Page 86 of 132
175
responsible way. In this regard, I hope the Government, the Hong Kong Association of Banks and the bank concerned would promptly make some constructive and positive proposals for improvement.
Mr. Chairman, now I would like to turn to the tragic situation in Po On Road Market. The problem of viability of the market has cropped up. There are 740 stalls in Po On Road Market, which is probably the largest market of the Council. It was built at a time when the hawker policy attached more importance to the resiting of on-street hawkers than the profitability of markets. Nearly 6 years old, the market is faced with the problem of viability on account of various factors. First of all, there are too many stalls in it and the types of goods allowed to be sold there are too limited. This has led to vicious competition among the stalls selling the same type of goods. For instance, there are altogether 450 vegetable/fruit stalls and about 194 grocery stalls, the turnover of which is on the decrease in recent years. According to the information provided by the Housing Department, the residents in the vicinity of the market are moving out and decreasing. The number has dropped from 68,000 in 1990 to around 56,000 in 1993, and is expected to go further down to 47,000 by 1996. In other words, the population will decrease by more than 20,000 people. Another factor attributed to the decrease in turnover is the opening of new markets nearby, say, the Lai Wan Market at Mei Foo Sun Chuen. If I remember correctly, this market has 43 stalls or so but caters to the needs of approximately 50,000 people. Thus, we can draw a comparison and see how keen the competition faced by the Po On Road Market is. Apart from that, there has been a substantial rise in the number of competitors. They include four supermarkets and about 61 meat, fish, vegetable or fruit shops around the Po On Road Market. What makes things worse is the presence of illegal hawkers outside the market who take away from the stall operators a large portion of their business. I know that the Department has already made considerable efforts to tackle this problem. Despite serious staff shortage resulting from the launching of the re-ordering exercise at Pei Ho Street and Nam Cheong Street, the largest of its kind in the territory, it has conducted frequent raids against illegal hawkers. Nevertheless, this kind of operation is not a radical solution to the long-term problems of the markets. What I am doing now is to reflect the worries of the stall operators of the Po On Road Market. 451 stall operators of this market will have to renew their 3-year leases around January and February, 1994. This means that they will be under the pressure of rent increases. They have great reservations about the criteria and the methodology adopted by the Rating and Valuation Department in assessing the market rents of their stalls. In order to solve the problems of the stall operators, I hope that both the Council and the Department will take positive action immediately by conducting an overall review of the business turnover of the stall operators of the market, the methodology for fixing the new rents, and the percentage of rent increase.
Mr. Chairman, with these remarks, I support the motion.
Page 86 of 132
HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL
MR. FUNG KWONG-CHUNG (in Cantonese): Mr. Chairman and Fellow Councillors, following the Lan Kwai Fong tragedy that happened on New Year's Day 1993, a number of unpleasant incidents in connection with recreation and entertainment activities occurred during the year, resulting in fatal injuries and monetary losses. Looking back in this perspective, 1993 can be termed a year of regrets.
Being a provider of recreational facilities and entertainment programmes for the general public does not necessarily mean the Urban Council has to bear full responsibility for such incidents. In fact, the Council did give positive response every time and review the cases afterwards. Nonetheless, as the major statutory body to formulate cultural and recreational policies for the urban areas, the Council, whilst staging recreation and entertainment events, is duty-bound to protect the interests of the participants which include their physical and mental health as well as their safety. I would like to take this opportunity to review the incidents in question and to find out if there is a need for improvement in the formulation and execution of policies relating to the provision of recreation and entertainment activities and facilities.
At the early hours of 1 January 1993, massive crowds gathered at Lan Kwai Fong to celebrate the New Year. There were shoving and jostling, leading to a tragedy in which 21 people died and more than 100 people were injured.
Although it was not a UC event, the presenter Commercial Radio had officially applied to the Council and had been granted a public entertainment licence. The licence was awarded subject to approval by the Police, Fire Services Department, Buildings and Lands Department, and Television and Entertainment Licensing Authority. I have experience of applying for a similar public entertainment licence in the name of my ward office and found that the Urban Services Department's requirement for relevant information from the applicants and the vetting procedures are fairly adequate. The question, however, is who has the responsibility for monitoring the situation after the licence had been issued? Were there discrepancies between what was stated in the application and what actually happened on the scene? If that was the case, who should be held responsible? At the time of application, Commercial Radio estimated the number of participants to be around 1,000 but it turned out to be 15,000 - 15 times the estimated number!
Because of the accident, some people suggested that the Urban Council should organize more activities for the New Year. In early September, a paper entitled 'Countdown to New Year 1994' was submitted by the Department for discussion at the Standing Committee of the Whole Council in October. This event was the brainchild of three companies. The total estimated expenditure was $8.9m and the Council was requested to sponsor $2.5m. Some Councillors pointed out that the contribution was too large and the budgetary information supplied was insufficient. To rush through the proposal might be seen as a move on the part of the Council to win popularity by achieving a massive task. The admission charge was subsequently raised to $20 from the originally proposed...
