2
17:
d.
His third point is expense, with which I will deal later.
And his fourth point is a Development Board, which a Port Trust would welcome.
Messrs. Mackinnon Mackenzie'■ objections appear to be on the grounds of expense, and they compare India and Colombo.
You cannot compare costs in one port with costs in another and blame the form of administration because one is higher than the other. The cost depends upon the services rendered. To compare Calcutta with Hong Kong is highly ridiculous. At Calcutta ocean-going vessels are brought 120 miles up a dangerous and fast flowing river and taken into systems of wet docks for safety, or else chained with heavy double chains aft and forward, below and above water the range of tide is fifteen feet.
K
It is superficial to compare the charges at another port such as Calcutta with those of Hong Kong. To accept Messrs. Mackinnon Mackenzie's opinion we must consider whether Cancutta would be cheaper and more efficient if the accounts were in the hands of the Bengal Government Finance Department, the Engineering Works were carried out by the Bengal Public Works Department, and the Port and river for 120 miles were maintained and controlled by the Harbour Master.
Colombo has not got a Port Trust. A few years ago the Government considered the question and sent an expert to report. He happens to be a personal friend of mine and he told me quite recently that the Government accountants had such exaggerated ideas as regards the value of the liabilities which they expected the Port Trust to take over that the burden of debt would have been impossible for the traffic to carry. Incidentially, he warned me to be very careful not to allow the Hong Kong Government to sting the new Hong Kong Port Trust. If Colombo had got their Port Trust on reasonable terms the shipping would probably be much better off today.
Messrs. Mackinnon Mackenzie then propose a Committee which appears to be partly an Advisory Committee and partly a Working Committee.
Messrs. Wang Kee are mainly interested in the expense of a Port Trust and therefore prefer a Committee.
The Hong Kong & Yaumati Ferry Company refer to the expense and want more co-ordination from the Government with a declaration of policy.
The Bank Line (China) Ltd. would like to leave things more or less alone on the grounds of expense of a Port Trust.
Gentlemen,
have been surprised that there have been so few objections raised to this Port Trust. I am justified in saying that at the back of them all is the fear of additional expense. There are no grounds for this assumption with one possible exception.
All the evidence I can collect points quite to the contrary, based on Sir David Owen's recommendation. Some of you may argue and some of you have argued that the ferry royalties should not come to the Port. I do not agree.
If you accept that the ferry royalties are not legitimate revenue, then you must accept the position that the Government has subsidized the shipping of Hong Kong for many years and, whether there is a Port Trust or not, that if the shipping community are to pay their fair share to the general revenue there should be an increased charge for pier leases and all shipping charges generally.