Page 80 of 498
HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL
77
MR. RONNIE WONG MAN-CHIU (in Cantonese):-As to considering options from the perspective of their rates of return, I think at the meetings of the Board which I have attended, we never took that approach. I am sure the Chairman of the Hong Kong Stadium's Board of Governors has heard it clearly and I hope the Board will do so at future meetings.
Mr. Ambrose Cheung Wing-SUM (in Cantonese);—Mr. Chairman, from the answer given by Mr. Ronnie WONG, he mainly focused on the Board meeting held on 6 January 1995. At that time I was not a member of the Urban Council and hence not a member of the Stadium's Board of Governors. As such, I would like to raise 2 follow-up questions.
The first question. The information we were given just now was obtained through Wembley or even through the contractors' active approach to the Board. There seems to be no initiative or scientific approach of the Board to consider the proposal to build a roof over the Stadium. My question has to do with whether we can ask the Board to seriously follow up and obtain a firm reply over the total investment required.
My second question concerns the amount of investment and the rate of return. On becoming an Urban Councillor in April 1995, I asked for the documents concerning the Stadium for the last six months for reference. It can be seen clearly from the document dated 6 January 1995 which I am holding that, if we invested $2.2 billion, then working on the assumption of 50 concerts a year at the Stadium, the rate of return would render the cost to be recovered after 4 years. That was clearly recorded in the minutes of meeting. I would like to ask, in fact I am repeating my first question, that the Board of Governors continue to follow up on the proposal to build a roof, take the initiative to ask contractors for information and prices as well as consider the estimated rate of return. After that, I hope the Board will report to the Council.
Chairman (in Cantonese):—There should be no problem in doing that.
MR. RONNIE Wong Man-Chiu (in Cantonese):-The Board of Governors will certainly put the above proposal on the agenda.
(2) Mr. Tam Kwok-KIU asked the following question (in Cantonese):-In November 1995, the Police took action to stamp out the gambling activities at Hoi Sham Park in To Kwa Wan. If parkkeepers detect park goers gambling in the parks, although they do not possess the power of taking legal proceedings against the gamblers, they are nevertheless empowered to take arrest action under Section 11 of the Public Health and Municipal Services Ordinance, Cap. 132. I would like to ask:
(a) In the past three years, has the Urban Services Department arrested gamblers under this Ordinance? If the answer is positive, what is the number of cases involved? If the answer is negative, what are the reasons?
Page 80 of 498
Page 80 of 498
Page 80
Page 81
Page 80 of 498
Page 80 of 498
HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL
77
MR. RONNIE WONG MAN-CHIU (in Cantonese):-As to considering options from the perspective of their rates of return, I think at the meetings of the Board which I have attended, we never took that approach. I am sure the Chairman of the Hong Kong Stadium's Board of Governors has heard it clearly and I hope the Board will do so at future meetings.
Mr. Ambrose Cheung Wing-SUM (in Cantonese);—Mr. Chairman, from the answer given by Mr. Ronnie WONG, he mainly focused on the Board meeting held on 6 January 1995. At that time I was not a member of the Urban Council and hence not a member of the Stadium's Board of Governors. As such, I would like to raise 2 follow-up questions.
The first question. The information we were given just now was obtained through Wembley or even through the contractors' active approach to the Board. There seems to be no initiative or scientific approach of the Board to consider the proposal to build a roof over the Stadiran. My question has to do with whether we can ask the Board to seriously follow up and obtain a firm reply over the total investment required.
My second question concerns the amount of investment and the rate of return. On becoming an Urban Councillor in April 1995, I asked for the documents concerning the Stadium for the last six months for reference. It can be seen clearly from the document dated 6 January 1995 which I am holding that, if we invested $2.2 billion, then working on the assumption of 50 concerts a year at the Stadium, the rate of return would render the cost to be recovered after 4 years. That was clearly recorded in the minutes of meeting. I would like to ask, in fact I am repeating my first question, that the Board of Governors continue to follow up on the proposal to build a roof, take the initiative to ask contractors for information and prices as well as consider the estimated rate of return. After that, I hope the Board will report to the Council.
Chairman (in Cantonese):—There should be no problem in doing that.
MR. RONNIE Wong Man-Chiu (in Cantonese):-The Board of Governors will certainly put the above proposal on the agenda.
(2) Mr. Tam KwOK-KIU asked the following question (in Cantonese):-In November 1995, the Police took action to stamp out the gambling activities at Hoi Sham Park in To Kwa Wan. If parkkeepers detect park goers gambling in the parks, although they do not possess the power of taking legal proceedings against the gamblers, they are nevertheless empowered to take arrest action under Section 11 of the Public Health and Municipal Services Ordinance, Cap. 132. I would like to ask:
(a) In the past three years, has the Urban Services Department arrested gamblers under this Ordinance? If the answer is positive, what is the number of cases involved? If the answer is negative, what are the reasons?
Page 80 of 498
Page 80 of 498
Page 80Page 81
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.