CO129-519-2 Estimates for 1930 19-9-1929 - 19-9-1929 — Page 140

244

HONG KONG LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL.

have to face other heavy expenditure-$10,000,000 for waterworks, for instance-I do not suppose we shall be able to find the money neces- sary for reconstruction of the gaol in the immediate future. In the opinion of the Government the project for rebuilding the Government Civil Hospital must have priority. Therefore I do not think we are wrong in assuming that it will be something like ten years before we have a new gaol.

HON. SIR HENRY POLLOCK.—I should, Sir, like to confer with my unofficial colleagues on what you have just said. There is an alter- native proposal made by the Government that we should accept the printing machines and a less vote for the offices.

THE COLONIAL SECRETARY.-In that connexion I should like to say that I am told by the Superintendent of the Gaol that a linotype machine will save the work of about 20 compositors.

The unofficial members having conferred,

HON. SIR HENRY POLLOCK said. As the result of the con- ference we are prepared to accept the vote so far as it relates to the linotype and Rota Print machines. We think the number of officers should be kept as at present. The new posts should not be inserted in the Estimates. Another point is the question whether the material used for printing paper is of too good a quality as used in the gaol and whether some economy can be effected.

H.E. THE GOVERNOR.-I gather you are definitely of opinion that the printery should not be extended.

HON. SIR HENRY POLLOCK.-We shall be against the printing shop.

THE COLONIAL SECRETARY.-Are you against even the modified printery scheme?

HON. SIR HENRY POLLOCK.-We are against any change whatever.

THE COLONIAL SECRETARY.--It was passed last year.

HON. SIR HENRY POLLOCK.-We are against any enlargement.

H.E. THE GOVERNOR.—I would suggest that no change be made in the Estimates, as printed, but, the Government give an undertaking to incur no expenditure for increasing the printery without prior reference to the Legislative Council. I understand the view of the unofficial members to be that the large scheme should not be undertaken. Apparently the unofficial members are not altogether clear in their minds whether the original smaller scheme, involving an expenditure of $40,000, should stand. That point we will go into later on and the question of staff can also be settled then.

162

Page 140Page 141