A
B
SECRET
Mr Stuart
Reference...
HKK 10/7
the spoke. You asked
سلامول كلاما
the Celle estive from
decided
Q
we fo
course her we should
16
recast
Also we
کھیر
compromise might be an
joints of fancyple
easier course
مد
HONG KONG'S DEFENCE CONTRIBUTION
1.
driod
better to Mod heller
PA
The letter to the Governor on the question of
a technical review of Hong Kong's defence contribution has been despatched after clearance with all interested parties.
2. However we are still left with the question of the minutes of the meeting held in your room under your Chairmanship on 29 March 1974. My record of the meeting which you agreed is at Folio 6. The Ministry of Defence record is behind Mr Thorp's letter of 19 April (Folio 10).
3. The main difference lies in the conclusions (paragraph 6 of my record, paragraph 8 of Mir Thorpe's). Neither we nor our Defence Department (Mr Price) like the Ministry of Defence conclusions (a). This was not one of the agreed conclusions of the meeting and we cannot accept it as such. The other conclusions b. c. d. are in effect those in my paragraph 6. Neither can we accept paragraphs 9 and 10 of the Ministry of Defence draft. As Chairman you did not say what you were alleged to have said in paragraph 9 and we have no recollection of what was allegedly said and recorded in paragraph 10. The rest of the record has been re-written but apart from style and the exception of Mr Scholar's remarks (see below) is not a matter of major contention.
4.
I think we are agreed that as the meeting was chaired by yourself the FCO record of the meeting should stand. I attach a draft for your signature taking up this matter with Mr Thorpe.
5. Mr Scholar has asked that the first two sentences of paragraph 4 of the FCO record should be revised using the wording in the draft letter attached. I think we should accept this.
1 May 1974
MA Goodfellow
Hong Kong and Indian Ocean Department
SECRET
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.