HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL
17
Very often we have the chance to meet members of the public or our friends. As a Councillor, I am most afraid of being asked the following question. The estimated income of the Urban Council for the financial year 1996 is $6.8-6.9 billion while the estimated expenditure is about $7.1 billion. Meanwhile, the surplus stands at $2.5b to $2.7b. This means that the Urban Council has the adequate resources, funds and power to act independently and has the capacity to enforce its policies. So what is being done by the Urban Council for the public? And what will the Council be doing after 1997? Does it have a long-term strategy and programme? An organization with an annual income of $6.8b or 6.9b but without any long-term working strategy is doomed to fail and will suffer a gradual loss of public support. Therefore, I would like to make four guiding proposals to address these two issues.
First, the Council should clearly define its role by formulating at the earliest possible time its long-term aims. This is not a new proposal. In July 1995, Miss Ada WONG and I moved this motion for debate and were supported by the Council. But what is worrying me is that the implementation of this proposal has been repeatedly postponed and now I am afraid that it will be shelved indefinitely. I do hope that the Council will have formulated by June 30, 1996 at the latest its five-year plan, aims and programmes, including what each Select Committee should accomplish. I would also like to see that each year's aims and working plan state concretely how the five-year aims are to be achieved in stages.
Now I move on to my second proposal. There is a public perception that the Urban Council is financially well-placed to achieve a good deal. Nonetheless, its capital works projects are often delayed. I would like to propose that starting 1996, an element of healthy competition be introduced, at least, in certain projects in order to enhance efficiency and minimize delays. In many instances, works that are originally scheduled to complete in three years have been delayed to five years or even indefinitely. On other occasions, the Council's performance falls short of public expectations as a result of cost overruns. The major hold-ups occur in the planning, design, consultation and tendering stages. I propose that healthy competition be introduced by contracting out at least some of the works to private companies specialized in relevant fields so that designs will be improved and construction speeded up. Completion of building programmes on schedule will definitely boost the image of the Council.
My third proposal concerns the Hong Kong Stadium, which has been under our management for two years and is, in my opinion, still crisis-ridden. During the past two years, the Stadium has been beset with a series of problems, viz funding for the opening gala, noise generated by concerts, unsatisfactory condition of the turf, self-financing policy, optimizing the hiring rate, public relations of the Stadium Management Company and discontent of the executive suite-holders. Grave problems they are, but most of them still do not have solutions.
The Council must attach great importance to the management of the Stadium as it has a close bearing on the Council's image. In this respect, I believe the
Page 304 of 485
Page 304 of 485