Non-Communist Fress
(A) Against the increase in Hong Kong's contribution to defence costs:
Nam Wah Man Po (6.10.71)
:
(Estimated circulation 50,000 - 75,000)
Tin Tin Yat Po (8.10.71)
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
Estimated circulation : 50,000
75,000)
Although the amount of Hong Kong's Contribution to defence costs turned out to be less than what we had expected, we should not be overjoyed about it, because this is afterall an unreasonable burden.
Garrison troops in Hong Kong is a sign of support from Britain, but Hong Kong is a British Colony and it is an obligation of the British soldiers to render us their services. If they do more meaningful work for Hong Kong such as helping build the cross-harbour tunnel or the mass transit system, I am sure every resident here will be willing to contribute more to the huge defence costs.
As for the "handing back" of land by the armed services to the Hong Kong Government, it sounds quite absurd. Since the land actually belongs to Hong Kong, why then is the term "hand back" used? Does it mean that Hong Kong people have no right to use their own land?
The amount Hong Kong has been contributing towards the defence costs has already reached the maximum, how could it be responsible for more?
It is absolutely impossible to maintain peace and prosperity in Hong Kong solely with a strong armed force. What she needs most is a good police force. Therefore instead of increasing the amount of contribution towards defence costs, the Government should strengthen the police force and raise their salary. This we believe is the basic need of Hong Kong.
An alternative is to spend the money on the promotion of industry or social welfare work and this would also bring about fruitful results.
(B) In support of the increase:
Kung Sheung Yat Fo (8.10.71)
(Estimated circulation : 60,000)
14
The Governor mentioned in his speech at the Legislative Council meeting "benefit", "peace" and "freedom" for the people of Hong Kong, but what is more vital to us than the above is "security".
We overcame the 1967 disturbances due to several factors, but one of them is because we had a strong police force. Although the activities of the local Communists seem to have changed their form, we cannot guarantee that they will not revert to the original form. Besides, there has been a drastic increase in crime rate, showing that there is insufficient force to maintain order in Hong Kong. Under such circumstances, if we further reduce the Garrison and assign the duty of border patrol as well as defences entirely to the Police, the police force will have no time or enough man- power to curb crime or control trouble-makers.
We ought to know that the main purpose of keeping British armed forces here is to suppress internal riots to maintain peace and order. 10,000 soldiers may not be enough to defend the Colony against foreign aggression, but they can surely put down internal up-risings with the co-operation of the Police. The danger Hong Kong is facing today is not external invasions but internal unrests, therefore we must not refuse to contribute to the defence costs at the expense of our safety.
/Communist
3