TNAG-2960-FCO40-4239-Future-of-Hong-Kong-British-Consulate-General-building-incl-1993 — Page 67

CODE 18-77

RESTRICTED

Reference

(iii) Ref 2(c) The funding arrangements with the British

Council certainly needs to be clarified. But RMD and myself do not consider that it affects or needs to be included in our submission to Treasury.

OED have aleady, politely, raised (in March) with the British Council the point about a pro-rata share of the increased cost over the original budget. Their reaction, as predicted by Mr Muir, has been to reduce their space by 320m2 approximately which can usefully be used by Procurement Unit who were omitted from the Consulate-General side in our earlier cost savings exercise: this will prevent the need for Procurement Unit to be housed off site in leased premises. As the design layouts for both the Consulate-General and British Council have recently been changed we have asked Farrell urgently for the new gross floor areas for the separate buildings to establish the cost of each element in order to accurately access what share (if any) the British Council should be asked to contribute. If it is clearly established that the British Council should pay a pro-rata share of the increased cost OED and RMD will need to liaise closely with HKD and CRD before making a more formal approach to the British Council: it should be borne in mind that it is politically more in FCO's interest to have the British Council (including their large ELT operation) co-located with the Consulate-Generatà substantial building on a prestigious site

in order to

show our future confidence in Hong Kong.

It could become exceedingly complex if BC withdrew or reduced considerably their requirements e.g. a redesign and delay to programme as well as a debate over what should be done with the British Council share of the PES bid.

PCAS3.677

RESTRICTED