News Stories:

Click-on these handy "jump links" to quickly access the news item
you're looking for.

1. Stanley Ho to unveil alternative hub plan

2. Government responds to passage of Legco motion on West Kowloon Cultural District

1. Stanley Ho to unveil alternative hub plan
SANDY LI and CHLOE LAI, SCMP 7 January 2005

Property tycoon Stanley Ho Hung-sun will today unveil details of an alternative proposal for the West Kowloon cultural district which he says will reap at least $200 billion profit for the government.

The announcement by the casino mogul came as the Legislative Council passed an amended motion by Democrat James To Kun-sun yesterday that urged the government to scrap the single-developer approach and the giant canopy planned to cover the site.

Chief Secretary Donald Tsang Yam-kuen remain defiant, saying that starting the project all over again would cost the city too much time. He agreed, however, to disclose the three bidders' financial arrangements for their proposals after the winning consortium was chosen. "We will take public interest first, and politics second," Mr Tsang said, also stressing that the government would not allow the winner to make an excessive profit.

He said scrapping the single-developer approach or the canopy would be difficult, as this would mean overturning previous decisions, and force the government to abort the existing plan and the ongoing public consultation. He said the government would happily extend the consultation, due to end in March, if the public wanted.

However, the government said in a statement after the debate last night that it would carefully consider Legco's views.

"At the end of the day, the development of the project hinges on the wishes of the community," the statement read.

Mr Ho, chairman of the Real Estate Developers' Association, said yesterday the government currently stood to reap between $50 billion and $60 billion from the project, as only one consortium would be awarded the deal.

"I am confident of generating $200 billion [for the government] from this project," he said.

"My proposal will only deal with the residential and commercial areas and leave the arts and cultural facilities to the government."

Mr Ho will present his plan during an emergency meeting of the association this afternoon. If approved, a formal proposal will be sent to the government.

2. Government responds to passage of Legco motion on West Kowloon Cultural District
Hong Kong Government, 6 January 2005

In response to the passage of a member's motion on the West Kowloon Cultural District (WKCD) by the Legislative Council (Legco) today (January 6), a Government spokesman said:

"The views of the Legislative Councillors are very important. We attach great importance to them, and will carefully consider them. Even when dealing with issues of controversy, we will, as we always do, put public interest first.

However, as the Government is now conducting a public consultation exercise on the WKCD project, the Administration and the legislature should keep an open mind and allow members of the public to express their views instead of coming to a premature conclusion. We need to understand that scrapping the single-development approach or the canopy means overturning previous decisions, as well as forcing the Government to abort the existing plan and terminate the public consultation that is being conducted under the current development blueprint. This is not a course of action the Government wishes to take.

In terms of the mode of development, we are confident that the public's interests will be sufficiently protected under the single-development option, and we will not allow the selected proponent to make excessive profits. There are a number of ways to stop this from happening: after evaluating the construction costs of the WKCD and operating expenses for 30 years, we could ask the proponent to set up a fund that would operate independently to enhance its support for the operation of arts and cultural facilities; we could ask the proponent to share its profits with the Government so that the Government could use the funds to support the development of the arts and culture or for other social uses; we could also ask the proponent to pay a one-off land premium sum, which would go into the public coffers.

Regarding the proposal by some Legco members to set up a WKCD development authority, we believe that since the WKCD project is already under the statutory control of the Town Planning Board in terms of the planning aspect, the establishment of another statutory body for the same purpose would only create an unnecessary overlap.

As to the organisation and mode of operation of the future arts and cultural facilities in the WKCD, the Government maintains an open mind on the issue. Apart from the Government or statutory bodies operating the facilities, there are other viable options such as establishing a trust fund or a non-profit-making body. Different modes of operation could be adopted for different facilities.

Regarding the financial information of the various development proposals, we have pledged that before a provisional agreement with the selected proponent is signed and after obtaining the agreement of the proponents, all relevant financial information will be released, including construction costs, operating expenses of the arts and cultural facilities, the original financial proposals submitted to the Government in June last year by the three proponents, their subsequent revisions, and the final proposal by the selected proponent, etc. However, as the Government has not yet completed the assessment of the proposals or started negotiations with the proponents over their proposals, premature disclosure of the financial information would not only affect the ongoing assessment work, which needs to be kept confidential to ensure it is fair and impartial, but would also weaken the Government's future negotiating position in securing a package that is in the interests of the public. A responsible Government will not allow this to happen.

The Government feels it is necessary to explain to Legislative Councillors the implications of accepting the various proposals in the motion by illustrating the possible consequences of such a move. This is because we would like the community to be able to make an informed decision. More importantly, we must be accountable to the public, arts and cultural groups, art lovers and the local community, and we must provide them with reasonable explanations for any decisions made.

We are keeping an open mind on the consultation period although we consider that 15 weeks will be sufficient. If, at the end of March, the public expresses the need for more time to give their views, we would be happy to extend the consultation period. It is not necessary for us to make a decision immediately.

The public consultation exercise has only just started, and already a substantial number of the public have submitted their views by completing comment cards and participating in discussion forums. Some people think that the public is being forced merely to choose one of the three proposals. This is a misunderstanding of the consultation exercise. As a matter of fact, we invite members of the public to send their views on the WKCD project to us through various means, including by post, e-mail and fax, apart from filling in the comment cards or taking part in the discussion forums.

We will carefully consider the views of the Legco and the public after the public consultation has been completed. At the end of the day, the development of the WKCD project hinges on the wishes of the community."