20
HONG KONG LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL-14 March 1984
With the reduced permit fee, I believe the Company would make a modest profit for the year, and I must say that it is quite wrong in principle to safeg
i the profitability of a private enterprise at the expense of the public purse, particularly at a time when Government is borrowing in an attempt to make ends meets.
However, in view of the fact that discussions are in progress with the Company, as advised by the Secretary for Transport, to established a new formula which would avoid future ad hoc reduction of the annual permit fee, I am prepared to support the proposed amendment with the understanding that this is the sixth and the last time for an ad hoc reduction.
Sir, with these remarks, I support the motion before Council.
Secretary for Transport:-May I, Sir, comment briefly upon what Mr. CHEN has said. The permit fee for the Peak Tramway was orginally designed as a form of royalty. Royalty payments have, over the years, been discontinued in respect of other public transport companies, so that the total level proposed in this case for the Tramway is by no means out of line. I hope that this will re-assure Mr. CHEN. As he noted discussions with the Company are underway which will establish a new formula, and at the same time, we hope, result in modernizing the Tramway.
Question put and agreed to.
Bill read the second time.
Bill committed to a committee of the whole Council pursuant to Standing Order 43(1).
LABOUR TRIBUNAL (AMENDMENT) BILL 1984
Resumption of debate on second reading (15 February 1984)
Question proposed.
Question put and agreed to.
Bill read the second time.
Bill committed to a committee of the whole Council pursuant to Standing Order 43(1).