HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL
then the Council considered how to develop. That approach is passive when compared to deciding what sort of development is needed and fighting for land allocation by government. It takes much longer too. From our past experience, the Council often did not make timely and optimum use of land allocated to it whereas Government was unable to supply the Council with land at locations where land was required. Some places were first allocated to the Council and then resumed by the authorities to be let to other organisations. Such a situation exists now. So, we must determine our need and ask Government for land supply. Longer term 10-year capital works are therefore more practical and more suited to the needs of the Council, the public and urban development.
The case of Hong Kong Stadium mentioned just now by Mr. No doesn't fit in here because with it, we were unable to participate. As a matter of fact, according to the Memorandum of Administrative Arrangements, Central Government has the right to plan the construction or reconstruction of the Hong Kong Stadium and then, on its completion, exclude the Council from management. In view of it, we moved in those days to secure the management right of the Stadium.
Mr. Chairman, I think that a 10-year period is a more appropriate time-frame for acquiring land from Government for capital works development. It is more practical and more forward looking too. The 10-year plan mentioned in the original motion actually includes the shorter term five year plan mentioned in the amended motion. As such, the contents of the amended motion have been included in the original motion and I find it unnecessary. The original motion is more comprehensive and pro-active. Mr. Chairman, I do not support the amended motion.
CHAIRMAN (in Cantonese): There is one thing I want Mr. Ng to take note of. According to Section 21(17) of the Standing Order, you do not have the right of reply. I just want to remind you of it. Now, I invite Ms. Jennifer CHOW, mover of the original motion, to conclude.
MS. JENNIFER CHOW KIT-BING (in Cantonese): As a matter of fact, the contents of Mr. No's amended motion share the same goal as my motion. The goal is for the Council to have adequate land and that new facilities will match community needs. However, we differ on one aspect - level.
The level I am talking about is to look from further away, a macro view, a more comprehensive one, so as to formulate a plan of vision. In fact, the Planning Department is currently formulating its vision outline. They too want Hong Kong to become an international city. Whether in public relations or promotion, the Council should get up and win public endorsement for the slogan of 'Enriching City Life'. We must have real faith in making that slogan a commitment, a truth. I think if we can formulate a 10-year plan of vision, let the public know that plan falls in with their expectations, look to development
Page 58 of 498
Page 58 of 498
Page 58 of 498