The minutes were confirmed on 4 September 2018 without amendment.

Minutes of the Third Meeting of District Council in 2018

Date : 26 June 2018 (Tuesday)

Time : 9:30 a.m. – 6:30 p.m.

Venue : Conference Room, Council, 13/F., Yuen Long Government Offices, 2 Kiu Lok Square, Yuen Long

Present Time of Arrival Time of Withdrawal Chairman: Mr SHUM Ho-kit (Beginning of the meeting) (End of the meeting) Vice-chairman: Mr WONG Wai-shun, MH (Beginning of the meeting) (End of the meeting) Members: Mr CHAM Ka-hung, Daniel, (Beginning of the meeting) (End of the meeting) BBS, MH, JP Ms CHAN Mei-lin (Beginning of the meeting) (4:50 p.m.) Mr CHEUNG Muk-lam (Beginning of the meeting) (3:30 p.m.) Mr CHING Chan-ming (Beginning of the meeting) (End of the meeting) Ms CHIU Sau-han, MH (Beginning of the meeting) (End of the meeting) Mr CHOW Wing-kan (Beginning of the meeting) (End of the meeting) Mr KWOK Hing-ping (Beginning of the meeting) (2:55 p.m.) Mr KWOK Keung, MH (Beginning of the meeting) (End of the meeting) The Hon KWONG Chun-yu (Beginning of the meeting) (End of the meeting) Mr LAI Wai-hung (Beginning of the meeting) (11:15 a.m.) Ms LAU Kwai-yung (Beginning of the meeting) (End of the meeting) Mr LEE Yuet-man, MH (Beginning of the meeting) (End of the meeting) The Hon LEUNG Che-cheung, (Beginning of the meeting) (12:15 p.m.) SBS, MH, JP Mr LEUNG Fuk-yuen (Beginning of the meeting) (End of the meeting) Mr LEUNG Ming-kin (Beginning of the meeting) (End of the meeting) Mr LUI Kin, MH (9:45 a.m.) (6:10 p.m.) The Hon LUK Chung-hung (Beginning of the meeting) (12:15 p.m.) Ms MA Shuk-yin (10:00 a.m.) (End of the meeting) Mr MAK Ip-sing (9:50 a.m.) (4:00 p.m.) Mr MAN Kwong-ming (Beginning of the meeting) (6:05 p.m.) Mr MAN Ping-nam, MH (Beginning of the meeting) (12:15 p.m.) Mr SIU Long-ming (Beginning of the meeting) (End of the meeting) Mr TANG Cheuk-him (Beginning of the meeting) (6:00 p.m.) Mr TANG Cheuk-yin (Beginning of the meeting) (3:15 p.m.) Mr TANG Ho-nin (Beginning of the meeting) (5:50 p.m.) Mr TANG Ka-leung (Beginning of the meeting) (6:05 p.m.) Mr TANG Lai-tung (Beginning of the meeting) (12:15 p.m.) Mr TANG Sui-man (Beginning of the meeting) (11:00 a.m.) Mr TANG Yung-yiu, Ronnie (Beginning of the meeting) (2:50 p.m.) Mr TO Ka-lun (Beginning of the meeting) (End of the meeting) Mr TSANG Shu-wo (Beginning of the meeting) (6:15 p.m.) Mr WONG Cheuk-kin (9:35 a.m.) (4:50 p.m.)

- 1 -

Ms WONG Wai-ling (9:40 a.m.) (End of the meeting) Mr WONG Wai-yin, Zachary (Beginning of the meeting) (End of the meeting) Mr YIU Kwok-wai (Beginning of the meeting) (End of the meeting) Mr YOUNG Ka-on (Beginning of the meeting) (End of the meeting) Ms YUEN Man-yee (Beginning of the meeting) (End of the meeting)

Secretary: Mr KONG Kwok-piu, Bill Senior Executive Officer (District Council), Yuen Long District Office Assistant Ms WONG Man-ting, Executive Officer I (District Council), Secretary: Mandy Yuen Long District Office

In Attendance Mr YUEN Ka-lok, Enoch, JP District Officer (Yuen Long) Mr NG Lak-sun, Nixon Assistant District Officer (Yuen Long) 1 Ms MAK Ka-ying, Carren Assistant District Officer (Yuen Long) 2 Mr CHAN Hon-kwan, Harris Senior Liaison Officer (Rural), Yuen Long District Office Mr NG Kai-tung, Absalom Liaison Officer i/c (Town 1), Yuen Long District Office Mr LAM Chi-keung, Desmond Chief Engineer/West 1, Civil Engineering and Development Department Mr KWONG Ying-wai Chief School Development Officer (Yuen Long), Education Bureau Mr CHEUNG Pui-chung District Environmental Hygiene Superintendent (Yuen Long), Food and Environmental Hygiene Department Mr LEE Wai-man District Commander (Yuen Long), Police Force Ms YIP Yan-cheung Assistant Police Community Relations Officer Youth Engagement (Yuen Long District), Hong Kong Police Force Mr WONG Wing-hung, Chief Manager/Management ( and Stephen Yuen Long), Housing Department Ms CHAN Suet-ching, District Lands Officer/Yuen Long (District Lands Angela Office, Yuen Long), Lands Department Mr NG Ping-tong, Gordon Administrative Assistant/Lands (District Lands Office, Yuen Long), Lands Department Mr LEE Wai-keung, Ambrose Deputy District Leisure Manager (District Support) Yuen Long, Leisure and Cultural Services Department Mr NG Yuk-man, David District Planning Officer (Tuen Mun and Yuen Long West), Planning Department Ms CHU Wing-yin, Diana District Social Welfare Officer (Yuen Long), Social Welfare Department Mr LAM Chi-ming, James Assistant District Social Welfare Officer (Yuen Long)1, Social Welfare Department Ms TAM Lok-yan, Carol Senior Transport Officer/Yuen Long 1, Transport Department

- 2 -

Item II Mr LIU Chun-san, JP Under Secretary for Development, Development Bureau Ms CHONG Yau-ling, Principal Assistant Secretary (Planning & Christina Lands)6, Development Bureau Mr LAM Chi-man, David Principal Assistant Secretary (Planning & Lands)5, Development Bureau Mr WONG Lap-ki Assistant Secretary (Planning)6, Development Bureau Ms CHIU Lee-lee, Lily Chief Estate Surveyor (Acquisition Section), Lands Department Mr WU Pak-lam Senior Manager/Clearance (Clearance/Headquarter Office), Lands Department Mr YAM Sai-ling Principal Lands Executive/Railway Development & Special Projects (Atg.), Lands Department Mr LAM Chi-keung, Desmond Chief Engineer/West 1, Civil Engineering and Development Department

Item III Mr CHOW Bing-kay Senior Engineer/North West, Transport Department

Items IV to VII Mr HO Hon-kit, Humphrey Assistant Director/New Buildings 2, Buildings Department Mr TAM A Ray, Albert Chief Structural Engineer/, Buildings Department Mr CHAN Chau-fat Assistant Director/Railways, Electrical and Mechanical Services Department Mr VY Ek-chin Chief Engineer/Railways 1, Electrical and Mechanical Services Department Mr WONG Wing-kin, Terry General Manager – Infrastructure Maintenance, MTR Corporation Limited Mr HO Wing-hong Manager – External Affairs, MTR Corporation Limited Ms LAM Yuen Assistant Public Relations Manager - External Affairs, MTR Corporation Limited

Items VIII to X Mr FU Chuen-fu, Mark Political Assistant to Secretary for Transport and Housing, Transport and Housing Bureau Mr LO Kwok-wah, Kelvin, JP Project Manager/Major Works, Highways Department Mr WAN Cheuk-keung Senior Engineer/Yuen Long Footbridge, Highways Department Mr LAU Shing-cheong Chief Engineer/Land Drainage, Drainage Services Department Mr WONG Hip-lik, Thomas Chief Engineer/Drainage Projects, Drainage Services Department Mr CHOW Bing-kay Senior Engineer/North West, Transport Department

- 3 -

Absence Mr CHAN Sze-ching Absent with apologies Mr TANG Hing-ip, BBS Absent with apologies

* * * * *

Opening Remarks

The Chairman welcomed Members and departmental representatives to the third meeting of the Yuen Long District Council (“YLDC”) in 2018. He congratulated Mr LEUNG Ming-kin on his daughter’s birth on behalf of Members.

2. The Chairman extended a particular welcome to Mr NG Yuk-man, David, the newly appointed District Planning Officer (Tuen Mun and Yuen Long West) of Planning Department, to the meeting. Mr NG replaced Mr LAM Chi-man, David, whom the Chairman thanked for his past assistance to the Council on behalf of the YLDC. The Chairman also extended a particular welcome to Ms YIP Yan-cheung, the newly appointed Assistant Police Community Relations Officer (Yuen Long District) of Hong Kong Police Force, to the meeting and thanked Mr LEE Pak-ho, Beco for his past assistance to the Council on behalf of the YLDC.

3. The Chairman welcomed the following departmental representatives to the meeting:

Deputy District Leisure Manager (District Mr LEE Wai-keung, Ambrose Support) Yuen Long, Leisure and Cultural Services Department (Stood in for Mr WONG Shu-yan, Francis, Chief Leisure Manager (New Territories North))

Senior Transport Officer/Yuen Long 1, Transport Ms TAM Lok-yan, Carol Department (Stood in for Mr HUE Ka-yiu, Daniel, Chief Transport Officer/New Territories North West)

Assistant District Social Welfare Officer (Yuen Mr LAM Chi-ming, James Long)1, Social Welfare Department ((Stood in for Ms CHU Wing-yin, Diana, District Social Welfare Officer (Yuen Long))

4. As to the agenda, the Chairman suggested dealing with Items IV to VII together as they were four questions raised by 26 members about the subsidence of the viaduct piers at West Rail . The Chairman said following the media report on the subsidence problem of the viaduct piers at West Rail Yuen Long Station on Friday before the meeting, Members hoped that the YLDC would pay due regard to the situation and invite representatives from the Government and MTR Corporation Limited (“MTRCL”) to the meeting for an urgent discussion. Therefore, he agreed to exercise the power under Order 13(1) of the District Council Standing Orders ("Standing Orders") and accepted the above four questions at a short notice.

- 4 -

5. Moreover, as agenda items VIII to X were three questions raised by 20 Members about the works project of an elevated footbridge linking West Rail and Kau Yuk Road in Yuen Long, the Chairman suggested dealing with the items together. The Chairman said five Members had already submitted questions about the elevated footbridge on 4 June. Since matters on pedestrian corridor had all along been followed up by the Traffic and Transport Committee (“T&TC”), the questions should be referred to the T&TC for follow-up. That said, as the Legislative Council Finance Committee (“LegCo FC”) would deliberate the works project of the footbridge on 29 June or later, it might be too late if the matter was discussed at the T&TC meeting on 12 July. At the same time, various sectors of the community were very concerned about the issue lately and they hoped that a discussion would be held at the YLDC as soon as possible. Therefore, the Chairman suggested that the matter be discussed at the meeting, together with Members’ relevant questions to be raised at the T&TC.

6. The Chairman said that he had received a motion about the footbridge from seven Members the day before the meeting. The Secretariat had tabled the motion for circulation. According to Order 17 of the Standing Orders, Members had to inform the Secretariat of the motion to be moved 14 clear working days prior to the meeting. Considering that the motion was related to the questions about the footbridge and the public were highly concerned about the issue, the Chairman exercised the power conferred by Order 17 of the Standing Orders and agreed that Members could discuss and vote on the motion.

7. Mr Zachary WONG said that the motion moved by seven Members was to urge professional institutes to design a pedestrian corridor in but agenda items VIII to X were to discuss the pedestrian corridor in . Holding that the motion was irrelevant to the pedestrian corridor in Yuen Long Town, he asked the Chairman to reconsider his decision.

8. Mr TO Ka-lun shared Mr WONG’s view that the motion was about designing a pedestrian corridor in Tin Shui Wai, which was irrelevant to that of Yuen Long. He asked the Chairman to reconsider his decision.

9. Mr LEE Yuet-man, MH said that the pedestrian corridor was a very important issue related to people’s livelihood attracting great attention from residents. Though he just returned to Hong Kong on Saturday before the meeting, he approached other Members to submit the item to the Chairman, in the hope of discussing it before the LegCo FC meeting. Thanks to the Chairman’s arrangement, the issue could be promptly discussed at the meeting. He agreed with and supported the Chairman’s people-oriented decision. He held that the motion on livelihood issue should be accorded priority and discussed at the YLDC meeting, but he felt sorry that professional institutes failed to send any representatives to the meeting. He hoped that the DC would go into the issue as soon as possible.

10. Mr YIU Kwok-wai agreed with the Chairman to accept the motion. First of all, the construction of a pedestrian corridor, be it in Tin Shui Wai or Yuen Long, was a livelihood issue in Yuen Long District. While professional institutes opposed the proposed pedestrian corridor in Yuen Long Town, the motion was about inviting them to design a pedestrian corridor in Tin Shui Wai. Therefore, he agreed to the Chairman’s arrangement.

- 5 -

11. Mr Zachary WONG did not understand why Members invited professional institutes to design the pedestrian corridor in Tin Shui Wai well before government departments had drawn up any plan. What he had just reflected was the procedures for dealing with a motion but Members could not explain why the motion could be discussed at the meeting under the procedures. If the motion was discussed just because it was a livelihood issue, he was worried that the discussion items in the YLDC would cover any territory-wide issue in the future. If the motion was to invite professional institutes to design a pedestrian corridor in Yuen Long Town, it would be relevant to the agenda items to be discussed. In his opinion, Members could raise a separate issue on the pedestrian corridor in Tin Shui Wai but it was inappropriate to accept discussing it with other items.

12. Mr TO Ka-lun said the motion might cause confusion to the public, given their concern about the pedestrian corridor in Yuen Long and the focus of the motion was to design a pedestrian corridor in Tin Shui Wai. He agreed to Mr WONG’s argument that Members could raise a separate issue on the pedestrian corridor in Tin Shui Way and he hoped the Chairman would reconsider the arrangement of the motion. Furthermore, he hoped that Members would respect the professional institutes which were unable to send any representatives to the meeting within a short period because of their work commitments.

13. Mr LEE Yuet-man, MH emphasised that Yuen Long District comprised Yuen Long Town, Tin Shui Wai and rural areas and therefore the pedestrian corridor in Tin Shui Wai was a matter related to Yuen Long District. Also, if he did not propose the matter of the pedestrian corridor in Yuen Long with other Members, the issue submitted by Mr WONG and other four Members long ago would not be discussed at the meeting but be deferred to the T&TC meeting in July when the LegCo FC might have already made a resolution on the pedestrian corridor in Yuen Long. He opined that Members should not waste their time on discussing whether to accept the motion but examine the issue of people’s livelihood as soon as possible. Otherwise, it would run counter to the purpose of the YLDC. Since the motion was to invite professional institutes to design a pedestrian corridor in Tin Shui Wai with their expertise on a similar facility in Yuen Long and both pedestrian corridors were related to people’s livelihood, he supported the Chairman’s decision.

14. Mr MAN Ping-nam, MH said that Members could object to the Chairman’s arrangement regarding the motion. However, no matter they were for or against the arrangement, they could not oppose discussing the pedestrian corridor in Tin Shui Wai at the meeting. As the Chairman had decided that the motion complied with the Standing Orders, Members could make a discussion.

15. Mr Zachary WONG said a Member pointed out that the pedestrian corridor in Yuen Long would not be discussed at the meeting without the submission of the matter by that Member and 13 other Members. In response, he clarified that he and four other Members, who submitted the concerned matter on 4 June, were the first to raise the topic for discussion. He did not understand why the Member said the issue would only be discussed under his lead. It was noted that the matter had been scheduled for discussion at the T&TC special meeting on Thursday instead of the next T&TC meeting in July. Also, concerning Mr MAN ping-nam’s view that Members should not oppose discussing the pedestrian corridor in Tin Shui Wai at the meeting, he clarified that he was not against the discussion. Instead, the motion should not be discussed alongside the pedestrian corridor issue in Yuen Long. That was why he suggested that Members conduct a standalone discussion on the matter.

- 6 -

16. Mr YIU Kwok-wai clarified that the motion related to district affair in Yuen Long. As a YLDC Member, he held that the motion could be discussed in tandem with other issues at the meeting. Also, he respected the Chairman’s power and his decision of discussing the motion with relevant matters. Lastly, he opined that YLDC Members should not be so narrow-minded as a pedestrian corridor in Yuen Long District could generally refer to any pedestrian access in the district. Such facility could be constructed above the nullah in Yuen Long Town or Tin Shui Wai. As people said the role of DC Members was to “construct bridges and pave roads” for residents, he hoped to fulfil these duties.

17. Mr LEE Yuet-man, MH thanked the Chairman for the arrangement regarding the motion. He pointed out that he was not asking for credit but the agenda would not have been revised to include discussion of the topic at the meeting if he had not submitted it with 13 other Members. Also, as a T&TC member, he enquired why he was not aware or informed of the special meeting of the T&TC. He emphasised that Tin Shui Wai was a part of Yuen Long District so it was appropriate to discuss the motion in association with relevant matters at the meeting. He supported the Chairman’s decision.

18. Mr CHING Chan-ming said as the T&TC Chairman, he would like to allay Members’ concern on the special meeting of the T&TC. In view of the public’s grave concern about the subject matter, many Members had raised relevant issues for discussion at the meeting. However, according to the Standing Orders, matters could only be discussed at the meeting with the consent of more than half of the Members present. Therefore, the matter was not supposed to be discussed at the meeting. Considering that the T&TC had been handling matters of traffic and transport in the district and the LegCo FC would discuss the elevated pedestrian corridor in Yuen Long, the T&TC had originally planned to convene a special meeting two days after the DC meeting.

19. Mr KWOK Keung, MH said it was DC Members’ responsibility to “construct bridges and pave roads” for residents. He pointed out that the YLDC had endorsed the construction of a pedestrian corridor above the Yuen Long Nullah in 2014. Also, the proposal by professional institutes which did not meet the needs of Yuen Long residents had been rejected. At that time, the professional institutes indicated they would respect the views of the YLDC and did not raise any objection within 60 days after the original scheme was gazetted but now, they objected when the Government applied for funding from the LegCo FC. While the professional institutes indicated serious concern about the pedestrian corridor in the district but had no respect for the views of the YLDC, Members would like them to design the pedestrian corridor in the new development area in Tin Shui Wai to be discussed at the meeting.

20. Mr LEUNG Fuk-yuen said that the pedestrian corridor in Yuen Long had been discussed by the YLDC for more than 10 years and had been endorsed in 2014. However, the views of the YLDC had not been respected by the professional institutes, as reflected in their objection. He supported discussing matters relating to Yuen Long and Tin Shui Wai at the meeting.

21. Mr LUI Kin, MH said Members’ motion about the pedestrian corridor in Tin Shui Wai should be distinguished from the pedestrian corridor in Yuen Long, suggesting that they be handled

- 7 -

as two subject matters. Members should discuss the issue on the pedestrian corridor in Yuen Long and put the motion of the pedestrian corridor in Tin Shui Wai to vote.

22. The Chairman asked whether Mr LUI supported handling the two subject matters individually.

23. Mr LUI Kin, MH said he would respect and support the Chairman if it was decided that the two matters be dealt with concurrently. However, as regards the nature of the motion, the pedestrian corridor in Tin Shui Wai and that in Yuen Long were two distinct matters though relevant. Therefore, they should be handled separately according to the Standing Orders.

24. Mr MAK Ip-sing said the agenda items VIII to X were about the pedestrian corridor in Yuen Long. According to the Standing Orders, if Members wanted to move a motion on a matter, they could do so during the discussion. Therefore, he held that Members should not discuss whether to accept the motion at the moment. As the motion was associated with the pedestrian corridor in Tin Shui Wai but the discussion topic was about the pedestrian corridor in Yuen Long, they were two different issues. If the Chairman decided to allow the meeting to discuss the motion, he suggested doing so separately and not simultaneously with the matter. If the motion and the matter were combined for discussion, he was worried that Members would consider the works projects of different locations together in the future, making it difficult for the departments to grasp Members’ views. Furthermore, he pointed out that the department had not mentioned the proposal at a cost of $1.7 billion during the consultation and was concerned that the costly pedestrian corridor in Yuen Long would be a waste of the public money.

25. The Chairman said one of the Members proposing the motion had said it was more appropriate to discuss and vote on the motion separately. However, according to the Standing Orders, matters could only be discussed at the meeting with the consent of more than half of the Members present. Therefore, the Chairman suggested Members moving the motion to gain support from more than half of the Members present so that the matter could be discussed separately at the meeting.

26. Mr LEE Yeut-man, MH said the Chairman who initiated a joint discussion had made a right decision because a pedestrian corridor was relevant to people’s livelihood, be it in Yuen Long or Tin Shui Wai. Members should not merely argue over the meeting procedures. Nonetheless, he had no say at all if the Chairman would like to change his initial decision and decided that Members could only discuss and vote on the motion with the support of more than half of the Members.

