advantages for China at the present time and there is some prospect therefore that the Chinese Government will refrain from raising "the Hong Kong question" in the immediate future unless prodded into it by pressure from any quarter.
(iii)
From the point of view of material development of Hong Kong, it would be very desirable for us to issue a reassuring statement about its future but at the same time the issue of such a statement carries the risk that it may stimulate the very thing that we desire to avoid, namely pressure on the Chinese Government to reopen the question with us.
In these circumstances I wonder whether instead of inserting in the draft joint memorandum a new paragraph pointing out how necessary it is that we should have some assurance of continued control over any new airport constructed in the New Territories we should not really do better to tackle the matter from the other end.
Clearly the ideal thing from our point of view would be an unequivocal declaration by H.M.G. that there will be no question of relinquishing any of our rights in the New Territories until the end of the lease. There is obviously a danger, however, that the
thers concerned will decided that we may fail to get agreement from others concerned to the making of such a declaration. That being so, it seems to me that there may be some danger from our point of view in linking up too closely this question of the consideration of the new air field with the political status of the New Territories. It is clear that no new air field of the type required can be constructed without full Treasury support, even if only in giving permission for the loan to be raised. These political questions have a way of dragging on without any final clear cut decision ever being reached and I am very much afraid that if we make it clear that we ourselves feel that it would be much too risky to undertake the construction of an airport in the New Territories without a final decision on the political issue, the Treasury will stall staff indefinitely.
It seems to me therefore thatwe should be much wiser to attack this question of the airport not from the point of view of political decisions in principle but of such estimate as we can make of real probabilities. Here, of course, I must speak with great diffidence: but as far as I can see given the present state of China and the fact that our possession of Hong Kong does no material damage to the Chinese Government but on the contrary greatly benefits it, we have every prospect of retaining de facto control of any airport we construct in the New Territories sufficiently long for it to be a worth while investment. It seems to me therefore that our efforts as an Office should be directed not to tying up the airport question with the political question but on the contrary endeavouring to get a decision on the airport question irrespective of the political question.
/Moreover