5
"When the two proposals, Mr. Lee's and ou. s, are compared over
the four-year peric, ours turns out to mean that we will be providi̟ő
some £14 m. less it all than was envisaged in the proposals Mr. Lee
brought with him: although it needs a more care; ul analysis of the
figures than is possible for ze here to explain precisely how this c aes
about.
Moreover, although the defence contribu: ion will now cost us
+
•
£5 m.
a year, we shall in fact only be paying £4.525 m. in cash to te
Aray here because, in order to effect savings, ie have agreed that te
Public Works Department will perform certain ma: atenance functions 1.cally
on behalf of the Aray, at our expense. I would point out also that
substantial part of the money we spend will go the construction o
permanent buildings which we will own; and that all of it will be a ney
spent here in Hong long.
Certain other agree, .ents,
"However, this is only part of the story.
advantageous to us, have been made. But before I go on to explain them,
I want to be sure I have not misled you by what have just said.
W ile
it is true that we propose to pay each year in the next 4 years no more
than we will have paid out in these last two, nevertheless this is really
relevant only in considering whether we can afford to pay so much. As
compared with the previously agreed actual defence payments, we are paying £21 n. more a year than we had already committed oursleves to paying.
, This, again, is a figure which needs more explanation than I can give it
here; but it is a deliberate contribution towards the continued stability
of the pound, as well as a contribution towards defence costs.
t
.....
Page 180Page 181