Page 49
indirect aid to Hong Kong in squatter
resettlement, they have agreed not to press a
claim for an increased defence contribution;
he thinks that that explanation might satisfy his
unofficials and informed public opinion that H.M.
Government giving some practical support to
Hong Kong and thus enable him to get the
Finance Committee and Legislative Council to agree
to the maintenance of the defence contribution at
its present level.
5.
Bearing in mind the delicacy and difficulty
of these manoeuvres, we do not think that they
can be brought to a successful conclusion until
the Minister of Defence has returned from the Far
East and a decision has been taken about the two
units over and above the long-term garrison, by
which time the debate in the United Nations General
Assembly will probably also have been held.
Meanwhile you may rest assured that this Department
is no less anxious than the War Office that a
which
conclusion should be reached that is agreed by
all concerned to be fair.
6. I am sendinging copies of this letter to
Phelps and Russell-Edmunds in the Treasury.
Page 49
1
:
1
TOP
SECRET
Copy No.......
FOR
DISABLED
150H..
be 50 of 85 File onceive
ge
MEN
16/Abroad/4071 (F.1.)
Dear Johnston,
to my Housingss
Dackson
THE WARASFF, Of85 16
CE,
LONDON, S.W.1.
3rd September, 1957.
We have received information from Hong Kong that the Accountant General, Hong Kong, has advised the Command Paymaster that no payment for the year 1957/58 can be made in respect of the £1,000,000 contributed annually towards the cost of the Hong Kong Garrison, on the grounds that the matter is currently under discussion with H.M. Government in U.K.
I have not heard of the outcome of your talks with the Colonial Secretary and Financial Secretary in London, to which you referred in
(8) your letter of 3rd June, to Phelps, and it is disquieting therefore to
learn that the Hong Kong Government has already taken action and ceased paying the defence contribution for the current year.
It is appreciated that the question of stationing two additional units in Hong Kong has been the subject of Ministerial discussions in recent months, but I do not regard this as a reason for ceasing the defence contribution without prior consultation and agreement, nor can I agree that the refugee problem should be alleviated at the expense of the defence contribution. Perhaps you would let me know the latest position on this matter ?
I am copying this letter to Phelps and Russell-Edmunds.
Yours sincerely,
ESEP 1957
(T. A. G. CHARLTON)
J. B. Johnston, Esq., Colonial Office,
Pages Church House,
Gt. Smith Street,
LONDON, S.W.1.
TOP SECRET