1995 — Page 46

· 46 of 485

24

HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL

Thirdly, the capital cost of constructing a multi-purpose centre is $400 m, which is not to be paid by the Council but by the Government. The Council is only responsible for managing the facility. As far as the construction of a multi-purpose civic centre in Kwun Tong is concerned, is the Urban Council not going to recommend its construction to the Central Government? Is it because of this that the Government has not considered allocating $400 m to build the civic centre?

Mr. Pao Ping-WING (in Cantonese): I think there are three parts in Mr. Li's question. The first question concerns whether the civic centre in Kowloon East can meet the demand of the residents. Of the 78% utilization rate, the hirers' usage is only 41%. 46% is taken up by the Urban Council. That is the actual situation. In addition to Ngau Chi Wan Civic Centre, there is another regional civic centre, for Kowloon East, that is the Ko Shan Theatre. The Ko Shan Theatre is under reconstruction. By early 1996 it will be commissioned. About two years ago, the Council decided to convert the Ko Shan Theatre into an air-conditioned theatre with a capacity of 1,000. So in Kowloon East another venue for cultural activities will be in operation by 1996. The impact of the reopening of the Ko Shan Theatre on the overall utilization rate is still unknown. So the most sensible approach is to see the utilization rate after the operation of the Ko Shan Theatre. On the other hand, all policies decided by the Council can be changed by the Select Committee or even the Council. But I have to say that the 40% subsidy level is not our policy. I only wish to point out that given the utilization rate of 70%, or the income of $12 m per year, we still have to subsidise the operation of up to 40%, so it is not a policy. Finally, concerning the Council's reluctance to make recommendation leading to the delay in the construction of a civic centre in Kowloon East, I think every Council's decision should be a sensible one. If our internal discussion does not give ample justification for making recommendation to the Central Government then I think it is unreasonable to tell the Government that the Council does not care anything except having a civic centre. As you are aware, LegCo will also be involved as the Government has to seek money from the Finance Committee of LegCo. The decision made by LegCo in 1988/1989 that no more civic centres should be built is still valid. That was the recommendation made by the Director of Audit. I think Members have to be very careful and reasonable in dealing with this matter. The most prudent and sensible way is to look at the demands. The most opportune time to review the situation would be some time after the completion and commissioning of the Ko Shan Theatre. By that time we can assess and consider the situation in the whole of East Kowloon.

MR. LI WAH-MING (in Cantonese): I have more questions to ask after listening to what Mr. Pao tried to separate hirers' usage rate from the Urban Council's own presentations. The utilization rate is 78%, if it is 87% it is even better. Now he says that outside hirers only represent a small proportion and the majority of the utilization is taken up by Urban Council. Is it a policy that utilization by the Council should be discounted and only hirers' usage should be taken into account?