TNAG-0255-FCO40-291-Contributions-of-Hong-Kong-for-costs-of-maintaining-military-1971 — Page 29

SECRET

to D.O.P.C. is concerned, there is really only one

matter in issue, namely how the costs of the garrison

tare to be shared as between HMG and the Hong Kong

Government.

The point in (b) of this paragraph

an inter-departinatal

appears to be entirely a domestic issue of co maller behoren ourselves.

only to HMG.

Paragraph 3(b) The general remarks in paragraph

3 above are very apposite here. Moreover, am I

not right in thinking that the figure of £21.85 million

for the running costs of the garrison in 1971/72

includes certain activities carried out for HMG's

own purposes which are not appropriate to a

contribution from Hong Kong? This factor was taken

into account in assessing the current contribution

and I assume that it should likewise not be over-

looked in the present negotiations.

Paragraph 4: We would certainly have to query the

phrase "subsidy to a self-governing Colony" in

line 4. Hong Kong is not, and never can be, self-

governing". It is a Crown Colony, a territory which

is constitutionally wholly dependent on HMG and for

the defence of which HMG is responsible. We feel

therefore that to talk of a subsidy for the defence

of Hong Kong tends to ignore the factual position

Paragraph 5: I venture to question the statement

that the Overseas Defence Committee policy adopted

in 1960 and quoted in this paragraph has been

followed since its adoption. It was, for example

departed from in 1966 when the current Hong Kong

defence contribution was agreed by the D.O.P.C.

That contribution covers the local costs of that

proportion of the garrison (four major army units

-2-

SECRET

NOTHING TO BE WRITTEN IN THIS MARGIN