TNAG-0544-FCO40-639-Strength-of-garrison-in-Hong-Kong-1975 — Page 104

SECRET UK EYES A

359

PS/Lord Goronwy-Roberts

orong-Rober

HONG KONG:

1.

DEFENCE COSTS AGREEMENT

I understand that Lord Goronwy-Roberts mentioned to Mr Cortazzi this morning that there may be parliamentary criticism of the proposal to release substantial quantities of land in central Hong Kong as part of the proposed defence agreement; and that it might indeed be suggested that Hong Kong will make a substantial financial gain at our expense, notwithstanding the much increased financial contribution she is being asked to make to the costs of the garrison.

2.

Lord Goronwy-Roberts will doubtless appreciate that the details of the land under discussion (and e most aspects of the proposed settlement) are still classified in order to give the Hong Kong Government time to prepare public opinion for the unpalatable news. Indeed, for the same reason, the fact that agreement in principle was reached at all is still highly confidential. What follows is a defence of the lands aspect of the proposed agreement for use in inter-ministerial discussions and with Parliament when the agreement is announced in due course.

3.

-

There is little doubt that the real estate in question if not all of Victoria Barracks in centre of the city and land at present occupied by the RAF at Kai Tak airport - is valuable. however, impossible at present to quantify its actual worth. because:

4.

(a)

(b)

(c)

(a)

most

It is, > This is

the exact extent of the land to be released will only be determined in the light of the report of the working party which is to meet shortly to consider the matter;

the Hong Kong Government have had no time to prepare plans for developing the sites;

there is in consequence no estimate of how much of the land will be assigned to non-commercial use e.g. parks, schools, clinics etc;

there can be no estimate yet of the costs to the Hong Kong Government of re-locating the forces at present at Victoria Barracks and Kai Tak.

quite apart from these uncertainties, it should be remembered that the land in question is not "ours": it belongs in law to the Hong Kong Government and our giving it up merely restores the land to its original owners. Quite apart from legal considerations, it would be quite wrong in Hong Kong's present state of development to insist upon the retention of land on a scale appropriate to an urban situation of twenty or more years ago unless there were some overriding military or security consideration involved. CBF and the Chiefs of Staff have accepted that this is not the case. The Hong Kong Govern- ment can furthermore be relied upon here, as elsewhere, to apply

/rigorous

SECRET UK EYES A

www