31
335
PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE
Reference :-
། ། ། ། །
سلسالسا
C.O.882/11
PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE, LONDON
ALLY WITHOUT PERMISSION OF THE BE REPRODUCED PHOTOGRAPHIC-
COPYRIGHT PHOTOGRAPH-NOT
30
on the new defences, is therefore £52,000 greater than it should have been, while the figure given in the same letter for the cost of the garrison in 1928, viz., £467,885, which the Colony has paid as its contribution for that year, is correspondingly less than it should have been.
9. Turning now to the future cost of the garrison, it will be understood from the above review of the variations since 1920 that it is very difficult to forecast with confidence the annual expenditure over, say, the five years following 1931. Assuming, however, that the establishment of the garrison does not materially differ from that taken for Estimates, 1931, that the expenditure on barracks continues at a level somewhat above the average, but that there is no further exceptional expenditure on armament or ammu- nition other than that referred to in paragraph 7, it is estimated that the average annual cost of the garrison for the years 1932-36 will be about £440,000. In addition there will be the charges, estimated at £50,000, for items to complete the programme of changes shown in paragraph 7; this amount spread over five years would raise the average annual cost over the period 1932-36 from £440,000 to £450,000. These figures allow no margin for contingencies; in other words, it is assumed that unforeseen factors are no more likely to increase than to reduce the cost of the garrison.
All work on the military defences of the Base is postponed for five years and there is to be no military expenditure in connexion with the Base except a small sum of £5,000 a year to maintain the buildings, etc., already erected. This £5,000 is not included in the above total of £450,000.
10. As regards the payment from the Colony for the Army financial year 1931, the amount shown in Estimates, 1931, is £498,000, being the same figure as in 1930 Estimates, but this has been inserted as a purely conventional figure as the whole subject was under review.
If a change is made in the method of calculating the contribution and a fixed sum basis is introduced as from some date between now and 31st March, 1932, the Army year 1931 (1st April, 1931, to 31st March, 1932) will be a transition year, and it is desirable to state here the estimated payments by the Colony under the existing basis. Leaving out the £5,000 relating to the new Base, the elements of the contribution would have been as follows:-
(1) The arrears in respect of previous years, viz.—
(a) The under-estimate of the cost
of the garrison in 1929. (Para-
graph 4, footnote (a))
(b) For A.A. equipment errone- ously excluded from the cost of the garrison in (Paragraph 8)
£46,508
1928.
£52,000
£98,508
(2) The estimated cost of the garrison in 1931, viz., £446,000 (paragraph 4). (3) On the other hand there will be a refund to the Colony of £87,320 held in suspense in War Office books. It will be remembered that, pending con- sideration of the treatment of expenditure on the defences of the new Base, a sum of £142,000 was provisionally included in the estimated cost of the garrison for 1927 in respect of the estimated expenditure in 1927 on those defences, and was included in the Colony's monthly advances in the ordinary routine. The actual expenditure on the new defences in 1927 was only £87,320, and the difference, viz., £54,680, between this amount and the £142,000 advanced by the Colony on this account was repaid to the Colony in June, 1929.
In view of the Peel Committee proposals and subsequent discussion, the £87,320 provisionally retained was not brought to account by the War Office but has been held in a suspense account for refund to the Colony in the ultimate settlement.
11. The manner of dealing with the Army year, 1931, can most conveniently be considered when it is known what are the Colony's proposals for the future and from what date they are to take effect. It will suffice to say here that the War Office at present know of nothing to indicate whether the actual costs of the garrison for 1930 and 1931 will prove to be more or less than the estimates, and it may be desired to settle the contri- butions for either or both years finally without waiting till the actual costs are known at considerably later dates.
War Office,
March, 1931.
No. 20.
C. 82093/31 [No. 40].
LORD PASSFIELD (SECRETARY OF STATE For the ColonIES)
to
SIR C. CLEMENTI (GOVERNOR, STRAITS SETTLEMENTS).
DEAR SIR CECIL CLEMENTI,
Downing Street, 19th May, 1931. Since you have been at home you have made great efforts to adjust the unhappy differences that have arisen over the military contribution question. It gave me much pleasure to learn that thanks to the care which you have taken to explain fully to the Departments concerned the views held in the Straits a basis for a settlement has now been found.
I write to confirm that, if a final settlement of the Straits Settlements Defence Contri- bution question is offered by the Legislative Council in the terms which you have proposed and which are embodied in the enclosed draft Ordinance, His Majesty's Government will accept it without further discussion.
Your proposal is that in place of percentage contribution the Straits Settlements shall pay a fixed annual contribution of $5,000,000 for the purpose of Imperial Defence. This sum represents the cost of the Singapore military garrison (exclusive of expenditure, capital or maintenance, on the new defences of the Naval Base) plus a supplementary voluntary contribution to the cost of Imperial Defence generally, and will remain un- changed for five years and thereafter be variable by agreement.
If you think it desirable you may, in connexion with the introduction of the proposed Bill, make the following public declaration:-
"If the garrison should be withdrawn from the Colony the Legislative Council will naturally be at liberty to reconsider the whole question of the contribution. In view, however, of the existing defence policy of His Majesty's Government it
is extremely unlikely that the military garrison will be removed from the Colony." I am very glad that your frank personal discussions have enabled us to remove the doubts and misunderstandings of recent years and I sincerely hope that the proposals now approved by His Majesty's Government will be found by all parties to supply a Jasting and satisfactory settlement.
-
Enclosure in No. 20.
DRAFT ORDINANCE.
Yours, &c.,
PASSFIELD.
AN ORDINANCE TO PROVIDE FOR A CONTRIBUTION FOR THE PURPOSE OF IMPERIAL
DEFENCE.
ORDINANCE No..
1. This Ordinance may be cited as Ordinance No.........
Defence).
(Contribution to Imperial
2. For a period of five years and thereafter until the Legislature shall make other provision there shall be appropriated yearly from the Colonial revenues to His Majesty's Government in the United Kingdom, as a contribution for the purpose of Imperial defence the sum of $5,000,000.
3. The said sum shall be deemed to be a fixed contribution payable by the Colony in full return for the cost of the defence of the Colony including the cost of the military garrison but excluding the cost of any local forces raised and administered by the Colony.
4. One-twelfth part as nearly as may be of the said sum shall be paid monthly into the Imperial Treasury Chest in the Colony on account of His Majesty's Government in the United Kingdom at or about the end of each month in each year.
5. Ordinance No. 64 (Defence Contribution) is hereby repealed but without prejudice
to any liability or right accrued thereunder.
6. This Ordinance shall come into force on the first day of January, 1992.
I