CO129-625-4 Hong Kong University- rehabilitation (1951) 1-12-1950 - 30-11-1951 — Page 5

ら

20.2.51

12.2.51

5

W Adams

6

Brown

(6)

Genden

r. Hall.

Professor Gordon Brown was unable to secure any steel in the United Kingdom, so flew to Belgium where he secured an option on 750 tons. It is for the University to decide now if it wants to take up the option; I think they will have to or their building programme will come to an end with partially completed buildings.

Attached opposite is a copy of Professor Gordon Brown's letter to me of the 12th, which awaits confirmation by the Vice-Chancellor. It is not in the form of a draft C. D. & W. scheme, but perhaps a draft could be prepared from it pending an official request from the University. He suggests a sum of £100,000 for this pre-ordering.

The letter discloses, what I had not fully realized, that the University has actually started (and in some cases completed) a fair amount of building. This may raise the awkward question of retrospective sanction so far as C. D. & W. funds are concerned. As the C. and M.E.3. provision may not be so restricted (in that authority was given some years ago in general terms) would it be desirable now

(a) to send a reminder to Hong Kong that the scheme

promised in (38) on 54147 is urgently wanted;

(b) to arrange that 1950/51 expenditure is met from the

C and M.E.S. money;

(c) to charge the "pre-ordering" scheme against

C.D. & W. funds;

(d) to get back on to the proposed 50/50 withdrawal

basis as soon as the full detailed scheme for the £500,000 plan has been received and approved.

If there is to be any detailed consideration by the Inter-University Council and Colonial University Grants Advisory Committee of the building and other capital expenditure proposals when these are received, there is no hope of getting the whole £500,000 scheme approved before the end of the current financial year. I will ask the Inter-University Council and Colonial University Grants Advisory Committee if they would authorize their respective Chairmen to act on their behalf to save time, but if they were asked to work at that speed they might feel that they could not seriously question any detailed point in the proposals and that "approval" was therefore a meaningless formality.

Mr Hall.

We spoke. d.h

J.J. Anderson 23/2

wan

22.11.51