27. The Chairman clarified that he was not changing his decision but what he had decided caused disputes among Members. The YLDC emphasised democracy but at the same time, it had to follow the Standing Orders. He only suggested that Members moving the motion gain support from more than half of the Members present when he considered that one of them also found a separate discussion more appropriate. If Members moving the motion raised no objection, the Chairman proposed to vote by a show of hands. The motion about the pedestrian corridor in Tin Shui Wai could be discussed at the meeting with the support from more than half of the Members.

- 8 -

Then the Chairman asked Members to vote by a show of hands.

28. Mr Zachary WONG said the motion could be discussed at the meeting upon support from more than half of the Members. Therefore, Members did no need to raise their hands to express opposition.

29. The Chairman understood that the motion could be discussed at the meeting upon support from more than half of the Members but under normal procedures, opposing votes should also be recorded.

30. Members cast their votes by a show of hands on whether discussing the motion at the meeting should be accepted.

31. The Chairman announced that 25 Members voted for the motion, 4 Members against it and 3 Members abstained from voting. More than half of the Members were in favour of discussing the motion at the meeting.

32. The Hon KWONG Chun-yu said he did not intend to influence the decision of the Chairman but the motion should be handled carefully. The motion stated “The YLDC urges professional institutes to design a pedestrian corridor in Tin Shui Wai” but according to his understanding, professional institutes were non-public organisations and district councils would rarely request them to design a pedestrian corridor in a district. Members proposing the motion gave people an impression that because the pedestrian corridor in Yuen Long was discussed at the meeting, they took the chance to request professional institutes to design the pedestrian corridor in Tin Shui Wai. He understood that the motion had gained support from more than half of the Members but he hoped the Chairman would handle the issue carefully.

33. The Chairman thanked Mr KWONG for his opinion. He understood that Members held different views which were expressed by a show of hands on how to deal with the motion. As the Chairman, he would preside at the meeting following the Standing Orders and would respect Members’ views. As more than half of the Members were in favour of discussing the motion at the meeting, he accepted the motion which would be discussed after the item on the pedestrian corridor in Yuen Long. He also took the opportunity to remind Members that the motion was moved in such haste that professional institutes were not represented at the meeting and departmental representatives might not be able to respond.

34. The Chairman suggested referring the following matter to the Culture, Recreation, Community Service and Housing Committee (“CRCS&HC”), i.e. “Mr WONG Wai-shun, MH and Mr WONG Cheuk-kin requested the Government to brief on the results of public consultation on the proposed amendments to Building Management Ordinance, requested the water and electricity expenses be excluded from the calculation of remuneration, and the Deeds of Mutual Covenant (“DMC”) manager’s remuneration be further reduced in proportion to the number of households to a reasonable level.”

- 9 -

35. Also, the Chairman suggested referring the following matters to the Traffic and Transport Committee (“T&TC”), namely, “Mr LEE Yuet-man, MH, Ms CHIU Sau-han, MH, Mr WONG Cheuk-kin, the Hon LEUNG Che-cheung, SBS, MH, JP, Mr LUI Kin, MH, Mr SIU Long-ming, Mr KWOK Keung, MH, Ms WONG Wai-ling and Ms MA Shuk-yin condemned the TD and bus companies for their failure to respond to the passengers’ demand in Tin Shui Wai by forcefully launching the Yuen Long District Bus Route Retrogression Programme in 2018-19 against people’s wish, and requested the Programme be withdrawn and endorsed by the YLDC before implementation”, and “Mr LEE Yuet-man, MH and Ms CHIU Sau-han, MH opposed the unreasonably sharp fare increase by Citybus and requested the fare increase application be withdrawn and endorsed by the YLDC prior to the increase”.

36. Members raised no objection to the agenda.

Item I: Confirmation of the Minutes of the Second Meeting of YLDC in 2018 37. The minutes of the second meeting of YLDC in 2018 were confirmed.

Item II: Proposed enhancements to ex-gratia compensation and rehousing arrangements for government development clearance exercises (YLDC Paper No. 40/2018) 38. The Chairman asked Members to take note of Paper No. 40, which was a brief by the Development Bureau and Lands Department on the proposed enhancements to ex-gratia compensation and rehousing arrangements for government development clearance exercises.

39. The Chairman welcomed the following bureau/department representatives to the meeting to brief Members on the paper and respond to their enquiries:

Development Bureau (“DEVB”) CUnder Secretary for Development Mr LIU Chun-san, JP uPrincipal Assistant Secretary for Development Ms CHONG Yau-ling, Christina l (Planning and Lands) 6 tPrincipal Assistant Secretary for Development Mr LAM Chi-man, David u (Planning and Lands) 5 rAssistant Secretary for Development (Planning) 6 Mr WONG Lap-ki e ,Lands Deparment (“LandsD”) RChief Estate Surveyor (Acquisition Section) Ms CHIU Lee-lee, Lily eSenior Manager/Clearance (Clearance/HQ Office) Mr WU Pak-lam cPrincipal Land Executive/Railway Development Mr YAM Sai-ling r and Special Projects e Civil Engineering and Development Department (“CEDD”) Chief Engineer/West 1 Mr LAM Chi-keung, Desmond

40. Mr LIU Chun-san, JP said when launching development projects such as the programmes in New Development Area, Yuen Long South, South and

- 10 -

Housing Development, the Government received views on compensation and rehousing arrangements from affected parties and local stakeholders. A considerable number of residents affected by clearance exercises pointed out that the existing arrangement could not cater for their needs. For example, when the Administration briefed the YLDC on land resumption, rehousing and ex-gratia compensation arrangements and other implementation details at the meeting of the Working Group on Hung Shui Kiu New Development Area (“WGHSKNDA”) in June 2017, the WGHSKNDA expressed the views on clearance, asking the Government to consider waiving the income and asset tests for rehousing the affected households. The Government was well aware that the affectees were concerned about clearance and removal as a result of development. It also understood the society had an aspiration that when taking forward a development project, the Government should adopt a fair and reasonable approach to ensure resources were used properly so that the needs of different sectors of the society, especially the grassroots, could be fulfilled. From the legal perspective, surveyed squatter structures that were “tolerated” and “allowed to exist” did not carry legal title to the land, and were subject to clearance by the Government where necessary. In line with the “people-oriented” philosophy, and having tapped and consolidated the views of stakeholders from different sectors, the current-term Government announced the proposed enhancements to the present ex-gratia compensation and rehousing (“C&R”) arrangements on 10 May 2018. Having positively addressed the concerns raised by various parties, the proposal fairly and pragmatically balanced the use of public money and public housing resources as well as the expectations of the community and stakeholders. The Government also hoped to facilitate land resumption and clearance for timely delivery of land for housing, commercial and other community needs. He invited Ms Christina CHONG to outline the Government’s proposed ex-gratia C&R arrangements, and sought Members’ views and support.

41. Ms Christina CHONG gave an overview of the proposed enhancements to ex-gratia C&R arrangements as follows:

(1) The Government planned to launch a unified as well as enhanced general ex-gratia C&R package applicable to all future Government’s development clearance exercises, irrespective of project scale;

(2) To step up its efforts in the rehousing arrangements, the Government offered non-means tested rehousing for affected eligible households in dedicated rehousing estates (“Dedicated Estates”) to be developed and managed by the Hong Kong Housing Society (“HKHS”), in addition to the current means-tested rehousing option offered by the Hong Kong Housing Authority (“HKHA”). Eligible households should have resided in 1982-surveyed/licensed structures continuously for at least seven years immediately preceding the date of Pre-clearance Survey (“PCS”), and meeting other eligibility criteria;

(3) As a transitional arrangement, eligible households would be rehoused to vacant units of HKHS’s rental and HKHA’s public rental housing (“PRH”) estates before the first phase of Dedicated Estate in Hung Shui Kiu was completed by 2023/2024. Households concerned could opt (instead of being mandated) to relocate to Dedicates Estate or continue to reside at the above transitional units when the Dedicated Estate was completed;

(4) Moreover, the Government would relax the eligibility for Ex-gratia Allowance for Permitted Occupiers (“EGAPO”) to cover eligible households having resided in 1982-surveyed/licensed structures continuously for at least two years immediately

- 11 -

before the date of PCS and met the other prescribed eligibility criteria. It was previously required that households have resided in surveyed/licensed domestic structures for at least 10 years;

(5) The Government would also relax the way of calculating EGAPO. For the rates payable in the New Territories, taking a household residing in an eligible structure of at least 10 square metres as an example, the EGAPO rates payable would increase from a range between $48,384 and $600,000 to a proposed range between $60,480 and $1,209,600, depending on the size of the structure and the length of continuous residence of a household. The EGAPO basic rates were updated every six months with reference to rental level;

(6) As far as 1982-surveyed/licensed non-domestic structures were concerned, the proposal also relaxed the eligibility to cover households currently residing at these structures. 1982-surveyed/licensed non-domestic structures were those for non-domestic use as registered/covered by the licence, such as pigsties and chicken sheds, and were subsequently converted to domestic use. The discretionary C&R arrangements were offered to households residing in such structures on the condition that they met the same eligibility criteria as households residing in other surveyed/licensed domestic structures (such as the “no-domestic-property” requirement), and that they resided in the structures on or before 10 May 2016. These households should also register with the LandsD in a one-off registration exercise on a voluntary basis. Only households meeting the registration requirements were eligible to apply for C&R arrangements in a development clearance exercise in future;

(7) Regarding the Domestic Removal Allowance (“DRA”) for domestic occupants in squatters, the Government would relax the eligibility criteria to include all households covered by PCS and cleared by the Government. At the same time, the Government would raise the DRA rates from a range between $5,365 and $20,251 to a range between $9,410 and $28,840. The rates would be adjusted annually according to the established mechanism; and

(8) Lastly, in respect of Ex-gratia Allowance (“EGA”) for business undertakings, the Government announced on 11 April 2017 the proposal of introducing EGAs for eligible open-air/outdoor business undertakings on top of the present channel of making statutory claims. On 10 May 2018, the Government proposed to further relax the eligibility threshold for EGA by shortening the minimum continuous operational period requirement from ten to seven years immediately preceding the date of freezing survey. Apart from this, the eligibility for EGA would be partially relaxed to cover business undertakings operating from 1982-surveyed/licensed structures.

42. The Chairman said that he had received a motion proposed by Mr LEUNG Fuk-yuen, Mr MAN Ping-nam, MH, Mr TANG Ho-nin, Mr TANG Lai-tung, Mr TANG Sui-man and Mr TSANG Shu-wo at the meeting, and seconded by Mr CHEUNG Muk-lam, Mr CHING Chan-ming, Mr LEUNG Ming-kin, Mr MAN Kwong-ming, Mr TANG Cheuk-yin, Mr TANG Ka-leung, Mr TANG Yung-yiu, Ronnie, Mr YOUNG Ka-on and Ms YUEN Man-yee. The motion was as follows:

“Motion on the Proposed Enhancements to Ex-gratia Compensation and Rehousing

- 12 -

Arrangements for Government Development Clearance Exercises

When launching development projects in the district, the Government has failed to provide reasonable compensation and rehousing to affected residents. Therefore, this Council welcomes the enhancements to ex-gratia compensation and rehousing arrangements as proposed by the Government, such as the non-means tests and relaxing the eligibility criteria of households residing in licensed non-domestic structures for EGAPO and rehousing, indicating that the Government has given a positive response to the previous requests of this Council. That said, to allow more affected residents to benefit from the new policy, this Council strongly advises the Government to adopt the following measures:

1. Given that quite a number of residents may not be able to provide sufficient documentary proof of their length of residence, this Council requests that the Government allow residents to make statutory declarations on their residency length instead of giving supporting documents;

2. Despite a raise of the maximum EGAPO to $1,209,600, the actual number of households that can receive the EGAPO in full is very limited. Hence, this Council requests that the Government further relax the percentage of full EGAPO rates payable to households of shorter length of residence;

3. Squatter households in breach of registered records (other than uses) are not eligible for compensation and rehousing. In this connection, this Council requests that the Government partially relax such requirement;

4. This Council requests that the Government review the squatter control policy and suspend any enforcement against surveyed domestic squatters.”

43. The Chairman proposed that the motion could be discussed together with this agenda item in view of their relevance.

44. Members raised no objection.

45. Mr Daniel CHAM, BBS, MH, JP praised the DEVB for their consultation by organising two consultation sessions before the DC meeting so that Members being briefed on the proposed measures would gain a more in-depth understanding of the issue. He held that the proposals put forward by the Government showed a significant improvement over the previous arrangements. The direction and principal were worth supporting, though the implementation details might need further discussion and refinement. He enquired whether the proposed unified ex-gratia compensation arrangement instead of project-specific packages would be applicable to all Government land resumption exercises including the developments in Hung Shui Kiu and Kam Tin South, infrastructural developments, construction of roads and sewerage treatment works, or even housing development of smaller scale. In the past, the Government usually linked clearance compensation with land resumption compensation, which was higher for Zone A agricultural land. In view of the Government’s proposal of a unified compensation package, he asked whether the agricultural land required for future new town developments or other projects would be upgraded to Zone A agricultural land. Moreover, under the proposal, non-means tested rehousing option was offered to eligible households having resided in surveyed/licensed structures for seven years,

- 13 -

shortened from the existing threshold of 10 years. Even households having resided in the structures concerned for two years would be eligible for EGAPO, which was a more desirable arrangement than the previous one to keep conflicts to a minium. The Government also proposed that households having resided in surveyed/licensed non-domestic structures for a minimum of two years before 10 May 2018 were eligible for EGAPO after a one-off voluntary registration with the LandsD. He enquired whether such households in the whole New Territories region were required to make a voluntary registration with the LandsD. He said these households might not be aware of the registration requirement, worrying that information on unauthorised structures provided to the LandsD in the registration process such as domestic squatters converted from pigsties or chicken sheds years ago might result in enforcement action. He also expressed concern over a sharp rise in partitioned flats or residential units converted from illegal structures because of possible abuse in the policy initiative, and hence he hoped that the authorities would improve the registration arrangements.

46. Mr CHEUNG Muk-lam said as mentioned in point one of the motion, a large number of households might not be able to provide sufficient documentary proof for their length of residence. It was difficult for many squatter households receiving mails by public mail boxes to prove the address. He hoped that the DEVB would exercise discretion and examine other ways such as declarations to enable squatter households to prove their length of residence. While the proposed enhancements raised the compensation rates to a maximum of around $1.2 million, the actual number of beneficiaries was small because of many requirements. Quite a lot of them did not intend to reside at squatters. Now that the residents encountered the clearance problem, the DEVB should be compassionate to them and helped them solve housing problem by relaxing restrictions and enhancing compensation arrangements. The proposed unified package would be a compensation indicator for future development projects and would determine whether the projects would go smoothly or not. If the indicator was set improperly, the future development projects would be subject to many constraints. He hoped the DEVB would prudently consider the Members’ motion and the positive message embedded. Regarding the EGA for open-air warehouse operators under the proposed enhancements, eligibility was relaxed to shorten the operational period of the business undertakings from at least ten years to seven years before the PCS. He held that the open-air warehouses would be subject to clearance by the Government for development regardless of the operational period, and the operators would gain nothing or even end up losing their hard-earned money. Therefore, he hoped that the authorities would offer business operators with reasonable compensation by further relaxing the eligibility such as shortening the operational period by two to three years.

47. Mr CHOW Wing-kan said the Government’s proposed enhancements were better than the previous arrangements because the need of occupants who did not have any actual interests in the land were catered for. Many of them thought that being transferred the Government land licence or paying the licence fee for the licencee would confer them an interest in land, but they did not know that it was illegal and invalid. The proposal could accommodate the need of the occupants who would become homeless when the land was resumed by the Government. To be eligible for EGAPO, the households should have resided in the structures concerned for at least two years. By stepping up inspections, the Government could avoid abuse of the compensation mechanism. He shared Members’ view that squatter occupants who found it difficult to provide proof of length of residence could make declarations as an alternative to giving supporting documents to facilitate their application for compensation.

- 14 -

48. Mr KWOK Hing-ping enquired whether non-means tested rehousing arrangement would be applicable to HKHA’s PRH units. He also enquired three households residing in one squatter would be registered as one unit or as three separate parties, and whether the size of PRH flat and EGAPO amount depended on the number of households.

49. Mr LAI Wai-hung said that the proposed enhancements to the C&R package for the Government’s development clearance exercises were in the right direction. Where the Government was facing problems in land resumption, clearance of squatters and removal of godowns, it should put forward reasonable compensation proposals to squatter households and brownfield operators. The Government should consider offering non-means tested rehousing to households having resided in squatters for seven years. This would address the problem more properly to assure the occupants.

50. Mr LEUNG Che-cheung, SBS, MH, JP said that the public, especially clearance affectees, were very concerned about the C&R arrangements. He found that the current-term Government had endeavoured to solve the rehousing problem by relaxing the eligibility criteria, which was a commendable initiative. However, the proposed calculation method was so complex that even the Members present might not fully grasp the way to compute. The EGAPO rates were estimated having regard to the squatter size and length of residence. For a squatter of 100 square metres, the maximum EGAPO rate was around $1.2 million. He considered that very few occupants could afford building squatters at a size of 100 square metres. Therefore, the rate set was not appropriate. He held that the rates should be standardised as the purpose of EGAPO was to compensate occupants for the damages caused by clearance, or to provide them with transitional housing before they were relocated to PRH estates. To calculate the EGAPO rates based on the squatter size was not ex-gratia in nature. Hence, the Government should reposition the EGAPO such as offering a blanket compensation amounting to at least $600,000, which allowed a reasonable rate increase if the squatter was larger in size. Besides, the length of residence of an eligible squatter household for rehousing was set at a minimum of seven years to prevent those who moved into the squatters temporarily from exploiting the arrangement. The Government might launch land resumption two or three years after an announcement was made, making the number of eligible households rather small. Therefore, he proposed shortening the length of residence to a minimum of five years.

51. Mr LEUNG Fuk-yuen said he noticed the severity of the problem when the Government announced the new compensation package on 10 May. For the purpose of housing and land development, the Government launched the development project in Northeast New Territories, which was encountered by resistance of Choi Yuen Tsuen villagers. The Government had a plan to launch several large-scale development projects in Yuen Long, but could hardly proceed. Reacting slowly, the Government put forward these proposals in which the compensation was utterly inadequate. He opined that all affected squatter households with a length of residence of at least two years should be offered compensation and rehousing after registration. Even the godown operators should be compensated and re-accommodated. Having declared himself as the Chairman of the New Territories Warehouse and Logistic Business Association, he reflected that the traders had a lot of complaints on the Government’s development and clearance exercise, which caused total loss in their investment and manufacture tools. Although multi-storey buildings had been proposed to relocate brownfield operations, these buildings failed to accommodate heavy mechanics, rendering the proposal unfeasible. Affected households who were residing in squatters, pigsties and chicken sheds felt that the Government had forcefully implemented clearance for the development in the next ten years. They became homeless and the situation was too horrible to endure. He lamented that while

- 15 -

refugees were accepted by other countries, the squatter occupants became homeless after the clearance exercise in the New Territories. He received complaints from the residents every day, claiming that nobody in the government departments would help them rehouse. Even if affectees would be provided with in-situ rehousing in units for rent or sale in Dedicated Estates and EGAPO, they could not afford a three-bedroom flat to maintain the living standard. The Government was responsible for solving the housing problem. Because of high land and property prices, many people had to live in unauthorised building structures. The Government should review it policy to help the public who only wanted a comfortable home.

52. Mr MAK Ip-sing said that the C&R package offered by the Government were merely petty favours which would not help the affected residents. The proposals were contradictory, reflecting the long-standing practice of the Government. For example, while the length of residence of eligible households in concerned structures for non-means tested rehousing was shortened from ten years to seven years, paragraph 10 of Annex to the paper pointed out that households having resided in non-domestic structures for at least ten years should submit their registration on a voluntary basis starting from 10 May 2018 to assess their eligibility for any C&R arrangements in future. He did not understand why there was a difference in the required length of residence, which was unreasonable. In this connection, he suggested a uniformed length of residence of two years. Secondly, the EGAPO rate was proposed to be around $1.2 million at maximum. As households eligible for this amount were limited, the Government should fix the compensation at a uniform rate. At the same time, due to the numerous requirements set for the C&R package, affected households could hardly receive compensation and rehousing. Lastly, he hoped that the Government should get back to the right track. It was not the occupants who initiated the clearance exercise, but the Government which forcefully resumed land and cleared the squatters. Under these circumstances, the Government was not in line with the “people-oriented” spirit if it did not relax the eligibility and requirements so that affectees were provided with reasonable compensation. Therefore, he supported the motion and requested the Government revise the proposals.

