CONFIDENTIAL
in such circumstances to the end of 1973 and 1974 respectively). If, of course, RTV (HK) had a guarantee that they would get a further licence they could put in their orders for new equipment now and they would be on the air as soon as their new licence was issued. But they really could not be expected to bear continuing losses with no certainty of getting a new licence, or to order equipment on a hypothetical basis. The Hong Kong Government had in fact made it possible, by their handling of the matter, that the people of the Colony would have no alternative channel to TVB from April 1973 to mid 1975.
4. We asked Mr Dennis about his communication to the Colonial Secretary. Had it been taken into account? He said that no answer had been received. In answer to a telephone call to Mr Clinton (Deputy Colonial Secretary), RTV (HK) had been told that because the letter was addressed to "the Hon the Colonial Secretary" instead of to Sir H Norman Walker by name it was difficult for the letter to be taken into consideration except with the advice of the Attorney General since the affair was said already to be on the Executive Council agenda. We found this hard to understand, but were assured that this was the case and that RTV's letter had never been acknowledged in writing.
5. Mr Wilford concluded the meeting by saying that in view of the formal nature of Mr Dennis' representations, we would of course enquire officially of the Hong Kong Government what the situation was. As he was leaving Mr Dennis added that they had heard another rumour that Government was considering extending RTV(HK)'s licence for a year or two. RTV (HK) had not been consulted about this, but from what he said to us, and from the figures he had given us, we would see that this was a wholly unattractive proposition, likely to cost them about £1.5 million with no guarantee of a new licence.
3
CONFIDENTIAL
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.