3. This brings me to the need for stationing the unit in Hong Kong from March 1970 instead
of 1971. There appear to be two reasons giver
in the various studies on this matter for the
earlier date. At that time Hong Kong is to become an independent Command and the Hunter Squadron in the Far Eastern Air Force is to be
disbanded. Neither of these seem to be
compelling reasons for the earlier date,, presume that there would be no difficulty, if it was decided to postpone the establishment of the unit in Hong Kong for one year, for air cover to continue to be provided for Hong Kong either from Singapore or from the UK.
Blog I can
44.
When Ministers last year considered the Defence Secretary's proposals on the shape and size of the post-1971 garrison in Hong Kong (OPD(68)32), they decided, in the words of the Prime Minister's summing-up, that "Consideration of where the costs of the garrison should be borne should be deferred but the Defence Secretary, in consultation with the Chancellor of the Exchequer, should arrange for the best assessment possible to be made of the full cost to us of the Hong Kong commitment" (OPD(68)11th Meeting on 29 May, 1968). In our view there is no prospect that agreement could be reached, outside that all- embracing exercise, on where the costs of the fighter unit should be borne (if not by Hong Kong); and there cap, as explained above, he
7% of patging a chergo against Hong
I allow it to raise a Kong for costs arising prior to 1chage agains
Cat
5.
see that it will
be administratively convenient and perhaps.
провер preaccially
attractive
In all the circumstances therefore it is our view that, unless the costs of the unit can be borne on Defence Votes for the period 1970/71, it would be better to defer the whole exercise for a year, positioning the aircraft in Hong Kong in April 1971.
16.
Kerng
NOTHING TO BE WRITTEN IN THIS MARGIN
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.