53. Mr MAN Kwong-ming said that Members generally supported the paper submitted by the Government but there was a big loophole in paragraph 2(c): “relaxing the eligibility criteria and increasing the amount of cash EGAs for eligible households residing in surveyed/licensed structures”. When the Government conducted the Squatter Control Survey in 1982, information on the location, materials, sizes and purposes of the squatters were collected. After 36 years, occupants in the squatters had become totally different. Although the Government’s C&R package covered occupants residing in squatters converted from non-domestic to domestic use, the threshold was very high. For example, cases where transferred squatters for long-term domestic purpose were regarded as illegal and in breach of land lease. In fact, among the 2 600 squatter households in Hung Shui Kiu, only 120 were eligible for compensation from the Government, which was unacceptable. He hoped that the current-term Government which emphasised the “people-orientated” principle would provide the public with a desirable living environment. It was the Government’s responsibility to help the public solve the housing problem. The length of residence of the affected occupants should not be an eligibility criterion for compensation and rehousing. Rehousing should come before clearance to maintain the public’s living condition.

54. Mr MAN Ping-nam, MH considered the C&R package unfair to many people who were stakeholders of the agricultural land in the New Territories. Palm Springs and The Vineyard in Yuen Long were sold at over $10,000 per square feet and a house of the Riva was sold at some $50 million. The compensation rate for resumption of agricultural land at $1,248 per square metre was

- 16 -

unreasonably low and unfair to the stakeholders. He would write to the Heung Yee Kuk to express his strong opposition to the Government’s graded resumption of land. In response to Members’ enquiry on land resumption in the LegCo question-and-answer session, the Chief Executive indicated that land resumption was for public purposes. He enquired whether the Government had sufficiently justified that such exercise was for a public purpose to comply with legislation.

55. Mr TANG Ka-lueng said that he was the elected Member and indigenous inhabitant in the Ha Tsuen Hung Shui Kiu constituency, but no land or business was involved. A lot of land owners and residents expressed their views on the development planning in Hung Shui Kiu. The Government made it clear to the society that land resumption was for public purposes, and agricultural and private land was resumed for construction of public housing and roads. Private land was resumed forcefully at a dirt-cheap price of about $1,240 per square feet, but after resumption, the land was not for public housing or road construction. Several years later, the Government would revise the planning intention of the land for sale by public auction. Considering the geographical conditions in Hung Shui Kiu, the land would be sold at a minimum of $50,000 per square feet by public auction, the situation of which was unfair to the stakeholders. Besides, the proposed package involved an expenditure of merely $240 million. In view of the economic situation in Hong Kong, the land resumption compensation rates should be reconsidered or social instability might be caused. As for rehousing, it was proposed that only households residing in 1982-surveyed squatters were eligible for non-means tested rehousing and EGAPO at a maximum of around $1.2 million. However, there were around 2 600 to 3 000 households in Hung Shui Kiu not meeting the requirement, and the occupants would become homeless. They were Hong Kong citizens residing in squatters on the waiting line of public housing just because of insufficient public housing supply. Should the Government forcefully adopt the proposed assessment policy without due regard to the squatter problem and rehousing affected households, the occupants would definitely oppose or undermine the planning of the development.

56. Mr TO Ka-lun said that “people-oriented” philosophy indicated by the Under Secretary was also mentioned many times in the paper. He discussed with squatter occupants and found that they were not aware of details of the Government’s proposal. Therefore, there was obstruction to the flow of information. Indeed, the Government had conducted many consultation forums and attended the LegCo meetings, but many villagers who were working hard day and night had no time to attend these events to collect information and express their views. He requested the Government conduct a general and in-depth consultation expeditiously so as to gauge the views of villagers and understand their aspirations. Secondly, according to paragraph 3 of Annex 2 to the paper, “the occupation of surveyed/licensed non-domestic structures for domestic purposes remains a breach of the current Squatter Control Policy”. Occupants were worried that the authorities would take enforcement action because the record was different from that in the survey years ago. The Government should put an appeal mechanism in place so that the villagers, together with the Rural Committee or village representative, could negotiate with the Government. Regarding the means test, he said that the assessment was based on the total income of a family unit or household. If the financial situation of an individual member of a household changed or a member left, the elderly would lose support and became homeless. He hoped the Government would recognise this.

57. Mr TSANG Shu-wo said that public grievances today were caused by the SAR Government itself. Many squatters would be cleared whenever a development plan was launched in a district. Regardless of whether the squatters were licensed or not, all occupants there were

- 17 -

Hong Kong people. Before the development of an area, the Government should have offered appropriate rehousing and compensation to reassure the squatter occupants in licensed or unlicensed squatters. It would be unfair to these occupants who were forced to live in the squatters to pass the means test before rehousing. On the contrary, the British Hong Kong Government assured that all affected squatter occupants were rehoused to public housing when there was a clearance as a result of a development programme so that the residents did not need to worry. He hoped that affected squatter occupants would be offered non-means tested rehousing and compensation and given priority in public housing allocation with all conditions and restrictions withdrawn so that Hong Kong people could live and work in a better environment. Only in this way would the SAR Government be a good administration. Finally, he opined that the sound financial position of the current-term Government allowed it to offer proper assistance to affected squatter occupants.

58. Mr Zachary WONG said the proposal was a non-comprehensive “belated review”, hoping that the Government would listen to more public views to enhance the proposed arrangements. As the Government initiated the clearance exercise, it should exercise greater flexibility to give more relaxed and favourable offers to affected occupants when dealing with the compensation and rehousing issue. Besides, senior officials of the LandsD would not know some actual problems the residents encountered. Taking the clearance exercise in Wang Chau as an example, among the cases he handled, one involved an elderly women over 80 years old whose husband had gone missing for decades. That said, DLO staff in the PCS requested that she filed a divorce before rehousing could be arranged. As all her daily activities took place in the Wang Chau area, the elderly woman would not know how to approach the Legal Aid Department office in Mongkok for assistance. In absence of her husband’s identity card number which she forgot a long time ago, the elderly woman could not go through the formalities for rehousing. He held that the Government could handle this case in a lenient way. Moreover, some people who resided in non-domestic structures such as pigsties and chicken sheds could not even afford renting a squatter and should be given assistance in rehousing. Besides, some squatter occupants did not know whether their rented squatters were unauthorised. Occupants residing in structures that were confirmed unauthorised by the Government would not be eligible for rehousing, which was unfair to them. As for in-situ rehousing, he made an enquiry with the relevant department about reserving public housing units in Yuen Long for 100 households affected by the Wang Chau clearance exercise. However, the response was negative. These residents were rehoused to units in other districts such as Tuen Mun and Fanling. He hoped that the authorities could provide in-situ rehousing. Finally, the squatters affected by clearance were generally larger in size housing 10-odd persons. If occupants were regarded as one household unit, it would be difficult to identify public housing unit of a suitable size for them. He considered that the Government should handle these cases more leniently, or might allow ineligible households to apply for Home Ownership Scheme (“HOS”) flats with green forms. In fact, the Government could continue with an in-depth review of the above issues.

59. Mr LEUNG Ming-kin remarked that while the Government had announced compensation proposals in respect of the development project, clearance of squatters was conducted in a vigorous way. For example, the entire village of Tai Fat Tsuen in Yuen Long was cleared. Furthermore, private land with unauthorised structures not removed by land owners would be confiscated. Squatter occupants would also found it difficult to provide supporting documents of their addresses such as water, electricity and gas bills. Therefore, Members hoped that residents would be allowed make declarations instead of providing documentary proof. Besides, the Government’s stringent requirements would render the squatter occupants not eligible for compensation, such as retaining the materials registered in the survey in 1982 but after some 30 years, many squatter features would be different from what were registered after refurbishment. Regarding

- 18 -

compensation for godowns, the Government required businesses to have operated in 1982-surveyed structures for a minimum continuous period of seven years, which was similarly stringent. He said that for application for conversion of private land into godowns, planning permission for one to three years would normally be granted. Therefore, he hoped that the continuous operational period of business would be further shortened by the Government to three years. Besides, the Government should not phase out godown operations but help operators identify suitable places to continue their businesses. As pointed out by godown operators, relocating to multi-storey godown buildings as proposed by the Government was not feasible as these buildings could not accommodate heavy mechanics and large building materials. Lastly, he hoped that apart from in-situ rehousing, the Government should also consider rehousing squatter occupants within the same Heung.

60. Mr LEE Yuet-man, MH said that he was the beneficiary of the Government’s rehousing measure. He had resided in a squatter at Pak Kiu Tsai in since young. In the clearance exercise of his squatter in 1987, his family was rehoused to Fu Shin Estate in Tai Po. Subsequently, as PRH tenants, he and his family applied for HOS flat, and moved to private property, which was an evidence of his climbing up the social ladder. At that time, the policy of the Government was good and the consultation and communication with the local community was effective. Therefore, the residents were satisfied with the arrangements. He had all along hoped the Government would adopt a lenient approach in addressing the grievances of the people in squatters and clearance areas. It should understand more about their situations rather than citing ordinances rigidly. Occupants of squatters, who were human beings and not animals, required merciful and humanitarian treatment. Today, he noted the SAR Government had taken a big step ahead but it needed to keep on the track. He did not miss the life before 1997, but the more flexible approaches adopted by the then British Hong Kong Government had facilitated policy implementation. In a clearance exercise, the squatter occupants would be allocated public housing. If the occupants asked to split a household, the Government would allocate them with public housing units on their requests. Occupants were required to take an immediate means test but were assessed ten years after rehousing. Therefore, residents of the entire Pak Kiu Tsai village were rehoused to Shin Nga House in Fu Shin Estate so that the whole community could be retained. At that time, ex-gratia compensation was handled with a light hand. Occupants being offered reasonable compensation for the land, seedings and chickens were contented with the Government’s arrangements. He hoped that the Government would continue with the merciful approach in the squatter issue as the occupants were underprivileged grassroots who relied on the Government’s rehousing policy to climb up the social ladder. The Government should give them proper assistance in compensation and rehousing as far as possible.

61. Mr KWOK Keung, MH said it was most important for the Government to be reasonable, rational and lawful when addressing the clearance and compensation issues. Besides using public money properly, it should be more lenient towards the affectees and prevent anybody from taking advantage of the situation. While the proposals advised by the Under Secretary had been enhanced and relaxed, some of them could be even more lenient and reasonable. For example, the compensation covered business undertakings operating on brownfields but to be eligible for compensation, such undertakings were required to have operated for at least seven years. He considered that business undertakings of shorter operational period of even one year should receive compensation on a pro rata basis. To discourage people from operating a business temporarily, the Government should set the compensation rate at an appropriate level so that the gain of those people would not cover the loss. Besides, people residing in unauthorised squatters and those having resideed in licensed squatters for less than seven years would not be eligible for rehousing.

- 19 -

Regarding Members’ suggestion on making declarations instead of providing supporting documents to prove the length of residence, he considered the former too simple. In view of the above two situations, he suggested that the Housing Department (“HD”) consider allocating these occupants with Interim Housing units. After a certain period of residence, such as two years, they could be rehoused to PRH units. Eligible occupants who could provide supporting documents of their length of residence could be rehoused to PRH units immediately. It was more reasonable for the two approaches to run in parallel, and would plug the loophole to prevent people from immediately acquiring squatters to be subdivided for rent or sale to attract those looking for prompt rehousing to PRH units when the Government’s development plan was made known.

62. The Hon KWONG Chun-yu said that the discussion on this issue was crucial to Yuen Long. In fact, rehousing would be involved in any development plan in Yuen Long. The proposed enhancements were a “belated review”. In the past, there were a lot of controversies when the Government carried out land resumption. For example, in the clearance of Choi Yuen Tsuen for development, the Government took vigorous enforcement actions by invoking the Land (Miscellaneous Provisions) Ordinance (Cap. 28) and the Lands Resumption Ordinance (Cap. 124), without having due regard to the aspirations of residents. Because of poor information flow, the Government had not given the residents details of the clearance plan, resulting in strong opposition. The communication between the Government and the residents, by way of residents’ meetings or direct contact with residents in villages, was very important. It was believed that the residents were happy to discuss with the Government. While the Government had previously set asset limits on rehousing, non-means tested rehousing would be offered to affected households in Dedicated Estates of the HKHS under the current proposal. However, quite a number of elderly people were worried that the rent of Dedicated Estates of the HKHS would be higher than that of HKHA. If affected households were not given other rehousing options, the proposed initiatives were not humane. The future development projects in Hung Shui Kiu and Yuen Long South would affect even more Yuen Long residents. The poor communication between the Government and residents in the past was evidenced by the fact that the former started land resumption and clearance right after posting of notices. He did not want to see similar situations in future, and hoped that the Government would step up communication with the residents.

63. Mr CHING Chan-ming said if a development project required relocation of godowns, the Government should identify vacant sites in the same district so that the godowns relocated could continue operation. In the numerous discussions between local personalities and DEVB, it was suggested that the Government should consider granting temporary licences to godown operators relocated to vacant agricultural land to continue operation. He strongly requested the Government to do so but as nothing had been achieved so far, he urged the DEVB consider this proposal prudently. As regards the squatter issue, the then British Hong Kong Government adopted the approach of rehousing before clearance. The current-term Government, on the contrary, used the clearance before rehousing approach. Members found it very problematic because even if compensation covered households residing in squatters or even in chicken sheds or pigsties, the proposal was merely empty promise. Among the Government’s development projects in the New Territories, the one in Yuen Long was of the largest scale. The enforcement in respect of squatter control was very strict. Whenever squatters were found inconsistent with the records in the 1982 survey during inspections, the District Lands Office (“DLO”) would order demolishment within 28 days. Otherwise, the land would be confiscated. Within such a short notification period of 28 days, it was not possible for all occupants identify a new home, not to mention rehousing by the Government. Therefore, if the Government was genuinely concerned with the rehousing of squatter households, it should put all squatter control on hold. Finally, he shared a tidbit with

- 20 -

Members. After the meeting with local personalities at the DLO the day before, he found a banner at the entrance saying “It is hoped the Government will put the squatter control arrangements on hold”. He held that the Government’s frontline staff members were not satisfied with the squatter control measures.

64. Mr LIU Chun-san, JP gave a consolidated response as follows:

(1) He thanked Members for their valuable comments. Having struck a balance among the use of public money, public housing resources as well as the expectations of the community and stakeholders, the proposed enhancements were to establish thresholds for different eligibility criteria. While Members had expressed different opinions on this issue, affected people might have even stronger views. The Administration targeted at catering for the needs of a majority of people by a balanced proposal, which meant that not all affectees would receive the same offer. Under the proposed enhancements, two categories of people would receive a less favourable offer, including occupants recently moved into the squatters affected by the development, and occupants of newly erected squatters. The Administration considered it was necessary to set a threshold to avoid abuse;

(2) Concerning the resumption of private land as mentioned by some Members, the proposed enhancements had nothing to do with changes in the arrangements of private land resumption, as it was required that private land be resumed for “public purposes” according to statutory processes. Regarding a Member’s suggestion that agricultural land compensation be based on the soaring property prices, he held that such view might not be valid because a premium was generally charged for developing agricultural land into housing site under the applicable policy. Hence, the compensation for agricultural land would not be calculated on the basis of the housing site value;

(3) As for the refinement of implementation details proposed by Members in the motion, the Government would consider them in line with the “people-oriented” and “fair and reasonable” principles without compromising the policy direction, so as to flexibly cater for the needs of different people affected. The Government would strive to work out a feasible plan as far as possible, not only to minimise the effect to residents but also to avoid social dispute. The Government hoped that clearance and rehousing could be carried out smoothly in a harmonious environment;

(4) Some Members talked about the flow of information. Noting the importance of information flow, the Administration considered it desirable to brief each and every household on the new measures. Nevertheless, he hoped Members would understand that the Government was required to meet the residents’ representatives if the conventional approach of consultation was adopted. After identifying areas for improvement in new development projects, the Administration set up a social worker team to study the situation of each household to offer help as far as possible. Villagers should seek help from the team if clarification on the measures was required. Where no social worker team had been set up for a development project, villagers could seek help from DLO staff, who would be willing to brief them on the new measures; and

(5) Regarding the other measures proposed in the motion for Government’s

- 21 -

consideration, such as making declarations instead of submitting supporting documents on the length of residence which aroused concern of abuse, the Government would take different views into account for the convenience of residents while preventing abuse.

65. Ms Christina CHONG supplemented that the Administration had, in respect of the proposed enhancements, organised several briefings to residents in addition to discussion with every household in the area covered by new development project works by the social worker team. Moreover, in-depth discussions of smaller scale were also arranged. The Administration had set up a number of channels at different levels (including bureaus and departments) to gauge the views and concerns of residents on the proposed enhancements or implementation of new development projects through the social worker team.

66. Mr LIU Chun-san, JP said that the proposed enhancements were of policy matters having undergone negotiations with different bureaus (including the Transport and Housing Bureau (“THB”)). For instance, after negotiation with THB, HKHA and HKHS would offer transitional arrangements to eligible households by making use of vacant units of their rental estates before the Dedicated Estates were ready for population intake.

67. Ms Lily CHIU gave a consolidated response as follows:

(1) Regarding Members’ concerns over residential proof of squatter occupants, the LandsD would consider every case on their own merits based on the “people-oriented” principle. For cases where the affected residents were required to divorce their spouses before rehousing could be arranged by the HD, the department had to consider the eligibility of the households after referral from the LandsD. Nevertheless, the LandsD would provide assistance and take follow-up action in coordination with the HD;

(2) Regarding Members’ concern on the one-off voluntary registration exercise, the LandsD would announce the details in papers and on its website subject to approval by LegCo on the proposed enhancements involving the ex-gratia compensation arrangements. After the LandsD had worked out details to facilitate registration, its staff members would brief the residents; and

(3) Concerning enforcement, the prevailing priority of enforcement action under the squatter control policy was based on the severity of irregularities. The LandsD announced in 2016 that squatters extended or built on or after 22 June 2016 would be accorded priority, and for those erected before the date, the Squatter Control Unit would request that the occupants rectify the irregularity. Only when no action was taken or the request was ignored would the Squatter Control Unit consider cancelling the squatter survey number.

68. In response to Mr Daniel CHAM’s enquiry, Mr LIU Chun-san, JP supplemented that a unified package under the proposed enhancements were applicable to all future Government’s development clearance exercises, including clearance work arising from land resumption for infrastructure development.

- 22 -

69. Ms Lily CHIU supplemented that the freezing survey was mainly for registration of the structures and their occupation status. Each core family would be registered as one household. In other words, two brothers and their own families who were economically independent from one another would be registered as two separate households, even if they resided in the same squatter hut. If one of them wanted to be rehoused and the other preferred cash EGAs, the LandsD would consider their preferences on an individual basis.

70. Mr TO Ka-lun said that it was the Government’s responsibility to ensure every Hong Kong citizen had a place to live. As stated by the Under Secretary, with the implementation of such regular measure, social worker team would approach residents in villages which were affected or would be affected by development. The team would communicate with villagers of each household in every village so that they would be provided with information and sufficient time to express their views.

71. Mr TANG Ka-leung said that local people in principle opposed the enhancements to the C&R arrangements in respect of land resumption in Hung Shui Kiu. It was hoped that the authorities would review the situation. Otherwise, social instability would arise. He also hoped that the authorities would clarify whether households having resided in squatters for a period of two years were eligible for EGAs and rehousing.

72. Mr TANG Cheuk-yin said that the message brought about by the protest at the main street was very clear: the Government was to resume land in the name of development. Most of the land in the New Territories under development was private land, such as the land resumed by the Government for the development of . All the land was acquired at a price of no more than $200 per square feet. Subsequently, the land was tendered out at an astronomical price of $7.6 billion. The Government took the lead to be a property developer and even if it repeatedly asked Members to be rest assured, they would never be.

73. Mr MAK Ip-sing said the paper stated that the Government would conduct a one-off voluntary registration exercise for all squatters from May this year. He pointed out that households not taking part in the registration would not be offered any compensation or rehousing regardless of the length of residence. The end results would deviate from the Government’s original aim of relaxing the eligibility criteria. Most importantly, both registered and non-registered households should receive reasonable compensation when they were affected by the Government’s land resumption exercise.

74. Mr LEUNG Fuk-yuen said that the new policy should not merely cover the new development areas but the entire New Territories. The Government was responsible for solving the housing problem of the public, not pushing the residents into a dead end. The Government should construct more public housing and offer reasonable C&R package to the affected households, rather than plunging the people into suffering with its high land price policy. The Government should not only review its entire policy and the compensation package but also refrain from forceful acquisition of land for tender that was in violation of justice.

- 23 -

75. Mr Ronnie TANG said the banner he saw at the entrance of DLO office this morning reflected that the frontline staff members were also in opposition of the squatter control policy. Among the two cases he handled before, one involved a household including several members and an elderly. Because of an unauthorised extension, the DLO handled the case with a tough hand by requiring the household to rectify the irregularity within 28 days. Otherwise, the registration number would be cancelled and the land confiscated. He considered that if the household was financially sound, it would not need to reside in a squatter. The authorities appeared to be righteous saying that its measures were in line with the “principle-oriented” principle. In fact, they should look into the situation.

