1994 — Page 11

Urban Council Proceedings 市政局議事錄 All AI Reviewed

Page 11 of 115

HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL

such as soccer matches or other types of sports activities. There should be large scale whole day carnivals organised by the UC in the Hong Kong Stadium. So I think unless we can effectively control noise, it would be irresponsible for us to accept bookings of pop concerts. The Urban Council should take the initiative to seek ways and means to arrive at solutions which are reasonable and practicable to resolve the noise issue. We should co-operate with the department, the Jockey Club and the RCB. There have been criticisms concerning the hiring charge of the Hong Kong Stadium. The daily hire is $150,000. This would really affect the Urban Council's role in promoting sports activities in future. I hope that the Urban Council will be concerned about the pricing policy and I also hope that the BOG will consider the hire charges seriously. Finally, I rise to support Mr. MA Lee-wo's motion.

MR. JOSEPH CHAN YUEK-SUT (in Cantonese):—Mr. Chairman, the noise problem at the Hong Kong Stadium is in fact a design mistake. The redevelopment of the Hong Kong Stadium was initiated by the Hong Kong Government and the Royal Hong Kong Jockey Club. They were responsible for the design and construction. The Urban Council was not consulted and was unable to have any say. Our request for the keeping of the running track was rejected. At that time, I was very angry. The Central Government also told us very clearly that the redeveloped Hong Kong Stadium, when handed over to the Urban Council, would have to stage sports, recreation and entertainment activities, particularly Rugby Sevens, soccer and major concerts. Unfortunately, the Jockey Club and the Central Government at that time did not take into consideration the report on noise assessment. In their construction of the Stadium, no adjustment was made to abate noise. On the question of responsibility, since the Central Government and the Jockey Club did not construct the Stadium according to the recommendations of EPD, the Urban Council has to face the problem of noise nuisance to nearby residents when staging pop concerts. The responsibility should be borne by the Central Government and the Jockey Club and not the Urban Council. If the EPD wants to prosecute, it should prosecute the Central Government and the Jockey Club and not the Urban Council. If they prosecute the Urban Council, it is unfair. Moreover, the Central Government has handed over the management of the Hong Kong Stadium to the Urban Council. So our task is to make the best use of the Stadium. The Urban Council has the ability and the courage to face the problem. Let's put aside the noise problem first. To be fair, the redevelopment of the Hong Kong Stadium is something that we can be proud of. It is a very modern facility and a very grand one. If we can make the best use of this modern and grand facility, our general public will be able to enjoy more sports and recreational activities and the quality of life can also be enhanced. On the noise problem, in the long term, I think there are a number of things that need to be done. First, we must talk to the Central Government so that we will be allowed to deviate from commercial principles in our management and operation of the Hong Kong Stadium. I really don't understand why the Government forces the Urban Council to do so. Because all along, the Urban

Page 11 of 115

HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL

Council has been serving the public and subsidizing a lot of activities. But with regard to the Stadium, we have to make money. I really can't understand why. If there had not been such a condition of self-financing and making a profit, then the question would have been quite simple. We can open the Hong Kong Stadium for the general public free of charge. We can organize a lot of sports and other recreational activities. We even needn't hold any pop concert at all. But the problem we face now is: on the one hand we need to be self-financing, on the other hand, if we cannot stage pop concerts to bring in more money, then there will be a huge deficit and the Urban Council would have to subsidize the Hong Kong Stadium. It will greatly affect our services to the public in other areas and provide other facilities as well. So if the Central Government is willing to allow us to dispense with the self-financing principle, then we will not be forced to make money and to engage Wembley to manage the Stadium for us and we will be able to cut expenses. If the Hong Kong Stadium could be maintained as a multi-purpose facility, then I think the design at present is not suitable for holding concerts. It will definitely create nuisance to nearby residents and it will be detrimental to their health as well. We must engage experts to modify our design. For instance, we should construct an acoustic shell and other noise barriers. The Urban Council has sent delegations overseas and have seen such multi-purpose facilities elsewhere with reference to their designs and operations. For instance, in Toronto, there is a sky dome and it is a very good example.

