TNAG-0348-FCO40-384-Costs-of-extra-services-provided-by-armed-forces-of-UK-in-Ho-1972 — Page 90

CONFIDENTIAL

Reference....

Mr K M

KM

Wilford

THE BUILDING OF THE SNAKE FENCE IN HONG KONG

wre

gave

Illak up the affans of referring it & tk

late 1920

لسه

1.

of

We have not, in fact, made provision in 1972-73 estimates for reimbursement to the MOD these costs. We did, together with Hong Kong Department, consider whether some provision should be made in the PESC forecasts of expenditure for 1972-73 to 1976-77 which are now being prepared. But until the issue is settled one way or the other we should prefer not to do so as it might be thought tantamount to admitting FCO liability.

2.

As I indicated in my minute of 30 November 1971, Finance Department's concern in the case is to avoid FCO Votes being saddled with a charge which we could well find ourselves able to meet only by making cuts in other FCO expenditure. We thus would certainly see no objection to your making a further attempt to persuade the MOD to accept this charge.

3.

As for the draft letter itself might I urge that in paragraph 2 all beyond "in which case" should be omitted. It is, in fact, the MOD who would have to agree not to pursue the two other claims against Hong Kong and I am afraid that to give them an insight into, the way our minds had been working on this would simply provoke them to a rigid, doctrinal reaction.

4.

I

Might I also suggest that the second sentence of paragraph 7 should be rephrased to read " suppose the only alternative would be for the FCO to do

so.

5.

I think, incidentally, that '1970' in the first line of paragraph 2 should perhaps be'1971'. The last letter on the subject was, in fact, from the MOD on 17 August 1971.

6.

I should be grateful if I could have a copy of your letter and of any MOD reply fop-our records.

apture

S Stephenson Finance Department

Signature bot

147

11 February 1972

Туре Type for

CONFIDENTIAL

شا

،އ

amended

DD 896639 140609 500M 7/71 GM 3643/2

Page 90Page 91