TNAG-0348-FCO40-384-Costs-of-extra-services-provided-by-armed-forces-of-UK-in-Ho-1972 — Page 45

CONFIDENTIAL

10.

In the view of the Ministry of Defence, the

attitude of the Hong Kong Government is illogical,

since there was no material difference between

"Highland Bonnet" and "Spring Clean".

Since

that Government agreed to meet the cost of the

latter, then in the view of the Ministry there is

no reason why it should not likewise meet the

costs of the former operation. It app ars to the

Ministry of Defence that the Hong Kong Government

is basing its case simply on the fact that it was

not consulted before the works required for

"Highland Bonnet" were put in hand.

11.

The Hong Kong Government's case is as follows:-

(1) The border positions occupied by the

Army under "Highland Bonnet" were old

military positions which had originally

been prepared by the Army several years

earlier to meet external armed

aggression: they had been sited as a

military commitment long before the

nature of the 1967 disturbances became

apparent. Such works had previously

always been a charge to Her Majesty's

they had been refurbished

(2)

Government:

in 1967 by the military authorities on

their own initiative and without

reference to the Hong Kong Government

which sees no reason why it should meet

the costs involved.

The experience of 1967 made it clear

that there was a more permanent need

6.

CONFIDENTIAL

/for

NOTHING TO BE WRITTEN IN THIS MARGIN

Page 45Page 46

NOTHING TO BE WRITTEN IN THIS MARGIN