expected here, so there was no question of us not, in the emotive terms you put it, standing up to China on that issue.

The people we are standing up for are the people of Hong Kong in a way that is right for Hong Kong and is sustainable for Hong Kong and we are perfectly prepared, as I have said on a number of occasions already in this press conference, after we have had the elections this year to discuss with the people who were elected and review the situation and see what happened and make our judgements there and nothing in our policy upon that has changed.

QUESTION:

You have made a lot of comments about how much you have done for Hong Kong. Would you care to comment on the comments of one of Hong Kong’s leading lawyers and the leader of what is almost certainly the most popular political party in this Territory, Mr, Martin Lee, that your Memorandum of Understanding is actually in breach of the Joint Declaration and would you care to comment on the fact that it is now two years since the airport project was first announced and at that time there was no suggestion either from your Government or from the Hong Kong Government that China would even need to be consulted let alone that you would have to go to Peking yourself and sign a statement which Mr. Martin Lee believes is in breach of the Joint Declaration?

PRIME MINISTER:

I have heard many of the things Mr. Lee has said over the last few days and some of them have been very supportive of what we have done and others have been less supportive but as I said to the earlier question, we are in the midst of an election in Hong Kong and I am not going to get drawn into a debate on comments from anyone running for election in Hong Kong, whether Mr. Lee or anybody else who would hold contrary views; that is not for me in the middle of an election period.

QUESTION (ORIENTAL DAILY):

After you signed the Memorandum of Understanding, the Chinese side has said that what is stipulated in the Memorandum will serve as a model for future problems when we want to have solutions. Do you agree with that?

PRIME MINISTER:

What the Memorandum is there for is to enable the airport, which is a huge development that is absolutely critical for the future of Hong Kong, to go ahead with general agreement. The problem is whatever would have happened had there not been general agreement and had not the Memorandum been signed. We could have either continued with the airport unilaterally or we could have scrapped the airport. Many people, if we had scrapped it, would have said; “Splendid! What a wonderfully virile thing to do!” but Hong Kong would have suffered if we had done that. If one hadn’t reached an agreement, many people would have said: “Well, there is a huge disagreement between China and Hong Kong and Britain on this issue; is it safe for us actually to invest in the airport?” so one has to deal with the reality and it was wise, in the interests of the investors and in the interests of Hong Kong, to make sure we had an agreement. Now that is enshrined in the Memorandum of Understanding and that means the airport project can go ahead and it is secure in the eyes of the investors and it is welcomed in Hong Kong and welcomed beyond Hong Kong and will have a very practical effect of encouraging people to be more confident about other future investment in Hong Kong but I see no difficulties in the way in which the Memorandum has been reached or signed and I think it is very much in the interests of Hong Kong that we signed it.

TONY YIEWSLEY (AUSTRALIAN BROADCASTING CORPORATION):

I have got a very easy one for you. It has been a very hectic week and you have been by all accounts very successful in some areas. Do you think you have finally shrugged off this tag that I keep reading about that your name is Eric rather than John Major? It has been a tag given to you by the British press, not by the Australian press.

PRIME MINISTER:

Not a tag that I had heard, not a tag that I would recognise.

QUESTION (HONG KONG COMMERCIAL DAILY):

Britain and China have agreed to intensify efforts to solve the problem of the Vietnam boat people and will support all steps to help Hong Kong to solve the problem and I would like to know: can Hong Kong decide all by her own to take [Indistinct] steps and if Hong Kong decides a way to solve the [Indistinct] problem, will Britain fully support this decision?

PRIME MINISTER:

It is not for China to stop decisions that are being taken on the question of boat people and China also wants to help and assist with the problem that Hong Kong faces with boat people arriving, some of them of course arriving across the mainland and going straight back, others arriving in the harbours. We are discussing regularly – by “We” I mean the British Government and the Hong Kong Government – how best to deal with it both in the interests of Hong Kong and to deal with the very great human problem of the people who are coming here and I set out in my opening remarks the way in which we feel we should proceed from now on and we are in discussion at the moment with the Vietnamese Government about the establishment under the control and management of United Nations agencies an internationally-managed centre in Vietnam to which those boat people who are not refugees would be able to return and that is the right way – it is the only way – for us to proceed and the only way I think for Hong Kong to proceed that would be acceptable for Hong Kong or for others.

