FO371-27622 — Page 242

Page 242

Page 242

10

Mr. DRUMMOND:

I rather got the impression that the meeting which Mr. Forrest referred to between His Excellency and the Colonial Secretary varied to some extent the decision of the Executive Council. There were to be no monopolies but this variation permitted a certain degree of monopolistic preference.

Mr. SMITH:

A certain degree of advantage in the way of premises and advertisements and so on-

or more than that?

CHAIRMAN:

What actually happened was that, by the agreement with Mr. Kobza, he is put in such a position that the other agents can only come to the Immigration Office through him, so that to that extent, as the sole channel through which they can reach the Immigration Office, he is given a preference. I take it that that detail was never discussed?

Mr. SMITH :

I think I can say, certainly, that that was never contemplated. I might add that this agreement which Mr. Kobza signed was only seen by me at a very late stage. He brought it up one evening-I was still in the office between 6.30 and 7—and he came in and showed me this agreement which was signed.

CHAIRMAN:

After it had been executed?

Mr. SMITH:

26.

Long after, I think. In fact, it was fairly recently. I was surprised to see it. It

came as a complete surprise to me.

77

The agreement having been executed and a banking account having been opened by Mr. Kobza, the one provision of the agreement which imparted some measure of financial control on the operations of the agent was by parol agreement abrogated. No auditors were appointed, no accountant was available to countersign cheques, and they were in fact countersigned by Mr. Kobza's secretary, a lady in his pay and a very intimate friend of Mr. Forrest. We would add that before Mr. Kobza was appointed general agent no tenders were called for, though that was clearly contemplated by Executive Council, the terms of the proposed agreement were not submitted to the Crown Solicitor, Government's financial advisers were not apprised of the step contemplated and no security was taken from Mr. Kobza.

27. Mr. Forrest has consistently argued that the General Agent is agent not for the Immigration Officer but for the public who deal with him, and that therefore he handles no public moneys, Government supervision of his accounts is unnecessary, and he should not be called upon to give security for the due performance of his duties. Suffice it to say that in the course of the examination of Mr. Kobza it transpired that Mr. Forrest had authorized him to issue temporary permits without reference to Mr. Forrest. This,' we would point out, is a clear unauthorized delegation of the duties of the Immigration Officer, involves the issue and recognition of a form of permit for which the Ordinance makes no statutory provision and is open to every possible financial objection in that the permit forms are unnumbered, are not audit forms, and have never been submitted to Government's financial officers for approval or examination.

28. Of the whole matter of the appointment of Mr. Kobza as general agent we take a very grave view adverse to Mr. Forrest. We cannot resist the conclusion that, having advocated the grant of a monopoly "with the enthusiasm of a convert", Mr. Forrest, despite the adverse decision of the Governor in Council, determined to persist in the appointment of Mr. Kobza as agent in a preferential position to other agents. The provision in the agreement for its termination by three months' notice is one which might well give rise to misgivings in Mr. Forrest's heart, for Government on learning of the agreement might order him to terminate it. The supplemental agreement was the remedy for any such unfortunate state of affairs. We can draw no other conclusion from Mr. Forrest's failure to take any advice, administrative, legal or financial, before executing such an agreement, from his failure to report its existence and from the later execution of the supplemental agreement. For the delegation of the power to grant

2

Page 242

Page 242

Page 242