TNAG-0053-FCO40-89-Communist-activities-in-schools-1968 — Page 48

SECRET

Peking telegram No. 813 to Foreign Office

3.

keep the question of Communist schools in proportion. According to statistics published in the Hong Kong Education Dept. quarterly report, 31 March 1968, pupils at Communist schools constituted only 1.90% of Hong Kong's total student population (20,000 as opposed to 1,000,000). Moreover, this figure represented a decrease of .07% over the preceding year, when Communist percentage was 1.97.

5. The prospects of an expansion of Communist education must also. be kept in proportion. The relevant point is not the Communists' programme of expansion, but our assessment of their chances of attaining their targets. These do not appear always so very good. Thus some months ago the Chung Wah school was reported by Special Branch to be experiencing difficulty in enrolling adequate numbers of pupils. Nor does it seem correct that new Communist schools run on behalf of a discredited minority and with low educational standards could attract much custom, particularly if we can offer alternatives in the shape of non-Communist schools. I am sure that action could readily be taken to allay any public fears by helping them to take a more balanced and less alarmist view on these matters.

6. As regards the 20,000, I agree that these are probably a captive clientele. But it follows that even if some Communist schools are deregistered this small section of Hong Kong youth is likely to go to other Communist schools (as has happened with Chung Wah). As regards the much more important "floating voters", 1.e. the youths who are not captive, the answer here presumably lies not in suppressive action against Communist schools, but in providing a better alternative in the shape of non-Communist schools, as the Governor envisaged, in the end if we cannot in a fair field beat the Communists in the battle for hearts and minds our society has little to recommend it.

7. Nevertheless I see a distinction between the proposed and existing schools and there is no reason why we should fall over ourselves to help the Communists gp. omitted/ as many new schools as they want. There may be covert methods we could discreetly use - legal or administrative delays to make registration of new Communist schools a slower process provided such action does not become blatantly discriminatory,' From para. 6 of the telegram under reference, however, I assume these methods have been fully examined. The telegram is concerned with overt and direct action against proposed and existing Communist schools, which is a very different matter.

8.

To sum up, no one engaged in this debate wants Communist education to flourish in Hong Kong. Ideally we should prefer there to be no Communist schools in the colony. But we have to co-exist with the Communists and the questions to be asked are

(a)

Whether these schools constitute so real a danger as to merit tough Government action, and

I

(b) whether such action would not in any event bring greatly disproportionate damage in Hong Kong and elsewhere. have tried to show that the answers are (a) No;

(b) Emphatically yes.

I greatly hope therefore that in the light of these comments proposed course in Hong Kong will be reconsidered and I should be grateful for reassurance from you that no basic change is intended in our policy on peaceful Communist education or our policy of seeking

/improvement

SECRET