PAUL REYNOLDS (BBC):

Could I pick up on a question which was asked but not, I think, answered and that was to do with the Memorandum of Understanding being in breach of the Declaration and the fact that China has to be consulted now on the airport project when it was not two years ago? These are substantive points.

I wonder how you can persuade people you are not presenting an over-optimistic picture of China’s intentions, given your own very strong remarks and worries about human rights there and that to have the Joint Declaration reaffirmed is no great deal when we were told in 1984 this was going to be the deal, so are you perhaps not being over-optimistic and how do you deal with those substantive complaints about the airport agreement giving too much influence to China?

PRIME MINISTER:

I don’t think it is a matter of routine to have it reaffirmed and for a variety of reasons and I will set out those reasons for you:

The principal reason is that I have now had the opportunity of going to China, sitting down face-to-face with the Chinese leaders and having them reaffirm the terms of this Joint Declaration to me. If there is any dispute or any difficulties at any stage, I am now in a position to say to the Chinese leaders: “I sat down opposite you and you reaffirmed the terms of the Joint Declaration! No question of misunderstanding; no question of circumstances having changed; no question of changing times and the efflux of time! We sat down together in 1991 and we reaffirmed all the terms of the Joint Declaration!” I don’t think that is an insignificant thing and in view of the continuing confidence we have established, I think it was very worthwhile.

One particularly important point of those fresh contacts is the regular contact there will be between the Foreign Secretary and the Chinese Foreign Minister on matters of dispute and of course on wider matters too but if matters get blocked in the Joint Liaison Group, if there are matters that officials find themselves unable to solve because of the political connotation, there is now for the first time a direct link – that direct channel – between the two Foreign Secretaries to sort out that matter and if they are unable to do so, I am in a position to seek to sort it out myself with the Chinese leaders and in a better position to do so because I have sat down opposite them and reaffirmed myself the terms of the Joint Declaration.

The point about the Memorandum of Understanding, which I think is wrong, being in breach of the Joint Declaration: I don’t believe that is the case but the fact is in the airport project there is 40 percent of private investment, it is a multi-billion dollar project, 40 percent of it is private investment. Those private investors want to be reassured beyond 1997. That reassurance is there in the Memorandum of Understanding. Without that reassurance, the practical position is that they may not have come forward with that 40 percent of private investment and then there would have been no airport and then there would have been no boost to the confidence of investors in Hong Kong and the people who live in Hong Kong, so it was not in any way a change from the Joint Declaration and it is in my view unwise to say so. It was a practical reaffirmation that it was secure and safe for people to invest in the airport project and it has been enabled to go ahead.

QUESTION:

[Inaudible]

PRIME MINISTER:

I answered questions about the Governor earlier and I am not going to enter into speculation either way about the Governor. I don’t think that would be at all wise or fair on the Governor.

QUESTION (ATV NEWS, HONG KONG):

A former senior government official here has proposed that the newly-elected Legislature be given the power to ratify decisions reached by the Joint Liaison Group. Do you support that idea?

PRIME MINISTER:

I would want to consider that idea and I would want to discuss it with the people who are elected. I am not going to respond to that without some careful thought.

SAME QUESTIONER:

The United Democrats of Hong Kong are apparently headed for victory in the coming elections. If they gain a significant proportion of the seats, would you agree that the Governor should put either one of their directly-elected members or a liberal voice into the Executive Council here?

PRIME MINISTER:

Two points: firstly, anyone who thinks I am going to anticipate the result of an election in Hong Kong is wholly wrong; and secondly, I am not going to anticipate what the Governor might do on his own authority; that is a matter for the Governor and not for me; that is why he is there.

Below is the text of Mr Major’s comments on China, made in an interview held in Peking on Tuesday 3rd September 1991.

---

QUESTION:

[Mr Major was asked whether the talks with Li Peng broke the usual formalities].