76. Mr KWOK Hing-ping said the DEVB mentioned a non-means tested rehousing package would be in place. On the other hand, the representative from LandsD said the department would assist squatter households in collaboration with HD without indicating any non-means tested rehousing arrangement. He hoped the DEVB would clarify as rehousing by HD was always subject to a means test.

77. Mr CHEUNG Muk-lam said under the proposed enhancements, eligibility criteria for compensation for business undertakings had been relaxed by shortening the minimum continuous operational period from ten years to seven years. He considered that godown operators carrying out the business for two to five years should be offered compensation for the Government’s development clearance because of their huge investments in the construction of godowns and infrastructures. He hoped that the Government would review the situation so that business operators would receive equally favourable compensation, regardless of the operational period.

78. Mr Daniel CHAM, BBS, MH, JP remarked that he had always urged for lowered threshold for compensation for godowns, such as further shortening the operational period to two to three years in view of the tenancy of the same term for many godowns. With 190 acres in Hung Shui Kiu and 100 acres in Yuen Long South, the total area of godown sites amounted to almost 300 acres. In Hung Shui Kiu alone, there might be several hundreds of godown operators hiring over a thousand employees. Based on the proposed compensation criteria, the Government might meet resistance from not only squatter households but also godown operators, who had to close their businesses, making the employees redundant. As regards the EGAs for business undertakings, the operators were compensated at a rate of $390 per square metre for unlicensed godown sites and $2,310 for licensed sites, representing a 6-time difference. If covered unlicensed godown sites were regarded as vacant open sites which required self-clearance of surface structures before compensation, difficulties and pressure might arise and affect the close-down arrangements. Therefore, he hoped that the Government would further relax the compensation criteria. On the enquiry on whether the on-off voluntary registration covered the whole New Territories, the paper seemingly indicated that all occupants residing in non-domestic structures including pigsties and chicken sheds were required to register, and these people distributed across the New Territories. He doubted whether occupants residing in non-domestic structures in non-development area would register voluntarily because all information in relation to the squatters would be provided to the authorities, tantamount to disclosing all information including irregularities to the authorities which would have to take instant enforcement action. If no action was taken, they would be subject to criticism. He hoped the Government would clarify.

- 24 -

79. Mr LEUNG Ming-kin said representative from LandsD told Members that priorities were set for clearance of squatters. He enquired whether the squatters and godowns in the development areas were accorded priority of clearance. The stringent conditions of planning permission of godowns would hamper the business environment. He made another enquiry on whether the Government would set up some logistics parks for relocation of affected godowns to continue business operation.

80. Mr Zachary WONG said government representative told Members that cases involving divorce procedures would be considered individually. He did not understand why that was possible as occupants had to file a divorce before rehousing. Secondly, Members were informed that a social worker team would liaise with residents but there was no social worker team in Wang Chau, otherwise his assistant would not need to accompany the elderly woman to the LAD Mongkok office to file a divorce. He considered that a social worker team was necessary for each Government clearance exercise and he hoped the Government would pay due attention to this. It was pointed out that HKHS would construct some Dedicated Estates to offer non-means tested rehousing to eligible squatter households. In this connection, he enquired whether the HKHS could guarantee construction of these Dedicated Estates in every district. Otherwise, in-situ rehousing would not be possible. Lastly, regarding the one-off voluntary registration, he proposed that the Government conduct the exercise in the villages to help the elderly with the registration.

81. Mr LIU Chun-sang, JP said that Members’ enquiries were related to rehousing of households and compensation to godown operators. He invited representatives from DEVB and LandsD to explain the details.

82. Ms Christina CHONG gave a consolidated response as follows:

(1) Households having resided in 1982-surveyed/licensed structures for a continuous period of seven years prior to the PCS would be offered non-mean tested rehousing to HKHS’s dedicated estates, subject to their meeting the prescribed eligibility criteria. At the same time, the current means-tested rehousing arrangement would be retained to offer eligible households having resided in 1982-surveyed/licensed domestic structures for a continuous period of two years with PRH flats of the HKHA. The two rehousing options were available for households of different eligibility criteria;

(2) Before Dedicated Estates were ready for population intake by 2023/2024, HKHS and HKHA would offer transitional arrangements to affected households by making use of the vacant units in the public and PRH estates respectively. Households concerned would be given the option to stay at the transitional units of HKHS or HKHA, or relocate to Dedicated Estates when they were completed;

(3) EGAPO was another option for eligible households who had resided in 1982-surveyed or licensed structures for a continuous period of two years prior to the PCS and meeting other eligibility criteria. Those who received a full EGAPO would not be offered rehousing arrangements. Besides, eligible households who wished to purchase subsidised sale flat (“SSF”) units in HKHS’s Dedicated Estates could consider applying for a reduced EGAPO. To sum up, different options were provided to different eligible households; and

- 25 -

(4) Regarding the views on the eligibility threshold for EGAs for open-air/outdoor business undertakings, EGAs were a new option for eligible business undertakers who might opt for lodging statutory claims with the LandsD or Lands Tribunal. In other words, those open-air/outdoor business undertakers who had made considerable investment or whose continuous operational period had reached seven years prior to the PCS could lodge statutory claims with the LandsD or Lands Tribunal.

83. Ms Lily CHIU gave a consolidated reply as follows:

(1) The one-off voluntary registration would cover all 1982-surveyed/licensed non-domestic structures throughout the territory. While households residing in non-domestic structures would not be offered rehousing by the Government in the past, eligible squatter households were allowed to apply for ex-gratia compensation and rehousing under the proposed enhancements;

(2) To prevent non-domestic squatters from being converted for domestic uses after the proposed enhancements were announced, a one-off voluntary registration was introduced to plug the loophole;

(3) The one-off voluntary registration covered the whole territory. Households which resided in non-domestic squatters on or before 10 May 2016 could make registration with the LandsD on a voluntary basis, regardless of whether they were 1982-surveyed/licensed non-domestic structures affected by the development clearance exercises. The registration period was one year during which the LandsD would set up a hotline to explain the details to households. The Squatter Control Unit (“SCU”) would distribute leaflets to squatter households to assist them in understanding the arrangement for registration and encourage them to do so. The LandsD would announce the registration details once the proposed enhancements in respect of the ex-gratia compensation arrangements were endorsed by the LegCo. Only applicants affected by the Government’s development clearance exercise and meeting the criteria for compensation and rehousing would be eligible for relevant arrangements. The LandsD would call on the households to make registration;

(4) Under the prevailing squatter control policy, the priority of action depended on the severity of irregularity. Squatters with additions or new erections made on or after 22 June 2016 would be given priority. For other cases particularly domestic squatters, the SCU would request the households to rectify the irregularity. If the problem had been rectified on SCU’s request, the squatter control number would not be cancelled. Under the proposed measures, eligible business undertakers would meet the criteria for one of the two EGAs. First, business undertakers operating a business from a 1982-surveyed/licensed structure were eligible for the EGA applicable to such structures. According to previous practice, business undertakings operating from structures which were registered as workshops in the 1982 survey but converted to uses other than workshops were not eligible for any EGAs even if they were for non-domestic purposes. As for the proposed enhancements, EGAs would be offered, on a limited basis, to business undertakings operating from a surveyed/licensed structure whose uses registered in the PCS had been converted to those generally covered in the 1982 survey;

- 26 -

(5) Regarding open-air/outdoor business undertakings, the proposed enhancements covered eligible brownfield operations on agricultural land on the condition that such operations were permitted under the land leases or short-term land instruments (such as short-term tenancies). Nonetheless, as what the DEVB representative had said, while affected parties could only make statutory claims with the LandsD previously, the proposed enhancements offered another option to them without going through statutory claiming procedures, and the EGA would not override or infringe their right to make claims through statutory procedures; and

(6) For the new EGAs for eligible open-air/outdoor business undertakings, the current basic rate for open-air business operation was $390 per square metre and that for covered area was $2,330 per square metre, provided that the operation was compliant with the land lease. Both EGA rates were applicable with a cap and a floor.

84. Mr LIU Chun-san, JP responded to Mr Zachary WONG’s view on in-situ rehousing. He said that the Administration aimed at in-situ rehousing for eligible households. Whenever extensive developments were conducted in a district, the Administration would construct Dedicated Estates as far as possible. For example, the Administration planned to rehouse the eligible households affected by the development projects in Yuen Long to the Dedicated Estate in Hung Shui Kiu, which was expected to have adequate flat units to accommodate these households.

85. Mr WONG Wing-hung said Annex I to the paper had indicated that households had to pass the comprehensive means test and meet other requirements before rehousing to PRH flat units under the HKHA.

86. The Chairman said he had received a motion moved by Mr LEUNG Fuk-yuen, seconded by Mr CHING Chan-ming, Mr LEUNG Ming-kin and Ms YUEN Man-yee. The motion was as follows:

“This Council requests that the eligibility threshold for ex-gratia allowance for godown operators be relaxed by shortening the operational period from seven years to three years. This Council also requests that the squatter households and godown operators be offered in-situ rehousing and relocation.”

87. The Chairman said Members had thoroughly discussed the agenda item, and representatives from bureaus and departments had given corresponding responses. Unless otherwise requested by Members, there would be no further discussion on this motion.

88. Mr Daniel CHAM, BBS, MH, JP said that the godown sites in Hung Shui Kiu and Yuen Long South covered an area of 290 hectares and 100 hectares respectively. In-situ relocation of godown sites amounting to 390 hectares was apparently infeasible. Therefore, he hoped that the motion’s proponents would clarify the last sentence of the motion.

89. Mr LEUNG Fuk-yuen remarked that local personalities requested the Government to offer

- 27 -

in-situ rehousing and relocation to squatter occupants and godown operators during DEVB’s several rounds of consultation on the development projects in Yuen Long. As a result of the geographical situations, boundaries were drawn for the six Heungs and recognised villages with their own personnel connections. In-situ rehousing and relocation would facilitate more efficient clearance and compensation. For instance, local personalities proposed that the Government could identify deserted agricultural land to relocate godown sites in a systematic way so that they could continue their operation.

90. Mr Zachary WONG enquired about the grounds for shortening the operational period from seven years to three years and how the period of three years was calculated.

91. The Chairman enquired with the proponent as to whether the period of three years referred to shortening the operational period prior to PCS from ten years to three years instead of seven years as proposed in the paper.

92. Mr LEUNG Fuk-yuen said it was correct.

93. Mr CHEUNG Muk-lam said that disputes would arise if approval was granted by LandsD to the application for conversion of private land to godown use upon Government’s announcement of development and freezing survey, because godown operators would make investment to facilitate operation after approval was obtained. It was unfair to godown operators who were not compensated because of the shorter operational period when the Government suddenly announced clearance. He could not share the view of the department representative that affected godown operators could lodge claims through statutory channels because it was the Government which requested clearance to pave way for development. He considered it unfair to operators if the eligibility criteria was not relaxed by shortening the minimum operational period from ten years to three years or shorter. In such case, the Government would face enormous resistance.

94. The Chairman asked Members to vote on the first motion by a show of hands and open ballot. Mr Daniel CHAM, BBS, MH, JP, Ms CHAN Mei-lin, Mr CHEUNG Muk-lam, Mr CHING Chan-ming, Ms CHIU Sau-han, MH, Mr CHOW Wing-kan, Mr KWOK Hing-ping, the Hon KWONG Chun-yu, Ms LAU Kwai-yung, Mr LEUNG Che-cheung, SBS, MH, JP, Mr LEUNG Fuk-yuen, Mr LEUNG Ming-kin, Mr LUI Kin, MH, Mr LUK Chung-hung, Ms MA Shuk-yin, Mr MAK Ip-sing, Mr MAN Kwong-ming, Mr MAN Ping-nam, MH, Mr SIU Long-ming, Mr TANG Cheuk-him, Mr TANG Cheuk-yin, Mr TANG Ho-nin, Mr TANG Ka-leung, Mr Ronnie TANG, Mr TO Ka-lun, Mr TSANG Shu-wo, Mr WONG Cheuk-kin, Ms WONG Wai-ling, the Vice-chairman Mr WONG Wai-shun, MH, Mr Zachary WONG, Mr YIU-Kwok-wai, Mr YOUNG Ka-on and Ms YUEN Man-yee voted for the motion.

95. The Chairman announced that the motion was passed by an absolute majority of votes, with 33 Members voting for it, 0 Member voting against it and 0 Member abstaining from voting.

96. The Chairman asked Members to vote on the second motion by a show of hands and open ballot. Mr Daniel CHAM, BBS, MH, JP, Ms CHAN Mei-lin, Mr CHEUNG Muk-lam, Mr

- 28 -

CHING Chan-ming, Ms CHIU Sau-han, MH, Mr CHOW Wing-kan, Mr KWOK Hing-ping, Ms LAU Kwai-yung, Mr LEUNG Che-cheung, SBS, MH, JP, Mr LEUNG Fuk-yuen, Mr LEUNG Ming-kin, Mr LUI Kin, MH, Mr LUK Chung-hung, Ms MA Shuk-yin, Mr MAK Ip-sing, Mr MAN Kwong-ming, Mr MAN Ping-nam, MH, Mr SIU Long-ming, Mr TANG Cheuk-him, Mr TANG Cheuk-yin, Mr TANG Ho-nin, Mr TANG Ka-leung, Mr Ronnie TANG, Mr TSANG Shu-wo, Mr WONG Cheuk-kin, Ms WONG Wai-ling, the Vice-chairman Mr WONG Wai-shun, MH, Mr YIU-Kwok-wai, Mr YOUNG Ka-on and Ms YUEN Man-yee voted for the motion.

97. The Chairman announced that the motion was passed by an absolute majority of votes, with 30 Members voting for it, 0 Member voting against it and 0 Member abstaining from voting.

98. The Chairman concluded that considerable number of squatter households and godown operators might have been affected by the Government’s development projects in Yuen Long, including the developments in Hung Shui Kiu, Yuen Long South, Wang Chau and Tan Kwai Tsuen. They raised a lot of concerns or even expressed dissatisfaction towards the compensation and rehousing arrangements. The YLDC welcomed the Government for the enhancement measures in face of the failure to catch up with the current situation under its established policy. As mentioned by many of the Members, quite a lot of squatter households and godown operators were not eligible for compensation and rehousing under the new arrangement. Therefore, Members hoped that the Government would take the large-scale review as an opportunity to consider further relaxing and enhancing the measures to benefit more residents. The YLDC hoped that the Government would genuinely achieve the “people-oriented” objective so that all affected households and godown operators could live and operate in contentment.

99. Mr MAN Ping-nam, MH said regarding the development projects in Yuen Long, YLDC had passed a motion on opposing the Government’s development in the district before ancillary transport facilities were improved. Now it seemed that the clearance and compensation matters had overridden the motion. He enquired whether the motion was still valid.

100. The Chairman thanked Mr MAN for his views. He said that a number of discussions on the development in the district were held in YLDC. Today’s discussion was about compensation and rehousing for squatter households and godown operators, which had no clash with the previous discussion on traffic and local facilities in the development area. As pointed out in the previous motion, Members hoped that the Government would improve transport and facilities before giving support to the development projects. At the same time, compensation and rehousing should be addressed. Mr MAN was welcomed to submit a discussion item in due course if he wished to go into matters related to development. The Chairman thanked representatives from DEVB, LandsD and relevant departments again for attending the meeting.

(Post-meeting note: On 10 July 2018, the Secretariat wrote to the DEVB, LandsD and CEDD to convey the two motions passed by Members. On 27 August 2018, the departments’ reply was relayed to Members for reference.)

Item III: Question from DC Members: Mr WONG Wai-shun, MH and Mr WONG Cheuk-kin proposed to discuss “urging the Government to increase supply of car parking spaces for stabilising parking space rentals and combating monopoly and

- 29 -

control by consortia” (YLDC Paper No. 41/2018) 101. The Chairman asked Members to take note of Paper No. 41, in which Mr WONG Wai-shun, MH and Mr WONG Cheuk-kin proposed to discuss “urging the Government to increase supply of car parking spaces for stabilising parking space rentals and combating monopoly and control by consortia”. He also asked Members to take note of the consolidated reply from the DEVB, Planning Department (“PlanD”) and LandsD, and the consolidated reply from the THB and Transport Department (“TD”). The Chairman said as the DEVB and the THB representatives did not attend the meeting due to other official commitments, the following departmental representatives would be asked to respond to Members’ questions:

TD Senior Engineer/North West Mr CHOW Bing-kay

PlanD District Planning Officer (Tuen Mun and Mr NG Yuk-man, David Yuen Long West)

DLO (Yuen Long) District Lands Officer (District Lands Ms CHAN Suet-ching, Angela Office, Yuen Long) Administrative Assistant/Lands (District Mr NG Ping-tong, Gordon Lands Office, Yuen Long)

102. The Vice-chairman said the written replies from the government departments were positive but lacked specific contents. He held that the Government’s past approach of reducing private vehicle use by decreasing the supply of car parking spaces was ineffective but favourable to developers owning many car parking spaces. Recently, the monthly rent of car parking spaces in the vicinity of West Rail Yuen Long Station had significantly increased by 20% to 40% by the developer. If the Government did not increase supply of car parking spaces, consortia would continue to monopolise car parking spaces and this would lead to rising parking space rental. Also, the LandsD did not respond to the terms on the regulation on floating parking spaces under the land lease. It might be difficult to collect evidence to prove that the developers controlled parking spaces by making use of the loopholes on land leases that led to a breach of the terms. Therefore, the LandsD should tighten the lease terms and specify certain measures to ensure residents’ parking right. Lastly, he said the supply of car parking spaces was inadequate because land in Hong Kong was limited. Hence, he suggested that the Government develop multi-storey car parks, examine the introduction of underground automated car parks in Japan and provide more parking facilities by nullah decking. He hoped the Government would increase the supply of car parking spaces as soon as possible.

103. Mr WONG Cheuk-kin said during the YLDC duty visit to Tokyo in Japan, he found that the local parking facilities were well developed when compared to the poor design of car parks in Hong Kong. In Japan, underground automated car parks which could automatically store vehicles in different locations underground had been developed for more than a decade. They not only shortened the parking time and guaranteed vehicle safety, but also saved space at ground level. Therefore, he hoped the Chairman would initiate the study of the proposal with the YLDC and government departments so that Yuen Long could be a trial site of such car parks. Although he owned a parking space, he held that the Government should increase the supply to alleviate the

- 30 -

public demand and suppress the price surge of car parking spaces.

104. Mr Zachary WONG said the severe shortage of car parking spaces in Yuen Long was a well-known problem. It led to not only a speculative increase in the price and rent of parking spaces, but also intensified illegal parking problems and serious traffic chaos in Yuen Long town centre. The situation could not be tolerated anymore. Even the YLDC had repeatedly requested construction of multi-storey car parks, the PlanD had no plans to do so in Yuen Long town centre as the TD had not made any proposal. Considering that the departments were shirking responsibilities, he suggested the Government review relevant policies such as the “Hong Kong Planning Standards and Guidelines” (“HKPSG”). He also pointed out that the Government encouraged the public to use public transport by reducing car parking spaces in housing estates but people would still have an intention to purchase vehicles even if they took public transport. As such, the demand for parking spaces would not decrease. Also, in view of the severe shortage of parking spaces and illegal parking problem in Yuen Long town centre, he urged the Government to review the overall supply of car parking spaces in residential areas, new development areas and the town centre.

105. Mr CHEUNG Muk-lam said inadequate car parking spaces resulted in serious illegal parking and hence traffic congestion in Yuen Long. Although the Police had tackled illegal parking, the corresponding effect was not achieved because illegal parking recurred after enforcement as a result of insufficient car parks in Yuen Long. Therefore, he could not understand why the TD responded that car parking spaces could cater for the demand in Yuen Long. He also pointed out that there were many newly completed residential developments in Yuen Long. Taking Yuccie Square in Yuen Long as an example, the original site was to provide several hundred car parking spaces but the supply of car parking spaces had decreased in face of increased parking demand after population intake of the completed development. During the YLDC’s duty visit to Japan, he noticed that roads and amenities in Tokyo in Japan were neat and tidy. Although there were many vehicles in Japan, people there made use of underground space to provide parking spaces and constructed multi-storey car parks to ease the supply problem of car parking spaces. He said that Members had striven to conduct nullah decking to increase car parking spaces before but the proposal was not considered by the Government. In addition, noting that the Hung Shui Kiu area lacked public parking spaces and the car parking spaces in housing estates were always taken up, the Government did not tackle the problem proactively. He enquired about the proportion of the number of residential units to that of parking spaces provided and questioned why there was only 1 car parking space for every 33 households in Hung Fuk Estate. Because of inadequate supply of car parking spaces in housing estates, and in turn monopoly of parking spaces by developers, vehicles were parked disorderly near private residential buildings such as Yoho. He opined that the PlanD should be responsible for the situation. Furthermore, he enquired whether there were terms in land leases on the proportion of the number of households to that of parking spaces. Referring to relevant policies in the mainland, he questioned whether the current government policies were outdated. On the other hand, pointing out that there was only 1 bicycle parking space for every 15 households as shown in an evaluation, he enquired whether the TD had relevant information for reference.

