CO537-6046 — Page 43

Secretariat' 5/1136/49

ECRET

OEFENCE & GENERAL

14 NOV 1950 REGISTRY

рух

J4.

Dear Parkin,

PRINTED FOR USE?

Eastern

No. 182.

COLONIAL OFFICE

GOVERNMENT HOUSE,

HONG KONG,

November, 1950.

52

Would you please refer to Sidebotham's secret 45 and personal letter to Nicoll (54145/4/50) of 10th

October on the subject of constitutional reform. I discussed the matter with Executive Council on 31st October on the basis of the various points raised in that letter and I am now able to give you my considered opinion on those points.

Hagman, haves of tread

56-58

2.

บ

*

As regards the question of the additional uhofficial member, full account was taken of the Secretary of State's wishes that this member should be "elected", but in considering just how he was to be elected we ran into difficulties. You are aware that I consider that the principle of election by the Social Welfare Services has attractions. The mechanics of the thing, however, are a different matter. Social Welfare Services in Hong Kong still lack the degree of cohesion which would make them a satisfactory electoral body. At one end of the line there are long-established, responsible organisations in which Government has had full confidence for many years. At the other end there are enthusiastic but inexperienced bodies who have little knowledge of wider policy and whose true value to the community has still to be measured. The question of Government direction and control over these organisations is, as you are aware, a matter of some delicacy. On the one hand we wish to protect them from penetration by undesirable elements, and to that extent a certain degree of Government control would be an advan- tage. On the other hand, it is quite certain that nothing will dampen the spontaneous ardour of the newer organisations more surely than Governmental interference and direction. The danger does exist, therefore, that some, at least, of these organisations may in time become penetrated to a greater or less degree by persons who have only political objects in view. But it is a risk we have to take: the alternative would be to stifle all initiative in the sphere of Social Service and to fill the gap with organisations sponsored and directed by Government itself. Penetration of Social Service organisa- tions by political elements is therefore an unavoidable risk and, within its own limited sphere, a danger which we are prepared to meet. But penetration of a limited electoral body is another matter, and I am satisfied that to turn the Social Welfare Services into a separate body of electors at this stage in their development would not only create unnecessary potential dangers for the new legislature but would also provide an additional and considerable incentive to penetration of the Social Welfare Services by politically undesirable elements in view of the short cut to the Legislature which these services could provide.

J.. PASKIN, ESQ., C.M.G., M.C.,

COLONIAL OFFICE,

THE CHURCH HOUSE,

GREAT SMITH STREET

LONDON, S.W.1.