CHAIRMAN (in English):—The time for each speech should not be longer than 20 minutes. Please address the motion about the noise and also about the concerts.

MR. JOSEPH CHAN YUEK-SUT (in Cantonese):—Mr. Chairman, you didn't tell us of the time limit.

CHAIRMAN (in English):—This is according to Standing Orders. We have a large number of speakers and also we have another motion debate. We don't want to keep every member until mid-night here.

MR. JOSEPH CHAN YUEK-SUT (in Cantonese):—I think we should delegate the authority to the BOG to really study the issue to see whether interim measures can be put in place to resolve the noise problem so that the Hong Kong Stadium can be managed more effectively and we will be able to minimise the noise problem. As for the motion, it says that we need to effectively control the noise problem, I am in full support of that and I hope that the BOG will take this up and implement measures. I hope that the Hong Kong Stadium can continue to be a venue for concerts in the future and I hope that there won't be any noise nuisance to residents in the vicinity. I support the motion.

CHAIRMAN (in English):—May I appeal to members to be more specific to address the noise problems and also the booking of pop concerts in this motion debate. Next speaker is Mr. PAO Ping-wing.

Page 11 of 115

Edit History

2026-05-15 22:13:55 · NVIDIA / meta/llama-4-maverick-17b-128e-instruct

Live

View comparison

AI Proofread

Page 11 of 115 20 HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL such as soccer matches or other types of sports activities. There should be large scale whole day carnivals organised by the UC in the Hong Kong Stadium. So I think unless we can effectively control noise, it would be irresponsible for us to accept bookings of pop concerts. The Urban Council should take the initiative to seek ways and means to arrive at solutions which are reasonable and practicable to resolve the noise issue. We should co-operate with the department, the Jockey Club and the RCB. There have been criticisms concerning the hiring charge of the Hong Kong Stadium. The daily hire is $150,000. This would really affect the Urban Council's role in promoting sports activities in future. I hope that the Urban Council will be concerned about the pricing policy and I also hope that the BOG will consider the hire charges seriously. Finally, I rise to support Mr. MA Lee-wo's motion. MR. JOSEPH CHAN YUEK-SUT (in Cantonese):—Mr. Chairman, the noise problem at the Hong Kong Stadium is in fact a design mistake. The redevelopment of the Hong Kong Stadium was initiated by the Hong Kong Government and the Royal Hong Kong Jockey Club. They were responsible for the design and construction. The Urban Council was not consulted and was unable to have any say. Our request for the keeping of the running track was rejected. At that time, I was very angry. The Central Government also told us very clearly that the redeveloped Hong Kong Stadium, when handed over to the Urban Council, would have to stage sports, recreation and entertainment activities, particularly Rugby Sevens, soccer and major concerts. Unfortunately, the Jockey Club and the Central Government at that time did not take into consideration the report on noise assessment. In their construction of the Stadium, no adjustment was made to abate noise. On the question of responsibility, since the Central Government and the Jockey Club did not construct the Stadium according to the recommendations of EPD, the Urban Council has to face the problem of noise nuisance to nearby residents when staging pop concerts. The responsibility should be borne by the Central Government and the Jockey Club and not the Urban Council. If the EPD wants to prosecute, it should prosecute the Central Government and the Jockey Club and not the Urban Council. If they prosecute the Urban Council, it is unfair. Moreover, the Central Government has handed over the management of the Hong Kong