ADDITIONAL
2
MR J MEDWAY, OT2, DTI
NNNN
CONFIDENTIAL
171407
MDLOAN 9516
MR GROSSMAN, ARMD 3C, MOD
PAGE
2
CONFIDENTIAL
CONFIDENTIAL
Mar
I agree. Mr Heap's proposal, would put the Governor in a difficult and unfair position. (A pity he saw fit to copy his tel to DTI & MOD.) But it wo be in HIC's interests to show some sensitivity to the concerns of British firms, MPs & Ministers when a British tender is close to a
foreign one...
Perhaps the Stone cd lift as he proposes, from the Buns to our Heap?
Mr
Jox
FROM:
M V Stone
Hong Kong Department
DATE:
22 April 1991
CC:
Mr Paul
zyfio.
HONG KONG POLICE FORCE: PATROL BOAT ORDER
A
1.
B C
2.
Peter Heap's telno 129 refers.
Peter Heap is pursuing this order to surprising lengths. He has managed to get two DTI Ministers to speak with the Governor and both have been told the facts of life: the Governor would be pleased if the British bids succeeded but they had to be fully competitive: he could not interfere in this type of matter. He would lose all credibility.
Frankly I see little mileage in going any further.
3. As for tying this in with the RN Presence issue, I see no way in which we could use this as a threat (ie if Hong Kong does give Vosper the boats, they will not get any deal on the RN Presence). Apart from anything else, there is the small matter of Hong Kong's donation of HK$230 million to our Gulf war effort. As for suggesting that MOD might soften its stance on the RN Presence if HKG gave the order to Vosper, Martin Howard (SEC (O) (C)) has not even heard of the order, so he would not be impressed and Mr Grossman in procurements has no connection with the DCA.
To have any effect this would need to be done on the political network (saving jobs in return for a softer MOD negotiating position).
ROFARM/1
CONFIDENTIAL
CC
ฯ
CONFIDENTIAL
He
4. You ask how in practice the Governor could act on a letter as suggested in para 8 of BTC telno 129. He could express interest in how the exercise was going perhaps drawing on the recent Chinese incursions, as an excuse. could then, I am sure, find a subtle way of showing his inclination towards Vosper. But this is a most unlikely scenario. I am sure he would have to reply, as before, that he cannot interfere; that Hong Kong's tender system is by fair and open competition; and that the best package will win irrespective of country of origin.
5. I think it would be wrong for an FCO Minister to write on this.
The FCO wading in on a Dependent Territory is very different from us doing so in a third country: Hong Kong is answerable to the FCO, the letter would carry overtones of direction. I think we should only consider doing so if we can deliver something on the RN Presence: and that is not in our power. I see no objection to the DTI trying again, this is after all a trade matter. The DTI (Jean Gray) take the point that it would be difficult for an FCO Minister to write. But she cannot see much mileage to be gained and neither can I.
6. On the Australian bid, neither the MOD nor DTI can
the confirm whether subsidy mentioned by Peter Heap will occur. But the MOD think it is quite possible. MOD have confirmed with Vosper that the loss of 200 jobs is correct and Vosper, not unnaturally, are keen on a Ministerial message. MOD also think that FBM probably still think they are in the running.
7. If you agree, I shall draft a sympathetic letter to
Peter Heap explaining our position and saying that we have asked the DTI to consider a further approach.
Mill Stere
M V Stone
ROFARM/2
CONFIDENTIAL