TNAG-1072-FCO40-1322-Policy-of-the-Government-of-Hong-Kong-on-education-1981 — Page 188

XCC(81) 28

(iv)

(v)

(vi)

CONFIDENTIAL

機密

Page

to have these routes deleted from the scheme. Bearing in mind that the MTRC and the ferry companies will be operating the scheme on their cross-harbour services, there may be a slackening in demand for cross-harbour bus services. If there is spare capacity on the buses, then the companies' arguments do not hold. However, it is recommended that these should be excluded from the scheme at least until the first review ;

CMB has over recent years adopted a practice of supple - menting the basic network of urban and suburban routes with express services. These services charge a premium fare and generally do not offer concessionary fares to children or students under the existing scheme. CMB points out that students are not always well behaved as passengers. This practice reflects the Company's policy to offer a slightly better service to those who are prepared to pay a modest premium, by choice, and accordingly CMB is strongly opposed to the introduction of concessionary fares on the se routes. CMB adds that, as for Cross Harbour buses, the introduction of a concessionary fare for children on the se services would result in a loss of revenue to the Company which would have to be made up by the travelling public. (There is some sympathy for the Company's views, which reflect the approach adopted to deluxe HYF services where an alternative ordinary class service is available. It is recommended that express routes be excluded from the scheme provided that alternative ordinary routes are available);

One operator (CMB), while noting that the scheme may have social advantages, has pointed out that the difficulties of administering the scheme (including additional duties for drivers checking passes, the need for surveys of routes within the scheme at different times to establish travelling patterns and possible adverse effects on revenue and expendi- ture) outweigh any advantages that may accrue to the bus service as a whole. The Company has proposed that any subsidies should therefore be distributed through educational establishments. (There is some sympathy with CMB, but it has been explained to them that the method of subsidy the company has proposed has been thoroughly explored and has been considered and rejected);

SF and HYF have indicated that the introduction of the scheme will involve them in some capital and additional annually recurrent expenditure and have requested the Government to cover such costs. (It is considered that it would not be unreasonable for the companies to meet some of the costs of establishing and operating the scheme);

(vii) all operators (with the exception of the KCR, which is a Government

department) are concerned about the amount of payment that the Government may offer. In discussion with the operators, it has become evident that there is no way to measure accurately the

CONFIDENTIAL

機密

1