Stadium to the Urban Council. So our task is to make the best use of the Stadium. The Urban Council has the ability and the courage to face the problem. Let's put aside the noise problem first. To be fair, the redevelopment of the Hong Kong Stadium is something that we can be proud of. It is a very modern facility and a very grand one. If we can make the best use of this modern and grand facility, our general public will be able to enjoy more sports and recreational activities and the quality of life can also be enhanced. On the noise problem, in the long term, I think there are a number of things that need to be done. First, we must talk to the Central Government so that we will be allowed to deviate from commercial principles in our management and operation of the Hong Kong Stadium. I really don't understand why the Government forces the Urban Council to do so. Because all along, the Urban Page 11 of 115 HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL 21 Council has been serving the public and subsidizing a lot of activities. But with regard to the Stadium, we have to make money. I really can't understand why. If there had not been such a condition of self-financing and making a profit, then the question would have been quite simple. We can open the Hong Kong Stadium for the general public free of charge. We can organize a lot of sports and other recreational activities. We even needn't hold any pop concert at all. But the problem we face now is: on the one hand we need to be self-financing, on the other hand, if we cannot stage pop concerts to bring in more money, then there will be a huge deficit and the Urban Council would have to subsidize the Hong Kong Stadium. It will greatly affect our services to the public in other areas and provide other facilities as well. So if the Central Government is willing to allow us to dispense with the self-financing principle, then we will not be forced to make money and to engage Wembley to manage the Stadium for us and we will be able to cut expenses. If the Hong Kong Stadium could be maintained as a multi-purpose facility, then I think the design at present is not suitable for holding concerts. It will definitely create nuisance to nearby residents and it will be detrimental to their health as well. We must engage experts to modify our design. For instance, we should construct an acoustic shell and other noise barriers. The Urban Council has sent delegations overseas and have seen such multi-purpose facilities elsewhere with reference to their designs and operations. For instance, in Toronto, there is a sky dome and it is a very good example. CHAIRMAN (in English):—The time for each speech should not be longer than 20 minutes. Please address the motion about the noise and also about the concerts. MR. JOSEPH CHAN YUEK-SUT (in Cantonese):—Mr. Chairman, you didn't tell us of the time limit. CHAIRMAN (in English):—This is according to Standing Orders. We have a large number of speakers and also we have another motion debate. We don't want to keep every member until mid-night here. MR. JOSEPH CHAN YUEK-SUT (in Cantonese):—I think we should delegate the authority to the BOG to really study the issue to see whether interim measures can be put in place to resolve the noise problem so that the Hong Kong Stadium can be managed more effectively and we will be able to minimise the noise problem. As for the motion, it says that we need to effectively control the noise problem, I am in full support of that and I hope that the BOG will take this up and implement measures. I hope that the Hong Kong Stadium can continue to be a venue for concerts in the future and I hope that there won't be any noise nuisance to residents in the vicinity. I support the motion. CHAIRMAN (in English):—May I appeal to members to be more specific to address the noise problems and also the booking of pop concerts in this motion debate. Next speaker is Mr. PAO Ping-wing. Page 11 of 115

Baseline (Original)

