4.
MR. COLMAN'S REMARKS WITH REGARD TO OTHER
METHODS OF ADMINISTRATION AS ALTERNATIVES TO A PORT TRUST.
Introduction.
Mr. Colman prefaced his remarks by referring to the replies received in response to the Chairman's invitation to certain persons to express their views to the Committee, and remarked that so far eight had expressed their opinion in favour of setting up a Port Trust, while five opposed this proposal.
Comments on opposition arguments.
He then went on to consider the arguments of the five persons who were opposed to the proposal and remarked that Mr. Barry's statement that the kind of Port Trust proposed by Sir David Owen was a compromise was incorrect, and he did not agree with Mr. Barry's remarks with regard to the inconvenience which might be caused by the decentralization of the work now carried on in the Harbour Office. If any inconvenience did arise it would be quickly adjusted. A Port Trust would welcome the setting up of the Development Board which was suggested.
Of Mr. Marsh's comments, Mr. Colman said that oosts in one port cannot be compared with those in another so as to blame the form of administration because one is higher than the other, as the costs depend upon the services rendered. Thus at Calcutta ocean-going vessels are brought 120 miles up a dangerous and fast-flowing river and taken into systems of wet dooks for safety, or moored with heav double chains fore and aft, below and above water, so that any comparison between the charges in Calcutta and Hong Kong would be very superficial.
Nor was the fact that charges were high in Colombo an argument against the Port Trust form of administration, because Colombo is not administered by a Port Trust. A proposal with regard to the setting up of a Port Trust there had not been proceeded with because of the exaggerated value which the Government Accountants desired to place on the assets to be taken over by the Port Trust. But had a Port Trust been set up on reasonable terms he felt sure that the shipping interests would have benefited,
Financial considerations.
Mr. Colman summed up all the opposition views as being based on the fear that the formation of a Port Trust would result in additional expense to shipping, whereas if Sir David Owen's recommendations were accepted, the evidence pointed to the contrary. Mr. Colman referred to the opinion which had been expressed that the ferry royalties could not legitimately be regarded as Port Trust revenue. If that view were accepted, then it must be recognized that Government had been subsidizing the shipping using Hong Kong for many years and, whether there were a Port Trust or not, if the shipping companies were to pay their fair share to the general revenue an increase in pier rents and shipping charges generally would be inevitable. The only definite grounds for assuming that the formation of a Port Trust would result in additional expense was the proposal that the Chairman be a salaried official.