Page 393 of 485
18593 of 485
106
# HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL
In considering the recommendations contained in the Director of Audit's Report No. 22, the Public Accounts Committee of the Urban Council at its meeting on 29 September 1994 reaffirmed its position that it would be anomalous for the Council to subsidise cultural events as a matter of policy, whilst at the same time seeking to recover the full cost of its ticketing service. In this regard, the Council noted the subsidy level for the ticketing service has been substantially reduced over the past years. In 1985/86, the subsidy level was 96%. In 1994/95, this figure has been reduced to 48.5%. From this figure, we can see that we have actually reduced the subsidy level. The Council also reaffirmed its policy of not setting a target date for achieving the full cost recovery, but to continue to review the subsidy level having regard to the inflation, public acceptability and other factors.
The second part of the question asks whether it is the Council's policy to subsidise commercial activities. The current ticket charge of $3.00 per ticket as approved by the Council is applicable across the board to all URBTIX users. There is no differentiation between commercial and non-commercial hirers.
The third part of the question asks whether the Council should deduct the ticket costs from venue hire charges for inclusion in the income of URBTIX office. This is a policy matter for further review by the Council. As the issue involves the Culture Select Committee and the Entertainment Select Committee, the Department will submit a paper on this aspect for consideration of these two Committees.
In relation to the final part of the question, regular reviews have been conducted on the URBTIX's efficiency and productivity. For example, on the technical aspect after the computer upgrade in 1995, the system can now efficiently issue 21,000 tickets per hour (as compared to only 5,300 before the upgrade exercise). On the operational aspect, the productivity and performance standards have been reviewed as part of the 'Value for Money' study. Since the review, the establishment of HKCC Box Office staff has been reduced from 10 staff to 7, whilst that of City Hall has been maintained at 6. The productivity standard now stands at 27.02 tickets per man-hour for these two box offices. As compared to the previous performance of 24.4 tickets for the Cultural Centre and 21.7 tickets for City Hall per man-hour respectively, there has been a significant rise in productivity.
MR. CHAN CHOI-HI (in Cantonese):—I would like to ask a question in relation to paragraph 4 of the reply. At present, there is no subsidy for commercial activities, but the current ticket charges are $3 per ticket. So, to some extent, it is admitted that we are actually subsidising commercial activities. I would like to know the Chairman's view on this issue. I wonder if we really should subsidise commercial activities. Couldn't this policy be changed?
MR. SUEN KAI-CHEONG (in Cantonese):—I would like to reply to Mr. CHAN's question. Concerning paragraph 4 of my reply, I was stating that at present, we
Page 393 of 485
Page 393 of 485
18593 of 485
106
HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL
In considering the recommendations contained in the Director of Audit's Report No. 22, the Public Accounts Committee of the Urban Council at its meeting on 29 September 1994 reaffirmed its position that it would be anomalous for the Council to subsidise cultural events as a matter of policy, whilst at the same time seeking to recover the full cost of its ticketing service. In this regard, the Council noted the subsidy level for the ticketing service has been substantially reduced over the past years. In 1985/86, the subsidy level was 96%. In 1994/95, this figure has been reduced to 48.5%. From this figure, we can see that we have actually reduced the subsidy level. The Council also reaffirmed its policy of not setting a target date for achieving the full cost. recovery, but to continue to review the subsidy level having regard to the inflation, public acceptability and other factors.
The second part of the question asks whether it is the Council's policy to subsidise commercial activities. The current ticket charge of $3.00 per ticket as approved by the Council is applicable across the board to all URBTIX users. There is no differentiation between commercial and non-commercial hirers.
The third part of the question asks whether the Council should deduct the ticket costs from venue hire charges for inclusion in the income of URBTIX office. This is a policy matter for further review by the Council. As the issue involves the Culture Select Committee and the Entertainment Select Committee, the Department will submit a paper on this aspect for consideration of these two Committees.
In relation to the final part of the question, regular reviews have been conducted on the URBTIX's efficiency and productivity. For example, on the technical aspect after the computer upgrade in 1995, the system can now efficiently issue 21 000 tickets per hour (as compared to only 5 300 before the upgrade exercise). On the operational aspect, the productivity and performance standards have been reviewed as part of the 'Value for Money' study. Since the review, the establishment of HKCC Box Office staff has been reduced from 10 staff to 7, whilst that of City Hall has been maintained at 6. The productivity standard now stands at 27.02 tickets per man-hour for these two box offices. As compared to the previous performance of 24.4 tickets for the Cultural Centre and 21.7 tickets for City Hall per man-hour respectively, there has been a significant rise in productivity.
MR. CHAN CHOI-Hi (in Cantonese):—I would like to ask a question in relation to paragraph 4 of the reply. At present, there is no subsidy for commercial activities, but the current ticket charges are $3 per ticket. So, to some extent, it is admitted that we are actually subsidising commercial activities. I would like to know the Chairman's view on this issue. I wonder if we really should subsidise commercial activities. Couldn't this policy be changed?
MR. SUEN KAI-CHEONG (in Cantonese):—1 would like to reply to Mr. CHan's question. Concerning paragraph 4 of my reply, I was stating that at present, we
Page 393 of 485
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.