1983 — Page 131

228

HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL

Once the three categories are clearly defined, District Boards should be actively consulted on those facilities which are of exclusive interest to their Districts. It is important too that their views are respected and are seen to be taken into account as far as possible.

On the other hand the Council with its network of functional select committees can then be left to plan and build regional and territory-wide facilities without too much pressure from the District so that conflict between districts and the Council can be avoided, while the interest of the entire Urban population need not be compromised.

This categorization which I am advocating is but the first of a number of very important steps which we must now take to consolidate the very extensive building programme which the Council has to undertake in order to fulfil its public functions adequately.

Currently we have over 200 projects of different sizes and functions, different stages of planning and construction. The order in which they are scheduled has been historically determined by the readiness of the projects as advised to us by the Architectural Office of the Lands Department. The former would schedule our works according to their allocation and availability of manpower, while the latter would hand over land according to their own timetable. In other words, having identified and been granted sites for developments, the Urban Services Department and the Urban Council have not taken the initiative to establish priorities in our own capital works programme. As a result, facilities are built without consideration being given to varying degrees of demand and urgency on the part of users i.e. the general public and the provider i.e. the Council of these facilities and their related services.

In my view, it is vital that we assess the situation carefully, and take positive steps to establish principles that must guide the Council to determine priorities. Such principles are necessarily complex, and must be given the most careful thought and discussion before adoption.

A frustration which I share with some of my Colleagues is our inability to chart the progress of our work programme. Unlike the private sector where projected dates of completion are generally adhered to, slippage in Council projects seem to be the rule rather than the exception, and we have come to accept postponements as fairly routine. We do not seem to be too mindful of deadlines, and there appears to be lapses in between general approval of a scheme, the completion of detailed drawings, the calling of tender and the award of contracts. In cases where private architects are to be appointed, the actual appointments also take some time to realize. Hiccups seem to occur at every point. While being fully sympathetic with the complexity of the system, I am not convinced that some of these delays cannot be eliminated by better co-ordination and interphase. I would therefore like to make a plea to the Urban Services Department, which is the Client Department acting on behalf of the

HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL

Page 131 of 194

229

Council, to assure a more positive role in monitoring works programme so that all parties concerned can be encouraged to be more accountable for the efficient application of the huge amount of public funds that we allocate each year to our capital projects.

Before I close, Mr. Chairman, may I say just a few words about our Performing Companies.

It has been a year of activity for all our companies both locally and abroad. Both the Chinese Orchestra and the Dance Company have had the opportunity to tour, while locally all four companies are developing community ties in their outreach programmes to the districts and schools, apart from their regular programmes at the various cultural venues of the Council.

This coming year, we hope to place emphasis on more local involvement by drawing on local talents and themes so as to enrich the creativity and originality of material to be presented by our companies. I have no doubt this is a move in the right direction which will be beneficial to local audiences as well as the artistic community.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for your indulgence and I support your motion.

CHAIRMAN (in English):—Mrs. CHOW, you are most co-operative. You spoke for only about 13 minutes. (laughter).

MR. WALTER M. SULKE (in English):—I hope the Secretary's stop-watch is accurate.

Mr. Chairman, I am going to speak about three subjects today, two of which are outside the scope of this Council but need airing very urgently.

I shall speak first about the Nuclear Power Station which will be built at Daya Bay. Through my environmental work in the last 15 years, I have been in touch with many experts in the nuclear energy field and I think I can justly criticize the Hong Kong Government on two counts. One, that they haven't been absolutely honest with the public: For months and years they kept on telling us that they would have no influence on the building of this power station since it would be entirely a matter for the privately owned power company (C.L.P.) and the Chinese Government. Then it suddenly turns out that in fact the Hong Kong Government will invest, either by way of equity or by loans, in the company which will build the nuclear power station and subsequently run it so that obviously the Central Government's influence is going to be considerable.

Secondly, I can't help but feel that Government is sleepwalking into the nuclear age. Everything I have been told so far about Government's attitude to safety connected with this power station seems to indicate that they feel this can be all left to the Chinese authorities (who themselves have no experience with