12
PART II THE STAR FERRY FARE ISSUE
53. On November 11th, prominence was given to a statement by the Hon. Y. K. KAN, Chairman of the Advisory Committee on Public Transport, that it was unlikely an early decision could be reached on the application and giving an explanation of the arbitration procedure to which resort would be made in the event of a deadlock. Certain papers criticized reference to arbitration apparent- ly without being aware that this was the law and not within Mr. KAN's powers to decide. It was also reported that Mrs. ELLIOTT, an elected member of the Urban Council, had launched a signature collecting campaign for a petition to H.E. The Governor to oppose fare increases in public transport services. Together with the report was a form which she asked residents to sign and send to her for submission to the Governor. The form simply said, 'I agree to the contents of the petition opposing increase in fares of public transport'. From evidence given to us it seems doubtful whether many who signed this or other forms knew what was in the petition and it is to be noted that this form refers to public transport generally and not simply to Star Ferry fares.
54. On 17th November, it was reported that more than 3,000 residents had signed Mrs. ELLIOTT's petition and it was announced that the campaign had been extended for another week. Meanwhile a number of petitions opposing the pro- posed fare increase had been sent in by certain civic bodies. On 22nd November it was reported that the Chinese Manufacturers' Association had issued copies of the petition to its member factories to be signed and attached to Mrs. ELLIOTT'S petition.
55. On 23rd November Mrs. ELLIOTT presented a petition at Government House stated to bear 23,000 signatures together with a covering letter which pointed to the degree of public opposition to public transport fare increases as evidenced by the individual signatures, of which she said she had been promised a further 100,000, and by the views of civic bodies and trade associations which had already expressed their opposition. This was widely reported in the press and her action supported. A further attempt by the Star Ferry Company's Chair- man on 25th November to defend the increases and correct apparent misappre- hensions was unsuccessful and received further criticism. A report, on the same day, of the setting up of the Transport Advisory Committee with Mr. KAN as Chairman and including Mrs. ELLIOTT was generally welcomed but some sections of the press questioned the attitude which it would take on the issue of the Star Ferry Company's application in view of the known views of its Chairman and Secretary, but no comment of this kind seems to have been made about Mrs. ELLIOTT's views. When the Star Ferry Company's application was referred by Government to this committee on December 1st, press comment tended to die down, with only occasional mention of various organizations submitting their views to Government and reiterated opposition in editorials to any increase.
M
to
m
of
ha
са
of
fo
d
S
t]
r
S
С
t
t
C