106. The Hon KWONG Chun-yu agreed with the views of Mr CHEUNG Muk-lam that the supply problem of car parking spaces was originated from the outdated planning standards in Hong Kong. The standards for car parking spaces were based on Chapter 8 of the HKPSG in which some standards were unreasonable and outdated. He pointed out that the Second Parking Demand

- 31 -

Study conducted in 2002 had been subject to a lot of criticisms in recent years. It was held that the Government had assessed the parking demand wrongly and even mistook that there was an oversupply of parking spaces a few years ago, leading to the current undesirable consequence. He first thanked Members for bringing the matter to the meeting. He also noticed that the price and rent of parking spaces provided by the developers were pushed up by speculation. Recently, it was reported that the price of car parking spaces at had reached a record high of approximately $1.6 million. He held that the Government should review the HKPSG as the last study on parking demand was already 16 years ago and the policies had been outdated. As the Government had constructed fewer public car parks in recent years, not only the price of parking spaces in Yuen Long town centre remained high, the rent of parking spaces under The Link Real Estate Investment Trust had also drastically increased. This was because the Government did not update the planning guidelines to provide sufficient parking spaces, resulting in a shortage of parking spaces in the market. He pointed out that the speculation of parking spaces was an unhealthy phenomenon and the situation would worsen if the Government further postponed the review. The Government should review all policies about the supply of parking spaces in Hong Kong, especially those for Yuen Long where there were more motorists because residents in remote areas travelled by cars. As it was an imminent problem, he hoped the Government would initiate the review on the supply of parking spaces.

(The meeting was presided over by the Vice-chairman.)

107. Mr CHOW bing-kay gave a consolidated reply as follows:

(1) As land resources were limited in Hong Kong, the Government had to consider the needs of commercial vehicles first in providing parking spaces but this did not mean it was indifferent to the parking needs of private cars. As stated in the written reply, the TD had proactively taken a number of measures to increase the supply of private car parking spaces, including:

(i) To request that developers provide parking spaces exceeding the standard provision under the HKPSG in new development projects; (ii) To identify appropriate sites as far as possible for use as temporary public car parks by short-term tenancies (“STTs”); (iii) To build public car parks on “government, institution or community facilities” (“GIC”) sites where appropriate. The TD would examine with relevant departments whether the suggested site of Indoor Recreation Centre in Area 12, Yuen Long by Members in the letter was suitable for building a public car park; and (iv) To actively consider the introduction of automated parking system in Hong Kong. The TD had commissioned a consultancy study to locate a suitable area to introduce the automated parking system on a pilot basis. Upon satisfactory effects, the system would be further extended to increase the supply of car parking spaces;

(2) The Government would timely review the HKPSG;

(3) The department had not drawn up plans to conduct nullah decking to provide more car parking spaces. As the space after nullah decking could be designated for alternative uses, parking facilities might not be provided; and

- 32 -

(4) The department would identify spaces along streets and roads with less busy traffic in the district for parking use where possible.

108. Mr David NG responded that the HKPSG provided general guidelines for determining the scale, location and site requirements of various land uses, community facilities and infrastructure according to the population and other factors to ensure that, during the planning process, the Government would reserve adequate land for social and economic development and provide appropriate and sufficient facilities to satisfy the needs of the public. The TD was in charge of the parking facilities mentioned in Chapter 8 and would timely review the standards to provide adequate parking spaces.

109. Ms Angela CHAN responded to Members’ enquiry about the regulation of parking spaces by land leases. She said the proportion of car parking space supply in land leases was stipulated mainly according to the views of departments and HKPSG. In general, there were terms regulating parking spaces for different groups of people, such as residents and shopping mall patrons. Therefore, parking spaces for residents were only for use by residents and their visitors but not shopping mall patrons. Otherwise, it would be a breach of the terms under the land lease. However, the terms did not restrict the mode of renting out private car parking spaces (be it on a monthly, hourly or floating basis).

110. Mr CHEUNG Muk-lam pointed out that providing parking spaces by way of STT was not a long-term plan. The parking and traffic problem in Yuen Long district were imminent and required a review. He enquired about the proportion of the number of parking spaces to that of households in new development projects as he was concerned that residents would park their vehicles by the roadside and cause traffic chaos due to the insufficient supply of parking spaces. Moreover, the public would park their vehicles by the roadside if they could not find new parking spaces after the expiry of the STT. He pointed out that illegal parking in Hung Shui Kiu was serious. As the demand for parking spaces would continue to increase with the launch of new development projects, the Government should make a long-term plan on parking spaces in residential areas.

111. Mr CHING Chan-ming said as the demand for parking spaces in buildings had obviously outgrown the supply, the Government should review the planning standards. He suggested constructing places multi-storey car parks or underground car parks in locations in Yuen Long such as the minibus terminus at Fung Cheung Road and Fuk Tak Street and minibus stop near the food kiosk at Road, while the minibus stops would be kept on the ground level. He also suggested that the THB convert the minibus stops, in absence of management, into car parks to utilise land resources and facilitate the management of minibus stops.

112. Mr LEUNG Fuk-yuen said that in Yuen Long district where there were a large number of people and vehicles, the parking problem was getting serious. Over the decades, no standard multi-storey car parks had been constructed in Yuen Long town centre. Also, indiscriminate parking of bicycles was so serious that had consumed the YLDO much of its time to tackle the black spots of illegal parking of bicycles. He hoped Members could look into the solutions to the parking problem of bicycles and vehicles with government departments.

- 33 -

113. Mr MAK Ip-sing said the inadequate supply of parking spaces was a disturbing issue for Yuen Long residents. During their recent visit to Tokyo in Japan, the YLDC found that there were many underground car parks and automated bicycle parking lots. The construction cost of an underground automated car park which could accommodate 50 vehicles was around HK$40 million while the construction cost of an underground automated bicycle parking lot which could accommodate 180 bicycles was around HK$10 million. He suggested that the Government consider introducing the parking systems. However, he was worried that introducing new construction methods would take a longer time for assessment. He hoped the YLDC would submit the duty visit report to relevant departments for their examination, in particular for their reference to address the long-standing problem of inadequate parking spaces in Yuen Long.

114. Ms CHAN Mei-lin said the issue of inadequate parking spaces in car parks had been discussed repeatedly at YLDC meetings. With a growing population in Yuen Long, the shortage of parking spaces had become more serious. Also, during peak hours, the West Rail and Light Rail trains were usually full. Passengers needed to wait for a long time and many people chose to drive to work. In light of this, she held that the Government should review the ancillary facilities of public transport and enhance the services, while providing more parking spaces in existing and newly completed residential buildings and public housing. She also pointed out that residents in housing estates in her constituency such as Tin Tsz Estate had frequently reflected the problem of inadequate parking spaces and long waiting time. She expected a worsened situation in the future and urged the Government to look into the problem. She also suggested that the Government consider underground car parks.

115. Mr CHOW bing-kay gave a consolidated reply as follows:

(1) From the perspective of land resources, sites suitable for constructing standalone multi-storey car parks were also favourable for other development uses which would be more beneficial to the overall development. Nevertheless, the Government would build public car parks on GIC sites where appropriate;

(2) In 2018, the TD commissioned a pilot study on introducing automated parking system in Hong Kong. Suitable locations would be selected as trial sites to determine the feasibility of different parking systems; and

(3) In response to Mr CHEUNG Muk-lam’s enquiry on the proportion of the number of parking spaces to that of households under the HKPSG, as the data involved was subject to different factors (including the flat size, plot ratio, ancillary facilities, etc.), it was hard to illustrate the standard with a figure. He reiterated that the Government would timely review the planning standards and guidelines.

116. In conclusion, the Vice-chairman said as pointed out by Members, inadequate supply of car parking spaces in Yuen Long district had contributed to the monopoly of parking spaces by developers, leading to a continuous rise in the price and rent of car parking spaces. Insufficient parking spaces also intensified illegal parking and caused traffic chaos. Members had put forward a number of proposals, such as constructing multi-storey public car parks in Yuen Long town centre, conducting nullah decking to provide more parking facilities, requesting provision of a specific number of parking spaces in newly completed housing estates, constructing underground automated

- 34 -

car parks with reference to Tokyo, Japan and so on. He hoped the Government would proactively study a long-term policy for the supply of car parking spaces. He also urged the Government to expeditiously review the planning standards and policies about car parking spaces to increase the parking space supply.

Item IV: Question from DC Members: Mr SHUM Ho-kit, Mr LEUNG Fuk-yuen, Mr CHING Chan-ming, Ms YUEN Man-yee and Mr LEUNG Ming-kin proposed to discuss “grave concern over the serious subsidence problem of viaduct piers at West Rail Yuen Long Station” (YLDC Paper No. 49/2018)

Item V: Question from DC Members: Mr WONG Wai-shun, MH and Mr WONG Cheuk-kin proposed to discuss “requesting an urgent discussion on the subsidence problem of viaduct piers at West Rail Yuen Long Station” (YLDC Paper No. 50/2018)

Item VI: Question from DC Members: Mr LEE Yuet-man, MH, Mr SIU Long-ming, Ms WONG Wai-ling, Ms MA Shuk-yin, Ms CHIU Sau-han, MH, Ms LAU Kwai-yung, Mr YIU Kwok-wai, Mr TANG Cheuk-him, the Hon LUK Chung-hung, Mr LUI Kin, MH, Mr CHEUNG Muk-lam, the Hon LEUNG Che-cheung, SBS, MH, JP, Mr KWOK Keung, MH and Mr CHAM Ka-hung, Daniel, BBS, MH, JP proposed to discuss “requesting the Government to thoroughly investigate the serious subsidence problem of railway track viaduct at West Rail Yuen Long Station undermining railway safety and the MTR Corporation to give an open and transparent account of the incident to the public” (YLDC Paper No. 51/2018)

Item VII: Question from DC Members: Mr WONG Wai-yin, Zachary, Mr MAK Ip-sing, Ms CHAN Mei-lin, Mr TO Ka-lun and the Hon KWONG Chun-yu proposed to discuss “the subsidence problem of viaduct piers at West Rail Yuen Long Station” (YLDC Paper No. 52/2018) 117. The Chairman referred Members to the Papers No. 49 to 52, which contained questions from DC Members regarding the settlement problem of track viaduct at West Rail Yuen Long Station. He also asked Members to take note of the replies from the Highways Department (“HyD”), the Buildings Department (“BD”) and the MTR Corporation Limited (“MTRCL”) as circulated at the meeting by the Secretariat, while inviting Members to seek views from the following department representatives.

Electrical and Mechanical Services Department (“EMSD”) Assistant Director/Railways Mr CHAN Chau-fat Chief Engineer/Railways 1 Mr VY Ek CHIN

Buildings Department (“BD”) Assistant Director/New Buildings 2 Mr HO Hon-kit, Humphrey Chief Structural Engineer/New Territories Mr TAM A Ray, Albert

MTR Corporation Limited (“MTRCL”) General Manager – Infrastructure Maintenance Mr WONG Wing-kin, Terry Manager – External Affairs Mr HO Wing-hong Assistant Public Relations Manager – External Ms Lam Yuen

- 35 -

Affairs

118. The Vice-chairman thanked the Chairman for including the item in the agenda as requested by Members. He asked whether the settlement problem of the viaduct piers at West Rail Yuen Long Station would recur after the reinforcement works when piling works at a nearby construction site resumed. He also asked at which point of the settlement problem the authorities would call a halt to the piling works if the viaduct piers subsided again, and at which point the geological conditions of the construction site would be considered unfit for piling works. Finally, he asked whether the piling works would affect the structural safety of the housing estates near the construction site. He said the owners’ corporation of was worried the piling works might affect the structural safety of buildings in the housing estate, where the settlement problem had occurred before because of piling works at the Grand YOHO construction site nearby. He said he would resolutely oppose the resumption of piling works if department representatives failed to give satisfactory answers to the above questions. He expressed dissatisfaction the BD had not demanded the MTRCL explain the matter to the public, thus denying their right to know.

119. Mr Daniel CHAM, BBS, MH, JP said he had originally thought the final phase of the Grand YOHO housing project had not been completed because the developer deferred the works to sell the housing units at higher prices, but found later that it had been due to the settlement problem with the viaduct piers of West Rail Yuen Long Station. As the papers showed, the magnitude of the settlement ranged between 15 and 18 mm - within the maximum tolerable limit of 20 mm. The MTRCL was a public utility organisation serving large numbers of commuters, so the public should have the right to know. He questioned whether concealing the truth from the public had become part of MTRCL’s corporate culture, citing that cases such as cracks found on one of the viaduct piers located between Yuen Long and Long Ping Stations of the and the shortening of steel reinforcement bars at the platform of under the Shatin-Central rail link project were all uncovered by the media before the MTRCL made public relevant information. The settlement of the viaduct piers at West Rail Yuen Long Station was no exception. He was of the view that relevant government departments had the responsibility to notify the public of the matter, which should be open to public scrutiny. He added that public concern about the safe operation of the MTR system was justified because the MTRCL had concealed many incidents caused by construction works. As the problem had occurred, the Government and the MTRCL should both give the public a clear and candid explanation.

120. Ms CHIU Sau-han, MH said there was a widespread worry about the incident in the community. First, the public was worried whether the structural safety of nearby housing estates would be affected by the piling works, which would resume after the reinforcement works for the viaduct piers. Second, there were worries that the sinking viaduct piers might cause casualties, given the enormous West Rail passenger volume. Third, the MTRCL had seemingly tried to conceal the incident as relevant information was not made available to the public until after being uncovered by the media, thus having a negative effect on its public image. She believed the MTRCL should give an account of the incident, so as to restore the public confidence in the company. She also expressed dissatisfaction that the YLDC could only learn of the incident through media reports, urging the authorities to give the public a full account of the matter.

121. Mr CHOW Wing-kan said he believed more than one million Tuen Mun and Yuen Long

- 36 -

residents were concerned about the safety of travelling with the MTR when the train was running through Yuen Long Station. He said the MTRCL should keep a close eye on subsiding viaduct piers and ensure rail tracks ran parallel to each other. He questioned whether there had been any measures in place to monitor the condition of tracks, the depth of piling and the type of piles used for the construction of viaduct piers at Yuen Long Station. Yuen Long’s earth was composed of sedimentary rocks, and the geological structure was undermined by groundwater erosion over time. The authorities should monitor and conduct research on the geological conditions. He learned from the Tin Chung Court short-piling scandal that the load-bearing capacity of piles was subject to two factors: the supporting force of piles secured to bedrock, and the force of friction between piles and soil. When it came to the supervision of piling works, Government departments should conduct internal and external audits to ensure that the works had been conducted in compliance with relevant requirements, such as whether the piles had been driven deep enough, whether any shoddy works had been involved, and whether inferior construction materials had been used in the works. He said the authorities, in order to allay public concerns, should quickly explain how the viaduct piers had been built, whether the piles had reached the depths according to the original design, and whether the construction procedures had been completely appropriate.

122. The Hon KWONG Chun-yu said the settlement incident was severe, but what was of concern was that the authorities had never made public the incident in the past five years. The YLDC had never been informed of the incident. It was only after the media uncovered the incident that the MTRCL gave explanations. He expressed concern about the frequent occurrence of problems with the MTR system, citing the Shatin-Central rail link incident and the settlement problem of viaduct piers at West Rail Yuen Long Station. The average daily West Rail ridership was 410 000, but the riders did not know that their safety had been compromised in the past five years. The MTRCL did not seem to care about the safety of the 410 000 passengers. The papers said the authorities detected the settlement problem in 2013, but the reinforcement works for the viaduct piers were carried out only last year. With the handling of the incident like this, passengers could not feel safe to travel with the MTR. He quoted an engineer as saying that subsidence of 20 mm was already very serious, thus requesting the MTRCL to explain its subsidence assessment criteria and to provide relevant information. He asked the MTRCL to set out the chronology of key events relating to the subsidence of viaduct piers on the West Rail Line, while at the same time questioning whether the Transport and Housing Bureau (“THB”) already knew the problem long ago. He also asked what follow-up actions would be taken in the aftermath of the incident.

123. Mr LEE Yuet-man, MH said the settlement of viaduct piers at West Rail Yuen Long Station could put passengers’ lives at risk, and that he received a lot of enquiries about the issue from the public. He thanked the Chairman for including the issue in the agenda at the Members’ request, while asking whether the West Rail, built by the -Canton Railway Corporation (“KCRC”), was a jerry-built project. He requested the defunct company, which was responsible for the project, to clearly explain the matter to the public. He said the BD should have notified the YLDC of the incident as soon as it had been detected, and performed its gatekeeper’s role properly. He demanded indefinite suspension of all piling works near the viaduct piers before the public could rest assured that it was safe to travel on the West Rail. He also requested Sun Hung Kai Properties Ltd. (“SHKP”), which was responsible for the development project, to explain whether it had breached any regulations in the course of the piling works. Finally, he criticised the MTRCL for skillfully concealing the incident for so many years.

- 37 -

124. Mr LEUNG Fuk-yuen said the settlement of viaduct piers at West Rail Yuen Long Station had caused a great deal of concern because the West Rail was a mass transit service for local residents. He said Yuen Long Station was adjacent to Shap , and there were many villages in the vicinity. The parties concerned had liaised with the rural committee, saying monitors would be installed in affected areas to assess the impact of piling works on buildings in the vicinity. He pointed out that cracks had appeared on the walls of the village houses near Sun Yuen Long Centre some years ago, when the latter was under construction. With monitors set up in the area of housing estates near the piling site, he hoped the authorities would regularly collect the monitor data and consult the rural committee. He said the rural committee was ready to provide assistance in allaying nearby residents’ concerns.

125. Mr LUI Kin, MH said the West Rail was an essential transportation link in Yuen Long and Tuen Mun, with its average daily patronage exceeding 400 000 passenger trips. He said the settlement incident reflected the viaduct piers at the West Rail Line constituted a public safety concern, and might subside anytime because of nearby construction works. If this happened, the West Rail had to cease operation. In the early 1990’s when was not in existence, and whenever landslides happened, would be closed and external transport services in Yuen Long and Tuen Mun would be suspended, causing inconvenience to residents. He requested the relevant Government department representatives to answer whether there would be any other sufficient external means of transport to serve Yuen Long and Tuen Mun residents in case West Rail trains stopped running. Meanwhile, the reinforcement works for viaduct piers had been going on for a while. He queried whether the MTRCL was trying to conceal something as some residents had heard noise from the construction site in late hours and learnt that it was because noise barriers were being retrofitted. He also strongly protested against the Government’s disregard of the YLDC and of public safety by not making public such a big risk.

126. Mr YIU Kwok-wai said he felt puzzled as the MTRCL failed to make public the incident according to the notification mechanism. He pointed out railway was an integral part of the long-term public transport development strategy. While residents in the Northwest New Territories paid expensive fares for their West Rail train travel to and from urban areas, the MTRCL was concealing the railway safety problem, which was tantamount to betraying the residents. Even those without relevant engineering knowledge knew that settlement was likely to recur if it had happened before. It was never a trivial matter if a 20-mm crack appeared on a building, or if a building tilted by 20 mm, or if there was a 20-mm bump on a rugged footpath, where elderly walkers could trip or fall. Conceivably, a train could derail if it ran on a rail section which sank by 20 mm. However, the authorities still said it was safe to travel on the West Rail after the media uncovered the subsidence incident. The public had lost confidence in the MTRCL in the wake of a spate of problems found with its works projects, coupled with its reduced service levels. He hoped the Government and relevant departments would explain to the public the situation of the subsidising viaduct piers at West Rail Yuen Long Station, and asked whether the authorities would report such incidents if they recurred in the future.

127. Ms CHAN Mei-lin said more and more scandals surrounding the MTRCL had been brought to light. For example, the shortening of steel bars on the platform of Hung Hom Station under the Shatin-Central rail link project could cause casualties and catastrophic consequences. She pointed out the YLDC had not been aware of the settlement of the viaduct piers at West Rail Yuen Long Station beforehand because the MTRCL did not take the initiative to give an account of the incident and the Government did not notify the YLDC either after learning of the incident as

- 38 -

early as 2013. The YLDC was treated as nothing. It and the public could not accept the handling of the incident. Railway was nearly monopolising the entire transport network with more than one million New Territories West residents using the West Rail. The issue of railway safety aroused public concern, negatively affecting residents’ mental health. At this stage, the public confidence in the MTRCL could not be restored simply by MTRCL Chairman Frederick Ma Si-hang’s guarantee that it was safe to travel on the MTR. She asked whether Ma would be held responsible alone if any accidents happened, because many residents had said to her that MTRCL Chairman must step down. She opined the Government had a role to play in the matter, especially the THB, and should perform its supervisory role. She demanded the MTRCL explain whether there were already problems with the quality of the West Rail Line project as early as the works commenced, or whether the foundation was not firm or stable enough, or whether the subsidence emerged after SHKP conducted piling works there in recent years. She also enquired if any remedial works would be carried out to restore the public’s confidence in railway safety. Finally, she demanded a review of the notification mechanism, and that the YLDC be notified of any incidents in the future.

