XN000022-1996-07-04 — Page 6

5 -

Let's be clear what I think the community is agreed about. I think the community has made up its mind that it wants the Western Corridor Railway and the other associated elements in the railway development strategy. I don't think, there is, as it were, a whether question. The issues are how we best build the railway, how much its going to cost, how we can do it in the most expeditious and financially sensible way and that's what we're trying to examine at the moment. We're undertaking a number of studies. Now some Honourable Members say that the studies are too expensive, that there are too many of them. I have to say that in proportion to the total likely cost of the project, the cost of the studies isn't out of line. We've just come to this Legislative Council and got approval for $90 million in order to undertake studies for electronic road pricing, which we reckon will cost in all about a billion. So almost 10% is going in consultancy fees, in studies to make sure that the project is as efficient as possible and by and large that sort of percentage figure, of a total project, isn't out of order. We need those studies and we will keep honourable members wholly informed as we have in the past about the studies we're going to do and about the results of those studies. Now the sooner those studies, particularly on the alignment of the Western Corridor Railway, give us the opportunity to reach decisions, we'll reach those decisions. But it must be perfectly obvious to honourable members that the Western Corridor Railway is going to be built by the SAR Government and it will be a matter within the SAR Government's autonomy. The Government of Hong Kong will reach decisions as soon as it can. If those decisions have to be arrived at before July 1, 1997, we would of course need to have the enthusiastic agreement of my successor. Otherwise it would make no sort of sense whatsoever. If the main decisions are taken on the other side of July 1, 1997, I want to make sure that my successor has the best possible and most informed basis on which to take those decisions. But I really don't think that we should allow this important discussion to get distorted by arguments about whether or not we've given China enough information. Particularly, as 1 repeat, since when it comes to building this project, it should be a matter wholly within the autonomy of the SAR.

The President: Mr Ho, do you have a follow-up?

Mr Edward Ho: Yes, thank you Mr President. May be the translation was not very good, so I will just have to follow-up in English, because I mean I think the Governor probably has a prepared answer but that was not the question I asked. First of all I didn't raise any question about the costs of studies and so on and so forth, because I'm not in a position to comment on the cost you know until all the figures are known and all that.

And I'm certainly not trying to stir up something. I'm merely asking a simple question as far as how to co-operate with the Chinese. I mean during this period, I fully agree after 1997, this is the kind of project that Hong Kong SAR Government should do on its own, should decide on its own. But unfortunately at this time we do have to co-operate with the Chinese and I'm merely asking the question whether, you know, he agrees that the flow of information would be beneficial?