PRIME MINISTER:

I do not believe that it does. Our discussions today were about bilateral matters, about international matters in our shared responsibilities as members of the Security Council and specifically about human rights. There are very strong feelings about human rights and I think it is necessary to express those not discourteously but bluntly and clearly.

QUESTION:

[Mr Major was asked for how long in advance he had intended to raise the matter of human rights].

PRIME MINISTER:

In my discussions today with Premier Li Peng I not only expressed my concerns, not only detailed the cases and the events that were of concern to me, but we agreed that this was a matter that would be discussed further between us. So a dialogue has been established, that is a new set of circumstances.

QUESTION:

[Mr Major was asked when the decision had been made].

PRIME MINISTER:

The issue of human rights, the fact that I was going to deal with that was in my mind from the moment I decided to come to China, it was one of the reasons for coming. It was necessary on its own to come to sign the Airport Agreement, I had no doubt in my mind about that, it was in the interests of Hong Kong, it was right to come and I would have come just for that. But having decided that I was coming for that, the opportunity was clearly there to discuss human rights and to register the concerns that I feel and that I believe people around the world feel about many matters in China.

Below is the text of Mr Major’s press conference, held in Peking on Tuesday 3rd September 1991.

---

PRIME MINISTER:

The main purpose of my visit to Peking has been to sign with the Chinese Prime Minister the Memorandum of Understanding on the new Hong Kong Airport. The Memorandum was widely welcomed in Hong Kong and abroad. Without that Memorandum the airport project would not have gone ahead and without the airport Hong Kong would have been hamstrung. With it Hong Kong can be sure of having the airport it needs to ensure its future as a world financial and trade centre. For that purpose alone this visit was necessary and worthwhile.

My talks today with Chinese leaders have shown that although we do not share common values, we do have shared interests – Hong Kong foremost amongst them. The airport agreement opens up new prospects of cooperation in Hong Kong’s interests and that has been reflected in my discussions today.

Today we have also confirmed that Hong Kong should be able to open negotiations to include its own investment promotion and protection agreements, an important right if Hong Kong is to enhance its role as a centre for international trade and investment.

Hong Kong is a unique achievement, anyone who has ever been there will tell you that. Its continued success after 1997 will be a precious achievement for its own people, for China and for the rest of the world. The success of Hong Kong requires a dialogue with China, much of that dialogue is carried on directly between the Hong Kong government and the Chinese government. But the British government is responsible for Hong Kong until 1997 and it is our responsibility to conduct the dialogue at whatever level is necessary to achieve results.

My visit here today secures the implementation of the very important Memorandum of Understanding and has enable us to make the other progress that I have reported to you.

China is one of the five Permanent Members of the Security Council and as such we have a shared responsibility for handling many of the world’s most sensitive issues. We touched on a number of those issues in our talks today, we discussed arms control issues, in particular China’s commitment to accede to the Non-Proliferation Treaty. I urged China to support our initiative for an arms control register to ensure transparency of supply and therefore prevent the kind of build-up which allowed Iraq to invade Kuwait. The response from China was encouraging.

I was able to brief the Chinese leaders on my visit to the Soviet Union and on developments there. One lesson that I drew from that visit in my discussions with Premier Li Peng was that there is a global trend to more open and more accountable government, that trend is inevitable and growing.

It is against that background that I raised human rights. I told Premier Li Peng of a letter which I had received from a British opposition Member of Parliament, Bob Parry, who knows China well. I raised that letter to illustrate the strength of concern about human rights that exists across all strands of opinion in my country.

Specifically in our discussions I raised the situation in Tibet, I raised the treatment of religious believers in Tibet and elsewhere and I raised the detention of people in China for exercising the freedom of expression, predominantly student demonstrators. I also raised the cases of four detainees from Hong Kong. In our exchanges I made it clear that we will continue to pursue all these matters vigorously in the future.

I also raised with the Chinese leadership a number of individual cases which Amnesty International had particularly asked me to take up. These included members of the 1989 pro-democracy movement and five employees of a car factory, one of whom is reported to have been sentenced to 20 years in prison, the heaviest sentence known to have been imposed since June 1989. I asked Premier Li Peng to take a personal interest in all these cases.

