CO129-596-4 Hong Kong University- Apprenticeship scheme 4-2-1947 - 3-9-1947 — Page 4

I have

больт

whether

4& Serpall

من

receptors

hobl

WD

downs Pay.

wolon 18

levast the memoran Dem.

dep lto coveri's

4

fathers to

مسمسم

Financ DeAs.

дерб

5. F.O.

6.

LC.110/110/452

tis of tel 294 214-3-47 to Nanking

I have attached

hew

slightly amended the draft.

Miss Rustor informed

14-3-4 19-3-42 and

Pinancial summary an

me to day that the F.B.I. have

how selected the five students and she is therefore anxious that the scheme should be approved

may

as Loo

possible

to

ما

that all concerned be informed and action taken to reply to the despatch at SOA) on '46 file (see also © and enclosures from F.O. after on this file). I have accordingly marked this in red.

ABX Raqus.

20.347.

Mr. Bryant.

Please Nos.19,22 and 26 on -/46 and Miss Whyte's minute of 4th June, 1946 on that file.

We seem to be breaking fresh ground here so far as D. and W. training procedure is concerned. It is proposed that normal scholarship terms should not apply to these engineering graduates and that they should be assisted on a scale comparable with the F.B.I. awards to Chinese graduates. Since we are here concerned with post graduate students who will be gainfully employed during apprenticeship, there are reasonable grounds for departing from normal scholarship terms, but a number of difficulties will be introduced.

For one thing we have to consider what if any of the normal arrangements will apply. It is proposed to pay an outfit allowance, but shall we also pay, for example, medical expenses and possibly dependants' allowances either in this country or in Hong Kong. These graduates are not particularly young and some may very well have local commitments. These points can perhaps be left over for more leisurely consideration after the scheme has been accepted in principle and the present interim grant sanctioned. A point of fundamental importance which must however be resolved now is the question of income tax. I do not regard the proposal that the graduates should receive a net payment of £30 a month as either practicable or acceptable in principle, at least without a closer examination of what is involved.

The tax position of these graduates is not, as I see it, analogous to that of normal Colonial

scholars