CO129-618-7 Port Adminstation Inquiry Committee- report and minutes of meetings 1-1-1945 - 31-12-1946 — Page 26

2

26

(b)

On the first page of the confidential report of 18.).45 submitted by the Port Engineer, Mr. Nicol says that he as ed the late Sir David Owen when pier rents should be revised, and that to the best of recollection the answer was that all requests for revision of pier rents should be resisted until immediately prior to the falling in of the pier leases.

Did Mr. Colan subscribe to that view, or did he feel, as many persons do, that decision on this question calls for the earliest possible attention of Government or the Pr Trust, as the case may be.

Mr, Colman remarked that Mr. Nicol reported Sir David Owen as referring to the revision of pier rents as distinct from the renewal of pier leases. He said there seemed to be some doubt as to what was meant and why the reference was made, which he

But if, as the thought r. Nicol might be asked to elucidate. Chairman thought likely, Mr. Nicol was referring to the possibility of some decision being reached now about the renewal of the leases instead of leaving the question until the expiry of the present leases, Mr. Colman thought that that was a problem which would fall to be dealt with by the Trustees of a Port Trust if one were constituted, and not by the Chairman alone. He thought it was necessary to remember that Sir David Owen's remarks were made in 1941 when the leases had eight years to run: whereas now the leases would expire only some two years from now, and that before coming to a decision it would be necessary to Acide on an over-all plan and know what the private interests themselve: planned to do if given freedom of action.

Mr. Colmar said that personally he shared the view expressed. ly Sir David O en in his report that it would not be necessary to interfere with the private interests which were operating cficiently, and accordingly if such private interests had development plans which they wished to proceed with and those plans were consistent with the general planning for the harbour as a whole, he would consider it right to recommend the renewal of the leases £ffected us soon as possible.

(c) In para.2 c. his memorandum of 7th January, 1946, Mr. Jolly Favours the acquisitio y the Port Trust of all port facilities, reg.rding it as generally agreed that the autonomous body should own the main berthage and warehousing undertakings. He considers that it would be a strange Port Trust which left these features in the hands of strong vested interests. This seemed to go much farther than anything suggested by Sir David Owen.

Mr. Colman pointed out that Mr. Jolly himself in the reports considered by the Committee had quoted examples of Port Trusts which did not operate all the facilities of the port, and he insisted that it was not unusual in a port controlled by a Port Trust for strong p.ivate interests to operate important port facilities, and Mr. Colman mentioned the examples of Liverpool and Glasgow. He thought it was clear that because Sir David Owen was satisfied that these strong pri ate interests had not misused their freedom in Hong Kong, he had thought fit to recommend that there should be no change so far as they were concerned. however, a Port Trust were constituted, and difficulties at present unforeseen arose, it would be possible for the Port Trust to take over quite quickly and operate the facilities now controlled by private interests, without detriment to the users of the Port, although the consequent financial settlement might be a protracted matter.

If,