Britain and China have strong commercial ties. I drew the attention of Chinese leaders to the important areas – energy, transport, telecommunications, aerospace, airports and petrochemicals – where British companies can offer the best quality at competitive prices.

The world has not forgotten the events of June 1989 but we face a choice, on the one hand we can make ourselves feel better by armchair denunciations of China, for which Hong Kong pays the price; on the other hand we can talk to Chinese leaders, in the interests of Hong Kong, in the interests of human rights and for the sake of a more peaceful world. I have no doubt which is the right choice to make.

 

QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS

QUESTION (Mike Brunson, ITN):

As you know, the Chinese dismiss the right of people to raise human rights issues with them, but in their press conference today they were saying there was no greater human right than to be able to feed every person in this country. Can you therefore give us just a little more detail of as it were the status on which you based your right to raise these issues with them?

PRIME MINISTER:

There is a world-wide concern about human rights in a number of countries and amongst them China. I made the worldwide concern perfectly clear in my remarks today, they were free, frank and forthright exchanges. We agreed at the end of those exchanges that that dialogue between us on this issue would continue. Our Ambassador in Peking will pursue the matters that I raised today with Premier Li Peng. I shall continue to take a personal interest in those matters and ensure that they are pursued.

This is a dialogue that has begun with China, it will not go away, it will continue with us and I believe it will continue with other people as well. The world has a deep, a genuine and a continuing concern for human rights and that applies in China as elsewhere in the world.

QUESTION (Brian Barron, BBC TV):

As the leader of one of the Western world’s oldest democracies, is there any advice or words of wisdom you could offer to democracy supporters and activists in China at present?

PRIME MINISTER:

The world is changing, we have seen that in the most dramatic way over the last two or three years and perhaps most especially over the last two or three weeks. There is a movement across the world for democracy and economic and political freedoms, That, like the world’s concern over human rights, is a movement that is not going to go away. Each country must find its own route in order to enshrine that democracy and to enshrine that freedom of expression and those economic and political freedoms. It is not for me to determine what the right way ahead is in China, but that there must be a way ahead I think is beyond doubt and that was clear from our discussions today that that is my opinion.

QUESTION (Sally Blythe, RTHK):

Bearing in mind the differences you have had with Chinese leaders over human rights would you as a result of your visit now say that relations with China are now back to normal, to their pre-1989 status?

PRIME MINISTER:

We have discussed today some matters that are of important and very great interest both bilaterally and also particularly of interest to Hong Kong. It is not possible simply to step aside and say one will not deal with these important matters, if one were to seek to do that one would betray the interests of Hong Kong and that is not something that any British government, certainly not my British government, would ever do. We are concerned about the interests of Hong Kong and so it was necessary to have these discussions and reach the agreement that we have reached today.

But I have expressed my concern about a number of matters, that is well known and well understood in Peking and that dialogue will continue. But if I wish to express my concerns, if I wish to press those concerns, if I wish to make known to people the areas where I agree with them and the areas where I disagree with them then I must have a proper contact in order to do so. I believe that is the right way ahead.

QUESTION (Philip Stevens, Financial Times):

Premier Li Peng seemed to make it clear this morning at the signing of the Joint Declaration that he sees the Airport Agreement as a way to intensify Chinese influence and control over events in Hong Kong before 1997. If you don’t get deals on the outstanding issues, how are you going to prevent that increasing influence and control by China in Hong Kong?

PRIME MINISTER:

As you will see from the communique that we have issued, we have specifically reaffirmed the Joint Declaration and the responsibilities that exist for Hong Kong with the British Government and the Hong Kong Government in advance of 1997. It has always been envisaged that there will be consultations on matters that straddle 1997; that was clearly understood at the time of the Joint Declaration, it is clearly understood now. The position remains now as it was then and has been expressly confirmed in the communique jointly signed by both of us today.

QUESTION (Andrew Higgins, The Independent):

Your predecessor, Margaret Thatcher, described Mikhail Gorbachev as a man with whom she could do business. How would you describe Premier Li Peng?

