SKYLINE Technologies -- News Update ( 28 February 2005 )

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

We have a government that says it wants to preserve Victoria Harbour. Yet, it does not want to sacrifice the road-building that eats away at the harbour.

Our political leaders refuse to treat the Central-Wan Chai harbourfront as one continuous stretch of waterfront when it presents development plans. It will not acknowledge the large tracts of reclaimed land that could be sold in the future. It tries to justify the reclamation solely on the basis of a bypass to ease traffic congestion.

The government refuses to commission studies for no-reclamation or minimal reclamation options for the Central-Wan Chai bypass, even when community groups have presented viable alternatives.

The administration at one point drew up three "options" for the Wan Chai waterfront via the advisory body, the Harbourfront Enhancement Committee (HEC). They had to be withdrawn, not only because the way it was done created the impression the committee was being used as a government stooge. But, further, because questions arose as to whether the brief to consultants had explicitly required them to observe the presumption against reclamation, as set out in law.

In response to that embarrassing episode, Secretary for Housing, Planning and Lands Michael Suen Ming-yeung told the public the bypass was needed because by 2011, it could take up to 45 minutes to travel from Central to Causeway Bay during rush hours - a journey that takes 15 minutes today. Mr Suen said the bypass would shorten the journey to a mere five minutes, and that this was an "urgent" matter for " Asia's world city".

The reclamation and the road will of course cost many billions for the convenience of a five-minute drive during peak hours. Mr Suen claims that there is no other way. As for electronic road pricing (ERP), he claims Hong Kong first needs to build the bypass so that drivers have an alternative. The government refuses to release a full consultancy report on ERP completed several years ago.

There is no reason why Hong Kong cannot use a "no-new road" option as a thinking framework for considering how to improve traffic flow. But, unfortunately, it does not want to put itself into such a thinking mode, because it has become so used to building roads.

Because of this entrenched attitude, other benefits from a "no-new road" option - such as air quality improvements and aesthetic benefits - are never considered. Indeed, the government seeks to weaken the Protection of the Harbour Ordinance and the Court of Final Appeal judgment by saying traffic easing is an "overriding public need".

Mr Suen says the public should decide whether it wants the bypass or face congestion - as if they were the only options. Many will be taken in by this simplistic positioning by the government. People seeking to demand alternatives will be painted as unreasonable and impractical. The government is even blocking the Society for Protection of the Harbour's submission to the Town Planning Board on alternative traffic and development plans for Central, with implications for Wan Chai.

So, road building continues to be serious business in Hong Kong. In all this, Secretary for Environment, Transport and Works Sarah Liao Sau-tung is nowhere to be seen. The charge to reclaim the harbour and build roads is being led by Mr Suen, even though transport and public works come under the purview of Ms Liao.

The reason why environment and transport are in the same bureau stems from the recognition that the two are intimately linked. So, why is Ms Liao always silent?

Christine Loh Kung-wai is chairwoman of the Society for Protection of the Harbour and runs the think-tank Civic Exchange.

The high cost of repairing the wall of an old building in Tsim Sha Tsui may have led to an accident in which a policeman was injured by a 1kg lump of falling concrete on Thursday, a building representative said yesterday.

The 26-year-old policeman suffered head injuries after being hit by a chunk of concrete the size of a fist outside Hankow Apartments at 43-49 Hankow Road. He was discharged from Queen Elizabeth Hospital yesterday.

Ng Yiu-mun, the chairman of Hankow Apartments owners' committee, said repairs had been done on the building in 2000, but mainly focused on internal facilities and equipment, including a lift, pipes and electrical wires.

He said the work had cost $3 million and the owners of the 90 residential flats and 25 shops had paid about $25,000 each.

"Although we considered repairing the wall of the building, each of us would have to pay $50,000 to $60,000," said Mr Ng. But he was confident his committee could raise the money to repair the wall after the accident.

