2
t
5.
I think a modest establishment of, say, two or three diplomatic officers
of lat or 2nd Secretary rank supported by one shorthand typist would be
sufficient to produce worthwhile reports. If it were decided to go
ahead, I suggest that the staff should not be attached to my office but
to one of the existing U.K. offices, possibly the Trade Commission, but
alternatively the Regional Information Office. My idea is that there
would be a small group serving the interests of the F.C.O. It might be
that the Hong Kong Government would want to have some part in it. I have
no doubt they would find the products useful but I have not taken up the
matter inside the Hong Kong Government. It will be time to do that if
you decide that my proposal merits detailed examination.
6.
The main question is whether China watching is thought to be of
sufficient interest and the advantages of Hong Kong to be sufficiently
great to justify the allocation of those manpower and financial
resources at a time when the main trend must be towards economy. The
problem of relations with China is likely to occupy the attention of
Ministers frequently over a long period. The staff we deploy at
considerable expense and inconvenience in Peking is fairly small. If we
are seriously interested in following Chinese affairs, it seems
ridiculous to ignore the openings in Hong Kong.
7.
It seems to me to be not an excessive burden on the resources of the
Diplomatic Service to deploy an extra three or four officers in Hong
Kong. I regard myself as entirely disinterested in this question, since
I would never qualify to join the proposed group and do not suggest that
it should be part of the Political Adviser's Office. I write as a member
of the Diplomatic Service, not as Political Adviser. I am confident that
however much they dislike the prospect of new burdens, E. & 0.
Department will examine my proposal seriously since they know that in my
last post I took the initiative in abolishing at least that number of
posts. It also seems appropriate to raise the matter now because the
Duncan Committee is engaged in thinking about the future shape of the
Service, which implies expanding in some places as well as reducing in
others.
8.
I am sending a copy of this letter to Percy Cradock, Michael Hannam and
Tony Ashworth.
Your
ever.
Authm.
(A.F. Maddocks)