MR WADE-BROWN
HONG KONG
ASSISTANCE TO THE POLYTECHNIC
35
Reference
Thank you for letting me see this project paper. Clearly there are a number of problems associated with this project proposal. It does not conform with the Minister's aid policy. It also contravenes the long-standing requirement that equipment financed from technical assistance funds should only be given if it is associated with experts. In view of this you may think it desirable to expand on the reasons leading up to the 1972 offer of £1m and how it fits in with our policies for Hong Kong. It may be useful, too,to append a copy of the statement that Mr Royle made.
2.
Regarding more particular points:-
if a visithes
bean wyse and
the conclusions are
In the passen parkupt квад коловой все
人
▸
CODE 18-77
.i. As you will see from PC(73) minute 15 para 1
copy attached it was understood that the project should be re-submitted after a visit by the Technical Education Adviser or someone from TETOC.
You may, therefore, think it advisable that the paper should demonstrate that this has been done and include the conclusions of the visit. It would be useful if these showed the grounds for choosing the areas that had been selected for assistance and how the amounts were determined.
ii. While our commitment is only for £3m nevertheless, definite items of equipment and quantities of books are now envisaged. It would be useful therefore if the paper commented on the reliability of cost estimates, the rate allowed for inflation and the date at which the estimates were made. (If there is any likelihood of the provision being exceeded you might like to say how savings could be made or overruns are to be financed.)
iii. The paper should perhaps mention who will have the responsibility for installing and maintaining the equipment and comment on their competence to carry out these tasks.
iv.
The Committee would probably find it helpful if the section concerning Financing showed how much you expected to be disbursed in each of the financial years for which you reckon the project will be active. In view of PC(73) minutes 15 perhaps an assurance that expenditure will not be concurrent with expenditure on the other four institutes should be given.
V.
A mention should be made of Department of Trade/Department of Industry, Treasury and our own Finance Department views (particularly in the light of my first paragraph). There of other interested depousers sited abo
веле менитель
3. Cash figures should be in sterling throughout. The exchange rate between the pound and Hong Kong dollars should be mentioned.
4.
I have pencilled in a project paper number in the top left-hand corner of the first page of the paper: on the top right-hand corner I have pencilled in the amount of ODM proposed contribution. I have pencilled in a couple of suggested amendments. The
more important one is in paragraph 1. The Projects Committee do not approve projects: they make recommendations to the Minister.
I omitted to mention that the paper should include an estimate of the total cost of establishing the Polytechnic.
R S White
22 April 1975
Projects Committee Secretariat, ODM
Bhite.