Mr Ng said his building was insured for $10 million and could pay for any liability for the accident. But solicitor Daniel Wong Kwok-tung warned that if it was confirmed the concrete had fallen from the building, residents might not have enough insurance.

"Victims of such accidents can seek up to $30 million compensation. As a result of insufficient insurance cover, residents would have to share the remaining compensation," said Mr Wong.

Repairs began yesterday on the building and part of Hankow Road remained sealed off.

The Buildings Department found concrete outside the fifth, sixth and seventh floors could fall and said it would demand the owners' committee repair the wall.

Senior police inspector Kwok Hing-cheung said investigations concluded the concrete lump was not deliberately thrown.

Last night, concrete and sand fell from a building in Chatham Road South, about 500 metres from where the officer was hit, but no one was injured. "A shopkeeper called and said lumps of concrete and sand fell in front of his shop from the building's 5th floor unit," a police spokesman said.

3. Lawmakers back plan for MTR West Island Line
ELAINE WU , SCMP 26 February 2005

The two-decade-old plan to build a West Island train line cleared a major hurdle yesterday when lawmakers backed the project.

The transport panel passed a motion sponsored by the Democratic Party's Lee Wing-tat, urging the government to build an MTR extension from Sheung Wan to Kennedy Town.

This is a turnaround from a motion passed in May, when lawmakers urged the government to shelve plans for the West Island and South Island lines until a review of population growth, tourism and commercial projects was finished.

"Residents in southern and western districts have been waiting a long time for these train lines," Mr Lee said. "I understand the construction of these lines might bring in competition issues [with other transport operators] but I think residents' needs should be the prime consideration."

MTR Corp yesterday presented a revised and more flexible plan for the lines, by dividing the project into three segments, allowing them to be built separately rather than at once as previously planned.

It has picked the West Island Line as its priority, which would extend the Island Line from Sheung Wan to Sai Ying Pun, University and lastly Kennedy Town.

The second priority is to build the South Island Line (East), linking Admiralty to Ocean Park, Wong Chuk Hang, and Lei Tung and South Horizons in Ap Lei Chau.

By creating a direct link from Admiralty to Ocean Park, the MTR Corp has forgone its previous and costlier plan to build a Wan Chai and Happy Valley station on the line. But a company spokeswoman said the operator would be open to including those stations if the government asked it to do so.

Happy Valley district councillor Stephen Ng Kam-chun criticised the scrapping of the Happy Valley station as neglecting the transport needs of local residents.

Mr Ng, who was surprised by the development, said the company had consulted residents on the station and had "given us false hope". He said traffic was particularly congested on race days and congestion at Aberdeen Tunnel also affected traffic in the district.

A third segment with the lowest priority, South Island Line (West), would connect Wong Chuk Hang to Aberdeen, Wah Fu, Cyberport and University.

The original proposal in March quoted the project cost at $14.6 billion, with less than half coming from government funding.

MTR chief design manager Malcolm Gibson was unable to estimate how much the new plan would cost but said government funding, in cash or property, would still be needed.

"The new lines will not be financially viable as an investment for the MTR," he said. They would bring $36 billion in economic benefits and create 20,000 to 40,000 jobs.

Environment, transport and works deputy secretary Thomas Chow Tat-ming said more time was needed to study the proposal and lawmakers' advice before deciding on a timetable for construction and how much funding to provide.

Another motion was passed calling for tourism and commercial development plans to be prepared in conjunction with the South Island line.

4. Other priorities, low population kept Kennedy Town out of the loop
ANDY CHENG , SCMP 26 February 2005

The quest for an extension of the MTR's Hong Kong Island line from Sheung Wan to Kennedy Town dates back to the 1980s, according to district councillors.

But Kennedy Town's thunder was stolen by the building of the Tung Chung, Airport Express and Tseung Kwan O lines during the 1990s.

Another major obstacle was the insufficient population in Kennedy Town, said Chan Tak-chor, chairman of Central and Western District Council.

