CO129-608-7 Future policy- Report on Port Administration by Sir David Owen 24-2-1941 - 24-2-1941 — Page 85

1

J

5

-

(vi) The various other schemes as outlined would no doubt

follow in approved arder. There is nothing original in any of the projects for they have been proposed by various officers of the Port Works Office over a long period. They are all sound propositions if the future trade of the port will justify them that is the question. In any case they can't all be undertaken simultaneously, and if Government will bring itself to lay down a plan of ordered develop- ment, and stick to it, I see no reason why they should not be supervised by the Port Engineers when the plans have been checked and passed by the Consulting Engineers to the Colonial Office who would also advise on contracts.

It is

(vii) Another point to remember is that the Wharf and Godown

Company have a well ordered plan of development which will take some years to complete, and it is quite likely that the warehousing accommodation and facilities so provided for will meet the requirements of the port for many yoars. rarely the five piers belonging to that Company are fully occupied, and so long as Hong Kong remains, in the main, a Transhipment Port they may suffice for some time. Before their piers aru extended over the present Naval property, the railway is transferred to the west side of the Peninsula and the typhoon shelter reclaimed, I think we should look around for some indications of a rapidly inoreasing Transit Traffic to the hinterland.

(viii) The "obvious defect" in the existing system seems to

be that, so far, Government has been incapable of producing and implementing a planned policy of improvement; and it may well be argued that a Trust would prove to be a more competent directing authority,

(3) Railway Control. Southampton, under the administration of the Southern Railway, is perhaps the best example of its class but there are many other instances. Such ports are naturally and obviously worked for the benefit of the system to which they belong, and they

The direction serve as feeders thereto, bringing traffic to the lines. of such a port is, accordingly, dominated by this consideration. At the most, our railway can never be anything but a "Port Belt Line" serving the port area and linked up with the main railways of the interior who may, in the future, be grarted running rights over our lines. Unless Hong Kong ultimately becomes a Transit Port, railway control is no advantage; but I feel that the best interests of the dual services could best be served by their forming a part of a Transport Board or Directorate.

(4) Municipal Control. Municipal control is a distinctive feature of certain continental ports (Antwerp); and it is very extensively the practice in America (Baltimore and Philadelphia), whereas in Great Britain there are only two of notable importance those of Bristol and Preston. Maybe in the future Hong Kong will have some form of Municipal Government, but municipal oontrol of the port does not recommend itself for the qualifications which enable a man to gain a seat in a popular civic assembly are by no means identical with those which render him a capable and efficient member of a port authority. Furthermore, the interests of a municipal council are inclined to be narrow and confined to the benefit of residents within