X
13
The Malayan proposals are concerned
solely with war compensation and have gone forward separately as such. If His Majesty's Government does anything for Malaya it seems to me that there are bound to be repercussions in Hong Kong, particularly if any class of loss is ignored in Hong Kong, because it would appear that Hong Kong has already to a certain extent covered certain losses. I would say in passing that I do not think there was much "denial" in Hong Kong. War damage was due chiefly: (a) to American bombing during the occupation, (b) to looting by Chinese.
Hong Kong undoubtedly is due some consideration. It paid military contribution for over 40 years, supported its own volunteers and naval volunteers and expended large sums on defence and in contribu- tions to Imperial war expenses before it was itself attacked (vide 1 of enclosure 5 to 12). It has had a rapid post-war recovery and enjoyed considerable prosperity, though its future is uncertain with the instability in China.
I have, however, the feeling that the beneficiaries of this recovery are the vested interests (big business in the local sense) both European and Chinese and refugee Chinese from China who have no roots in the place.
In Malaya there was an insurance scheme which forms a major item of the compensation programme. Hong Kong retsed an insurance scheme to cover goods in godowns etc.
Although the defence was actually
a farce the military had insisted on extending the seige period (during which Hong Kong was expected to hold out till relief arrived) to, I think,130 days; the defence lasted 17. Hong Kong had to stock up accordingly food, petrol, etc. all of which were surrendered to the Japanese without sabotage or denial. In paragraph 11 of 12 the Government, on what appears to me to be a legal quibble, repudiates major liability for requisitioned motor vehicles (mainly the property of individuals and amounting in all to claims of £40,000) but has (paragraph 16) paid claims of over £350,000 for requisitioned food, chiefly to the Dairy farm, whose shares have recently appreciated from a pre war level, if I recollect correctly, some 20 odd dollars to $100. There has been a regular spate of bonus shares in Hong Kong.
It seems to me that the same argument could have been used against the Dairy Farmer as against the motor vehicle owners and in any case there was no need in my opinion ever to requisition the food, except deliberately to put Government anta pseudo-contract al liability.
Nor am I satisfied that Hong Kong
efirins
is making any very serious attempt to tax these firms
farmers in this time of prosperity, which is
not