128. Mr Zachary WONG said it was not known when Hong Kong Government started to develop a “concealed” culture, causing public organisations to follow suit. The “concealed” culture in the Government and the MTRCL had been so widespread, putting public safety at risk. Even its staff could not stand it, so they disclosed such information to the media. He asked whether the Yuen Long District Officer had not been informed of the incident, either. He also requested the MTRCL to disclose whether there had been any ongoing projects that could pose a threat to passenger safety, apart from the subsidence problem. He also asked which level of management in the Government and the MTRCL was in the position to decide whether to make public the incident. He said the YLDC should have been notified of all matters relating to Yuen Long District with relevant information disseminated to local residents. On the other hand, the BD monitored the planning, design and construction of buildings and associated works on private land according to the Buildings Ordinance (Cap. 123), and the papers said the BD had seemingly ascertained the subsidence problem was associated with the piling works conducted by SHKP for two private residential buildings. But he doubted whether the subsidence of the viaduct piers was a natural phenomenon. Meanwhile, he enquired whether the MTRCL was subject to the Buildings Ordinance (Cap. 123) as the BD denied responsibility for the cracks appearing on the external walls of the buildings in the housing estates near a West Rail construction site when the railway was under construction, and said it was the MTRCL which should handle the issue. Finally, he said Hong Kong was a city with many buildings closely packed together, so the advanced piling method, instead of the percussive piling method, should be used in construction as it was quieter and would have less impact on the surrounding environment.

129. Mr TO Ka-lun said that it was fortunate that Hong Kong still had freedoms of speech, press and publication. When the media uncovered the incident, Hong Kong people knew what had happened. The incident suggested the Government departments and the MTRCL had covered up the incident, while the written reply of the BD revealed the chronology of the events as follows. In May 2012, two concrete piles were found to have slightly subsided. In June of the same year, the number of measurements of the subsidence was increased to three times a day. In September of the same year, mitigation measures such as grouting were carried out near the pile foundation. In October of the same year, the BD permitted the piling works to go on. In September 2013, the piling works were suspended after the subsidence of the two piles was found to have reached between 15 mm and 18 mm, close to the upper tolerable limit. He pointed out that it had been one year and four months from the detection of the subsidence to the suspension of the piling works. In October 2014, the MTRCL submitted a proposal on preventive reinforcement works for the two

- 39 -

piles, which was accepted by the BD in June 2015 and implemented in September 2017. In May 2018, the MTRCL submitted a revised piling plan, which was accepted by the BD in June of the same year. He was of the opinion that the MTRCL had its corporate integrity ruined as it and the Government departments had not given candid and clear explanations on the issue. He demanded MTRCL Chairman and Directors and the Secretary for Transport and Housing (“S for T&H”) step down.

130. Ms YUEN Man-yee said the public became worried about the safety of travelling with the MTR and lost confidence in the railway operator after the media had repeatedly reported problems with railway projects. She despised the MTRCL for covering up the settlement problems, so the construction works’ impacts on viaduct piers could not be effectively ascertained. The viaduct piers at West Rail Yuen Long Station had been sinking since 2012, but the Government and the MTRCL had been concealing the incident, ignoring more than 400 000 people’s right to know, who took the West Rail every day. In her opinion, the MTRCL had always acted as it wished, bullied the public, and did not care about the public’s feelings. She said the MTRCL should face the public and shoulder the responsibility if its faults contributed to the occurrence of accidents. She said that life was precious so the MTRCL should not respond with just a few words and should address the problem seriously.

131. Mr LEUNG Ming-kin expressed his regret and disappointment towards the MTRCL, and considered it to be problematic for the company to make public the subsidence problem after it was revealed by the media. He said the MTRCL had shown no remorse, as reflected by its replies in the papers, as it shirked its responsibility and did not handle the crisis properly. The MTRCL should have alerted most of the stakeholders to the problem when it had emerged, rather than concealing it for about five years until after the media uncovered it. He said the MTRCL concealed the incident and adopted a low profile in handling it, which was a total disregard for public safety. He then asked the MTRCL and the developer how many housing estates had been affected by the settlement problem resulting from the piling works, given the many village houses near the subsiding viaduct piers at West Rail Yuen Long Station, including . He pointed out the BD and the Geotechnical Engineering Office (“GEO”) had been aware of the problem as early as 2012, but underestimated the impact of the piling works on the surrounding environment, thus failing to address the crisis. He requested the Ombudsman to investigate the handling of the incident by the BD and the GEO.

132. Mr MAK Ip-sing said that it was fortunate that the mass media could still scrutinise Hong Kong or it would no longer be a safe city as the Government claimed. The West Rail would have to cease operation if the viaduct piers at West Rail Yuen Long Station subsidised by almost 45 mm. However, the MTRCL seemingly did not attach any importance to the problem. According to the papers, the incident was associated with the piling works for two private residential buildings. He suggested the developer be held liable for the incident as there were laws governing construction works in the vicinity to ensure railway safety. In 2012, the MTRCL notified the BD of the slight subsidence of the viaduct piers, but the BD did not report this to the YLDC. He asked the departmental representatives at the meeting about the name of the official who decided whether to report the incident. Moreover, as the papers stated the BD approved in June this year the revised piling plan as submitted by the developer, he asked who should be held responsible if the piling works caused settlement of the viaduct piers again and exacerbated the situation. He also asked whether the MTRCL could ensure the piling works would not affect the rail tracks of the West Rail Line and whether the MTRCL would bear the risk associated with this. He suggested the two

- 40 -

housing development projects be suspended for good to reduce safety hazard to the public.

133. Mr KWOK Hing-ping enquired the BD and the MTRCL whether they had deployed their staff to investigate the viaduct piers in question, but he did not think the developer would pay for the filling of underground space if caverns were found there. As the papers did not give details about the geological conditions of the area where the viaduct piers were located, the piers could sink when piling works nearby were carried out and if the piles had not penetrated into the solid formation. He demanded the BD give details about the depths of the piles of the viaduct piers driven into the ground.

134. Mr KWOK Keung, MH praised the media for uncovering the settlement of viaduct piers on the West Rail Line, prompting senior officials of the Government and the MTRCL to explain the incident at the meeting in an open and transparent manner. He asked the MTRCL to explain the causes of the settlement, and believed that viaduct piers would not be affected by piling works nearby as long as piles penetrated deep enough into the solid formation. Moreover, he asked what remedial measures would be taken to prevent the viaduct piers from sinking again and to ensure the safe operations of the West Rail Line.

135. The Chairman said the viaduct piers in question were in Shap Pat Heung, adjacent to Grand YOHO and Sun Yuen Long Centre. Residents who lived nearby and often took the West Rail were worried that frequent piling works at nearby construction sites over the past decade might have been responsible for the settlement of the viaduct piers, and would affect the structural integrity of buildings in nearby housing estates. Despite its strong link with the Government and the MTRCL, the YLDC had been updated only on the progress of noise barrier installation and the construction of residential blocks atop railway stations, except for the reinforcement works for viaduct piers. Prior to the meeting, he had a chat with former KCRC Chairman Michael Tien Puk-sun, who said the company had known long ago the existence of underground caverns and sedimentary rocks in Yuen Long, as well as the fact that their presence would increase the difficulty for the foundation works of Yuen Long Station, thus resulting in higher construction costs. He also asked why the MTRCL had never talked about the issue with the YLDC despite their close ties, while calling on the Government and MTRCL representatives to guarantee that it was safe to travel with the West Rail, and to reply whether residents living nearby did not need to worry the viaduct piers might collapse. He said it was of utmost importance to ensure public safety and hoped the Government and MTRCL representatives could carefully reply or they would have to assume a major share of the responsibility if any accidents occurred in the future. Lastly, he requested the Government and the MTRCL to set up a notification mechanism to update the YLDC on any matters relating to construction safety and news about the sinking viaduct piers.

136. Mr Terry WONG gave a consolidated reply as follows:

(1) The MTRCL took operational safety as its primary concern, and any situation that would compromise the safety of passengers, staff and the general public would not be tolerated;

(2) The MTRCL had a set of stringent, complete railway protection measures in place which were carried out by a dedicated railway protection team composed of engineers, surveyors and technicians, whose responsibility was to protect railway

- 41 -

property by patrolling works sites and monitoring rail tracks;

(3) The MTRCL had been keeping close watch of the situation of viaduct piers on the West Rail Line since the commencement of the development project near Yuen Long Station, and had requested suspension of the construction works when two of the viaduct piers had subsided by a magnitude of 20 mm, in order to ensure their structural safety;

(4) The MTRCL had been maintaining close liaison with relevant Government departments. The BD said there had not been any significant changes in the settlement of the viaduct piers, and the West Rail Line had been operating safely;

(5) Regarding the railway operational safety, the MTRCL stressed the most important thing was to ensure even rail tracks. The MTRCL had been regularly monitoring the status of rail tracks using orbital rally vehicles and other instruments to ensure the tracks remained even and in a safe and good condition;

(6) The MTRCL’s main concern was to ensure railway operational safety. After the preventive reinforcement works conducted for the viaduct piers, it was mainly the developer which wanted to resume construction works, which would not be resumed until after relevant Government departments and the MTRCL reviewed and agreed with the developer’s proposal and relevant information. For the MTRCL, it was never a key consideration when the developer should be permitted to resume construction works. Instead, what the MTRCL would mainly consider was whether the reinforcement works would affect railway safety and services as well as nearby residents. The developer must put forward a solution that ensured the proposed construction works would not affect the safety of railway structure, facilities and operations after resumption. The MTRCL would carefully consider every aspect of reinforcement works before its implementation. The ongoing reinforcement works for the viaduct piers began in October 2017 and was scheduled for completion by the year end;

(7) The MTRCL had been conducting regular inspections, repairs and maintenance of railway facilities in accordance with the rigorous railway infrastructure and asset maintenance and repair systems, and would notify Government departments of the situation according to the mechanism, where necessary. In case of any situations that would affect the operational safety and services, the MTRCL would, as always, notify the public through various channels; and

(8) The MTRCL appreciated the public’s concern about the incident and agreed there was room to improve sensitivity to such incidents, with more efforts made to improve external communications.

137. Mr Humphrey HO gave a consolidated reply as follows:

(1) Registered structural engineers, registered geotechnical engineers and registered contractors responsible for construction works had to ensure the works would not cause adverse consequences or damage to adjacent buildings, structures and facilities, according to the system regulating piling works on private construction sites. Under the Buildings Ordinance (Cap. 123) and its subsidiary regulations, registered

- 42 -

structural engineers were required to submit a piling plan to the BD for approval. The plan should include details of monitoring requirements for the adjacent and nearby buildings, such as monitoring checkpoints at appropriate locations, settlement records collected from monitoring checkpoints, tolerable settlement limits and corresponding contingency measures;

(2) The piling works of a development project located within a railway protection area as included in Schedule 5 of the Buildings Ordinance (Cap. 123) should be conducted in compliance with a more stringent set of standards, in order to ensure structural safety and stability of railway facilities. For example, registered structural engineers, registered geotechnical engineers and registered contractors responsible for piling works should ensure that the settlement upper threshold of railway facilities caused by piling works did not exceed 20 mm (25 mm for general buildings), which was an established standard for piling works. The BD would consult the GEO of the CEDD and the MTRCL about the piling plan according to the centralised processing mechanism for building plans to seek their advice on the design and supervision relating to geotechnical engineering and from the perspective of railway protection respectively. The BD would also consult their views when processing consent applications for piling works;

(3) Regarding the settlement incident of viaduct piers at West Rail Yuen Long Station, the piling plan approved for the construction site of a nearby development project set out the requirements for monitoring the piling works near railway facilities (including concrete columns nos. U278 and U279). Among them was that piling works should be suspended with necessary remedial measures carried out immediately if settlement at monitoring checkpoints exceeded a tolerable limit of 20 mm and should not be resumed unless with BD’s approval. The registered contractor of the construction site had set up settlement monitoring checkpoints (four monitoring checkpoints installed on the two piles) according to the approved piling plan and the requirements set by the MTRCL;

(4) The registered structural engineer should submit the settlement monitoring records to the BD on a regular basis when the piling works at the construction site were underway. In September 2013, the settlement levels at the four monitoring checkpoints set up at the two piles ranged from 15 to 18 mm, which did not exceed the maximum tolerable limit nor affect the structural safety of the two piles. That said, in response to the settlement incident and according to MTRCL’s requirements, the registered structural engineer requested the BD in mid-September 2013 to have the piling works temporarily suspended. Meanwhile, the BD continued to closely monitor changes in the settlement level and required the registered contractor to continuously measure the settlement at monitoring checkpoints and then submit the monitoring records to the BD. To date, the settlement of the two piles had not exceeded the maximum tolerable limit of 20 mm. According to the monitoring records as of the beginning of this month, the settlement levels at the four monitoring checkpoints varied between 16 and 18 mm;

(5) The BD accepted in June 2015 MTRCL’s proposal for preventive reinforcement works for two concrete pillars after its submission in October 2014. The works began in September 2017, and were still underway. The registered structural engineer responsible for the works submitted to the BD in May 2018 a revised piling plan in which more mitigating measures were proposed, such as preserving steel

- 43 -

tubing when the remaining piles were driven to the ground, and reducing its speed of advancement in the process of drilling, in order to further minimise the impact on nearby railway facilities. It was also proposed in the revised piling plan that the rest of piling works would only commence after completion of the reinforcement works for concrete pillars. The BD approved the revised piling plan in June. When the remaining parts of the piling works were underway, the registered structural engineer would work with the MTRCL to continuously measure the settlement recorded at the monitoring checkpoints, and reported the measurements to the BD and GEO on a regular basis; and

(6) The BD would continue to monitor the settlement of railway facilities near the piling site to ensure public safety, while reviewing and improving the arrangements for information dissemination.

138. Mr CHAN Chau-fat gave a consolidated response as follows:

(1) The EMSD, a statutory regulator in Hong Kong responsible for regulating and overseeing the safe operation of the MTR system, operated a regular mechanism to oversee the maintenance of the MTR system in order to ensure railway safety. The MTRCL was required to notify the EMSD of safety incidents according to the established notification mechanism;

(2) The MTRCL would conduct regular inspections of rail tracks using rail testing vehicles in order to ensure operational safety. The EMSD would review the data obtained to determine whether the tracks had met safety standards, and whether figures about the evenness and left-right deviation of rail tracks had exceeded acceptable levels;

(3) According to the professional viewpoints of a railway regulator, whether the rail section where settlement occurred was safe depended on the actual monitoring data. The EMSD had reviewed MTRCL’s railway monitoring data in the past seven years, and found their compliance with safety levels; and

(4) The EMSD understood Members’ concerns about railway safety. The EMSD had a regular mechanism in place to oversee the repairs and maintenance of the MTR railway system, and would continue to closely monitor the situation to ensure railway safety.

139. Mr Zachary WONG said Government and MTRCL representatives had not answered his questions. First, he had asked whether there had been other similar remedial works which were underway but unknown to the public, apart from those for the two subsiding piles. Second, he had asked who decided not to make public the settlement incident in 2013, of which the MTRCL had notified the BD. Third, he asked whether it was true that the Yuen Long District Officer had not been notified of the incident, either. Fourth, the Buildings Ordinance (Cap. 123) empowered the BD to monitor how private developers carried out construction works including piling works, so as not to affect surrounding buildings and railway facilities, but the point was whether the BD could require the MTRCL to suspend piling works in accordance with the ordinance, when construction works carried out by the MTRCL was affecting surrounding buildings. Finally, he asked whether percussive piling was still suitable for Hong Kong.

- 44 -

140. Mr TO Ka-lun said the accountability system must be enforced and the Chairman and the Director of the MTRCL and the S for T&H must be held accountable and step down. He said MTRCL’s track records in Yuen Long District had been deplorable and the company must be condemned for turning a blind eye to Yau Tam Mei Tsuen villagers’ protests over the falling water levels in the village’s wells and the cracks on housing and road surface since the commencement of the construction works for the Hong Kong section of the Express Rail Link project. As the viaduct piers at West Rail Yuen Long Station were sinking, the MTRCL should review its corporate social responsibility.

141. Ms CHAN Mei-lin said the representatives of neither Government departments nor the MTRCL had answered her questions clearly. She asked the MTRCL again to explain whether there had already been problems with the quality of West Rail Line works at the time of construction. She had also asked whether the settlement had occurred because the foundation was not stable enough, or because of the piling works conducted at the Grand YOHO construction site in recent years. She also asked whether piling works would affect the structures of nearby buildings.

142. Mr LUI Kin, MH said he asked the representatives of the Government departments and the MTRCL to give an account of two issues. One was whether the authorities had any long-term, comprehensive measures to monitor the settlement of viaduct piers, such as installing monitors at viaduct piers along the West Rail Line, in order to ensure the safety of travelling with the West Rail, given the karst geological conditions in Yuen Long. The other issue was whether there would be penalties for any damage caused to MTRCL facilities by the piling works of a private developer. He said the settlement caused by piling works was irreversible because a big mistake caused by piling like this could result in the collapse of viaduct piers -- a consequence too big for one million residents in Tuen Mun and Yuen Long District to bear.

143. Mr MAK Ip-sing said the ongoing reinforcement works for the viaduct piers at West Rail Yuen Long Station were only preventive in nature, and could not restore their original height. As the construction site in question adjoined the viaduct piers, the BD should not approve the revised piling plan of the developer and should stop all piling works there to avoid aggravating the settlement of the viaduct piers.

144. Mr LEUNG Fuk-yuen said the Government and MTRCL representatives had yet to respond to his enquiries. As the construction works atop West Rail Yuen Long Station were in progress, he hoped the Government could urge the developer to regularly send its staff to the Shap Pat Heung Rural Committee to report on the extent of damage caused to nearby villages by the works, particularly to the buildings and village houses in .

145. Mr LEE Yuet-man, MH said he hoped to find out who in the former KCRC, BD, SHKP and MTRCL should be held responsible for the settlement incident. Meanwhile, Government and MTRCL representatives had, in their professional capacity, assured the public of the safety of travelling with the West Rail, but what they said was still not trustworthy and the public did not take the West Rail confidently. He urged the BD not to approve the revised piling plan of the developer, saying it was unreasonable of the BD to consult only GEO and MTRCL about the

- 45 -

revised piling plan, except for the YLDC. He requested the BD not to approve any revised piling plans from the developer before YLDC nodded and before the mind of the public was put at ease. He also requested suspension of all piling works in the vicinity indefinitely, or the BD should be held responsible for casualties caused by any accident.

146. The Hon KWONG Chun-yu said the incident was a serious issue, given the significant public safety involved. The Government representatives’ failure to clearly answer Members’ questions made the public worried. They had not answered when the piling works near the viaduct piers would resume, or whether there would be any improvement measures. The Buildings Ordinance (Cap. 123) empowered the BD to carry out monitoring, but the THB and even high-level Government officials should be responsible for the handling of the incident, which involved significant public safety. He criticised the authorities for failing to be open and transparent and asked for a review of the existing notification mechanism to prevent the YLDC from being kept in the dark.

147. KWOK Hing-ping said that all the seven representatives of the Government departments and the MTRCL attending the meeting just read out their scripts. They either failed to answer Members’ questions clearly or said something irrelevant. He said bluntly that the seven people were incompetent and should withdraw from the meeting immediately.

148. Mr KWOK Keung, MH said he wanted to understand the cause of the settlement, and enquired about what methods had been used to drive the two piles of viaduct piers into the ground. He also hoped to understand the specific details about the existing reinforcement works for viaduct piers.

149. Mr WONG Cheuk-kin said the problem had also occurred at an MTRCL-SHKP development project near Light Rail in Tin Shui Wai. He pointed out that land acquired through reclamation was, theoretically, more prone to settlement, and it could be more serious. While piling works at the development project near Tin Wing Stop were already underway, private housing owners or schools could not afford to hire professional engineers to assess the impact of piling works on their buildings, or prove the piling works were affecting the structures of nearby buildings. He requested the BD to send its officers to surrounding schools and buildings to set up settlement monitoring checkpoints.

150. Mr YIU Kwok-wai said he could not understand why the Government would permit the developer to resume piling works after paying the cost of viaduct pier reinforcement works. He enquired whether there were caverns at the bottom of the two viaduct piers, and whether this was the cause of the settlement of nearly 20 mm. He also asked the authorities to respond whether the settlement would cause West Rail tracks to deform or become non-parallel, and whether there had been measures to monitor the situation. He also asked what would be done to ensure the safe operations of West Rail trains, saying the final joint installations at the Hong Kong-Zhuhai-Macao Bridge allowed an error of less than 15 mm and the difficulty of doing this could be measured up to threading a needle under the sea. Given its smaller construction scale compared to the bridge project, the settlement of nearly 20 mm at the viaduct piers of Yuen Long Station was simply unacceptable.

