RESTRICTED
proposed?
You say that participants from Hong Kong, South China
and eventually Taiwan will be attending the Centre.
Do you envisage that students from places other than Hong Kong will benefit from an HMG scholarship
programme? My own view is that we should not dilute the range and scope for Hong Kong scholarships in
favour of candidates who may already have access to
existing FCOSAS programmes in China, and Taiwan?
James Smith-Laittan says in his letter that without
HMG's support there is reason to suppose that the nature of the training provided by the MTC is likely
to change over time in a way which dilutes or even
removes its value to Britain. We do not really follow
this. How could the presence or absence of our
support for graduates from the Centre affect the way
the Centre itself operates? If the British Council
are to administer the centre, and British Universities
provide the curriculum, is that not sufficient guarantee of the British link?
James Smith-Laittan's letter mentioned (perhaps not as
ominously as it read!) that the Hong Kong Government had
sought "certain assurances on the financial feasibility of the project". It is certainly not realistic to think of
our scholarship budget as a major contribution to the survival of this project. To put it more bluntly, we may be able to piggy-back on it, but are unlikely to make more
than a marginal difference to its viability. On capital
costs, it would be useful to know how much of a real
problem funding for bricks and mortar is for the British
Council. As you discussed with Peter Ricketts it is not
possible for us to use scholarship funds (revenue) for
cornish.0112.SCHO.SH
RESTRICTED