279
Page 29.0
36
HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL
HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL
Page 29 of 279
37
cleared away once a day. What you term "accumulated refuse", Sir, may have been caused by unco-operative private refuse collectors depositing uncovered baskets of refuse at collecting points for prolonged periods. Better co-operation is being sought by persuasion, warning and prosecution. During the month of March, eleven summonses were taken out in this area for offences under the Public Cleansing and Prevention of Nuisances By-laws committed by these refuse collectors.
Tai Kok Tsui is an area many parts of which are yet undeveloped or being developed. Some of the side streets are rather narrow and congested and this hinders cleansing operations to a certain extent. The cleanliness of this area has received close attention from the Environmental Hygiene Select Committee. Considerable improvements have been achieved by the joint efforts of many Government departments including the Police, Public Works, Resettlement, Fire Services, etc. A large number of pavement settlers have been resettled, temporary structures demolished and huge quantities of building debris cleared. Roads are being formed or reinstated. The process of development and improvement is still proceeding.
DR. BELL: Mr. Chairman, could I ask a supplementary question on this? As you may be aware—perhaps you don't know—Mr. Kenneth KINGHORN accompanied myself round this area some three or four months ago, and I would like to ask you whether you would request the Public Works particularly to make a greater effort in clearing this area, because there are so many broken roads and broken pavements in this area which are causing an accumulation of debris in the whole area. There are other areas where there are great big junk heaps of wood. I think it is land that has been allocated by Crown Lands for wood storage, but it is not being properly looked after. Could you refer the matter to the Public Works for their very close attention, please?
CHAIRMAN: Dr. BELL, I will convey your remarks to the Director of Public Works.
(19) MR. HENRY H. L. Hu asked the following question:
Could the Chairman kindly tell this Council whether the fixing or raising the charges for hiring certain facilities in the City Hall is within the jurisdiction of this Council? Is the Chairman aware that recently there were increases on the average about 100% of such charges in the City Hall? Did any Select Committee or Committees ever discuss this matter before the decision of increase was made?
THE CHAIRMAN replied as follows:
The answer to the first part of the question is "yes." Under the City Hall (Amendment) Ordinance of 1966, the Urban Council may fix the fees to be paid for the use of all or any of the facilities in the City Hall, subject to the approval of the Governor.
I propose to deal with the last part of the question next, and the answer is also "yes". The revised hire charges were discussed at length by the City Hall Select Committee at two meetings held on 4th November, 1964 and 8th December, 1964, and the Select Committee agreed to recommend the proposed revised hire charges to the Standing Committee of the Whole Council for adoption. A paper on the proposed revised charges was issued to the Standing Committee on 21st December, 1964 and approved by the Committee on 28th December, 1964. I may add that the promulgation of the revised charges was delayed as it was considered that an amendment of the City Hall Ordinance 1961 was necessary before the promulgation.
The answer to the second part of the question is "No". The revised charges for the Concert Hall and Theatre do not represent a direct increase but are, in fact, made on a different basis. Whereas the previous charges were based on a percentage of the gross takings, with a minimum fee, the revised charges are flat rates irrespective of takings. The revised charges for exhibition facilities are 333% higher than the previous charges, but give 37.5% longer time of usage.
Charges for the Lecture Rooms and Committee Rooms have been increased by 50% and an extra charge is made for projection facilities. It is therefore not correct that there were increases on the average of about 100%.
The revised charges were arrived at after a full investigation of the actual cost of operating each unit, excluding land and building investments.
MR. HU: Mr. Chairman, how about the concert hall and theatre, after revision. Are the prices going up or going down?
279
Page 29.0
36
HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL
HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL
Page 29 of 279
37
cleared away once a day. What you term "accumulated refuse", Sir, may have been caused by unco-operative private refuse collectors depositing uncovered baskets of refuse at collecting points for prolonged periods. Better co-operation is being sought by persuasion, warning and prosecution. During the month of March, eleven sum- monses were taken out in this area for offences under the Public Cleansing and Prevention of Nuisances By-laws committed by these refuse collectors.
Tai Kok Tsui is an area many parts of which are yet un- developed or being developed. Some of the side streets are rather narrow and congested and this hinders cleansing operations to a certain extent. The cleanliness of this area has received close attention from the Environmental Hygiene Select Committee. Considerable improvements have been achieved by the joint efforts of many Govern- ment departments including the Police, Public Works, Resettlement, Fire Services, etc. A large number of pave- ment settlers have been resettled, temporary structures demolished and huge quantities of building debris cleared. Roads are being formed or reinstated. The process of development and improvement is still proceeding.
DR. BELL: Mr. Chairman, could I ask a supplementary question on this? As you may be aware-perhaps you don't know-Mr. Kenneth KINGHORN accompanied myself round this area some three or four months ago, and I would like to ask you whether you would request the Public Works particularly to make a greater effort in clear- ing this area, because there are so many broken roads and broken pavements in this area which are causing an accumulation of debris in the whole area. There are other areas where there are great big junk heaps of wood. I think it is land that has been allocated by Crown Lands for wood storage, but it is not being properly looked after. Could you refer the matter to the Public Works for their very close attention, please?
CHAIRMAN: -Dr. BELL, I will convey your remarks to the Director of Public Works.
(19) MR. HENRY H. L. Hu asked the following question:
Could the Chairman kindly tell this Council whether the fixing or raising the charges for hiring certain facilities in the City Hall is within the jurisdiction of this Council? Is the Chairman aware that recently there
were increases on the average about 100% of such charges in the City Hall? Did any Select Committee or Committees ever discuss this matter before the decision of increase was made?
THE CHAIRMAN replied as follows:
.........
The answer to the first part of the question is "yes." Under the City Hall (Amendment) Ordinance of 1966, the Urban Council may fix the fees to be paid for the use of all or any of the facilities in the City Hall, subject to the approval of the Governor.
I propose to deal with the last part of the question next, and the answer is also "yes". The revised hire charges were discussed at length by the City Hall Select Com- mittee at two meetings held on 4th November, 1964 and 8th December, 1964, and the Select Committee agreed to recommend the proposed revised hire charges to the Standing Committee of the Whole Council for adoption. A paper on the proposed revised charges was issued to the Standing Committee on 21st December, 1964 and approved by the Committee on 28th December, 1964. I may add that the promulgation of the revised charges was delayed as it was considered that an amend- ment of the City Hall Ordinance 1961 was necessary before the promulgation.
The answer to the second part of the question is "No". The revised charges for the Concert Hall and Theatre do not represent a direct increase but are, in fact, made on a different basis. Whereas the previous charges were based on
a percentage of the gross takings, with a minimum fee. the revised charges are flat rates irrespective of takings. The revised charges for ex- hibition facilities are 333% higher than the previous charges, but give 37.5% longer time of usage.
Charges for the Lecture Rooms and Committee Rooms have been increased by 50% and an extra charge is made for projection facilities. It is therefore not correct that there were increases on the average of about 100%.
The revised charges were arrived at after a full investigation of the actual cost of operating each unit, excluding land and building investments.
MR. HU: Mr. Chairman, how about the concert hall and theatre, after revision. Are the prices going up or going down?
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.