- 46 -

151. The Vice-chairman said the departmental representatives had not responded to his enquiries. They seemed to care only about the settlement of West Rail viaduct piers, and did not say how they would ensure the structures of buildings in Grand YOHO and Sun Yuen Long Centre would not be affected by piling works. In his capacity as the Chairman of the Grand YOHO Owners’ Committee, he urged the authorities to ensure the safety of piling works or he would call on residents to take stronger action.

152. Mr Terry WONG said the West Rail Line was built by the KCRC, and then taken over by the MTRCL when the two railway operators merged in 2007. The MTRCL maintenance team had all along conducted detailed annual inspections of the bridges and piers on the West Rail Line, in accordance with the comprehensive, stringent railway infrastructure and asset maintenance and repair systems to ensure their structural safety.

153. Mr Zachary WONG said the MTRCL representatives still just read from the script, and hoped they could respond to each and every question raised by Members. If they did not know much about the issue, they should admit this.

154. The Chairman said he hoped the representatives of the Government departments and the MTRCL would respond only to the questions raised by Members.

155. Mr Terry WONG gave a consolidated reply as follows:

(1) To ensure railway safety, the MTRCL would inspect railway through regular visual inspections and using ultrasonic testing vehicles and track aerial cable geometry recorders, and then review the data obtained from the inspections to assess the status of rail tracks; and

(2) The MTRCL had been closely monitoring the tracks of the section affected by the settlement since the commencement of the construction works near West Rail Yuen Long Station, and found the impact of the settlement of the viaduct piers on rail tracks had been negligible. The data obtained confirmed compliance with the safety standards, and the rail tracks were considered to be safe.

156. Mr HO Wing-hong gave a consolidated response as follows:

(1) The MTRCL would continuously monitor the status of various railway facilities including rail tracks, whatever the circumstances might be. The train service would be suspended with passenger safety taken as a priority consideration when an incident affecting the safety of MTR trains occurred;

(2) The MTRCL would announce the news once any accident affecting the safety of MTR trains occurred, and

(3) The MTRCL would strengthen its communication with the YLDC and the public, understanding Members’ concerns about the handling of the incident.

- 47 -

157. Mr Humphrey HO gave a consolidated reply as follows:

(1) The BD had a meeting with GEO and MTRCL representatives, registered structural engineers, registered geotechnical engineers, developer representatives and registered contractors in June 2012, when the viaduct piers were found sinking. It was found that the settlement of the viaduct piers was caused by large-diameter discharge piling works at the Grand YOHO construction site, where no percussive piling had been conducted. As the construction site was located in an area with underground caverns, the piles would be driven deeper into the ground than other types of piles and would need to reach 80 to 100 m below the ground. The settlement of the West Rail viaduct piers nearby was caused by the shock generated when the steel casing was taken out.

(2) The registered structural engineers responsible for the piling works had submitted a revised piling plan to the BD, which proposed retaining steel casing and reducing its speed of advancement during drilling when the remaining piles were driven into the ground, thus minimising the shock generated during the construction and the impact on adjacent buildings and railway facilities;

(3) Preventive reinforcement works were underway for two concrete piles involved in the piling works. Hydraulic jacks were used to raise the piles to reduce the settlement before grout was poured into the bottom of the piles, which was believed to be able to effectively prevent further settlement of the viaduct piers;

(4) The BD would continue to monitor the settlement of railway facilities to ensure piling works would not cause settlement of more than 20 mm for them. The BD would require the contractor to suspend piling works for implementation of remedial measures, and not to resume the works until after obtaining BD’s approval;

(5) His BD colleagues would follow up on the issue of whether nearby piling works would affect the structural safety of buildings at Grand YOHO, Sun Yuen Long Centre and housing estates near Light Rail Tin Wing Stop;

(6) The BD had to consider the geological factor of underground caverns in Yuen Long District when processing the applications of construction works in the district, including the design for piling works. The BD would send the building plans received to the GEO and the MTRCL according to the centralised processing mechanism for building plans, and seek their advice about the design and supervision related to geotechnical engineering and from the viewpoints of railway protection respectively;

(7) The BD surveillance system was based on a three-tier triggering mechanism, where contingency measures corresponding to each settlement level were carried out. As the settlement of nearly 20 mm of the viaduct piers in question was classified as third level, the piling works had to be suspended with relevant mitigation measures forwarded to the BD. However, it had to be stressed that although the settlement was classified as third level, it did not mean the buildings affected had become a structural hazard. The piling works had to be suspended and necessary remedial measures had to be proposed to ensure that the safety of nearby buildings and railways would not be affected. The piling works should not be resumed until after

- 48 -

BD’s consent was obtained; and

(8) The BD would continuously abide by the abovementioned surveillance system, and closely monitor the settlement of the viaduct piers to ensure public safety.

158. Mr CHAN Chau-fat gave a consolidated response as follows:

(1) He reiterated the EMSD’s responsibility to regulate and oversee the safe operation of the MTR system; and

(2) The BD monitored the settlement of viaduct piers while the EMSD closely monitored the condition of tracks and requested the MTRCL to monitor and maintain tracks to ensure their positions would not change because of any external influences, and their compliance with international safety standards.

159. The Chairman said he had received the following motion at the meeting which was raised by Vice-chairman Mr WONG Wai-shun, MH and Mr LEE Yuet-man, MH, and was seconded by Mr Daniel CHAM, BBS, MH, JP, Ms CHAN Mei-lin, Mr CHEUNG Muk-lam, Mr CHING Chan-ming, Ms CHIU Sau-han, MH, Mr CHOW Wing-kan, Mr KWOK Hing-ping, Mr KWOK Keung, MH, the Hon KWONG Chun-yu, Ms LAU Kwai-yung, Mr LEUNG Fuk-yuen, Mr LEUNG Ming-kin, Mr LUI Kin, MH, Ms MA Shuk-yin, Mr MAK Ip-sing, Mr MAN Kwong-ming, Mr SIU Long-ming, MH, Mr TANG Cheuk-him, Mr TO Ka-lun, Ms WONG Wai-ling, Mr Zachary WONG, Mr YIU Kwok-wai, and Ms YUEN Man-yee. The whole text was as follows:

“This Council expresses strong dissatisfaction with the BD and the MTRCL for failing to report the settlement of viaduct piers at Yuen Long West Rail Station to the public and the YLDC. This Council also demands that all piling works in the vicinity be suspended indefinitely until the BD confirms that the works will not affect the structural safety of viaduct piers at West Rail Yuen Long Station and nearby housing estates.”

160. The Chairman said Members had had a thorough discussion on this item, and there was no need for further discussion unless specifically requested by Members.

161. The Chairman invited the Members to vote on the motion by a show of hands and open ballot. Mr CHEUNG Muk-lam, Mr CHING Chan-ming, Ms CHIU Sau-han, MH, Mr CHOW Wing-kan, Mr KWOK Keung, MH, Mr KWOK Hing-ping, the Hon KWONG Chun-yu, Ms LAU Kwai-yung, Mr LEE Yuet-man, MH, Mr LEUNG Fuk-yuen, Mr LEUNG Ming-kin, Mr LUI Kin, MH, Ms MA Shuk-yin, Mr MAK Ip-sing, Mr SIU Long-ming, MH, Mr TANG Cheuk-him, Mr TANG Cheuk-yin, Mr TANG Ka-leung, Mr Ronnie TANG, Mr TO Ka-lun, Mr WONG Cheuk-kin, Ms WONG Wai-ling, the Vice-chairman Mr WONG Wai-shun, MH, Mr Zachary WONG, Mr YIU Kwok-wai, and Mr YOUNG Ka-on voted for the motion.

162. The Chairman announced that the motion had been passed with an absolute majority of votes from the Members, with 26 votes in favour, none against and no abstentions.

- 49 -

163. The Chairman concluded the YLDC had expressed grave concern, regret and dissatisfaction over the issue, saying that the MTRCL had probably concealed the settlement of the West Rail viaduct piers, thus affecting the safety of West Rail passengers and residents nearby. He strongly urged the MTRCL and relevant Government departments to establish a notification mechanism to regularly update the YLDC on the latest condition of the subsiding viaduct piers on the West Rail Line. Moreover, according to the motion passed, the piling works nearby must be suspended as the authorities had yet to ascertain the piling works would not affect the structural safety of the viaduct piers at West Rail Yuen Long Station and nearby housing estates, in order to ensure public safety. He understood the representatives of the Government departments and the MTRCL could not respond to Members’ questions with sufficient information, given the urgency of the meeting, and thus requested them to answer the questions in writing after the meeting. He thanked the representatives of the Government departments and the MTRCL for attending the meeting.

(Post-meeting notes: the Secretariat wrote to the EMSD, BD and MTRCL on 10 July 2018 about the passage of the motion. Their replies were passed to Members for reference on 27 August 2018.)

Item VIII: Question from DC Members: Mr Zachary WONG, Mr MAK Ip-sing, Ms CHAN Mei-lin, Mr TO Ka-lun and the Hon KWONG Chun-yu proposed to discuss “the design and unduly high cost of the footbridge to be constructed above Yuen Long Town Nullah” (YLDC Paper No. 53/2018)

Item IX: Question from DC Members: Mr LEE Yuet-man, MH, Mr LUI Kin, MH, the Hon LEUNG Che-cheung, SBS, MH, JP, Ms CHIU Sau-han, MH, Ms MA Shuk-yin, Mr KWOK Keung, MH, Ms WONG Wai-ling, Mr SIU Long-ming, Mr WONG Cheuk-kin, Mr WONG Wai-shun, MH, Mr YIU Kwok-wai, the Hon LUK Chung-hung, Ms LAU Kwai-yung and Mr TANG Cheuk-him proposed “further discussion on the works of the elevated pedestrian corridor linking West Rail Long Ping Station to Kau Yuk Road in Yuen Long” (YLDC Paper No. 54/2018)

Item X: Question from DC Members: Mr CHAM Ka-hung, Daniel, BBS, MH, JP proposed to discuss “the work progress of the pedestrian corridor above the nullah linking Long Ping Station to Kau Yuk Road in Yuen Long” (YLDC Paper No. 55/2018)

Item XI: Motion moved by DC Members 164. The Chairman referred Members to Paper Nos. 53 to 55 which were about the questions raised by a number of Members regarding the works of the elevated pedestrian corridor connecting West Rail Long Ping Station to Kau Yuk Road in Yuen Long. He also referred Members to a consolidated response circulated by the Secretariat during the meeting, which was from the Hong Kong Institute of Architects (“HKIA”), the Hong Kong Institute of Planners (“HKIP”), the Hong Kong Institute of Landscape Architects (“HKILA”), the Hong Kong Institute of Urban Design (“HKIUD”) and the Hong Kong Institute of Surveyors (“HKIS”).

165. The Chairman welcomed the following persons to the meeting:

- 50 -

THB Political Assistant to Secretary for Transport and Housing Mr FU Chuen-fu, Mark

Highways Department (“HyD”) Project Manager/Major Works Project Management Mr LO Kwok-wah, Kelvin, JP Office Senior Engineer/Yuen Long Footbridge Mr WAN Cheuk-keung

Drainage Services Department (“DSD”) Chief Engineer/Land Drainage Mr LAU Shing-cheong Chief Engineer/Drainage Projects Mr WONG Hip-lik, Thomas

TD Senior Engineer/North West Mr CHOW Bing-kay

166. Mr Philip LO, JP briefed Members on the works project with the aid of a Powerpoint presentation (attached at Annex).

167. Mr Daniel CHAM, BBS, MH, JP said the T&TC had discussed the design of the elevated corridor during the meetings of July 2014 and May 2015 respectively, where the majority of YLDC Members opted for the original proposal of the HyD after in-depth discussions, saying the alternative proposal put forward by the professional organisations representing architects, planners, landscape architects and urban designers did not facilitate access by people with disabilities and the elderly. However, Members did not know much about the proposal of the HyD, except that the existence of underground caverns could pose difficulties in construction, because the department did not disclose the construction cost. Meanwhile, the public considered the proposed pedestrian corridor unduly expensive, comparable to the Government’s budget of $1.7 billion some years ago for the Ting Kau Bridge project. However, Mr CHAM said the alternative proposal of the professional bodies would be even more costly. This was because the construction of the 540-metre-long elevated corridor in the Government’s proposal could cost $1.7 billion, or about $3 million per metre, but the 180-metre-long elevated pedestrian corridor proposed by the professional groups would cost $900 million, or more than $5 million per metre. Cost per metre-wise, the latter was more expensive. He requested the HyD to resort to more cost-effective construction approaches, such as the raft foundation design used by the HKHA in the construction of Wang Fu Court to address the problem of underground caves, or to study the use of other less heavy and cheaper materials to cut down the cost.

168. Mr CHEUNG Muk-lam said the project would take more than 10 years, from the stage of survey to completion. Because of rapid population growth in Yuen Long District, every junction of (Yuen Long Section), known as Yuen Long Main Road, was congested during peak hours. Widening pedestrian crossings alone could not solve the problem as footpaths were narrow, so an elevated pedestrian corridor must be built to enable residents to bypass the Main Road and go directly to On Ning Road and Kau Yuk Road. He hoped the Government would consider extending the pedestrian corridor to connect with Ma Tong Road and Shap Pat Heung Road in the next phase of the project to tie in with the development of Yuen Long South. Meanwhile, he said the YLDC had endorsed the pedestrian corridor design so there was no need to discuss it further. The price tag of $1.7 billion was not high, when compared with the alternative proposal of the professional groups. It was because the proposed elevated pedestrian corridor was

- 51 -

designed to be six metres wide and equipped with six lifts and 12 escalators to tie in with future development. He said the construction cost was inevitably higher than in the past years when housing prices had been nearly ten-fold. He believed the HyD might have tried its best to make provisions in the light of legal procedures. He hoped Members could support the design for the benefit of Yuen Long residents, while requesting construction to commence as soon as possible in order to alleviate the congestion problem.

169. Mr CHING Chan-ming said the YLDC had discussed the elevated pedestrian corridor design many times, and he agreed more infrastructure facilities should be provided in the district to cope with incessant population growth. He hoped construction would commence sooner as the Government had already confirmed the project. He added the YLDC had requested decking of the nullah, which the Government said was not viable, before switching its request for provision of the elevated pedestrian corridor. However, he said the Government should consider decking the nullah completely when developing Yuen Long South in the future to mitigate the contention.

170. Ms CHIU Sau-han, MH said the YLDC had discussed the project for a very long time. It had been 10 years since public consultation began and when the funding request was made with the Finance Committee of the Legislative Council (“LegCo FC”). The elevated pedestrian corridor should be built as soon as possible to cope with a rapidly growing population. She queried why the professional groups did not raise objection before LegCo deliberated the funding request. She decided to support the original proposal after YLDC’s discussions, which showed the alternative design of the professional groups was neither desirable nor able to bring greater convenience for residents. She also proposed the elevated pedestrian corridor be extended to connect with Ma Tong Road, but expressed concern LegCo might reject YLDC’s resolutions because of the comments of the professional groups. Since the public wanted public money to be spent properly, she called on the Government to consider cost-effective construction methods. She believed the corridor could serve the interests of the entire Yuen Long and other districts, and cater for population growth.

171. Mr CHOW Wing-kan said the main point of contention was whether the elevated pedestrian corridor delivered good value for money, not its concept or functions. He suggested the Government, in order to cut costs, set out design requirements so that contractors could design the corridor and find the most cost-effective approach to construct the foundation. The Government should also consider contracting out the management and operations of the elevated pedestrian corridor for the next 20 years to generate shop rents and other incomes, such as advertising income, in order to cover the construction cost, while minimising operation expenses on management and cleaning.

172. Mr KWOK Keung, MH said the T&TC of YLDC vetoed the alternative proposal of the professional groups on 24 July 2014 after considerable deliberation. According to the minutes of the meeting, the professional groups said it expressed respect for YLDC’s views, but Mr KWOK queried their motives saying they did not raise objection within 60 days after the proposal was gazetted, until in the final stage before consideration by LegCo. He believed the Government’s proposal could bring about positive effects on the community and the economy as a whole, because the elevated pedestrian corridor was designed to reach West Rail Long Ping Station, On Ning Road and Yuen Long Main Road, as well as Kau Yuk Road. The effects would be phenomenal as Yuen Long’s population was estimated to grow by 400 000 in the future. In addition, when the project

- 52 -

was completed, Tuen Mun and Tin Shui Wai residents could walk to the Yuen Long Town through the corridor more quickly than taking the LRT, upon their arrival in Yuen Long on West Rail trains. This could pave the way for relocation of Light Rail tracks from Yuen Long Main Road, so that the roads could be widened accordingly. Finally, he criticised the professional groups’ proposal for failing to satisfy YLDC’s requirements, while requesting the Government to commence construction as soon as possible based on the original proposal endorsed by the YLDC.

173. Mr LEE Yuet-man, MH said the construction cost of the elevated pedestrian corridor proposed by the professional groups was hefty or sky-high, if the Government’s proposal was said to be costly. Although the professional groups responded by cutting the cost of its proposed pedestrian corridor from $1.7 billion to $900 million, its length was accordingly shortened from about 540 metres to 180 metres with its width changed from 6 metres to 3 metres. As the construction unit cost was higher, he did not support the alternative proposal of the professional groups. He also queried the feasibility of a suggestion by an architect that the $1.7 billion should be spent on acquiring buildings along Yuen Long Main Road to widen footpaths, while criticising him for ignoring the fact that each tenement block there was worth at least several hundred million dollars and most of their residents were elderly people. He also criticised the professional groups for not attending the meeting to respond to Members’ questions.

174. Mr LEUNG Fuk-yuen said the professional groups did not raise objection when the proposed plan was gazetted, until before LegCo FC deliberated the funding request. He accused the professional groups of discriminating against Yuen Long residents, asking why they had always opposed works projects in Yuen Long District, but supported many infrastructure projects in other districts. He said the professional groups’ proposal was already voted down in the initial stage of consultation. He spoke highly of the Government’s proposed corridor, saying it could link up the north and south of Yuen Long District, while quoting a Member as saying the corridor should be extended to Ma Tong Road to tie in with the development of Yuen Long South and future population growth. He criticised the professional groups for obstructing the passage of the Government’s proposal and wasting public money, and demanded expeditious commencement of the works.

175. Mr LUI Kin, MH said that discussions on the works project began as early as 2009, criticising the five professional bodies for calling it a “white-elephant” project when LegCo was about to discuss it. He said the Government’s proposed elevated pedestrian corridor would serve three functions. First, it would provide a convenient pedestrian access, divert pedestrian flow, ease over-crowdedness and congestion on roads, and cope with future population growth. The elevated pedestrian corridor could connect the north and south of the district while directing pedestrian flow from West Rail Long Ping Station to the Main Road and other thoroughfares. Until then, removal of LRT tracks from the Main Road would become possible. Mr LUI also criticised the professional groups for going back on their words. During an YLDC meeting in 2014, their representative Mr Vincent NG Wing-shun said he would respect the choice of the YLDC after a “fragmented” elevated pedestrian corridor proposal NG recommended to the YLDC was rejected after discussion, although he said their new proposal would bring the cost down to $900 million. The five professional groups remained silent when the Government gazetted the project at the end of 2016, but voiced objections and exerted pressure on the Chief Executive when LegCo was about to scrutinise the proposal. Mr LUI said none of the five reasons they cited for their objection was justified, including removal of 37 trees. He asked, if this could be a reason, what the five professional groups would say about the removals of numerous trees by major property developers

- 53 -

over the years. He criticised the professional groups for disregarding the procedural justice and compared this to bullying Yuen Long people. Therefore, he requested the Government to make every effort to implement the project and commence construction as soon as possible.

176. Ms MA Shuk-yin said the elevated pedestrian corridor could satisfy the development needs in Yuen Long District, and that the time spent over the past would be wasted if the professional groups’ alternative proposal was adopted, because procedures such as public consultation and on-site surveys had to be conducted afresh. Construction costs would be even higher a few years later upon completion of another consultation. She also criticised the professional groups for failing to understand Yuen Long residents’ genuine needs. She hoped they would respect YLDC’s decision and support a proposal that could cater for Yuen Long residents’ needs, relieve congestion and connect the north and south of the district.

177. Ms WONG Wai-ling said many comments given by non-Yuen Long residents and professional groups on the design of the elevated pedestrian corridor had been inappropriate. The district’s population had been on the rise in recent years, with many housing estates completed on both sides of Yuen Long Town Nullah. Members supported the construction of the proposed corridor, considering it could improve residents’ accessibility to Yuen Long South and West Rail Long Ping Station while reducing the number of pedestrians on busy streets in Yuen Long Town. On the other hand, the corridor could provide convenience for residents of Tuen Mun, Tin Shui Wai and Long Ping areas. She said she requested the works to commence as soon as possible, as some Long Ping Estate residents had expressed their aspirations for an elevated pedestrian corridor. She also hoped her Long Ping constituency counterparts could exercise their influence in LegCo, and called on LegCo FC to endorse the much-needed corridor plan for the benefit of Yuen Long residents.