PRIME MINISTER:

I have today agreed with Premier Li Peng the Airport Agreement; I have done so for the reason I set out. I think the answer therefore is self-evident.

QUESTION:

As you are the most senior Western leader to visit China in the last two years, do you think that it will have any kind of impact on China’s relations with the Western world or Western nations in general?

PRIME MINISTER:

I came here to discuss both international matters and direct bilateral matters but I return to the point that I made a few moments ago: you cannot make an impact upon people by not expressing your views to them. I have expressed my views. Time will tell what impact that has had. I hope it has had a positive impact.

QUESTION:

Mr. Major you mentioned earlier today that the signing of the Memorandum marks the beginning of a new phase of the bilateral relations between China and Britain. What plans or measures are you going to take to increase that relationship between the two countries?

PRIME MINISTER:

What we are seeking to do of course and the extent to which it particularly moves events forward is it that it moves forward the work in the Joint Liaison Group; it moves forward the work that was getting blocked and that was in danger of damaging the position of confidence in Hong Kong. That has now been unblocked by the Memorandum of Understanding we have signed today and also by the decisions we have taken, particularly on the Court of Final Appeal, a matter of immense interest and importance to ensure the independence of the judiciary in Hong Kong and also the agreement that we will accelerate the work in the Joint Liaison Group to deal with the other matters that are as yet undetermined. We have also agreed that if matters stay in the Joint Liaison Group and there is great difficulty in reaching agreement, then the matters will swiftly be resolved to the two Foreign Secretaries of China and the United Kingdom for them to examine the matter at a political level and reach a conclusion.

QUESTION (Jim Munson, Canadian TV):

There may be some critics who feel that you have played into China’s hands, that you have come here and that you are playing around with the Chinese leaders today, that after two-and-a-half years you are the first Westerner who comes. How do you look upon those critics who say that you are playing into China’s hands? You have mentioned before and talked about dialogue on the question of human rights. Is dialogue enough? Don’t you want answers post the Tiananmen Square massacre? Don’t you want some sort of concrete answers on those dissidents who are languishing in Beijing prisons who spoke out on behalf of democracy the way that you speak out on behalf of democracy?

PRIME MINISTER:

Let me take those points, starting with the second one:

The purpose of asking the questions is to get those answers and as I expressly stated a few moments ago, our discussion today on human rights is not the end of the matter; the ambassador will follow the matter up; I have asked the Premier to take a personal interest in the matter; I intend to follow the matter up. The purpose of asking these questions is to precisely achieve what you ask, the answers to the questions that we and other people in the west are asking.

On the first point about whether coming here plays into Chinese hands, you say some critics might say that. I suspect they are exactly the same critics who would say! “Why are you abandoning Hong Kong?” if I had let the Airport Agreement fall away, confidence drain away from Hong Kong and all the problems that would follow from that but when you have responsibility, you have to take action and not strike attitudes and that is what I have done today.

QUESTION (CB News):

Did you discuss with the Chinese about ways of admitting China back into the international community?

PRIME MINISTER:

We didn’t specifically discuss that but China of course is a member of the Permanent Five of the United Nations. The previous questioner said I was the first Western leader to come but he neglected to mention that Prime Minister Kaifu was here a short while ago, Mr. Andreotti will be arriving within a few days, Mrs. Thatcher – a very distinguished Western stateswoman – will also be here within a few days and no doubt others will as well. The world is seeking to express its views to China on a range of issues in the ways I believe that I have done today.

QUESTION (Chris Moncrieff, Press Association):

Prime Minister, you said your views on human rights were frank and forthright. How did Premier Li Peng respond? Was he angered or irritated?

PRIME MINISTER:

I think that is a question for the Premier and not really for me but he listened to the points carefully that I made; he made a careful note of them. I am handing this evening, via the ambassador, details of the cases I raised to the Premier; he undertook that he would examine them. We must now wait and see what the result of that examination turns out to be.

QUESTION (Hong Kong Commercial Radio):

Mr. Prime Minister, in your statement tonight and the speech this morning, you reiterated the importance of Sino-British cooperation. Does it mean that there will now be cooperation with the Chinese, that the British type of government could not effectively administer Hong Kong?

