§ 19. Mr. P. Noel-Bakerasked the Secretary of State for the Colonies what reports he has received from the Government of Hong Kong concerning the dispatch from Formosa to Hong Kong of large numbers of Kuo Min-Tang agents and supplies of explosives and napalm; how many of these agents have recently been detected and detained by the Hong Kong police; and what quantities of explosive and napalm the Hong Kong police have discovered.
§ Mr. FisherThe Governor of Hong Kong has reported the detention this year of 21 Kuo Min-Tang agents and the seizure of 147 lb. of explosives and 7½ lb. of napalm.
§ Mr. Noel-BakerIs it not a fact that all the activities of the Kuo Min-Tang are in fact financed by the United States Government and maintained by the Central Intelligence Agency? Will the Under-Secretary ask the Foreign Secretary to insist with the United States Government that this illegal and intolerable use of Hong Kong shall cease?
§ Mr. FisherNo, I think it quite untrue that this is financed by or done with the knowledge or complicity of the United States Government. At any rate it is absolute news to me if it is so and I have no information of that kind at all. We deplore these activities and, of course, we 1073 have made representations through such channels as are available to us to Formosa.
§ Mr. Noel-BakerIs it not a matter of common knowledge that Marshal Chiang Kai-shek and his Government are financed by the United States Government and that their troops are trained by United States officers? Are we not entitled to ask that an ally shall insist that this illegal use of British-ruled territory shall come to an end?
§ Mr. FisherWhatever arrangements there may be about the finances of Formosa, this does not relate directly to the employment of these agents who, if they have government authority, must have only Formosan Government authority, not United States Government authority.
§ Mr. S. SilvermanReverting to the former answer to my right hon. Friend, did I understand the Under-Secretary to say, in the first place, that what my right hon. Friend said was untrue and, in the later part of his answer, that he had no knowledge of it? Are we to infer from that answer that anything of which he has no knowledge is quite untrue? [HON. MEMBERS: "Answer."]