117
3
After some discussion the balance of opinion was that the Port Trust could properly undertake the development of port works and that the inclusion of roclamation schemes could probably be made on a mutually satisfactory basis; but that no doubt the Government would desire to give detailed consideration to this problem.
5. Draft Port Trust Ordinance.
A draft Port Trust Ordinance dated 8th April, 1946, which had been prepared by Mr. Colman and circulated to members, was then considered by the Meeting. The Chairman mentioned that the Harbour Master who had been provided with a copy of the draft Ordinance had mentioned to him that he believed the definition of the Eastern boundary of the waters of the Colony required amendment, and that the definition of the harbour limits should be framed bearing in mind both the limits of the territorial waters and of the waters of the Colony. Commander Jolly had also queried whether it was intended that the Port Trust should control all Government craft. The Secretary was asked to see that the definitions of the boundaries were checked; and, with regard to the control of Government craft, Mr. Colman explained that it was intended that the Port Trust take over only sufficient oraft for its own purposes, but that it could be arranged for the Trust to service other Government craft if desired, and this would be particularly convenient if the Trust were to take over the Yaumati Slipway as suggested.
The following comments, suggestions and amendments were the outcome of the consideration of the Draft Ordinance by the Meeting.
(a) General.
It was suggested that, in view of the important financial
powers to be given to the Port Trust, consideration should be given to the desirability of giving power of rejection to the Legislative Council rather than to the Governor-in-Council alone. Sub-Section 10(2) with regard to the approval of by-laws was quoted as an example of a case where the Legislative Council should have such power of rejection.
Subject
Section
(b) Constitution 3 (1) (a)
(c) Constitution 3 (1) (a)
Comment or Amendment
Agreed that the number of
Commissioners should not exceed ten.
Delete "and nominated" after
"appointed" in the second line.
Delete "concerned with" and insert
"likely to be affected by". Although at first sight "new (d)"
was considered to provide for the more desirable method of appointment of nominated members, it was realised that the naming of particular bodies might at some future date involve unsuitable nominations and some lack of flexibility. After discussion the balance of opinion was that "old (d)" would in practice probably be more satis- factory, but that the phrasing of this paragraph would no doubt be given further careful considera- tion in Hong Kong.