PRIME MINISTER:

Of course we can administer Hong Kong but we have to look to the medium- and long-term interests of Hong Kong. The airport, for example, is critically important to the future of Hong Kong; it involves investment that straddles 1997; the investors therefore need to know that there will be a satisfactory climate after 1997.

There are all sorts of perfectly legitimate matters that are commenced now that have a very long time frame in which it is very desirable from the point of view of investors to have an agreement. Those were the points that we were discussing.

But there are wider issues as well, of course. China and Great Britain have very substantial joint interests through the United Nations; we are both members of the Security Council; we therefore have a particularly sensitive responsibility for many of the world’s trouble spots. We have to liaise on difficulties to do with the problems in the Middle East. There were matters of liaison necessary over the war in Iraq. We cannot ignore those realities; they are areas where there is a degree of joint cooperation necessary and we have been cooperating and in those circumstances we must cooperate.

QUESTION (Barbara O’Neill, Sunday Times):

Prime Minister, do we yet know who will appoint the members of the independent Judicial Committee and will it be Chinese or English law?

PRIME MINISTER:

I can’t give you the names of the people who are actually going to appoint those; I can tell you they will be independently appointed and it is English law that continues after 1997 and the appointments will be made independently under English law.

QUESTION (BBC Radio):

On the question of human rights, you said that yourself, your Foreign Minister, your ambassador in Peking will be pressing for answers from the Chinese Government. If you don’t get the answers you want, what action are you prepared to take?

PRIME MINISTER:

I think you have to go back to what has happened on other occasions elsewhere in other parts of the world. Continually, people are pressed in other countries on the question of human rights and that pressure has yielded results as it continues and that is actually what we wish to see. We wish to see results, so it is the unrelenting, unremitting continuance of pressure that often yields results on human rights, so we will continue to press but don’t expect me to set out precisely the form of that. I am just going to make it clear to you that these are not matters that we will let drop, neither in my judgement will anybody else let them drop as well.

I suppose one example I could most usefully have given you is the example I was able to announce the other day and that is the release of Mrs. Gordievsky and her family from Moscow. That is something we have been pressing the Soviet authorities for for some years. I myself raised it first I think in 1989; Douglas Hurd, the Foreign Secretary, has raised it repeatedly; I have had a number of discussions with the Soviet leaders over the years; and now we have a decision that Mrs. Gordievsky and her family can be released so this pressure does work and that is but one high-profile example of large numbers that could be given.

QUESTION (Robin Oakley, The Times):

Prime Minister, you described the Chinese response to your proposals for a UN register of arms sales as encouraging. Does that simply mean that the Chinese didn’t say “No” at this stage or does it mean you expect actual support for a UN Resolution and did Premier Li Peng give you any idea of a date for Chinese accession to the Non-Proliferation Treaty?

PRIME MINISTER:

On the latter point, we discussed that this morning and there was a degree of vagueness. It is being pursued this afternoon between the Foreign Secretary and the Chinese Foreign Secretary and it is probable that a decision for the Non-Proliferation Treaty will be before the end of this calendar year.

On the point about arms sales, there are two related matters: there is the arms register which will simply clarify who is selling what arms to whom and although we have not got a firm commitment I think there is a realistic prospect that we will get support from China for that proposition. Then, behind that, there are wider propositions that the United Nations are looking at concerning the sale of arms generally and they raise very serious and complex problems that have not yet had the expert or detailed discussions either in China or elsewhere that are necessary, so dates and conclusions on that are less clear. The Foreign Secretary may wish to add something on one or both of those points.

FOREIGN SECRETARY: [Douglas Hurd]

I think the Prime Minister has covered the first point.

On the second point, the Chinese made the argument, which is understandable, that any restrictions on arms sales have to be non-discriminative, they have to apply to everybody and as they argued, to a complete range of weapons but that is a different point from the immediate one which is support for the Prime Minister’s initiative in having a register so that there is transparency, openness, and everyone can see what is happening and on that, as the Prime Minister said, the Chinese response without being wholly definite was reasonably encouraging.

