App. II
AM.III
No member of the public responded to this invitation.
Press comment was limited to a leading article in the China
Mail on the 19th September, 1946, and an artiole in the Far Eastern
Economic Review of the 23rd October, 1946.
The former expressed the view that better arrangements than
the "haphazard methods" which existed in the past were essential if
Hong Kong was to develop to its fullest potentialities; the latter
expressed the opinion that a Port Authority or Trust as recommended
by Sir David appeared to be too heavy and that the development of a
separate staff with its consequential additional expense might,
especially with regard to the possible future establishment of a
Municipal Council, lead to duplication of services. The writer
considered that there was room for tightening up of co-ordination,
responsibility and initiative under a Harbour Master without
jeopardizing the advantages of private enterprise, cheapness and
efficiency.
(4) The Committee also decided to send individual invitations
accompanied by copies of the Owen Report and the Committee's terms
of reference to a number of people chosen either because they were
representative of concerns likely to be affected by changes in port
administration or were persons whom it was believed had opinions
which they might desire the Committee to consider.
A list of the 48 addressees of the individual invitations is
attached as Appendix II.
Twenty-six letters were received submitting representations
for consideration by the Committee. Copies of the representations
received are to be found in Appendix III.
A brief summary of the points of view put forward in these
representations is given in paragraphs 8 and 11.
(5) Mr. Colman was in attendance at meetings of the Committee
while information was being gathered and representations were being
considered and he addressed the Committee on two occasions, firstly
to outline the characteristics and merits of the Port Trust form of
: