Mr Sigre 115
HKC OG 2 / 1
SECRET
'ED IN REGISTRY
€ 1MAY 1990
agu Rn sc/14
Pa
ROYAL
[HONG KONG: ROYAL NAVAL PRESENCE AFLOAT :
1.
DEFENCE COSTS]
The basic problem is that the MOD have made no provision, in manpower or financial terms, for keeping on the Peacock Patrol Craft in Hong Kong after 1991/92. They are therefore looking to swing as much of the cost as they can onto Hong Kong.
2.
In support of their position, the MOD have sought to argue that the case for keeping on the patrol vessels is political rather than military: so the MOD should not pay. This is nonsense. In the case of Hong Kong, no useful distinction can be made between the political and military arguments for retaining any part of the Garrison.
3.
То
Previous Defence Cost Agreements (the negotiations for which have always been acrimonious) ran for five years. avoid the possibility of a further damaging negotiation in the mid-1990s, it was agreed that the 1988 DCA should run for the entire period up to the transfer of sovereignty in 1997. During this period there are likely to be a number of adjustments to the withdrawal plans for the Garrison. The Governor is rightly concerned that he should not have to have a fresh row over the apportionment of costs every time such an adjustment takes place.
4.
Against this background, I think it would be helpful if Mr Maude would speak to Mr Hamilton in the way Sir D Wilson proposes. As the Department suggests, we would need to warn MOD officials to brief their Minister in advance. Otherwise, Mr Hamilton might well be unsighted.
27 April 1990
Cc: Mr Gillmore
Miss Marsden, HKD
M14AAG
SECRET
R JT McLaren
21
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.