TNAG-0323-FCO40-359-Legislation-for-merchant-shipping-registered-in-Hong-Kong-1971 — Page 63

ship by a Colonial administration is not inviolable if the ship were to come to a port in the United Kingdom. The Merchant Shipping legislation relating to manning in many Commonwealth countries is based on the Merchant Shipping Act 1894 and refers to British ships, that is to say ships registered in Commonwealth countries independent and dependent. While the UK and some other Commonwealth countries may accept exemp- tions granted by the country of registry it is a matter for their discretion. The UK for example in practice accept valid exemptions on clear authority from countries of registry as follows:-

(a) independent Commonwealth countries

(b) dependent territories who have qualified surveyors and an examination system

approved by us. In fact Hong Kong is the only territory in this category.

To secure firm and automatic acceptance of Hong Kong exemptions throughout the Commonwealth would require detailed consultations with the other marine authorities and would, of course, be a clear pregedent for reciprocal facilities for all. There would be considerable work involved in administering such a system even if it found favour.

QUESTION 3. The Director of Marine, Hong Kong, has the power to exempt from Hong Kong law only. As the local law is likely to require duly certificated officers in British ships, such officers would be entitled to be employed in preference to aliens and unless and until our policy on the nationality requirements is changed we would expect that the employment opportunities of duly certificated officers should be furthered by the marine administration.

QUESTION 4. The answer to this will follow.

QUESTION 5. (a) I am awaiting further advice on this but I would think the short answer is that altering the nationality requirements would at the present time be incompatible with remaining parts of the British register.

(b) If the Hong Kong authorities were to decide to recognise certificates issued by certain maritime nations for the purpose of satisfying their manning requirements this would not affect reciprocal recognition provided Hong Kong did not issue a certificate in place of the certificate already held. This as you probably know is the practice of Liberia, We and other Commonwealth countries would need to be satisfied about the standard of the examination which has to be passed in order to qualify for the certifi- cate and as the assessments of the standard in the case of foreign countries is difficult we do not recognise them at the present time. We should be in the same kind of difficulty if the Hong Kong authorities were to decide that they will only accept certificates of competency of foreign nationals who have passed their examination. Once again anyone issued with a Hong Kong certificate on that basis would present us with a difficulty, this time because of our nationality requirement. This particular problem could presumably be overcome if we were to require both possession of a certificate of competency and proof of nationality but, as you will realise this would create considerable complications in the administration of our manning requirements.

QUESTION 6. (a) Further advige on this will follow.

(b) The question whether there should be delegated to a dependent territory a particular degree of responsibility is a political and constitutional matter which lies very much with your department. There seen to be political disadvantages in Hong Kong being a port of registry of the same status as Liverpool, London or Bristol as for example when ships which have no real connection with the British registry

2