Page 11 of 115 20 HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL such as soccer matches or other types of sports activities. There should be large scale whole day carnivals organised by the UC in the Hong Kong Stadium. So I think unless we can effectively control noise, it would be irresponsible for us to accept bookings of pop concerts. The Urban Council should take the initiative to seek ways and means to arrive at solutions which are reasonable and practicable to resolve the noise issue. We should co-operate with the department, the Jockey Club and the RCB. There have been criticisms concerning the hiring charge of the Hong Kong Stadium. The daily hire is $150,000. This would really affect the Urban Council's role in promoting sports activities in future. I hope that the Urban Council will be concerned about the pricing policy and I also hope that the BOG will consider the hire charges seriously. Finally, I rise to support Mr. MA Lee-wo's motion. MR. JOSEPH CHAN YUEK-SUT (in Cantonese):-Mr. Chairman, the noise problem at the Hong Kong Stadium is in fact a design mistake. The redevelopment of the Hong Kong Stadium was initiated by the Hong Kong Government and the Royal Hong Kong Jockey Club. They were responsible for the design and construciton. The Urban Council was not consulted and was unable to have any say. Our request for the keeping of the running track was rejected. At that time, I was very angry. The Central Government also told us very clearly that the redeveloped Hong Kong Stadium, when handed over to the Urban Council, would have to stage sports, recreation and entertainment activities, particularly Rugby Sevens, soccer and major concerts. Unfor- tunately, the Jockey Club and the Central Government at that time did not take into consideration the report on noise assessment. In their construction of the Stadium, no adjustment was made to abate noise. On the question of responsibility, since the Central Government and the Jockey Club did not construct the Stadium according to the recommendations of EPD, the Urban Council has to face the problem of noise nuisance to nearby residents when staging pop concerts. The responsibility should be borne by the Central Government and the Jockey Club and not the Urban Council. It the EPD wants to prosecute, it should prosecute the Central Government and the Jockey Club and not the Urban Council. If they prosecute the Urban Council, it is unfair. Moreover, the Central Government has handed over the management of the Hong Kong Stadium to the Urban Council. So our task is to make the best use of the Stadium. The Urban Council has the ability and the courage to face the problem. Let's put aside the noise problem first. To be fair, the redevelopment of the Hong Kong Stadium is something that we can be proud of. It is a very modern facility and a very grand one. If we can make the best use of this modern and grand facility, our general public will be able to enjoy more sports and recreational activities and the quality of life can also be enhanced. On the noise problem, in the long term, I think there are a number of things that need to be done. First, we must talk to the Central Government so that we will be allowed to deviate from commercial principles in our management and operation of the Hong Kong Stadium. I really don't understand why the Government forces the Urban Council to do so. Because all along, the Urban Page 11 of 115 HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL 21 Council has been serving the public and subsidizing a lot of activities. But with regard to the Stadium, we have to make money. I really can't understand why. If there had not been such a condition of self financing and making a profit, then the question would have been quite simple. We can open the Hong Kong Stadium for the general public free of charge. We can organize a lot of sports and other recreational activities. We even needn't hold any pop concert at all. But the problem we face now is: on the one hand we need to be self financing, on the other hand, if we cannot stage pop concerts to bring in more money, then there will be a hugh deficit and the Urban Council would have to subsidize the Hong Kong Stadium. It will greatly affect our services to the public in other areas and provide other facilities as well. So if the Central Government is willing to allow us to dispense with the self-financing principle, then we will not be forced to make money and to engage Wembley to manage the Stadium for us and we will be able to cut expenses. If the Hong Kong Stadium could be maintained as a multi-purpose facility, then I think the design at present is not suitable for holding concerts. It will definitely create nuisance to nearby residents and it will be detrimental to their health as well. We must engage experts to modify our design. For instance, we should construct an acoustic shell and other noise barriers. The Urban Council has sent delegations overseas and have seen such multi-purpose facilities elsewhere with reference to their designs and operations. For instance, in Toronto, there is a sky dome and it is a very good example. CHAIRMAN (in English):-The time for each speech should not be longer than 20 minutes. Please address the motion about the noise and also about the concerts. MR. JOSEPH CHAN YUEK-SUT (in Cantonese):--Mr. Chairman, you didn't tell us of the time limit. CHAIRMAN (in English):-This is according to Standing Orders. We have a large number of speakers and also we have another motion debate. We don't want to keep every members until mid-night here. MR. JOSEPH CHAN YUEK-SUT (in Cantonese):—I think we should delegate the authority to the BOG to really study the issue to see whether interim measures can be put in place to resolve the noise problem so that the Hong Kong Stadium can be managed more effectively and we will be able to minimise the noise problem. As for the motion, it says that we need to effectively control the noise problem, I am in full support of that and I hope that the BOG will take this up and implement measures. I hope that the Hong Kong Stadium can continue to be a venue for concerts in the future and I hope that there won't be any noise nuisance to residents in the vicinity. I support the motion. CHAIRMAN (in English):-May I appeal to members to be more specified to address the noise problems and also the booking of pop concerts in this motion debate. Next speaker is Mr. PAO Ping-wing. Page 11 of 115

