1991 — Page 33

Page 33 of 126

56

HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL

comparison purposes. For example, the operational cost of the Sheung Wan Civic Centre is $4.1 million annually. So we will have to seek more information on the joint presentation of events with district organisations to tie in with the change of policy of community halls managed by the CNTA. I am sure in the not distant future, the Council will be able to have a comprehensive review on the policy to cope with the need for provision of cultural and entertainment activities to the public.

MR. IP KWOK-CHUNG (in Cantonese):-Thank you, Mr. Chairman. The gist of Mr. BERNACCHI's question is: can consideration be made as to whether the Urban Services Department can take over these community halls run by CNTA because the District Offices due to reduction of financial and manpower resources are now giving less support and management to these halls. I don't think Mr. MAN SAI-CHEONG has touched on this point in his reply. I would like to know what is the view of the Council on this matter?

MR. MAN SAI-CHEONG (in Cantonese): The aims of providing civic centres by the Council and the community halls by CNTA are different. When the Council provides cultural facilities, such as city hall and civic centres, we take into account the need of performing arts. For example, at the venues concerned, we have to consider the viewline of the audiences, i.e. we have to make sure that every audience can see the show on the stage. Also on the stage, ample spaces have to be made available for staging. However, these characteristics are not available at the community halls managed by the District Offices. So if we are to convert the community halls for the use of staging cultural events, it would involve a tremendous cost because the experience of North District suggests that the conversion of community hall into a city hall type facility was a failure. So in this regard we have to be very careful before making any firm commitments.

3. DR. THE HON. ELSIE TU ask the following question (in English):—Several years ago, the Urban Council had to make extensive repairs and carry out sand replenishment to improve the water quality and beach at Repulse Bay, resulting from the ineffective sewage of construction works in the area.

Has any action been taken by the E.P.D. or other Departments to improve the sewage requirements and prevent effluent affecting our beaches and shores?

MR. RONNIE WONG MAN-CHIU, CHAIRMAN OF THE RECREATION SELECT COMMITTEE, replied as follows (in English):

This question asks whether any action has been taken by the Environmental Protection Department (EPD) or other Departments to improve the sewage requirements and prevent effluent affecting our beaches and shores after the sand replenishment to improve the water quality and beach at Repulse Bay.

According to EPD's Report on the Bacteriological Water Quality of Bathing Beaches in Hong Kong in 1990, the water quality at the Council managed Page 33 of 126

HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL

Page 33 of 126

57

beaches has improved substantially. Of the twelve beaches, five have been ranked good, six acceptable and one barely acceptable in the annual ranking of water quality. The substantial improvements are the result of a combination of 'first aid' engineering works (mainly to intercept and divert polluted dry weather flows in stormwater drains) and the progressive implementation of the Water Pollution Control Ordinance in the Island South areas. Most of the engineering works carried out by the Government were completed in 1988 and 1989, and improvements in Water Quality have already been visible since 1990. According to EPD's beach water quality monitoring report from 1 January to 31 May 1991, ten of our beaches, namely Big Wave Bay, Chung Hom Kok, Deep Water Bay, Hairpin, Middle Bay, Repulse Bay, South Bay, Shek O, St Stephen's and Turtle Cove, were ranked good (Grade 1), Stanley Main was ranked fair (Grade 2) and Rocky Bay was ranked acceptable (Grade 3) in its 4-tier ranking system.

Apart from the above-said measures to maintain satisfactory water quality at our beaches, the Government is also implementing proposals in the Hong Kong Island South Sewerage Master Plan which include, inter alla:

(a) new sewerage facilities to collect wastewater flows in the Deep Water Bay, Shouson Hill and Repulse Bay areas and pump them to the Aberdeen sewerage system; and

(b) new sewerage and treatment facilities in the Stanley area so that sewage there will be properly collected and receive biological treatment (at Tweed Bay) prior to discharge into Sheung Sze Mun.

These improvement works are scheduled for completion in 1993. By then, the beach water quality in the Island South areas can be adequately safeguarded.

DR. THE HON. ELSIE TU (in English):-Mr. Chairman, the one barely acceptable beach mentioned in para. 2, is that Rocky Bay? If so, does the Recreation Select Committee have any information on what is causing that particular beach to have problems and is anything being done about it now?

MR. RONNIE WONG MAN-CHIU (in English):-Dr. Tu's question I think is already answered in the reply. It is Rocky Bay. It is still ranked acceptable.

DR. THE HON. ELSIE TU (in English): Mr. Chairman, I was asking if the Chairman of the Select Committee has any information on what particular problem is causing Rocky Bay to be in this polluted condition?

MR. RONNIE WONG MAN-CHIU (in English):-I think the main reason for making the water polluted is due to the flow of polluted water from the shore. At the Rocky Bay area, the replenishment plan and all the underwater piping work have not been done to that area so that area is still ranked acceptable and is a little bit below the other beaches we have.

Page 33 of 126