QUESTION (Associated Press):

Mr. Prime Minister, did you invite Premier Li Peng to make a reciprocal visit and if so, how do you think that would be accepted in Great Britain? And if not, why not?

PRIME MINISTER:

That matter did not come up at all in our conversation today and was not discussed.

QUESTION (Julie Maplish, ATV News – Hong Kong):

Prime Minister, I understand from your comments that ties between Britain and China haven’t been normalised as far as you are concerned. Under what circumstances would you normalise relations or have relations with the current leadership that ordered the June 4th crackdown been permanently fractured?

PRIME MINISTER:

Let me make that clear because I think you may have a false impression. There is a lot of normal traffic going through in terms of the relationship between China and my country and indeed China and all the Western countries but because that normal commercial and political traffic continues does not mean that we have withdrawn our concerns or that we cease to express our concerns either about the past events that caused such a rupture in our relationship in 1989 or the humans rights or arms sales problems that have been the subject of frequent discussion between our two countries, but we have to live in the world as it is and we have to do business – and I don’t mean business necessarily in the commercial sense. We have to deal with large countries like China where we have joint interests and the illustration I gave earlier of our joint interests through the United Nations is in any case the best illustration I can give you. It is in everyone’s interest that we pursue those joint arrangements and that we normalise arrangements on this matter and they have been normalised and the fact that that is so puts us in a better position to continue to express clearly and bluntly the concerns that we have on those issues that have been raised so frequently by questioners this evening and that is what we are doing. There is a general normalisation of relations.

QUESTION (Geoffrey Crowther, South China Morning Post):

I was just curious, Mr. Prime Minister, why is there no mention of human rights in the joint communique you have issued this evening?

PRIME MINISTER:

The joint communique is an agreed document. The observations that I made about human rights were my observations to the Premier which he is considering and responding but the joint communique is an agreed document to which we have both put our names. The question therefore would be more aptly directed to the Premier than to me.

Below is the text of Mr Major’s joint speech made with the Chinese Premier, Li Peng, in Peking on Tuesday 3rd September 1991. The speech was made following the signing of a memorandum of understanding for a new Hong Kong airport.

---

PREMIER LI PENG:

Honourable Prime Minister John Major, Ladies and Gentlemen present:

The Memorandum of Understanding concerning the construction of the new airport in Hong Kong and related questions between the Chinese and the British Governments has just been formally signed into force. This is a delightful major event as a result of the common efforts from both the Chinese and the British sides; it not only contributes to the maintenance of Hong Kong’s status as an international financial trade and business centre but also provides favourable conditions for our sides to intensify cooperation in the future on the question of Hong Kong.

One country/two systems and the maintenance of the long-term prosperity and stability of Hong Kong are a firm policy of China which we resolve to carry out. The Chinese Government will, as in the past, continue to earnestly abide by and fully implement the Sino-British Joint Declaration on the question of Hong Kong and is committed to closer consultation and cooperation with the United Kingdom on that basis. We are convinced that in the second half of the transitional period of Hong Kong, as long as our two sides enhance mutual trust, consult fully with each other in a spirit of mutual understanding and mutual accommodation and intensify cooperation in compliance with the spirit and provisions of the Joint Declaration, the smooth transfer of government in Hong Kong in 1997 can be fully guaranteed and the prosperity and stability of Hong Kong truly maintained. In this regard, the Chinese and the British sides share a common interest. We have every reason to be fully confident of the prosperity and stability of Hong Kong.

The Chinese Government always attaches importance to long-term stable relations and friendship and cooperation with the United Kingdom. True, the two countries are different in social system, history, culture, heritage and values but these differences should not become obstacles to the development of our bilateral relations; recognising and respecting them and striving to seek common ground while putting aside the differences, we can be friends. We believe that there exists a solid foundation for maintaining and developing good relations between our two countries. Hong Kong is one question that binds us together. Both China and the United Kingdom are Permanent Members of the UN Security Council with major responsibilities in international affairs. Our two economies are mutually complementary, holding out great potential for mutually beneficial cooperation. In the present complicated world situation, the further improvement and expansion of Sino-British relations and closer bilateral consultations and cooperation not only serve the interests of our two peoples but also contribute to world peace and prosperity.

