Page 89 of 126
Page 89 of 126
156
HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL
indirectly elected from the District Boards. Therefore, this Council is a representative of the public interest. If the Council is deprived of the consultation by the Government, who is to speak for the interest of the public? We must always remember that the Recreation and Culture Branch is now conducting all the negotiation. This Branch is only a Government body which has different perspectives and different interests in mind. No wonder they have not consulted the Urban Council on any occasion. As the Chinese saying goes, 'if our path is different, we will never trust each other'. In particular, the dispute over the negotiation centres upon taking away of the track on field. Together with their omission to consulting the Council, this clearly shows the Government intends to sacrifice the public interest for the commercial gains. It seems the commercial gains can outweigh any other factors. There is ample evidence to show that the removal of track very seriously affects the public interest, particularly schools and students and amateur sports associations. Their concerns have been ignored. It may now be too late to turn back and ask for the track to be maintained. However, it is not time for us to give up yet. I draw all your attention to Section 4.22 of the Memorandum. If the Government requires any land use by the Council for the public purpose, and the Council facilities have to be demolished, such facilities must be reprovided on the same site or another alternative site. I think the spirit behind this section is admirable because it ensures the interest of the Government and the Council can be looked after at the same time. If the Stadium is to be re-developed and improved without the track, then the alternative means to cater for interest of the public who requires the use of such track must be provided. This is the only fair solution to the present dilemma. Failing which the Government would have breached its trust to the Council and the expectation of its people. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
MISS CHRISTINA TING (in Cantonese):-Mr. Chairman, today we have the motion debate on the re-development of the Hong Kong Stadium. I support this motion. During the previous annual debate, I have urged the Government to provide another sports ground on the Hong Kong Island in order to alleviate the demand of our school children. I understand that schools have used the Hong Kong Stadium for 83 weekdays for their athletic meets and inter-schools competitions during the period from September 90 to May 91. Now the Government wants to take away the running track from the Hong Kong Stadium even though the demands of the schools have not been fully met. Of course, I do not agree to this proposal for we all understand that athletic sport is the beginning of different kinds of sports, so schools have paid much attention to athletic activities. Through such activities, school children not only can be trained in their physical development but also they can gain a lot of psychological benefits. It would teach them how to co-operate with their team-mates. We know the RHKJC is going to spend 850 million dollars to re-develop the Hong Kong Stadium which has a history of 34 years. This should be a welcome news because this will give us a modernized sport ground, and pave the way for further internationalization of Hong Kong. But this is a news simply unpalatable to the 160 000 school children on Hong Kong Island
HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL
157
because they would lose a centrally located and easily accessible sports ground. So I hope that the authority concerned will reconsider the proposal and take in account the interests of the general public and councillors so that the re-development project will really be in the interest of the public and not a nuisance to the public. On the retention of the athletic track in the redevelopment of HK Stadium, I really don't want to see the good intention of the Jockey Club going down to the drain because of the small fault. As for the management of the Hong Kong Stadium, of course, the Urban Council is very concerned about this question. For very long time, the Urban Council has been the management authority of the parks, sport grounds and recreational venues in Hong Kong. This has already gained the recognition of the public. If the government is passing the management of the redeveloped HK Stadium to another authority, I am sure this will tarnish our image. I sincerely hope the Government would treasure the reputation that we have built in managing such venues. I hope the Government would still let the Urban Council be the managing authority of the Hong Kong Stadium so that the Urban Council can play a more positive role in the enhancement of sport development to the public. Mr. Chairman, I feel it most regrettable that the Government has not consulted us fully. Where the Government had commissioned a consultancy to study the financial feasibility of the project they had not sought the Council's views and those of the main users. I really am puzzled about the intention behind. Once again, I would like to appeal to the Government that it should not insist on the wrongdoing. By doing so, not only the youngsters but also the people of Hong Kong would welcome the rectification made by the Government, with these remarks, I support the motion.
