TNAG-0003-FCO40-39-Commission-of-Enquiry-into-the-Kowloon-disturbances-addition-1968 — Page 129

NT

PART VI CONCLUSIONS

109

398. It is ironic and unfortunate that Government should ultimately have been accused of ignoring and flouting public opinion on the ferry fare issue when it was at pains to refer the matter to a committee composed of an unofficial majority; but, in the two months between the receipt of the application and the reference to the Transport Advisory Committee, there was opportunity for rumour, suspicion and opposition to grow, and, at popular level, the tide continued to flow against the Company, in the ensuing months.

399. In referring the problem to the Committee, Government, no doubt, felt that the advice of such a body would be most valuable in assisting it to reach a decision and in satisfying the public as to the propriety of that decision; but, once the issue was referred, Government felt, as their counsel has told us, that it was not proper for it to seek to propound before the public the arguments for or against the Company's case. Whilst this may not be a complete answer to the point that more might have been done to keep the issue in perspective and to counteract the impression that the application would lead to inflation, it is easy to see how adjurations to this effect might have been confused with pleading the Company's case. As for the Company, it may well have felt that its primary task was not so much to persuade the public, as represented by the man in the street, as to persuade, in the first instance, the Transport Advisory Committee and then ave the Government, to whom its application had been made. The Company did, in

to

can

hey

ort

fact, put forward to the public at any rate some of the arguments supporting its ses request but these received little public notice. As a subject for publicity they had can little of the popular appeal attaching to the opposition. Publicity in the press was, on the whole, reduced in scale whilst the application was under consideration by the Committee, but unfavourable editorials did appear on occasion, and the cam- the paign in support of the opposing petition continued.

out

ent

nse

400. The Committee also made some efforts to bring the issues involved to the attention of the public by occasional press conferences, by publishing monthly reports of their activities and, eventually, by offering free copies of the report to the public. But at this stage there were two, virtually separate, exercises proceeding. the The man in the street was being urged to manifest hostility to any transport price to increases, irrespective of the terms of the franchise, whilst the Committee was considering the question whether the terms of the franchise justified an increase.

ces

ced

401. We do not conceive it to be any part of our task to evaluate the merits or demerits of the Transport Advisory Committee's Report as such. Suffice it to say that a committee with a membership so widely based, with knowledge, me experience, and integrity such as theirs, would be unlikely to reach, by a majority ted of 14 to one, an opinion that was unfair or unjust, or one that did not provide an to appropriate answer to the questions posed by its terms of reference. But precisely what the majority had to say about their conclusions and why these were reached did not, apparently, percolate very far. Despite the offer of free copies of the

at

ar.