HONG KONG UNIVERSITY
NOTE ON POINTS RAISED BY DR. SLOSS
18
>3
(1) H.M.G.'s free grant of a quarter of a million pounds.
t
The University's plans for rehabilitation and development envisage
९
the investment of this sum in a Hong Kong short-term loan, from which annual
drawings of capital and interest will be made over a period of 15 years; in
t
fact a kind of annuity. This annual sum will be used to make up the difference
between the recurrent costs of development and the other resources available.
Capital costs would be met by grants from C.D. and V. funds; about £220,000
would be required for the University proper, plus £12,000 for a School of
Architecture and £55,000 for a Teaching Hospital.
These proposals were referred to the Inter-University Council,
who viewed them with some disquiet but preferred not to give a final view
until their delegation had visited Hong Kong. This visit is at present
scheduled for the early part of 1950, but I understand that postponement may
be necessary.
We have sought Treasury approval for the inclusion in the 1950-51
C. and M.E.S. Estimates of provision for the whole quarter of a million pounds,
so that, if the University's plan were approved, the money would be available
for investment as proposed. I have heard unofficially from the Treasury,
however, that they are not at all inclined to view the proposed use of the
grant favourably; we await a letter from them.
(ii) Loan of £30,000 made to the University in 1946.
There appears to be no trace in our papers of any discussion of
the terms of this loan, or whether it was to be regarded as a loan or grant,
after the original despatch authorising the Governor to make it (this despatch
is at No. 34 on 54147/3/46). That despatch makes it quite plain that the
£30,000 is a loan, interest free; there was also a free grant of £70,000, but
this is quite separate. The letter from the Treasury authorising this loan
says "the terms and conditions of repayment can be left over for consideration
when the University's financial position can be more accurately judged". The
mtter does not seem to have been referred to again; but, as the loan was
rom Hong Kong funds, it may well be that there have been discussions in the
olony between the University and the Government about which we have not been