SECRET 高度機密
7
government-funded project. We might get more support in LegCo for it than for the airport platform since it is needed not only for the airport railway. Frederick Fung might support it as a "social infrastructure project". Even Elsie Tu might support it because of the Nathan Road corridor implication. The downside is that we may be pressed to undertake that the new railway will be built out to Tsing Yi, whatever happens. FS might wish to give views on this project. If our inclination is to go ahead we would also no doubt need to seek the views of Legco members before taking a final decision. The downside of not going ahead is that the low tender price would be likely to increase. In present circumstances, China can be expected to oppose any attempt to go ahead as "unilateral action". The CRC and traditional China supporters would be likely to echo such an objection.
416
Land
24.
Attached is a note from SPEL (ANNEX C) which examines
2 scenarios:
25.
no new land;
new land limited to 50 hectares per year.
Theoretically it should be hard for the Chinese to argue against 50 hectares of new land every year since that is allowed for by the JD with or without agreement. But in their present irrational mood, they could argue that past practice has been to agree the whole land programme with them and not just the land in excess of 50 hectares. Our counter argument would of course be that the programme has always exceeded 50
SECRET 高度機密
A
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.