This morning, I held friendly, businesslike and frank talks with Prime Minister Major on Sino-British relations including the question of Hong Kong as well as international issues of common interest. As long as we respect each other and seek common ground while putting aside differences, Sino-British relations will have a broad prospect for development.

May the visit by the Honourable Prime Minister John Major be crowned with complete success. [Applause].

PRIME MINISTER JOHN MAJOR:

Mr. Premier:

We have been able to discuss many matters last evening and this morning but on this occasion we are here to sign a vitally important document. This Memorandum of Understanding provides a firm basis for building a modern airport to meet the expanding needs of Hong Kong; it is the fruit of arduous negotiations; it meets the principal concerns of all parties; on its initialling and publication two months ago, it was widely welcomed in Hong Kong and internationally.

The airport at Chek Lap Kok together with its supporting infrastructure is a massive project. I am delighted that we have with us today the Governor of Hong Kong and some of the senior members of the Hong Kong Government; it is they who have the overall responsibility for it. Work will now forge ahead. The first main call for tenders has already been issued; all such tenders will be open to international competition. I know that Hong Kong’s overriding concerns in the interests of Hong Kong taxpayers are cost efficiency and reliability; I know, too, that some first-class and experienced British companies are showing keen interest; I very much hope that they will be able to meet Hong Kong’s criteria and be able to make a substantial contribution. I am glad to hear that Chinese enterprises are also closely interested.

The construction of this new airport is vital for Hong Kong’s future stability and prosperity but it is more than that; it is also a key factor in the preservation and enhancement of Hong Kong’s role as a centre of regional and international civil aviation but I see this understanding on the airport as having a still wider significance in that it marks a new phase in the relationship between Hong Kong, Peking and London.

Seven years ago, in December 1984, the Joint Declaration was signed here in Peking by my predecessor, Margaret Thatcher. Much progress has been made towards ensuring the smooth implementation of the provisions of this historic Agreement. At first, our good relations and joint purpose ensured that progress was smooth and relatively fast. More recently, this has not been the case and we have encountered difficulties. It is, however, a tribute to our common responsibilities as Permanent Members of the United Nations Security Council and our shared commitment to the people of Hong Kong that despite these difficulties we continue to talk to each other and seek a solution to them.

These contacts have now been productive; thanks to them, we have been able to reach the good Agreement on Hong Kong’s new airport which we have signed today and now we look to the future. As we do so, it is clear that the Joint Declaration remains the strong corner-stone of both British and Chinese policy towards Hong Kong. In our talks today, we have confirmed our determination to implement both its letter and its spirit. Britain is wholly committed by treaty to cooperate in the restoration of Hong Kong to Chinese sovereignty from 1 July 1997.

For its part, China is equally committed to maintaining Hong Kong’s existing systems for 50 years thereafter. The Hong Kong Special Administrative Region will enjoy a high degree of autonomy in all matters except foreign and defence affairs. We are agreed that Hong Kong people will run Hong Kong.

We have also solemnly confirmed our approach to the transition period. Up to 30 June 1997, the British Government are responsible for the administration of Hong Kong with the object of maintaining and preserving its economic prosperity and social stability; the Chinese Government will give its cooperation in this connection as we are agreed there is no question of the Chinese Government seeking any veto, condominium or joint administration. Instead, what is happening is what the Joint Declaration laid down clearly – the intensification of our cooperation during the second half of the transitional period.

Mr. Premier, this is a good Agreement. When Douglas Hurd was here in April, General Secretary Jiang Zemin talked about the transitional period before us; he used an old Chinese proverb about how people travelling in the same boat need to help each other whatever difficulties may come between them. I think that is a good metaphor. Our shared objectives have always been clear – Hong Kong’s continuing prosperity and stability. The Joint Declaration set our course; the Memorandum of Understanding helps us on our way; now we must redouble our efforts for the common benefit. That is what the people of Hong Kong will expect from both of us and that, today, is what we have committed ourselves to do. [Applause].