EXTRACT FROM A SPEECH BY THE HON. LO MAN-KAM, C.B.E.
MEMBER OF BOTH THE EXECUTIVE AND LEGISLATIVE COUNCILS AT A MEETING OF THE HONG KONG LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL HELD ON THE 19TH MARCH, 1948.
X
X
X
1
*
*
15 65
英
*
*
*
*
As soon as the Unofficial Members of this Council heard about this matter we made it quite plain to Government, and I now repeat categorically in this Council, that we should not agree to regard as a liability of the Colony War expenditure sanctioned by the Imperial Government in relation to the Colony as a unit of the British Empire. It is intolerable that on account of a liability which we repudiate the Colony remains subject to Treasury control.
ལ་ཇ་
What is Treasury Control and why was it imposed?
**
I understand, Sir, that Treasury Control means that, as long as it exists, this Colony cannot in theory expend a dollar without the Treasury's prior approval. It was imposed on the Colony because, as I understand, the Colony, on the resumption of its Civil Government, had no funds of its own with which to carry on, and had to rely on advances from H.M. Treasury.
I believe the usual occasion for the imposition of Treasury Control is when a Colony, through recklessness or improvidence or maladministration gets hopelessly into debt and has to look for financial aid from the Imperial Exchequer. I can fully appreciate this. After all in the case of insolvency of individuals, the minicipal laws of all civilised states make provision for the control and administration of a bankrupt estate, and impose stringent conditions on his obtaining a discharge from bankruptcy.
But what has all this got to do with Hong Kong? Why had the Colony no funds with which to carry on on the resumption of Civil Government? Surely the answer is that Hong Kong, as a unit of the British Empire, was captured and overrun by a ruthless enemy, that all local Government credit balances were
•
/ confiscated
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.