News Stories:

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

1. Suen rejects harbour ideas

2. A dream city for bureaucrats

3. Prime Mid-Levels site for sale

4. Cartoon

1. Suen rejects harbour ideas
Staff reporter, The Standard 1 December 2003

Secretary for Housing, Planning and Lands Michael Suen says proposals from the Society for the Protection of the Harbour to reduce reclamation are technically impractical.

Suen made the claim yesterday at a public forum in Victoria Park on harbour protection.

People at the forum sang songs urging the government to stop reclamation. The society last week submitted two options to the government to reduce reclamation. The first involved shelving the bypass to reduce the reclamation by 90 per cent, allowing sufficient room for a promenade and train tunnels, while the second option - with a bypass - would take 15.1 hectares compared with the government's planned 25.4 hectares.

The society's plans were prepared following research by traffic experts Geoffrey Rogers and John Patient, planner Ian Brownlee and works engineer Robert Chu, society chairman Christine Loh said. But Suen said the proposals would be difficult to implement although he claimed the government was determined to protect the harbour.

``We don't have any further plans to reclaim the harbour,'' he said.

He said the government wanted a promenade built along the harbour for leisure and enjoyment. He urged people to make their views known to the government on the recently released stage three consultation document - Hong Kong 2030: Planning Vision and Strategy - which stated the government would protect the harbour and return it to the public. ``I hope that we can walk from Wan Chai to Chai Wan and from Tsim Sha Tsui to Cha Kwo Ling,'' he said.

The Court of Final Appeal will rule on Wan Chai Development Phase Two on December 9. High Court Judge Madam Justice Carlye Chu halted the project in July, and the government decided to appeal to the Court of Final Appeal.

2. A dream city for bureaucrats
PHILIP BOWRING, SCMP 1 December 2003

The major theme of this column was to have been the government's just-published "Hong Kong 2030" planning consultation document. However, I have been sidetracked down one of those dingy alleys where it is difficult to separate this administration's tendencies towards incompetence, secrecy and cronyism.

In search of the planning document, I took myself to the Government Publications bookshop in the Queensway. To my surprise, the bookshop had vanished and there was no indication of its new location.

Inquiries finally directed to me to the Murray Building. There, I had to fill in forms and receive an entry pass before proceeding to the fourth floor where I found not a bookshop but a very ordinary government office where there was nothing on display and only a grubby, out-of-date catalogue of publications to guide one to access to official information published and printed at taxpayers' expense.

The Hong Kong 2030 document was not available at all. Why? "Because it's not on sale". It's free! Forget the fact that the government bookshop has long been a major distribution point for government information, free or not. The polite and apologetic staff at the so-called "bookshop" suggested I go either to a district office or take to the internet. I was handed a card urging me to "visit Government Bookstore http://bookstore.esdlife.com".

When I called up the site, instead of a government bookstore serving the public, I found myself at a commercial site run by the chief executive's favourite firm, Hutchison Whampoa. Even more outrageous, it proved impossible to access any catalogue of available publications without first registering not only my name but also a credit card.

Even normal online commercial bookshops such as Amazon do not require such information until one proceeds to buy a book. But here, a crony company has been given a special, quasi-monopolistic position to deal in government publications. Prior registration can only have dubious commercial motives.

I declined the invitation from Hutchison.

The situation cries out for investigation by the Auditor General - hopefully someone with teeth, not just another member of the bureaucratic mafia. At the very least, legislators should demand publication of the terms of the government's deal with Hutchison.

It is true that much information is now available for free on the internet - including the Hong Kong 2030 paper. But many people need hard copies of documents. And many government publications, including maps, departmental reports, marine tables and charts are not suitable for internet delivery. The fundamental point is that if government information is published in physical form, it should be available through open government channels, preferably at a centralised location. As for the document itself, it can hardly be regarded as likely to stimulate much debate. It is largely couched in platitudes and "quality of life" generalities. On the plus side, it acknowledges that Victoria Harbour reclamation should cease. It also says that, due to Sars, it may be time for a reduction in plot ratios to reduce development densities.

However, the report is more interesting for what it lacks than what it contains. First, its population projections are greater than those previously put out by the government. That has big planning implications, so it needs better explanation.

The paper fails to note that Hong Kong has a wide measure of control over its population size for the simple reason that mainland immigration will account for most of any increase. There is scant use in discussing how much housing will be needed without first discussing how many people Hong Kong wants to admit.

It also makes no effort to offer choices in key areas such as transport and pollution, both vital to the quality of life with which the paper purports to be most concerned. Transport issues are discussed entirely in terms of the provision of more roads and railways. There is not a mention of the possibility of congestion charges, electronic pricing, cycle paths, zones barred to private cars, and the other measures introduced in advanced cities to address pollution, efficiency and quality-of-life issues. Are the planners of "Asia's world city" stuck in a 1960s time warp? Discussion of such options must be part of any serious planning process.

The document's authors are certainly guilty of failing to acknowledge the fact that much of Hong Kong's current blight is due either to failure to implement established policies, or to change policy in the face of long-changed circumstances. In the first category is the persistent failure to prosecute effectively those who despoil the "agricultural" land of the New Territories with container parks, car breakage yards and so forth. If the Independent Commission Against Corruption was a serious organisation, it would stop fussing about policemen who go to massage parlours, and go after those profiting from the blatantly illegal use of land.

In the second category is change of zoning to rehabilitate old industrial areas whose knitting and plastic factories long ago moved across the border. No prizes for guessing why that has not happened.

Indeed, discussing long-term land needs and uses is pointless if land policy is actually to be determined by the short-term needs either of politics, the developers or the budget. Before 1997, land policy was a function of the Joint Declaration. Since then, it has been largely a function of the influence of leading developers over the administration.

Hopefully, a public now aroused to look after its own interests rather than entrust them to the world's highest-paid civil servants will take the Hong Kong 2030 document as a starting point for action on several fronts, rather than as a blueprint for the administration to do as it pleases in the name of "quality of life" sloganeering.

Philip Bowring is a Hong Kong-based journalist and commentator.

3. Prime Mid-Levels site for sale
PEGGY SITO, SCMP 1 December 2003

The tender for the residential property located at the Conduit Road - Kotewall Road junction will close on February 18.

A Mid-Levels site has gone on sale in a market climate favourable for high-end residential properties.

Built in 1961 and located at the Conduit Road-Kotewall Road junction, the three-storey residential property will be sold with vacant possession by tender, according to property advisers DTZ Debenham Tie Leung, which is handling the auction. The tender closes at noon on February 18.

The property sat on a 25,090- square-foot site where a 10-storey building could be constructed on top of a multi-level carport, the property advisers said.

At an auction in August, casino magnate Stanley Ho Hung-sun outbid developers Henderson Land Development, Asia Standard International Group and K Wah International to clinch a 6,372 sq ft site at 16-18 Conduit Road for $99 million.

The price was the equivalent of an average accommodation value of $3,100 per square foot.

"We believe the tender sale of 53 Conduit Road with vacant possession will attract market attention and fetch an even higher price, given its comparatively better location," DTZ investment director Alvin Yip said.

He said No 1 Po Shan Road, a nearby property, was selling at $8,000 per square foot for units with sea views, and $12,000 per square foot for top-floor units.

4. Cartoon
SCMP, 1 December 2003