difficult
that you will share, this does not rest either with
41
His Majesty's Government or with the Hong Kong Government,
even though the damage was done by U.K. British or by
citizens of Hong Kong, but with Japan. As regards the
second point, you have already reached a conclusion in
deciding not to have an ex gratia War Damage Compensation
Scheme.
6. I consider, therefore, that this is a somewhat
fortuitous legal liability arising from circumstances
which were unfortunately not envisaged at the time when
the legislation was passed. In this connection I must
refer to the free grant of £1,000,000 which was given to
Hong Kong by His Majesty's Government to assist the
Government of Hong Kong in resolving problems arising out
of expenditure connected with the war". At the time when
the financial settlement between His Majesty's Government
and the Hong Kong Government was reached there was some
misunderstanding in Hong Kong on the point whether the
liability now under consideration was included as one of
the items of "expenditure connected with the war" (see
your telegrams Nos. 406 and 426 of the 22nd and 27th
April, 1948).
7. Consideration of whether His Majesty's
Government would be prepared to give further assistance
in this matter would depend partly on the actual size and
would
be
existence of the financial cost, and no, therefore,
to take further until the actual cost of liability is
known; that is until the problem has finally been
disposed of on the lines suggested in paragraph 4 above.
It is considered improbable that all claimants will be
able to prove their case, and it would be necessary to
take into consideration the fact that, owing to the
decision of the Hong Kong Government not to have the War
Risks Insurance Scheme or a general ex gratia War Damage
/Compensation
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.