CO129-610-2 Rehabilitation of Hong Kong University 9-1-1948 - 18-1-1949 — Page 35

50

Hong Rang-

Sav: 420-

35

(32) ange

19.6.48

51

- Conf. Sad. He

11

444

(44) ((45) ansd.

30.6.48

01

be taget 54403/7/4811

These Coles Umiko Cce not

A

Mr. Christopher Cox

You should see No. 51 at once please, and I think that the question of the publication of the Report had better be considered (in connection with it. If your Report is published, and it concurrently becomes known in Hong Kong that assistance for the Hong Kong University is going to be limited to the £250,000 from H.M.G. under the settle- ment, which the Chancellor considers should be used for development, and any grant from C.D. and W. is precluded, H.M.G.'s/ Will "stink" in Hong Kong's noseven more

than it does at present.

Perhaps that does not matter much, but, as the Governor points out, the items for which a C.D. and W. grant is needed cover projects planned before the war and are not (repeat not) 'rehabilitation, the cost of which is to be met from local funds. If a C.D. and W. grant can be approved, it is proposed that the Treasury grant will be used to "salvage what is possible of those recommendations of the Cox Report which have direct reference to the needs of the Colony". What this means I am not altogether clear.

If no C.D. and W. grant is forthcoming, the Treasury money will have to go on the projects mentioned in paragraph 2 of the savingram at No. 51. I don't know how much, if any, attention need be paid to the arguments adduced in paragraph 8. Ferhaps you can say whether Hong Kong has, in general, been treated less favourably than other Colonies in the matter of assistance from H.M.G. in the past.

The question now is, I think, whether there is any ground for pressing for reconsideration of the decisions of the Advisory Committee recorded in paragraph 68 of No. 43 -

(a) of which does not seem to be just practical'

politics since the Treasury can't (or won't) cough up the cash for an enlarged University and, on the other hand, there must presumably be some proper facilities for higher education in Hong Kong, more especially in view of the present state of affairs in China, which seems likely to get worse rather than better; and

(b) of which, according to the Governor's savingram

at No. 51, appears to be ruled under a misap- prehension.

I should be grateful, therefore, for your further comments:

(a) as to whether you still agree that this is the

moment to publish your Report; and

(b) whether you think that, if a formal application for C.D. and W. assistance were to be preferred by the Hong Kong Government, there is:-

(1) any money available from which it could

be granted; or

(2) any likelihood of the Committee being

persuaded to alter their view in the light of the considerations marked

marginally A above.

f

/ I