that Stage IV presently constituted d
only in the Public works Programme, and that it would therefore be necessary to get definite items in Category B before applying for upgrading to Category ..
2.1.7.2 The Chairman then recalled that he had, at the last meeting of the Board, placed on record his belief that it was essential that there should be a careful re-examination of the amount of capacity and expertise which the Public Works Department could make available for Departmental projects, and the priorities accorded to such projects, if progress on essential airport development were not to be subject to serious delays. He had since made representations to this effect, but the Deputy Colonial Secretary had stated in reply that he was satisfied that, within the overall system of relative priorities for all Government public works, which involve availability not only of Public Works staff, but also of funds, that there was no reason to consider that the Department's projects are not being accorded appropriate priority.
-
2.1.7.3 The Chairman said that he took this reply to mean that even if the degree of priority accorded Departmental projects was not sufficient to ensure timely implementation and it was becoming increasingly apparent that it was not it was nevertheless all that could be afforded at the present time. Mr. Lupton disputed this interpretation, and said that even if Stage III development had been advanced by a year, difficulties similar to those now being experienced would still have been caused by construction works, although admittedly perhaps not to the same degree.
2.1.7.4 In reply to a query by Hr. Browne, Mr. Keep explained that there were some ten items of the Stage IV development programme, totalling an estimated expenditure of approximately $30M, for which Category A was urgently required; even if it were forthcoming immediately, the projects could not be completed before mid-1973. After further discussion, it was proposed by Mr. Horries that the Board should record that it had noted the complaints in executive Council occasioned by delayed implementation of Stage III development, endorsed the points made by the Chairman in his reply to these criticisms, relating to the inevitability of future congestion if the need for continuing development is not accepted, and urged most strongly that these factors should be taken into account when consideration was being given to the relative priority to be awarded to Stage IV Terminal Building development. This was agreed.