8 of 194
278
HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL
goods traffic between Hong Kong and Canton increasing in the future because of the competition of sea transport, nor did he think local goods traffic would grow, because of the advantage of using trucks to avoid double loading.
Unless therefore there are over-riding reasons (which are not obvious) why surface lines must continue to the waterfront at Hung Hom, why should we spend $45 million on moving the old station mile up the coast, where the same disadvantages would continue, the uneconomic use of valuable land, and the constricting effect on road traffic? Communications between the east and the west in the southern part of Kowloon would continue to be squeezed into the bottleneck of Chatham Road. But if we put the railway underground, we could build as many east-west roads as we wished, anywhere from the tip of the peninsula in the south, to Beacon Hill in the north.
There are many other uses to which this 2 million sq. ft. could be put, an area substantially more than the whole of the land now occupied by Whitfield Barracks. It would be an ideal area for high-class hotels and shops and a very large sum could be obtained if the land, or part of it were sold for private development. The public buildings which it is suggested might be built above the railway lines, the indoor stadium and the exhibition centre, would cost much less if built on the ground and would be much more attractive if surrounded by lawns and flowers. Mention has been made of the need for a park on the eastern side of Kowloon. Here, surely, on the waterfront would be an ideal place for it. Do we really want what could be one of the finest parts of Kowloon, covered by acres of rusting rails and overgrown weeds? Or is it proposed that we should build over the whole of the 2 million sq. ft. a cement floor 20 feet above the ground?
I have mentioned the constricting effect on traffic of the railway, which forces all east/west traffic to concentrate at a few crossings. It is obvious that the congestion on our roads is due, not merely to the limited amount of road surface available, but also to the delays caused at junctions. If there were no crossroads, the present volume of traffic could travel quite happily down Nathan Road at 20 or 30 miles an hour, and do the whole trip in about six minutes. The serious delays occur at the places where streams of traffic cross, and every effort should be made to improve these junctions. Last year I gave figures for the comparative costs and savings at the Chatham-To Kwa Wan-Ma Tau Wei Road junction, which showed that a flyover, built at a cost of about $2 million would save $34 million a year in delays, extra fuel and mileage.
There are several other junctions for which comparative studies should be made, such as the Nairn-Gascoigne-Chatham Road junction, and the Argyle Street-Waterloo Road crossing, in Kowloon, and in Hong Kong, the Roxy roundabout and the two new ones planned in Connaught Road and Harcourt Road. The question of time wasted by delays, and the financial savings which road improvements would produce, are being very carefully studied in Britain. There it is realized that money is well spent if it saves the taxpayers' pocket, and it does not matter if that saving is not shown in the income and expenditure account of Government. Mr. F. S. Li has spoken of the great inconvenience caused by delays due to road openings. These not only cause general irritation but also a definite, measurable, economic loss. I hope that when the Public Transport Survey team starts its work, the Honourable Director of Public Works will discuss this matter with it. Dr. LEE will, I am sure, join me in welcoming the presence in Hong Kong of Dr. MILLARD of the Road Research Laboratory and Mr. CHURCHILL of the London Transport, and hope that Government accepts their proposals for the Public Transport Survey and that a start is made as soon as possible.
Finally, I would like to say a few words about new duties which the Urban Council may be asked to undertake. My colleague Mr. SALES and other Members have spoken of the representative character of the Urban Council and its suitability to take part in wider fields of activity. We have, for example, recently agreed to run the proposed new library services. But if we are asked to devote our time, thought and energy to matters of public welfare, it is reasonable to assume that we shall have a say in the policies to be carried out and that under those conditions we shall be happy to undertake any duty Government may see fit to give us.
Last year, Mr. CHEONG-LEEN paid the Appointed Members the compliment of saying that he thought that one Appointed Member was worth two Elected Members. (Laughter). Today Mr. BERNACCHI has supported this view by proposing that there should be more Elected Members to make up the discrepancy.
MR. CHEONG-LEEN:-Mr. Chairman, I was speaking numerically at the last Annual Conventional Debate.
MR. WATSON:-I accept that correction, Sir. (Laughter). Mr. BERNACCHI goes on to suggest that if the system of Appointed Members is to be retained, they should be chosen to represent the minority interests. I can see one major drawback: if this change is made who then is going to represent the majority?
MR. CHEONG-LEEN:-The Elected Members, Sir.
MR. WATSON:--With that sombre thought, Mr. Chairman, I have much pleasure in supporting the motion. (Applause).
Page 279
HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL
Page 148 of 194