Mr Marshall, Finance Dept
OAB 2/114
CONFIDENTIAL
File
105
ра
TAI
24/4
HKIL 040/46
FROM: A C GALSWORTHY,
DATE: 14 August 1984
HKD
Cc: Mr Morris, PPD (3M 302)
Mr Masefield, PSD (2M 253)
FUTURE OF HONG KONG: TEST OF ACCEPTABILITY:
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS
1.
Thank you for your minute of 10 August.
COUNTERVAILING SAVINGS
and
2.
You ask what savings I foresee in my area of responsibility which might be used to pay for the monitoring exercise. The short
answer is none. The only diplomatic service post in Hong Kong is
the British Trade Commission. The DTI will be best placed to advise
on whether Our trade promotion effort in this important market
should be reduced. I doubt whether they would recommend it,
certainly in the present climate, it would be most unwise to
contemplate any step which appeared to reduce the British connection
with Hong Kong. As for the London based work, there is more likely
to be a need for increase than decrease given the importance and political sensitivity of issues with which the Department at present
has to deal.
FEES
3.
I explained both in my submission of 3 August and in my minute
of 7 August why the equivalence must be with
be with a Hong Kong Justice of
Appeal (the Hong Kong based monitor) rather than with any UK
counterpart. The Secretary of State has already accepted the
principle that the Hong Kong monitor could scarcely be expected to
take a cut in income: and that the two monitors must receive the
same fee. I think therefore that we have no alternative but to
offer the UK monitor a fee equivalent to the monthly income of his
Hong Kong counterpart,
that is
at a level slightly higher than the
CONFIDENTIAL
君