details of he guarantee furt
eru to
wh the opposition will give a thorough airing,
4.
The unacceptable risk lies mot in the fact
that the Hong Kong Government must give a guaranteo
but in the demand that the guarantee should
enforceable against its London assets. The
implication that would immediately be road inte
this require
that H,k,ü, raakars
Colony's only worthwhile assets aro those which
are held in Landon, The impact of this on
confidence in and outside Hong Kong would be
dhatterinɛ] the whole purpose of be acaroise
would be lost.
5. We therefore welcome your alternative
proposal involving promissory notes.
arrangemont could equally attract publicity but it im
not susceptible of the dangerous inferences which
mant put the previous suggestion out of court.
The Hong Kong Government see no difficulty in
moeting your wish that your bankers should receive
paymont in London without further specific
suthorisation.
6. Thore is one further point in your letter
which we must take up and that concerns your
query na to how the Hong Kong GovoŊnsent will
satisfy Costains that the firm will be paid if
contract cost amsods £10 million.
point arises, of course, on the condition laid
down in paragraph 6(e) of the agreedbrief for
Lord Shephard. As Cettorill will recall,
Cowperthwaite made the peint that Costain's, and
CONFID ITIAL
/the