TNAG-0699-FCO40-850-Maintenance-of-Government-Houses-in-Dependent-Territories-1978 — Page 30

.

·traur

lallay

Fin Daph

Duik,

Mr Duff, WIAD

Reference...H. 364/1.

R rawaît

49

ад римока

рии акад

Piel

1/4

1. Re the attached minute. As McLaren rightly observes the problem is not so much finding the money, but the manner in which it is to be used. There is no way you can conceal that British funds are being used to renovate and maintain Government Houses and whatever device you try to use there is always the real risk that someone could get

and hold of it in Legco and use it to embarrass HMG and the Governor, this will happen even if the funding of the work is done at no cost to the territory. The demagogic argument will take the line that if Britain has mocy to spare, it would be better to spend it on helping the poor of the territory rather than improving the Governor's mansion,

It is which by local standards is far better than most accommodation. a difficult argument to counter and believe me te the Governor's Head of the Estimates is always Aunt Sally in Finance debates, and some pretty vile things can be said.

2. 4 (i) (ii) of McLaren's minute will have to feature in the Abbropriatoms Bill. With regard to alternative 4 (iii), is it legal for the FCO to renovate and maintain a building that doesn't belong to it without the owner's permission? Anyway, the device would not conceal the fact that HMG was spending money on the Governor's resi- dence and this would also be grist to the demagogue_s mills.

3.

In Seychelles we got £65,000 for Gover ment House just before i dependence and this was accented without fuss because we said we

arted to mut the House in order for the new Head of State. We don't have such a realy explanatio ni these cases, butoetheless we could explain that GII is part of the territories assets and heritage and will o e day be needed as the Head of State's residence. It should there- fore be maintained and preserved, because if allowed to fall into disrepair, the cost of building a new one would be out of all propor- tion to the territory's revenues and ability to pay, and no aid donor

This sort of argu- is likely to pick up the tab for a new building. ment is sustainable and if put properly would, I think, be acceptable.

4. I strongly recommend that we make no attempt to fudge or condea? what we are doing. We should go to the Governments (through the Gover.ors) and seek their support, along the lines I have outlined above, for Government Houses to be renovated and maintained thereafter by additional grant-in-aid for say 3 years in the first instance. Whatever we do there will be the usual carping in the Legco, but with Government support

I am sure it this should be kept to the minimum. will not work any other way, and by putting the costs in the budget, we are not introducing a concealed subsidy. If any of the local gover.ments will not give us the support we need to go ahead, then the idea should be dropped pro-tem in that territory.

isaḥ,

DK Dale'

30 October 1978

HKA 364/1

RECEIVED IN REGISTRY NO. 51

- 7 NOV 1978

DESK OFFICER

REGISTRY

West Indian and Atextid Debartigemb Teke

肥

No

11

CODE 13.77

Page 30Page 31