TOP SECRET No. 562
My telegram No. 470.
Army Garrison.
The implications of the proposal made in your telegram No. 310 for the temporary retention of artillery units in Hong Kong are:-
(a) No final decision on the long-term Order of Battle
(6)
1
for Malaya, including the artillery requirement there for the three brigades now envisaged, has yet been taken. It is not yet certain how many artillery regiments will be required in Malaya and consequently how many would be available for temporary stationing in Hong Kong.
One of the three regiments is required to return to U.K. this year and cannot be replaced, which would leave a maximum of two regiments available for location elsewhere.
(c) War Office estimate the excess cost of maintaining the other two regiments in Hong Kong as opposed to U.K. at approximately £500,000 each (repeat each)
per annum.
(a) War Office also estimate capital cost of providing
additions to existing accommodation at about £1 million (though from paragraph 2 of your telegram this does not appear necessary).
2.
I realize that this would involve a very considerable burden, but in view of the present needs for defence economy here I see little chance of H.M.G. meeting any part of the cost in (c) and (d) above. I believe, however, that despite this you will still wish me to pursue the proposal and it would help me greatly in discussions with my colleagues if I could have your reactions and an estimate of the maximum contribution towards (c) and (d) which Hong Kong could sustain. You may wish to suggest detailed discussions with Clarke when he arrives in United Kingdom but meanwhile I should be grateful for your own views on this message.
Distribution:-
Top Secret Automatic + Mr. Melville
War Office (M.0.2)
Page eggn Office
Lt.Col.A.F. McGill Mr. P.G.F.Daltdage 60 of 85
Ministry of Defence (Chiefs of Staff Secretariat) Ca. H. G. Croly Commonwealth Relations Office
Mr. G.D. Hampshire#
Tel. No. WHItehall 1234. Ext...
Ry
SCHEM
You agœeld. FH185382/400/01
Truary
Reference. 147/326/01
RJ 8
TOP SECRET
Mydear Jack,
TREASURY HAMBEK$5
GREAT GEORGE STREET
EDANNY
LONDON, S.W.1
it 11
11
June, 1957
Phelps and I have discussed your letter of the 3rd June about Hong Kong's defence contribution. As the question of the refugees which you link with this problem is in my field of interest, I have undertaken to reply.
We are ready to agree to suspend taking the question of the defence contribution further until you have had your discussions with the Hong Kong Colonial Secretary and Financial Secretary.
Turning to the question of the refugees, we have, in two telephone conversations, exchanged some views on this. I gave you my tentative view along the lines that I thought an open mind on the question of getting some international help would be right until we are in a position to weigh up (i) the consequences of not trying to help Họng Kong along the lines she would like, and (ii) the implications of playing along with Hong Kong. seem to be at some risk that we shall find ourselves getting the worst of all worlds. As I see it, Hong Kong are taking the line that if she does not get some international help then H.M.G. should give direct help to the tune of, at least, foregoing £900,000 of the annual defence contribution.
J. B. Johnston, Esq.,
Colonial Office,