Mer. Saminara.
Reference......son
with (6)
This does not add to what we already know, and
to tell MOD that Hong Kong have again refused this little claim will hardly encourage
the langer claims themselves.
Werd
theme to feette
It seems to me from para 6 of C that MOD
propert
to drop the claim
Hong Kong would then pay the remainder. Perhaps we should try to persuade Hong Kong
MOD settle the nest.
for 2118 only if
to
pay
the 1118 if
mößell
30/3
Mr Laird
1.
Laird
The letter at (6) in reply to your letter at (5) is
a totally useless missive. I have noticed that right from the start of this thoroughly abortive correspondence, Hong Kong have downgraded the level at which the correspondence is being dealt with at their end.
2.
Hong Kong are in the happy position that the Ministry of Defence are attempting to recoup from them certain expenditure which has, in the first place, been met from Ministry funds. Hong Kong will not respond to approaches from the Ministry of Defence on these outstanding claims unless a charge of dynamite is used to move them in the matter. We are awaiting a reply from the Ministry of Defence to our letter at (4) and the Ministry of Defence are awaiting a further letter from us on the subject dealt with in paragraph 5 of our letter at (4). Behind this backchat of correspondence looms the issue of the "snake fence and behind that issue in turn is the main issue of the defence contribution.
3. I attach a draft reply to (6) for consideration. But you may consider that pending the outcome of the defence contribution issue, which will be followed by the issue of the "snake fence, this exchange of correspondence on these lesser matters is a waste of everybody's time and that unless pressed we should take no further action pending the settlement of the defence contribution issue.
31 March 1971
Art.
A W Gaminara