NEW EVENING POST (28/3/80)
The CAA's rejection of CPA's application is a major
case of discrimination that HK people cannot tolerate.
British Airways has been holding the monopoly on the HK-London route for 30 years. Now, another carrier is added to CPA cannot ever the route, and yet, it is again a British one. obtain a licence for three flights a week, in addition to the four flights granted to British Caledonien, This is, indeed, a very unfair arrangement.
:
Even though all the additional flights are granted to CPA, it is still not against the principle of reciprocity in trade. What CPA is demanding is only three flights a week, representing less than 25 per cent of the total service. This percentage is already to His disadvantage. But Britain still does not want to give HK the least share. This is too intolerable, opfession.
We
CPA is a reputable airline in HK. EK people have more trust in it than other airlines they are not familiar with. are not opposed to British Caledonien, but rather the discrimination against CPA. It is very obvious that HK people's views have not be taken into account, nor the interests of HK.
Although CPA also comprises British capital, it is a HK enterprise. It has closer relations with the interests of HK as a whole. The CAA's decision has gone against K's interests and the principle of reciprocity.
In international aviation, Britain not only has held
a monopoly on the HK-London routes for 30 years, but has long be using the landing rights in HK to bargain with other countries, and yielding profit from this.
App 3