Mr. Hall
Reference......
As a result of the meeting of the Hong Kong Ministerial Committee on 22 September (Flag D), the Secretary of State is committed to a paper for 0.P.D. on contingency evacuation planning and I submit a draft.
2. The Secretary of State deferred putting this to 0.P.D. pending a report from the Governor on plans already in
existence
Committee.
-
see "X" of Minutes of Hong Kong Ministerial Paragraph 4 of the draft paper is based on discussions you held with the Governor on this point during your recent visit to Hong Kong.
3. The draft paper does not touch on one matter which perhaps should be raised by the Secretary of State with his colleagues. That is the possible political embarrassment for H.M.G. if it became known at any time (but particularly in the event of a Chinese takeover) that we had no plans for evacuating British "belongers". It was this consideration
which led Mr. James Griffiths in 1951 to instruct an unwilling and protesting Governor to prepare a plan (DIGIT)
for the evacuation of British women and children. The
plan, prepared with similar security considerations in mind
as are exercising us today, is incapable of effective
implementation.
4. There is some danger at the present time that we will
be forced into a position in which we shall find it almost
impossible to prevaricate on this issue. We were near to
this in the House of Lords on 22 June when Lord Moynihan asked Lord Beswick categorically to say what plans we had. Lord Beswick managed to evade this (and in doing so had much understanding and support from other Members of the House)
by saying that Members would not expect him to disclose such
matters. We are near to it now in correspondence with a
Member of Parliament who has received a letter from a
constituent formerly resident in Hong Kong. The dilemma is that, for a Minister to say that we have no plans, would probably lead to a not inconsiderable public outcry here in the United Kingdom; while, if he said that we had plans (which he could say, even though they are useless) or were prearing plans, confidence in Hong Kong could be shattered.
5. We could continue perhaps to prevaricate. But to go on saying that we do not disclose such matters implies that we do in fact have plans (constant repetition of this would be noted
in Hong Kong). And to try and slide out of it by vague
/references