MR CHAN KIN-POR (in Cantonese): President, the Task Force on Land Supply (“the Task Force”) submitted a report to the Chief Executive recently, recommending the Government to give priority to three short-to-medium-term and five medium-to-long-term options to increase land supply. According to the projection of the Task Force, the eight options will be able to provide a total of 3 200 hectares of land, although there will still be a shortfall in land supply in the short-to-medium term will still remain.
The report points out that, in the short-to-meidum term, there will be a shortfall of 815 hectares until 2026. Even taken forward at full speed, the three short-to-medium-term options can provide 320 hectares only. In other words, even if the three recommendations, namely developing brownfield sites, private agricultural land and part of the golf course, are all implemented, there will still be a shortfall of 495 hectares in the short-to-medium term.
People who oppose reclamation keep saying that land supply will be sufficient if we focus on the development of brownfield sites and agricultural land. Yet, the report clearly indicates that there will still be a shortfall in land supply in the short-to-medium term even if these measures are taken forward at full speed. As stated in the report, although the development of brownfield sites receives the most support, society has underestimated the challenges and difficulties in developing brownfield sites. If compensation and relocation issues are not handled properly, brownfield development can hardly proceed. For example, the planning of Kwu Tung North/Fanling North new development area was launched a decade ago but land resumption has yet to start. Therefore, as pointed out by Mr Stanley WONG, Chairman of the Task Force, there is no single land supply option to eradicate the land shortage problem. The Government must adopt a multi-pronged approach and no option should be given up.
Moreover, according to the survey conducted by the Task Force, more and more members of the public understand the importance of the reclamation project to Hong Kong. Sixty-two percent of the questionnaire respondents and 58% of the telephone survey respondents supported the development of the East Lantau Metropolis. Among the options that can provide 1 200 hectares of land, the development of the East Lantau Metropolis received the support of 78% of the questionnaire respondents and 68% of the telephone survey respondents. I think the public are very smart as they understand that reclamation is the most effective way to solve the housing problem in the long run. With further explanations in detail by the Government on various issues, the public will better understand the truth of the matter and increasingly support the project.
Since the short-to-medium-term options cannot tackle the shortfall in the short-to-medium term, can we accelerate the supply in the medium-to-long term in the hope of compensating the shortfall in the short-to-medium term? A member of the Task Force with extensive experience in public policy tells me that it is possible if the Government is determined to accelerate the medium-to-long-term supply. The reclamation project under discussion now will take 13 to 14 years before the first batch of people may move in. However, if the Government proceeds with a breakthrough mindset and a new approach to overcome the cumbersome procedures, it can be shortened to eight to nine years before the first batch of residents may move in, and thus compensate the shortfall in the supply in the short-to-medium term.
That member of the Task Force points out that, in the case of the construction of the third runway taken up by the Hong Kong Airport Authority (“AA”), the reclamation is expected to take about six years, plus two to three years for the construction of the superstructure. It is estimated that the project will take eight to nine years in total to complete, far shorter than the Government’s projection of 10 years merely for reclamation. Hence, we can replicate the example of success of AA so that Hong Kong people can be allocated a flat as soon as possible.
This member of the Task Force states that, given the current political environment, it is impossible to set up a reclamation authority. Nevertheless, we may consider handing the development right to existing public bodies, such as the Hong Kong Housing Authority (“HA”), the Hong Kong Housing Society (“HS”) and Urban Renewal Authority (“URA”), upon the completion of development planning. HA can coordinate the development of public housing, the Home Ownership Scheme and the Green Form Subsidised Home Ownership Scheme, while HS and URA can coordinate the development of private and commercial buildings. They may work in partnership with the private sector and branch out their efforts to tap outside resources in order to accelerate the reclamation process. The time required for housing construction will definitely be shorter this way than being handled by the Government. There have been precedents for such arrangement. Apart from the experience of the third runway, the development of City One in Sha Tin is another example. Back then, the Government demarcated the seabed for four developers to conduct reclamation according to the Government’s planning. Moreover, the construction of the new airport back then, from the proposal in 1989 to the official opening, took nine years only. All these examples that reclamation can actually be accelerated and does not have to drag on for so long.
Frankly speaking, I think these suggestions are really insightful and worth considering. There are big problems in the existing mechansim of housing construction. Some people say that it takes too long for the Government to finish the process from finding the flour to the bread being baked. It shows that the bread-baking machine has broken down, meaning that the land creation mechanism malfunctions. The Chief Executive replied to me that the Government is simplifying the approval procedures of several relevant departments, but does that mean the bread-baking machine has been fixed? I believe many problems are yet to be solved. In order to complete land reclamation expeditiously so that the public can be allocated a flat as soon as possible, I very much agree with this proposal and hope the Government can look into it.
President, I have heard many people expressing admiration for the public housing system in Singapore, which truly achieves “housing for everyone”. Hong Kong may not be able to ahcieve the level of Singapore’s, but we can increase the supply of public housing substantially so that more people, in particular young people, may enjoy public housing. In order to achieve that, it is necessary to create a large piece of land by reclamation. We are envious of the Housing and Development Board flats in Singapore but oppose following their example in reclamation. This is totally unreasonable and asking for trouble.
The more the truth is debated, the clearer it will become. Reclamation is supported by the majority of the public. The next step is to study how to shorten the duration from 13 to 14 years to less than 10 years. Thirty years ago, the approval, reclamation and completion of the new airport took nine year only. Nowadays, with the advanced technology in reclamation and housing construction, the only reason for the project to drag on for so long must be the outdated procedures which the Government should really be determined to rectify.
I so submit.