2026-05-15 22:13:55 · Baseline

View content

Page 11 of 115

HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL

MR. JOSEPH CHAN YUEK-SUT (in Cantonese):-Mr. Chairman, the noise problem at the Hong Kong Stadium is in fact a design mistake. The redevelopment of the Hong Kong Stadium was initiated by the Hong Kong Government and the Royal Hong Kong Jockey Club. They were responsible for the design and construciton. The Urban Council was not consulted and was unable to have any say. Our request for the keeping of the running track was rejected. At that time, I was very angry. The Central Government also told us very clearly that the redeveloped Hong Kong Stadium, when handed over to the Urban Council, would have to stage sports, recreation and entertainment activities, particularly Rugby Sevens, soccer and major concerts. Unfor- tunately, the Jockey Club and the Central Government at that time did not take into consideration the report on noise assessment. In their construction of the Stadium, no adjustment was made to abate noise. On the question of responsibility, since the Central Government and the Jockey Club did not construct the Stadium according to the recommendations of EPD, the Urban Council has to face the problem of noise nuisance to nearby residents when staging pop concerts. The responsibility should be borne by the Central Government and the Jockey Club and not the Urban Council. It the EPD wants to prosecute, it should prosecute the Central Government and the Jockey Club and not the Urban Council. If they prosecute the Urban Council, it is unfair. Moreover, the Central Government has handed over the management of the Hong Kong Stadium to the Urban Council. So our task is to make the best use of the Stadium. The Urban Council has the ability and the courage to face the problem. Let's put aside the noise problem first. To be fair, the redevelopment of the Hong Kong Stadium is something that we can be proud of. It is a very modern facility and a very grand one. If we can make the best use of this modern and grand facility, our general public will be able to enjoy more sports and recreational activities and the quality of life can also be enhanced. On the noise problem, in the long term, I think there are a number of things that need to be done. First, we must talk to the Central Government so that we will be allowed to deviate from commercial principles in our management and operation of the Hong Kong Stadium. I really don't understand why the Government forces the Urban Council to do so. Because all along, the Urban

Page 11 of 115

HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL

Council has been serving the public and subsidizing a lot of activities. But with regard to the Stadium, we have to make money. I really can't understand why. If there had not been such a condition of self financing and making a profit, then the question would have been quite simple. We can open the Hong Kong Stadium for the general public free of charge. We can organize a lot of sports and other recreational activities. We even needn't hold any pop concert at all. But the problem we face now is: on the one hand we need to be self financing, on the other hand, if we cannot stage pop concerts to bring in more money, then there will be a hugh deficit and the Urban Council would have to subsidize the Hong Kong Stadium. It will greatly affect our services to the public in other areas and provide other facilities as well. So if the Central Government is willing to allow us to dispense with the self-financing principle, then we will not be forced to make money and to engage Wembley to manage the Stadium for us and we will be able to cut expenses. If the Hong Kong Stadium could be maintained as a multi-purpose facility, then I think the design at present is not suitable for holding concerts. It will definitely create nuisance to nearby residents and it will be detrimental to their health as well. We must engage experts to modify our design. For instance, we should construct an acoustic shell and other noise barriers. The Urban Council has sent delegations overseas and have seen such multi-purpose facilities elsewhere with reference to their designs and operations. For instance, in Toronto, there is a sky dome and it is a very good example.

CHAIRMAN (in English):-The time for each speech should not be longer than 20 minutes. Please address the motion about the noise and also about the concerts.

MR. JOSEPH CHAN YUEK-SUT (in Cantonese):--Mr. Chairman, you didn't tell us of the time limit.

CHAIRMAN (in English):-This is according to Standing Orders. We have a large number of speakers and also we have another motion debate. We don't want to keep every members until mid-night here.

CHAIRMAN (in English):-May I appeal to members to be more specified to address the noise problems and also the booking of pop concerts in this motion debate. Next speaker is Mr. PAO Ping-wing.

1994 — Page 11

Edit History

Comments

Private Research Note