SECRET
Reference
100
Mr Gaminara
HONG KONG DEFENCE CONTRIBUTION
1.
2.
This is to confirm what I told you last night.
After discussing with Sir M MacLehose the proposals for the future of the Urban Council Mr Royle brought up the question of the defence contribution He explained briefly what we were planning following the meeting we had with Sir D Trench yesterday morning and asked Sir M MacLehose what he thought about this. Sir M MacLehose immediately urged that we should not pursue the idea of a lump sum being placed at HMG's disposal without the knowledge of the Unofficial Members of the Executive Council. He said that this would be a "bomb" underneath him which might go off at any time with disastrous consequences. In view of the strong feelings of Sir M MacLehose, Mr Royle told me not to pursue this idea with other Departments. I told him that I had already written to the Treasury and the MOD and the Department of the Environment but that I could make our position quite clear at the meeting I was hoping to arrange for Monday.
He
3. I should also record that Mr Thorp telephoned yesterday afternoon to say that he was about to submit the question of the defence contribution to his Ministers. He thought that it was time the Defence Secretary was put into the picture; this was all the more important in view of the possibility that Sir D Trench might wish to discuss the matter with Lørd Carrington. I explained to Mr Thorp how far we had got and he readily agreed to delay his submission until after our meeting next Monday. then went on to say that he was most concerned about
the Governor's proposals in connection with the capital works programme. He even went so far as to suggest that if the Treasury did not approve the expenditure of £19.6 million but only, say, £13.6 million, Hong Kong should nevertheless still pay the contribution agreed on the basis, among other things, of a capital works programme totalling £19.6 million. He referred back to the original proposals about virement between expenditure on capital works and other expenditure and tried to convince me that those proposals justified the idea he had put to me. I told him flatly that I could not possibly recommend to Ministers in the FCO that we should consider any arrangement of this kind. In any case I am quite certain that the Hong Kong Government would not agree. Why should they? I left it with Mr Thorp that we would have to argue this point out at our meeting on Monday.
18 June 1971
En
E O Laird
SECRET
DD 737719 557664 500M 2/71 GM 3643/2
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.