SECRET
justifiably be paid for by us, and
what would not so qualify.
Finally, we
are still being asked about possible
additions to what has been proposed (as
an example, we were asked recently
whether we could consider taking on
additionally a seven-year programme
for the construction of up to 900
quarters)".
I must confess that I have some sympathy
with this point of view since my letter to the
Governor of 9 October, 1969, was inevitably
Flag E
rather hedged about with "ifs and buts". Moreover,
the very substantial increase in the estimates of
capital costs shown in the enclosure to Davis'
letter to Carter of 17 March, 1970, as compared
with the original figures forwarded with your
letter of 25 September, 1969, caused us some
surprise, and indeed the Treasury entered a
at that stage (Nicholls' letter to Carter, caveat/No. 2-DM.415/01 of 24 March, 1970) that
they had had no chance to subject the figures
to detailed scrutiny and therefore could not say
that the estimates would be acceptable to them. Can
you say what the present position is on this
matter?
It seeme to us that Now that Sir David Trench's
term of office as Governor has been extended a
we have
year, until October, 1971, it gives us a little
more time in which to try and provide him with
firmer figures for estimated costs (particularly
works costs) of the Garrison. Since he is the one
who is to make the first move by stating a
in
Flag C
Flag B
Mag.
figure for a possible Hong Kong contribution, t me think
is only reasonable that he should first have as
SECRET
1)
NOTHING TO BE WRITTEN IN THIS MARGIN