(DEFENCE AND EXTERNAL AFFAIRS SUB-COMMITTEE)
9 December 1975] Rt Hon WILLIAM RODGERS, MP, and
Mr RJ ANDREW
walking out and leaning over too far in sympathising with the real problems they face. The Governor would argue with me and my team, as he did, that he has substantially increased the spending in Hong Kong on welfare, and rightly so, at a time when Hong Kong has been undergoing a recession. It was put to me in conversation by the unofficials: how can you ask us to pay more for our defence when you acknowledge the con- dition of those who live in poverty in Hong Kong is more extreme than those who live in poverty in the United King- dom? This was the awkward position one was in, but I think in all the cir- cumstances the agreement ought to be a good one, but I do not want to under- estimate the extent to which the Gover- nor will not find it easy to make it acceptable in Hong Kong. Since our visit there has been a good deal of British hostile comment about the ex- tent to which we are asking them to pay more than they think they can afford.
Chairman
9. We did not see the Governor? No, he was here.
Mr Kershaw
10. We have read in the papers since you went to Hong Kong that further cuts in the defence forces may be asked for. In what you have said this after- noon I have gained the impression that in these current negotiations with Hong Kong you have not considered the fact that the British Government may come back again to the Hong Kong Govern- ment soon and say that we are cutting back further? One cannot predict the course of Government, least of all the conduct of my colleagues, but I think I would be on safe ground to say that, having examined this extremely closely, and cut the garrison to the mini- mum consistent with the objectives for which it exists, it is very difficult to believe that any further cuts could be made in it. If one looks at the figures involved one will see they are fairly trifling compared with the defence budget as a whole. My answer is that I do not anticipate that this agreement will be undermined in any decision on defence expenditure.
Mr Sandelson
[Continued
5
11. On the question of the cession of Victoria Barracks, or the major part, and Kai Tak, that is part of the deal and there is not going to be a capital quid pro quo coming from Hong Kong to this country in regard to the cession of those territories?-No, it is part of the deal, and very much tied, as I said, to the increase. What the Hong Kong Government would say is that they are Hong Kong lands and they would simply revert to Hong Kong. The point I would make is that the Hong Kong Government would provide for re- provision. In other words, we will have such accommodation as we require else- where paid for by the Hong Kong Government in exchange for the release of lands.
12. In the new territories or on Hong Kong Island?--In the case of Victoria Barracks it would be on the site of HMS TAMAR.
Mr Finsberg
13. One of the things we were told was that there have been serious riots some years ago and ten years before that, the last one being sparked off by a rise in the price of the ferry fare. There is, apparently, a major increase in the ferry fare coming and there is now this prospect of the people of Hong Kong having to pay more for their own defence. Did the Governor raise with you the possibility that these two coming together might well spark off major in- ternal security problems?- -I do not think he mentioned the ferry fare, nor did he suggest, though he is taking a gloomy view of the reception that the agreement will get in Hong Kong, it would lead to riots. * * *
Chairman
14. I think we were told that recruiting was under-strength for the police. You might have said why not do more about the police who rely heavily on the Army. We were told that they were not really recruiting the number of police they should?- -That may be so. If I re- member, the Governor did mention something on these lines. I thought he said recruiting had improved lately. I think it is a difficult question, and I do