5442492.
7 4
see p.28`of
enal to (7) opp.
•
and there are no signs that they will
Extract from minutes on 53537/2/50:
Hansard Reports
Read with interest. Hong Kong proposed to the 3.0. some time ago to write-off all outstanding ad- vances and Treasury were strongly opposed to this. If $3 million is outstanding and Hong Kong eventually got back 50%, or 61,500,000 and retained the proceeds, although it might be argued that as the advances were probably made out of H..G.'s Grant-in-id the proceeds would offset the outstanding claim by F.U. against Hong Kong for the balance of the Macao expenditure. If Hong Kong does not raise the Macao expenditure point at the forthcoming discussions, we need not raise the question of the disposal of any part of the a/s 3,000,000 recovered by H.K. although there would be advantages in all parties agreeing at the Conference how both expenditure and receipts were to be dealt with. Perhaps the paper might be looked up since the question of these receipts is relevant to the o/s F.U. claim.
(sgd) H. ralmer.
29.3.1950
A lot of the kacau expenditure was financed from loans (later grants) în aid and therefore any receipts as a result of reclaiming advances might be argued to belong, at least in part, to H..G. we have told H.K. (on I believe 54492 or 55364/xx/48-9) that we cannot agree to advances being written off and there will presumably eventually be some receipts arising out of macuo expenditure.
As however H.K. already owes about £300,000 in connection with macao expenditure in respect of the portion of the total expenditure which was not covered by granta in aid, I agree with ir, ralmer that the most equitable solution at present would be for both sides to let sleeping dogs lie i... if H.K. do not try to get out of paying their £300,000 odd we should not try on behalf of H...G.
0 bet any recoveries, which they may et, out of them.
(8gd-) a.J. Fairclough
29.3.1950