XN000022-1982-06-02 — Page 22

WEDNESDAY, JUNE 2, 1982

CROSS-SUBSIDISATION OF FERRY SERVICES

****

A DEGREE OF CROSS-SUBSIDISATION BETWEEN PROF ITABLE AND UNPROF ITABLE FERRY ROUTES MUST BE ACCEPTED, IN THE VIEW OF THE UNOFFICIAL MEMBERS' COMMUNITY SERVICES GROUP, THE LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL WAS TOLD TODAY.

SPEAKING AS CONVENOR OF THE GROUP, WHICH CONSIDERED THE FERRY SERVICES BILL, 1982, THE HON LYDIA DUNN SAID THE GROUP NOTED CERTAIN REPRESENTATIONS MADE BY THE FERRY COMPANIES. THESE INCLUDED THE CONCERN EXPRESSED BY THE STAR FERRY COMPANY AND THE HONG KONG YAUMATI FERRY COMPANY ABOUT THE GOVERNMENT'S POWER OF DIRECTION PROVIDED IN THE BILL.

+ IN PARTICULAR,+ SAID MISS DUNN, THEY ARE CONCERNED THAT THEY MAY BE DIRECTED BY THE GOVERNMENT TO OPERATE ROUTES IN THE PUBLIC INTEREST WHICH MAY NOT BE PROFITABLE.

+GIVEN THAT THEIR SERVICES ARE PUBLIC TRANSPORT SERVICES OPERATED ON A MONOPOLY BASIS, THE GOVERNMENT SHOULD, IN THE INTERESTS OF THE TRAVELLING PUBLIC, EXERT A DEGREE OF CONTROL OVER THE PROVISION OF SUCH SERVICES.+

THE SERVICES HAD TO BE LOOKED AT IN THE CONTEXT OF OVERALL PROFITABILITY, SHE SAID.

THE BILL, WHICH WAS PASSED WITH AMENDMENTS INTO LAW AT THE MEETING, REPLACES THE THREE EXISTING FERRY SERVICES ORDINANCES AND COVERS ALL ASPECTS OF FRANCHISED AND LICENSED FERRY SERVICES.

REFERRING TO CONCERN ABOUT THE GOVERNMENT'S POWER TO DIRECT THE TYPE OF VESSELS TO BE USED, SHE NOTED THAT THE GOVERNMENT HAD SAID THIS WAS NECESSARY FOR REASONS OF SAFETY AND TO ENSURE THAT DEMAND IS MET, AND THAT SUCH POWER DEALT ONLY WITH THE COMPANIES' EXISTING FLEETS.

MISS DUNN NOTED ALSO THAT THE PROVISIONS OF THE BILL ARE SIMILAR TO THOSE IN OTHER ORDINANCES GOVERNING PUBLIC UTILITIES.

+AT THE END OF THE DAY, THE BASIC PHILOSOPHY OF GIVING PRIVATE ENTERPRISE THE FREEDOM TO OPERATE EFFICIENTLY AND PROFITABLY MUST PREVAIL AND I AM SURE THAT IT IS NOT THE GOVERNMENT'S INTENTION TO TAMPER WITH THAT FREEDOM, SHE SAID.

REFERRING TO PART VI OF THE BILL EMPOWERING THE COMMISSIONER FOR TRANSPORT TO GRANT FERRY LICENCES TO ENABLE NON-FRANCHISED OPERATORS TO RUN FERRY SERVICES BETWEEN SPECIFIED POINTS, SHE NOTED THAT THERE WERE NO PROVISIONS FOR COMPETITIVE TENDERING AND NO APPEAL PROCEDURES FOR AGGRIEVED APPLICANTS.

THE GROUP CONSIDERED THIS MAY PROVIDE POSSIBLE OPPORTUNITY FOR CORRUPTION AND FELT THAT TENDERING AND APPEAL PROVISIONS SHOULD BE INCLUDED. +WE ARE PLEASED THAT THE SECRETARY FOR TRANSPORT HAS AGREED TO DO SO.+ SHE SAID.