Mr Chan, a long-time campaigner for the Kennedy Town extension, said that while a population of 500,000 was required for the extension, western Hong Kong Island had only had about 275,000 residents over the years.

New hope for the Western Island line emerged last year when the MTR Corp proposed merging the Western Island and Southern Island lines into one project.

But on May 28, after transport representatives voiced concerns at a Legislative Council transport panel meeting, Legco passed a motion urging the government to shelve plans for the lines.

The Environment, Transport and Works Bureau was critical of the patronage forecast for the Western Island line.

The MTR Corp forecasts about 315,000 passengers using the Western and Southern Island lines a day by 2016. The population in the southern and western areas is forecast to be 440,000 by then.

Last year's proposed $15 billion development for the western and southern districts could cost the government $7.5 billion in subsidies for the MTR.

Mr Chan said the new proposal offered new hope for residents. "The new approach is the best and most viable, because there is no need for the western and southern island lines to go ahead together," he said.

5. Rule of law must prevail over haste
Cliff Buddle, SCMP 27 February 2005

Justice delayed, it is often said, is justice denied. But this wellknown pearl of legal wisdom does not always apply. The ongoing court battle over the Link Reit shows why it is also important to guard against undue haste.

Since the moment the challenge to the Housing Authority's privatisation plans was launched, the government has breathlessly sought to speed it through the courts in record time.

The latest legal skirmish last week shows that even after a thinly veiled warning from the chief justice in his speech at the opening of the new legal year, these efforts are continuing. It also shed some interesting light on the authority's tactics.

Public housing tenant Lo Siu-lan on Monday was allowed additional time to appeal against a decision to refuse her legal aid. The 67year-old needs to know whether she will be granted public funding before deciding whether to take her challenge to the Court of Final Appeal.

The government opposed her bid for extra time, arguing that there was an urgent need to get this case before the Court of Final Appeal. But Mr Justice Geoffrey Ma, chief judge of the High Court, said Ms Lo should not be deprived of her right to pursue a bid for legal aid in accordance with established procedures.

He was partly swayed by the fact that she has obtained five legal opinions supporting her claim for public funding. They include a favourable opinion from Robin Allen, a prominent Queen's Counsel in London. Mr Justice Ma took the view that her chances of succeeding in the bid for legal aid "cannot be said to be remote". No date has yet been set for the legal aid appeal.

Last week's hearing also revealed details of the government's bid to speed things up by offering to pay Ms Lo's legal fees. This could have dispensed with the need for the time-consuming legal aid proceedings.

But, as the judge noted, the offer was conditional. And this is why Ms Lo rejected it. The authority wanted her to agree - in return for the money - to drop one of her grounds of appeal. It insisted that Ms Lo should not argue that the earlier fast-tracking of the case had resulted in unfairness.

The government is perhaps concerned that if Ms Lo wins on this point, the whole case might have to go back to the Court of Appeal, causing more delay.

But the condition might be seen as an attempt to influence the way in which she argues her case. It would also have deprived the Court of Final Appeal from hearing all the relevant arguments. It is not surprising Ms Lo was unwilling to play ball.

This was the fourth ruling on the pace of the proceedings to go against the government. But in the earlier stages of the case, the courts were more willing to accommodate the authority's demands for speed.

The Court of Appeal drastically cut short the usual timetable in December. One of those judges described the proceedings to have been conducted in "a frenzy". Another complained that the time constraints had not allowed her to reflect maturely on the important issues.

It is understandable that the government wants this inconvenient legal obstacle cleared as soon as possible. The reit listing is important to Hong Kong. It has already had to be postponed because of the legal action and will not get back on track until the case is concluded. The courts have been well aware of this.

But preserving the rule of law is much more important. Ms Lo is not just entitled to have her day in court, she has a right to adequate time to prepare for it.

To borrow a different legal maxim from the chief justice's speech, justice must be done - and be seen to be done.