of 654
560
HONG KONG PROVISIONAL URBAN COUNCIL
items for reduction. Was that so? I hope you will give an explanation for such a drastic change. Was it simply another case like the one mentioned just now by members of the ADPL in which not being aware of the market situation, they did not raise or support the proposal of reducing the rentals payable by Pei Ho Market stall lessees at the meeting of the Markets and Street Traders Select Committee in January? The issue was raised by Mr. WONG Chung-ki for discussion and the Department was urged to give consideration to it. In the end, the meeting concluded that the Department should prepare a paper to study an overall rental reduction scheme for markets. Was it because members of the ADPL were so inert to appreciate the difficulties of the people that it was not until the time for amendment (the exact date can no longer be recalled) that they realized them? The proposal was put up by the Democratic Party as early as January when the meeting of the Markets and Street Traders Select Committee was held.
We wish to clarify a figure. Today Mr. LAM Man-fai and another Member proposed that the rentals should be reduced by 40%. I believe that there are more than a couple of markets that need to have their rentals reduced. If this proposal was put up, all the markets might ask for a 40% reduction. I would like to ask Mr. LAM Man-fai and members of the ADPL what our loss would be if the rentals were reduced by 40%. Can they tell the public? We have made a preliminary calculation, which shows that a 1% reduction would mean an annual loss of $2.8m and that a 40% reduction would mean a loss of tens of millions of dollars. Could we cope with such a financial implication?
Of course, members of the Democratic Party support the idea in principle. Mr. Ambrose CHEUNG brought up some arguments just now and we want to elaborate on them. What affect directly the daily life of the public are the rentals of some cooked food stalls and markets, which are closely related with our livelihood. We support in principle that consideration should be made in this direction to cut down on the public's daily expenses. The livelihood of the people is affected not only by the rentals payable by the stall lessees, but also by the services provided by them because the cost of food would be cheaper. And I certainly hope that the cost of food would be cheaper after the rentals are reduced, so that life would be easier. I consider that we should move towards this direction and therefore we support in principle such a study. The direction should be one aimed at reducing the rentals of market stall lessees. We support this point.
I wish to add one point and that is, as a policy-making body, we have the duty to consider how we should recover our expenditure and loss in revenue from the Central Government. We hope that the motion, if carried, will not send out the wrong message that all the charges are being reduced. A Member recommended that admission fees for museums should be waived because of the economic recession. We are afraid that such a recommendation would convey a wrong message. The Urban Council has always given others a poor impression and its messages have always been misinterpreted. Take the
of 654
560
HONG KONG PROVISIONAL URBAN COUNCIL
items for reduction. Was that so? I hope you will give an explanation for such a drastic change. Was it simply another case like the one mentioned just now by members of the ADPL in which not being aware of the market situation. they did not raise or support the proposal of reducing the rentals payable by Pei Ho Market stall lessees at the meeting of the Markets and Street Traders Select Committee in January? The issue was raised by Mr. WONG Chung-ki for discussion and the Department was urged to give consideration to it. In the end, the meeting concluded that the Department should prepare a paper to study an overall rental reduction scheme for markets. Was it because members of the ADPL were so inert to appreciate the difficulties of the people that it was not until the time for amendment (the exact date can no longer be recalled) that they realized them? The proposal was put up by the Democratic Party as early as January when the meeting of the Markets and Street Traders Select Committee was held. We wish to clarify a figure. Today Mr. LAM Man-fai and another Member proposed that the rentals should be reduced by 40%. I believe that there are more than a couple of markets that need to have their rentals reduced. If this proposal was put up, all the markets might ask for a 40% reduction. I would like to ask Mr. LAM Man-fai and members of the ADPL what our loss would be if the rentals were reduced by 40%. Can they tell the public? We have made a preliminary calculation, which shows that a 1% reduction would mean an annual loss of $2.8m and that a 40% reduction would mean a loss of tens of millions of dollars. Could we cope with such a financial implication?
Of course, members of the Democratic Party support the idea in principle. Mr. Ambrose CHEUNG brought up some arguments just now and we want to elaborate on them. What affect directly the daily life of the public are the rentals of some cooked food stalls and markets, which are closely related with our livelihood. We support in principle that consideration should be made in this direction to cut down on the public's daily expenses. The livelihood of the people is affected not only by the rentals payable by the stall lessees, but also by the services provided by them because the cost of food would be cheaper. And I certainly hope that the cost of food would be cheaper after the rentals are reduced, so that life would be easier. I consider that we should move towards this direction and therefore we support in principle such a study. The direction should be one aimed at reducing the rentals of market stall lessees. We support this point.
I wish to add one point and that is, as a policy-making body, we have the duty to consider how we should recover our expenditure and loss in revenue from the Central Government. We hope that the motion, if carried, will not send out the wrong message that all the charges are being reduced. A Member recommended that admission fees for museums should be waived because of the economic recession. We are afraid that such a recommendation would convey a wrong message. The Urban Council has always given others a poor impression and its messages have always been misinterpreted. Take the
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.