CO129-610-2 Rehabilitation of Hong Kong University 9-1-1948 - 18-1-1949 — Page 37

कृप

have also suffered in no small measure, I feel, from its having missed the bus during the period when pressing claims were coming in from everywhere else, whereas Hong Kong's case (as it now stands) was tending to go by default. The principle reason for this is the very long delay of H.M.G. in reaching the decision to take no decision on the 1946 Report. I certainly a not blame the I.U.C.

or CUGAC, of both of which bogies I am a member and whose recommendations I sturbed, or the Department. But I think Hong Kong would have real grounds for feeling aggrieved if the issue were no regarded as settled. It has never been visited by the I.U.C. members and its case, as it now stands, has never been fully and clearly put to them; for this Hong Kong cannot escape some responsibility itself as Mr. Sloss's visit might have been used to present officially the Hong Kong case.

3. I certainly feel that in the light of 51 there is a lot more to be said to the I.U.C. and to CUGAC both (a) on why the University was re- opened instead of being replaced by professional schools to meet the Colony's needs when H.M.G. deferred further consideration of the 1946 Report Kain ecommendation (on this A in Mr. Bourdillon's minute of 4.6.48 should be kept well to the fore,, and (b) on the purposes for which they now want money. There is also the argument, which I do not think has ever yet been put, that if the University had been replaced by a string of separate professional schools (medical, agricultural etc.) when H.M.G. did not produce the full sum required for a University as envisaged in the Report, these professional schools would almost certainly have had a case for help from C.D.W. and the relevant allocation would surely have been CUGAC's "higher education" allocation, university or no university. The arguments in paragraph 8 of 51 would also have to be weighed; I think the. Governor is accurate in his reference to help from H.M.G. in the past (see paragraph 20 of the Report) and the large sums have, of course, recently been made available for higher education in other regions.

I was

With regard, therefore, to the two parts of your question (b) in your minute, my answer to the second part is, You never know till you try. Some members, at any rate, of CUGAC (which includes Sir Mark Young!) feel uneasy I am sure at "plumping" for the full 1,000,000 pounds for Malayagreeve because of the possiblity and indeed the prima-facie probable, résults for Hong Kong; one of those, but I came out strongly over promising Malaya the £1,000,000 now because I was convinced that might be a decisive step towards making practicable a very big idea and that this was the psychological moment for such a promise; the whole Hong Kong position was uncertain and confused. My own guess is that the I.U.C. at any rate, if fully and clearly informed as to the position, might well be persuaded of the signif benes of limited C.D.W. help; and CUGAC too, if the money can be found from any source (see below). At the least last I believe the I.U.C. would see that it must send a delegation of its own to this

to this, the only zolonial area relevant to its work before it could

has not

whereas

/take..