Page 86 of 132
Page 86 of 132
175
responsible way. In this regard, I hope the Government, the Hong Kong Association of Banks and the bank concerned would promptly make some constructive and positive proposals for improvement.
Mr. Chairman, now I would like to turn to the tragic situation in Po On Road Market. The problem of viability of the market has cropped up. There are 740 stalls in Po On Road Market, which is probably the largest market of the Council. It was built at a time when the hawker policy attached more importance to the resiting of on-street hawkers than the profitability of markets. Nearly 6 years old, the market is faced with the problem of viability on account of various factors. First of all, there are too many stalls in it and the types of goods allowed to be sold there are too limited. This has led to vicious competition among the stalls selling the same type of goods. For instance, there are altogether 450 vegetable/fruit stalls and about 194 grocery stalls, the turnover of which is on the decrease in recent years. According to the information provided by the Housing Department, the residents in the vicinity of the market are moving out and decreasing. The number has dropped from 68 000 in 1990 to around 56 000 in 1993, and is expected to go further down to 47 000 by 1996. In other words, the population will decrease by more than 20 000 people. Another factor attributed to the decrease in turnover is the opening of new markets nearby, say, the Lai Wan Market at Mei Foo Sun Chuen, If I remember correctly, this market has 43 stalls or so but caters to the needs of approximately 50 000 people. Thus, we can draw a comparison and see how keen the competition faced by the Po On Road Market is. Apart from that, there has been a substantial rise in the number of competitors. They include four supermarkets and about 61 meat, fish, vegetable or fruit shops around the Po On Road Market, What makes things worse is the presence of illegal hawkers outside the market who take away from the stall operators a large portion of their business. I know that the Department has already made considerable efforts to tackle this problem. Despite serious staff shortage resulting from the launching of the re-ordering exercise at Pei Ho Street and Nam Cheong Street, the largest of its kind in the territory, it has conducted frequent raids against illegal hawkers. Nevertheless, this kind of operations is not a radical solution to the long-term problems of the markets. What I am doing now is to reflect the worries of the stall operators of the Po On Road Market. 451 stall operators of this market will have to renew their 3-year leases around January and February, 1994. This means that they will be under the pressure of rent increases. They have great reservations about the criteria and the methodology adopted by the Rating and Valuation Department in assessing the market rents of their stalls. In order to solve the problems of the stall operators, I hope that both the Council and the Department will take positive action immediately by conducting an overall review of the business turnover of the stall operators of the market, the methodology for fixing the new rents, and the percentage of rent increase.
Mr. Chairman, with these remarks, I support the motion.
Page 86 of 132
HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL
MR. FUNG KWONG-CHUNG (in Cantonese): Mr. Chairman and Fellow Councillors, following the Lan Kwai Fong tragedy that happened on New Year's Day 1993, a number of unpleasant incidents in connection with recreation and entertainment activities occured during the year, resulting in fatal injuries and monetary losses. Looking back in this perspective, 1993 can be termed a year of regrets.
Being a provider of recreational facilities and entertainment programmes for the general public does not necessarily mean the Urban Council has to bear full responsibility for such incidents. In fact, the Council did give positive response every time and review the cases afterwards. Nonetheless, as the major statutory body to formulate cultural and recreational policies for the urban areas, the Council, whilst staging recreation and entertainment events, is duty-bound to protect the interests of the participants which include their physical and mental health as well as their safety. I would like to take this opportunity to review the incidents in question and to find out if there is a need for improvement in the formulation and execution of policies relating to the provision of recreation and entertainment activities and facilities.
At the early hours of 1 January 1993, massive crowds gathered at Lan Kwai Fong to celebrate the New Year. There were shoving and jostling, leading to a tragedy in which 21 people died and more than 100 people were injured.
Although it was not an UC event, the presenter Commercial Radio had officially applied to the Council and had been granted a public entertainment licence. The licence was awarded subject to approval by the Police. Fire Services Department, Buildings and Lands Department, and Television
and Entertainment Licensing Authority. I have experience of applying for a similar public entertainment licence in the name of my ward office and found that the Urban Services Department's requirement for relevant information from the applicants and the vetting procedures are fairly adequate. The question, however, is who has the responsibility for monitoring the situation after the licence had been issued? Were there discrepancies between what was stated in the application and what actually happened on the scene? If that was the case, who should be held responsible? At the time of application, Commercial Radio estimated the number of participants to be around 1 000 but it turned out to be 15 000-15 times the estimated number!
Because of the accident, some people suggested that the Urban Council should organize more activities for the New Year. In early September, a paper entitled 'Countdown to New Year 1994' was submitted by the Department for discussion at the Standing Committee of the Whole Council in October. This event was the brainchild of three companies. The total estimated expenditure was $8.9m and the Council was requested to sponsor $2.5m. Some Councillors pointed out that the contribution was too large and the budgetary information supplied was insufficient. To rush through the proposal might be seen as a move on the part of the Council to win popularity by achieving a massive task. The admission charge was subsequently raised to $20 from the originally proposed
Page 86 of 132
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.