MR. FUNG KWONG-CHUNG (in Cantonese):-Mr. Chairman, the Government has announced that the Hong Kong Stadium will be re-developed and its seating capacity will be upgraded to 40 000, and that the field track will have to be deleted. I think this is a very ill-conceived programme and the Government has not done any consultation prior to the announcement. So it is not surprising that we are now caught in a political controversy. The Hong Kong Stadium is a very important sports venue for it is centrally located and it has been a venue for a lot of sport events, large soccer events and lots of schools sport events. Days ago, the Jockey Club just announced that it was going to allocate 850 million dollars to turn the Hong Kong Stadium into a modernized facility. Originally, this is a good news. The RHKJC is returning the money back to society what it gets from society. That is very noble and really worthy of our praises. Unfortunately, an integral part of the redevelopment proposal is the removal of the track in order to make way for more seating capacity. One reason given is that the track will have to go in order to make way for more seating capacity to accommodate several large scale soccer events and rugby events. This is very unfortunate and I would like on behalf of the education sector to reiterate our stand on this proposal in order to arouse the attention of the relevant authority to reconsider the issue. On Hong Kong Island, 160 000 students have to rely on the Hong Kong Stadium for holding their sport meets,
Page 89 of 126
'Page 89 of 126
Page 89 of 126
156
HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL
indirectly elected from the District Boards. Therefore, this Council is a representative of the public interest. If the Council is deprived of the consultation by the Government, who is to speak for the interest of the public? We must always remember that the Recreation and Culture Branch is now conducting all the negotiation. This Branch is only a Government body which has different perspectives and different interests in mind. No wonder they have not consulted the Urban Council on any occasion. As the Chinese saying goes, 'if our path is different, we will never trust each other'. In particular, the dispute over the negotiation centres upon taking away of the track on field. Together with their omission to consulting the Council, this clearly shows the Government intends to sacrifice the public interest for the commercial gains. It seems the commercial gains can outweigh any other factors. There is ample evidence to show that the removal of track very seriously affects the public interest, particularly schools and students and amateur sports associations. Their concerns have been ignored. It may now be too late to turn back and ask for the track to be maintained. However, it is not time for us to give up yet. I draw all your attention to Section 4.22 of the Memorandum. If the Government requires any land use by the Council for the public purpose, and the Council facilities have to be demolished, such facilities must be reprovided on the same site or another alternative site. I think the spirit behind this section is admirable because it ensures the interest of the Government and the Council can be looked after at the same time. If the Stadium is to be re-developed and improved without the track, then the alternative means to cater for interest of the public who requires the use of such track must be provided. This is the only fair solution to the present dilemma. Failing which the Goverment would have breached its trust to the Council and the expectation of its people. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
MISS CHRISTINA TING (in Cantonese):-Mr. Chairman, today we have the motion debate on the re-development of the Hong Kong Stadium. I support this motion. During the previous annual debate, I have urged the Government to provide another sports ground on the Hong Kong Island in order to alleviate the demand of our school children. I understand that schools have used the Hong Kong Stadium for 83 weekdays for their athletic meets and inter-schools competitions during the period from September 90 to May 91. Now the Government wants to take away the running track from the Hong Kong Stadium even though the demands of the schools have not been fully met. Of course, I do not agree to this proposal for we all understand that athletic sport is the beginning of different kinds of sports, so schools have paid much attention to athletic activities. Through such activities, school children not only can be trained in their physical development but also they can gain a lot of psychological benefits. It would teach them how to co-operate with their team-mates. We know the RHKJC is going to spend 850 million dollars to re-develop the Hong Kong Stadium which has a history of 34 years. This should be a welcome news because this will give us a modernized sport ground, and pave the way for further internationalization of Hong Kong. But this is a news simply unpalatable to the 160 000 school children on Hong Kong Island Page 89 of 126
HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL
157
because they would lose a centrally located and easily accessible sports ground. So I hope that the authority concerned will reconsider the proposal and take in account the interests of the general public and councillors so that the re-development project will really be in the interest of the public and not a nuisance to the public. On the retention of the althletic track in the redevelopment of HK Stadium, I really don't want to see the good intention of the Jockey Club going down to the drain because of the small fault. As for the management of the Hong Kong Stadium, of course, the Urban Council is very concerned about this question. For very long time, the Urban Council has been the management authority of the parks, sport grounds and recreational venues in Hong Kong. This has already gained the recognition of the public. If the government is passing the management of the redeveloped HK Stadium to another authority, I am sure this will tarnish our image. I sincerely hope the Government would treasure the reputation that we have built in managing such venues. I hope the Government would still let the Urban Council be the managing authority of the Hong Kong Stadium so that the Urban Council can play a more positive role in the enhancement of sport development to the public. Mr. Chairman, I feel it most regrettable that the Government has not consulted us fully. Where the Government had commissioned a consultancy to study the financial feasibility of the project they had not sought the Council's views and those of the main users. I really am puzzled about the intention behind. Once again, I would like to appeal to the Government that it should not insist on the wrongdoing. By doing so, not only the youngsters but also the people of Hong Kong would welcome the rectification made by the Government, with these remarks, I support the motion.
MR. FUNG KWONG-CHUNG (in Cantonese):-Mr. Chairman, the Government has announced that the Hong Kong Stadium will be re-developed and its seating capacity will be upgraded to 40 000, and that the field track will have to be deleted. I think this is a very ill-conceived programme and the Government has not done any consultation prior to the announcement. So it is not surprising that we are now caught in a political controversy. The Hong Kong Stadium is a very important sports venue for it is centrally located and it has been a venue for a lot of sport events, large soccer events and lots of schools sport events. Days ago, the Jockey Club just announced that it was going to allocate 850 million dollars to turn the Hong Kong Stadium into a modernized facility. Originally, this is a good news. The RHKJC is returning the money back to society what it gets from society. That is very noble and really worthy of our praises. Unfortunately, an integral part of the redevelopment proposal is the removal of the track in order to make way for more seating capacity. One reason given is that the track will have to go in order to make way for more seating capacity to accommodate several large scale soccer events and rugby events. This is very unfortunate and I would like on behalf of the education sector to reiterate our stand on this proposal in order to arouse the attention of the relevant authority to reconsider the issue. On Hong Kong Island, 160 000 students have to rely on the Hong Kong Stadium for holding their sport meets,
Page 89 of 126
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.