TNAG-0540-FCO40-635-Strength-of-garrison-in-Hong-Kong-1975 — Page 240

MINISTRY OF DEFENCE

WHITEHALL LONDON SW1A 2HB

TELEPHONE 01-930 7022

CONFIDENT IAL

MO 21/2/20

PRIME MINISTER

STATEMENT ON DEFENCE ESTIMATES 1975

92B

When the Cabinet considered my memorandum C(75)21 on 27th February and confirmed the outcome of the Defence Review, it was agreed that further consideration should be given to the question of how the defence expenditure figures in the Statement should be expressed in the light of the fact that the White Paper on Public Expenditure to 1978-79 (Cmnd 5879) had noted that the figures from 1976-77 onwards were provisional.

2.

>

The

The figures for the cost of the defence programme following the Defence Review as set out in paragraph 75 of Chapter 1 of the draft Statement on Defence Estimates, are for the years 1975-76 to 1978-79 the same as those shown for the Defence Budget in Table 2.1 of the Public Expenditure White Paper. accompanying note in that White Paper, having referred to the fact that the Government's provisional conclusions following the Defence Review were announced in my statement of 3rd December 1974 and to the subsequent international consultations, goes on to say:-

"Once the consultations with the Allies have been completed, and the Government's final decisions have been taken, a detailed account of the outcome of the Defence Review will be given in the 1975 Statement on Defence. The figures for the defence budget in the first line of the table from 1976-77 onwards are provisional pending final Defence Review decisions. after completion of the process of consultation with the Allies."

The provisionality of the Public Expenditure White Paper figures was therefore linked with the outcome of international consultation and it was clearly implied that the Statement on Defence would include firm figures.

If the Statement on Defence were amended to imply that the Defence Budget figures were still provisional, as in the Public Expenditure White Paper, the clear inference would be that,

3.

/ despite

!

·CONFIDENT I AL

ALTIAL

Page 240Page 241

CONFIDENTIAL

2