MET-CAN'S PRODUCTION GAP. THE KCR HAVE NOT ITHERTO CONSIDERED RECOURSE: TO CREDIT BUT SINCE THE REQUIREMENT EXTENDS UNTIL 1988 MIGHT BE PREPARED TO CONSIDER AN OFFER IF IT WAS IN THEIR INTEREST. I HAVE BEEN INVITED TO OUTLINE POSSIBLE TERMS AT AN INFUR AND OFF THE RECORD MEETING WITH THE DEPUTY FINANCIAL SECRETARY CA WEDNESDAY AFTERNOON. COULD YOU SEND ME GUIDANCE ON THE CURRENT ECGD TERMS FOR ROLLING STOCK BY 190128Z.
CEC
4. I HOPE WE CAN EVEN NOW EXTEND THE ORIGINAL TTC COVER WHICH MOUNTFIELD REJECTED IN HIS LETTER OF 6 AUGUST TO TAYLOR. IF THE HONG KONG GOVERNMENT ARE FORCED TO GO TO TENDER, WE SHALL LOSE THE ORDER TO THE JAPANESE WHO BELIEVE THAT THEY COULD HAVE BEATEN THE MET-CAM PRICE IN 1978. UNTIL I HAVE DISCOVERED A LITTLE MORE OF THE CURRENT THINKING OF FINANCE BRANCH AND CAN ASSESS THE LIKELY COST TO ECCD OF ANY CREDIT REQUIREMENT, IT IS DIFFICULT TO ADD TO THE CASE SET OUT IN DELL'S LETTER OF 31 JULY. BUT I NOTE THAT YOU HAVE NOT DEPLOYED THE POLITICAL ARGUMENTS ABOUT FUTURE RAILWAY DEVELOPMENT IN SOUTHERN CHINA WHICH WEIGHED HEAVILY IN THE 1978 DECISION TO SUPPORT THE MET-CAM BID AND REMAIN HIGHLY RELEVANT. MAY 1 REFER YOU TO OUR TELS CREDAS 326, 328 AND 338 OF NOVEMBER 19787 MOREOVER IT WILL SEEM VERY ODD TO THE HONG KONG GOVERNMENT (AND TO THE GOVERNOR IN PARTICULAR) IF HAVING ACCEPTED ROYCE'S PLEA IN THE FINAL PARAGRAPH OF HIS CREDA 182 OF 9 NOVEMBER 1978, WE NOW THROW AWAY THE ADVANTAGE DUE TO AN UNWITTING FAILURE TO REFER TO THE OPTION IN THE ORIGINAL DISCUSSION. I AM SURE THAT PETER LAZARUS AT THE DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORT WHO DID SO MUCH TO HELP IN 1978 WILL ADD SUPPORT TO OUR CASE. MAY I ALSO SUGGEST THAT YOU COPY THIS TELEGRAM TO DICK CLFT AT THE FCO
MARCH
NNNN
ли
تھا
Ведний ра
Please letter 67. Began's for he clife supporting
сейч
supporting D Mant's pleas
معلم
please
ск
17/8/81