G.S. 84
RESTRICTED
9
XCR (80)205
Conclusion
26
It is not possible at this stage to exactly quantify the financial implications of declaring the Hong Kong Club building a monument, but they are likely to include the cost of the initial refurbishment of the premises and subsequent annual maintanance, estimated as $35 M. and $2 M. respectively and a liability to pay compensation for loss of redevelopment potential, which could amount to as much as $430 M.
27
While the arguments put forward in paragraph 6 above and the annexed petition for preservation of the Club building are not disputed, it is not felt that they are sufficiently in the public interest to justify public expenditure of this order. It is therefore recommended that the Hong Kong Club building should not be declared a monument.
Public Reaction
28
If, as recommended, Members agree that the Club building should not be declared a monument, it is expected that organisations, such as the Heritage Society and Conservancy Association, and individuals interested in these matters will attack this decision and will not accept the reasons for it, accusing Government of allowing "mere" financial concerns to prevail over "wider" aesthetic considerations.
29
However, it is not thought that the majority of the community will object. Support for preservation of the Club building has been restricted to the English language press, and most opinions expressed in the Chinese press have favoured redevelopment. Many people have little sympathy for the historical value of the building, regarding it (however irrationally) as a symbol of colonialism and the life of a privileged elite. In addition, if publicity given to the decision draws attention to the cost of declaring the building a monument, it is felt that most people will agree that there are more important priorities for Government expenditure. It is also felt that the Chinese news media will be highly critical of the Government if public money is used to pay for the cost of refurbishing a building, whose facilities can only be used by Club members. It is also possible that the shortage of land for development will lead some sectors of the community to support a decision not to preserve the Club building.
30
This assessment is made notwithstanding the claim made in the annexed petition that public opinion favours preservation. While it is undoubtedly true that there is a body of opinion represented by those interested in these matters which favours preservation, it is not felt that the majority of the community will object for the reasons stated above. As regards the street poll conducted by the Youth Environment Action Group in June 1980 on behalf of the Conservancy Association, some 80% of
RESTRICTED