178. Mr MAK Ip-sing said the construction cost of the Tsing Ma Bridge was only about $8 billion at that time, but the Government had not provided any information about the project cost of the elevated pedestrian corridor in the stage of consultation with the YLDC. He reiterated the YLDC endorsed the proposal when the construction cost was not known at the time. He said the project costing $1.7 billion could obstruct air ventilation, and might not give play to its functions fully as expected by the public. He proposed to have the nullah decked to create more road space. He drew the analogy of community centres, saying that the cost difference between the Government’s proposal and the professional groups’ was $800 million, which was enough for construction of seven community centres in Yuen Long District. He also queried whether even the Government itself had also found the problem because it had suddenly retracted the agenda on the proposal from the meeting of LegCo FC. He considered it extravagant to build the proposed pedestrian corridor at $1.7 billion, saying the YLDC should not be stigmatised for wasting public funds.

179. Mr MAN Kwong-ming expressed full support for the $1.7 billion proposal. In 2014, the DSD criticised a 1.9-metre-tall flood wall as suggested in the professional groups’ alternative proposal as costly and having adverse visual impacts on surrounding areas. The DSD criticised the alternative proposal, but the professional groups showed no disapproval of the criticism at the meeting. The HyD offered two proposals at that time, and Members unanimously accepted one of them, the elevated pedestrian corridor, because they wanted it to be a landmark structure in Yuen Long and benefit the public. He called on the Members to support the Government’s proposal,

- 54 -

saying it could ensure proper use of public money, minimise vehicle-pedestrian conflicts and alleviate the problem of crowdedness.

180. Mr YIU Kwok-wai hoped the Government would explain the reasons behind the abrupt withdrawal from the meeting of LegCo FC of the agenda item on the funding request for the elevated pedestrian corridor project. He said it was a waste of time for the YLDC to discuss the Government’s proposal again, while asking why the professional groups opposed when LegCo was about to consider the funding request. He criticised them for failing to attend the meeting, “chickening out” after causing trouble, and having no courage to bear the responsibility or face the Members and the public. He said that LegCo could overturn a YLDC decision in the final stage because of the limited role of YLDC Members. He took footpaths in a housing estate located in his constituency as an example, saying they were used more effectively after application of community wisdom, although most of such projects were designed by government departments. Meanwhile, YLDC Members expressed unequivocal support for the Government’s proposal and accepted the Government’s proposal that the elevated pedestrian corridor could not reach Ma Tong Road. This was because they wanted the project to be completed sooner. However, he did not think the $1.7 billion could be set aside for other uses for Yuen Long residents in case the project did not materialise.

181. Ms LAU Kwai-yung said she agreed with Mr YIU Kwok-wai that the YLDC still accepted the Government’s proposal although the elevated pedestrian corridor would not be extended to Ma Tong Road, because they hoped the works could commence as soon as possible. Like elevated corridor in , the proposed elevated corridor could provide convenience for residents and persons pushing baby prams, because they could walk from West Rail Long Ping Station to the newly completed library, and restaurants offering local delicacies on Kau Yuk Road and Yuen Long Main Road. She did not think the YLDC know the project cost while lobbying for the passage of the proposal, or they would have kept asking for a better plan and explained to the residents the elevated corridor could reduce conflicts between pedestrians and vehicles. She also queried why the professional groups did not strongly oppose the Government’s proposal during the consultation stage, nor when the project was gazetted, until the community reached a consensus on the issue and before LegCo was about to deliberate the funding request. She also hoped the Government would explain the retraction of the agenda item from the LegCo FC meeting.

182. Mr TANG Cheuk-him hoped both proposals of the HyD and of the professional groups could be put forward for public consultation to collect fair opinions about the issue. He said the people accusing YLDC Members of being irresponsible had yet to understand the issue. He said the elevated corridor project must go ahead to tie in with the rapid development of Yuen Long District. He cited Tsuen Wan as an example, saying an elevated corridor in Yuen Long District could help reduce pedestrian flow and shelter residents from the elements, and was entirely in the interests of local residents. Mr TANG requested the Government not to retract the proposal, and to allow LegCo to pass it as soon as possible for the benefit of the public.

183. Ms CHAN Mei-lin said the problem of congestion in the Yuen Long town centre was serious because of a growing population and as many residents of other districts went shopping in the district, and something must be done to facilitate pedestrian flow in the district. While the Government proposed constructing an elevated corridor to address the problem after saying decking

- 55 -

the nullah was not feasible, she queried why the staggering price tag of $1.7 billion, which was of great concern to the public, was not disclosed during the consultation stage. She said that, as an YLDC Member, she was duty bound to query about the hefty cost to ensure the taxpayer’s money would not go down the drain. She also hoped the HyD would explain the proposal with the aid of Powerpoint slides after the meeting, while exploring less costly construction approaches. She also asked the HyD about the possibility of cost overruns in the project.

184. Mr TO Ka-lun described the Government’s proposal as “a wrong diagnosis made with wrong medicine taken.” He pointed out Yuen Long Main Road was overcrowded because the Light Rail tracks had split the thoroughfare into two parts, and the Government’s proposal could not solve a problem at its root. He suggested the Government consider moving the northern part of the LRT line to a location where it could align with the West Rail line while at the same time moving the southern part of the LRT line to the area of Tai Tong Road and decking the nullah, in order to increase the road area. This could not only bring about commercial and cultural activities, but help enhance recreation and leisure facilities, such as pedestrian links and cycle tracks. He said he had kept opposing the elevated corridor proposal because he had asked Yuen Long residents about this issue, and they said congestion happened mainly in the east of the Yuen Long town centre, not the area of the proposed elevated corridor. He hoped other Members could think outside the box and come up with other ideas to alleviate the congestion problem.

185. Mr WONG Cheuk-kin queried why the professional groups did not attend the meeting, saying Yuen Long was Hong Kong’s third most populous district now and would become the most populous district in 10 years. With Long Ping Station located at the centre of the district, the number of pedestrians on both sides of the Main Road was on the rise, and thus could cause dangers. There was no denying that re-provisioning of LRT tracks could relieve the congestion but could not resolve the problem completely. There were many pedestrian passages in Tsuen Wan connecting with MTR stations and shopping arcades for the convenience of residents. The construction cost of the proposed elevated corridor in Yuen Long was higher because it was designed to be wider, and fitted with more lifts and escalators than the Tsuen Wan Town corridor network. He hoped the proposed elevated corridor would be very useful.

186. Mr Zachary WONG said the $1.7 billion would return to the Treasury if it was not spent on the elevated corridor, and would not be reserved for other uses in Yuen Long as Mr YIU Kwok-wai said. Therefore, the money should not be wasted on the “face-saving project.”

187. Mr YIU Kwok-wai asked Mr Zachary WONG, to clarify his words, saying he never said the construction of the elevated corridor was a waste of $1.7 billion.

188. The Chairman said Mr Zachary WONG should speak first and other Members could respond if they considered his words incorrect.

189. Mr Zachary WONG, said the T&TC of YLDC had seriously discussed the alternative proposal of the professional groups in 2014, except its pros and cons, because Members were only focused on some individuals’ motives in putting forth the proposal and turned the discussion into personal attacks. At that time, the HyD said at the outset that if the professional groups’

- 56 -

alternative proposal was accepted, another public consultation would be needed and the works would be delayed for at least two years. Mr WONG said the alternative proposal was not accepted, but the project had still been dragged on for more than four years since then. Therefore, public consultation should be launched again to allow the public to choose the best proposal. He queried why the Government said in 2014 that piles could not be used to support the corridor because of flood control consideration and opted for a more costly elevated arch-bridge design, and then suddenly said in 2016 that piles could be used for support. In view of this, he suggested the nullah-decking approach, rather than the elevated arch-bridge design, to reduce the construction cost and adverse visual impacts. He said that since footpath congestion mainly happened at the section between Hong Lok Road and Tai Tong Road, a pedestrian crossing should be provided outside the HSBC branch there to divert pedestrian flow. He urged the Government to expeditiously study removal of Light Rail tracks, so that two traffic lanes could be released for more space to widen footpaths.

190. Mr YIU Kwok-wai asked again Mr Zachary WONG to clarify his untrue claims, and reiterated his views did not include the meaning that constructing the elevated corridor was a waste of $1.7 billion.

191. Mr Zachary WONG denied his claims were untrue, and suggested listening to the recording to clear his name.

192. The Chairman quoted the Secretary as saying no recording was available for listening because of technical reasons.

193. Ms YUEN Man-yee said she favoured the HyD’s proposal. She lobbied for construction of the elevated corridor that day to alleviate the problem of pedestrian congestion in Yuen Long. She felt upset about the rejection of the plan, which was unanimously approved at that time. She said it was unreasonable and unacceptable of some individuals to oppose the proposal after consultation and gazette procedures. She said she had inspected barrier-free facilities in the district together with the Hong Kong Federation of Handicapped Youth the day before the meeting, and had sought the opinions of some people with disabilities about the elevated corridor. They said the corridor proposed by the professional groups was only 3 metres wide, and if they used it, they would have to go up and down many times. She hoped there could be a pedestrian corridor for them to go directly to Kau Yuk Road, thus facilitating their participation in community activities. She pointed out the YLDC had asked for extension of the elevated corridor to Ma Tong Road, but the HyD said it could end only at Kau Yuk Road because of insufficient pedestrian flow. Members still supported HyD’s proposal because the problem of pedestrian congestion was pressing and must be alleviated. As the HyD finally agreed to reserve joints on the proposed corridor for extension purposes, she expressed strong support for the proposal.

194. Mr LEUNG Ming-kin said that, during the meeting on 10 March 2016, the T&TC passed the motion requiring the proposed elevated corridor to reach Ma Tong Road, but government departments turned it down, citing insufficient pedestrian flow. He believed the professional groups should have accurately calculated the future population growth of Yuen Long District and persuaded the Government to take into account the factor of future population growth. Meanwhile, the T&TC expressed strong regrets about government refusal to connect the corridor to Ma Tong

- 57 -

Road. If it was confirmed after the first phase of the project that the elevated corridor was connected to Ma Tong Road, this would be conducive to the development of Yuen Long South. He also suggested the Government consider connecting the corridor to Shap Pat Heung Road, as pedestrian congestion not only happened in Yuen Long Town, but also in Yuen Long South. He also favoured the design of the proposed elevated corridor and considered it could divert pedestrian flow on at-grade footpaths.

195. The Hon KWONG Chun-yu said the proposed elevated corridor was expensive as $1.7 billion would be enough to pay for free dental scaling for 270 000 elderly people, eye examinations for 40 000 elderly people, and cataract checking for 7 650 elderly people. He pointed out that even Members who favoured the proposal considered it to be costly, although they did not know the cost during the consultations in the past few years. More people would benefit from the $1.7 billion if it was spent on social welfare. The crux of the contention was that the construction cost was open to question, so he hoped the HyD would give more details about the cost, and explain whether there would be other options and how to minimise impacts on residents when construction took place. On the other hand, he pointed out Yuen Long Town Nullah had caused an odour nuisance to residents of nearby housing estates. When he enquired with the department for the reasons, it replied the improvement works for the nullah could not be carried out until after completion of the elevated corridor. He hoped the department would respond to this.

196. Mr Kelvin LO, JP gave a consolidated response as follows:

(1) He thanked Members for their views, saying the elevated corridor could certainly help alleviate the problem of footpath congestion and vehicle-pedestrian conflicts. He also thanked the professional groups for putting forward their proposal, saying the two plans proposed construction of a north-south connecting corridor over the nullah and they were only different in construction approaches;

(2) He said the HyD’s proposed elevated corridor could carry a maximum of 11 000 pedestrians per hour during peak hours, thus effectively diverting pedestrian flow on at-grade footpaths and at pedestrian crossings. The elevated corridor was designed to be about 540 metres in length and 6 metres in width, which were about 10 times as long and 1.5 times as wide as those of the average pedestrian corridor. To tackle the geological and environmental constraints, which included the presence of limestone caverns at the project site, 11 sets of piles would be inserted into the ground as foundation piles at an average depth of about 55 metres to support the corridor. He said the raft foundation design as proposed by some Members was not viable as the elevated corridor would be constructed above the open nullah. The piling works at the nullah would be conducted during three dry seasons to ensure the hydraulic performance of the nullah, workers’ safety, and that the public would not be affected during construction. Given the aforesaid constraints, the estimated construction cost of the proposed elevated corridor would be higher than that of the average pedestrian corridor, but was still reasonable because of the functions of the corridor and the constraints involved;

(3) In response to Members’ enquiries about why the HyD had not consulted them earlier about the construction cost, he responded the department needed to follow the procedures for public works, which included preliminary design, land survey and consultation with the DC, conducting related statutory procedures and mapping out

- 58 -

detailed designs. Therefore, the department could not estimate the cost and apply for funding until the detailed design was completed. In addition, the public was generally supportive of the works project, as shown by two public engagement exercises the HyD had conducted on the corridor from 2009 to 2010 and in 2013 respectively. Subsequently, the HyD had also consulted the T&TC of the YLDC between 2014 and 2016 about the proposal and design of the corridor and obtained its support. This reflected the sufficient public engagement and acceptance of the proposed corridor;

(4) The Ting Kau Bridge was not suitable for comparison with the proposed elevated corridor because of different environmental constraints and construction time. He pointed out funding for the Ting Kau Bridge was approved in 1993 and the construction cost turned out to be about $2.9 billion. He clarified that the construction cost of the Ting Kau Bridge was not cheaper than the proposed elevated corridor because construction costs had more than doubled in the past 20 years;

(5) There had been no signs of overspending at this stage as the HyD had identified the locations of underground caves and had a clear grasp of the foundation after two land surveys carried out at the project site during two dry seasons, one in 2015 and 2016, and the other in 2016 and 2017 respectively, which were aimed at reducing uncertain geological factors affecting the construction cost, thus reducing the likelihood of cost overruns;

(6) As regards the alternative proposal, Mr LO pointed out the HyD, in the tender document, encouraged discussion between contractors and special contractors about the feasibility of alternative designs with a view to reducing construction costs. However, it was not appropriate at this stage to speculate whether any viable alternative design proposals were available for the project;

(7) Regarding drainage and environment issues, he said a 1.1-metre-high flood wall would be built on the nullah to ensure the works would not affect the drainage capacity of the nullah. Meanwhile, the HyD had completed a ventilation assessment, confirming the elevated corridor would not affect air ventilation in nearby areas. He also pointed out the HyD would try to retain the 125 trees in the project site, 87 of which would not be affected by the works. However, given the necessity of the project, the HyD would need to remove 37 trees, but would replant 37 trees and more than 28 000 shrubs to increase the greenery area by about 2 000 square metres; and

(8) Both existing footpaths of Ma Tong Road should be wide enough to cope with growing pedestrian flows, which the HyD estimated would exceed 1 900 and 1 500 people respectively by 2027. The HyD understood the Members’ requests and thus reserved a joint at the southern end of the proposed elevated corridor for possible extension to Ma Tong Road as and when necessary.

197. Mr LAU Shing-cheong said the relevant section of Yuen Long Town Nullah was about 30 metres wide and 3 to 4 metres deep, and its catchment and downstream areas were about 2 000 hectares. It was a major drainage channel in the district as the volume flow exceeded 200 m³ per second in the event of heavy rains. Therefore, decking the nullah was not a desirable solution. The proposed plan was a design which the DSD had developed in collaboration with the HyD after

- 59 -

completing a stormwater discharge impact assessment.

198. Mr Thomas WONG said the proposed improvement works for Yuen Long Town Nullah was mainly aimed at beautifying the nullah and improving the environment in the district. There were also plans to install a dryweather flow interceptor to ameliorate the stench problem. Regarding Members’ enquiries about whether the elevated corridor would affect the progress of the nullah improvement works, he said the DSD and the HyD had been working closely to ensure the two projects would dovetail with each other. It was also planned that the nullah improvement works would be carried out in phases. The works outside the elevated corridor area would be carried out first, with the remaining phases launched after completion of the elevated corridor.

199. Mr Mark FU said the elevated corridor had always been on the agenda of LegCo FC. The elevated corridor project was the 12th item on the FC meeting agenda. He pointed out the FC would have eight meeting sessions before the summer recess, and each session would last four hours. The THB would strive to have the project passed before the summer recess. He understood there had been many discussions and opinions in the community and from the YLDC after the inclusion of the elevated corridor proposal into the FC’s agenda and the release of details about the project, such as the project cost and design. The THB and relevant departments wished to have more discussions about the project with the public, so they had sent representatives to the meeting to listen to Members’ opinions upon receipt of YLDC’s invitation the previous day. He learnt at the meeting that the majority of the Members supported the proposal and recognised the functions of the elevated corridor, which were identical to the beliefs which the THB and relevant departments had all along held on. He said he would relay the Members’ views to his superiors, while pointing out the THB and relevant departments would continue to interact with the public and explain the functions of the elevated corridor, while communicating with the professional groups to allow them to understand the public’s demands.

200. The Chairman said that a motion had been moved by Mr LEUNG Ming-kin, Mr CHING Chan-ming, Mr LEUNG Fuk-yuen, Mr LUI Kin, MH, and Ms YUEN Man-yee, and the motion was seconded by Mr CHEUNG Muk-lam, Mr KWOK Hing-ping, Mr KWOK Keung, MH, Mr LAI Wai-hung, Ms LAU Kwai-yung, Hon LEUNG Che-cheung, SBS, MH, JP, the Hon LUK Chung-hung, Ms MA Shuk-yin, Mr MAN Kwong-ming, Mr MAN Ping-nam, MH, Mr SIU Long-ming, Mr TANG Cheuk-him, Mr TANG Cheuk-yin, Mr TANG Ho-nin, Mr TANG Ka-leung, Mr TANG Lai-tung, Mr TANG Sui-man, Mr Ronnie TANG, Mr TSANG Shu-wo, Ms WONG Wai-ling, Mr YIU Kwok-wai, and Mr YOUNG Ka-on. The full text of the motion was as follows:

“This Council urges the LegCo FC to pass as soon as possible the proposal of constructing an elevated pedestrian corridor in Yuen Long Town to connect with the Long Ping MTR Station to relieve the severe pedestrian congestion. This Council also strongly urges the Government to study extension of the pedestrian corridor to Ma Tong Road and Shap Pat Heung Road immediately after the first phase of the project, in order to cater for the needs of the existing residents of Shap Pat Heung Road, and to tie in with the growth of population and pedestrian flow brought by the development of Yuen Long South.”

201. Mr TO Ka-lun said he hoped the THB, HyD and DSD representatives would respond to his views earlier on.

- 60 -

202. Mr SIU Long-ming said that, after listening to the departments’ responses, he understood the proposed elevated corridor was crucial to the development of the district, particularly Yuen Long South. Currently, Yuen Long South residents who needed to go to West Rail Long Ping Station would mostly take feeder bus. However, since the feeder bus operator reduced the service frequency, the residents had to walk through crowded streets before they could reach the station. Therefore, the proposed elevated corridor could serve as a convenient access for residents. He believed the public should understand the corridor’s function in diverting pedestrian flows, rather than merely focusing on the project cost. He hoped the construction could commence earlier, so as to tie in with the development of the district.

203. Mr Zachary WONG said the HyD had been saying piles could not be used in the elevated corridor project and proposing the arch-bridge design since it started consulting the YLDC in 2009. However, the HyD started recommending the use of piles for support in 2016, giving no reasons for the change. It also said now that the construction cost was 40% higher because of underground caves. He asked the HyD about the feasibility of using the arch bridge design to cut the construction cost, and about whether the elevated corridor design could be dropped if piles were used in the project.

204. The Chairman said a motion had been moved by Mr Zachary WONG and seconded by Mr TO Ka-lun. The full text of the motion was as follows:

“This Council urges the Government to reprovision Light Rail tracks from the Yuen Long Main Road section as soon as possible to release road space for widening the footpaths on both sides of the road in order to resolve the problem of pedestrian congestion.”

205. Mr LEE Yuet-man, MH said the motion moved by Mr Zachary WONG was not related to the Yuen Long pedestrian corridor in question and thus should not be discussed under this item. But he said he would respect the Chairman’s decision.

206. Mr YIU Kwok-wai said the motion moved by Mr Zachary WONG and the Yuen Long pedestrian corridor under discussion were separate matters and thus should not be brought up for discussion under this item.

207. Mr LEE Yuet-man, MH said that, if Mr Zachary WONG added to his motion wordings like “Opposing the construction of the proposed elevated corridor”, it would be more relevant to the discussion. He hoped Members could clearly indicate their positions on the elevated corridor issue.

208. Mr Zachary WONG said he had intentionally moved the motion because its nature was similar to that of the Tin Shui Wai pedestrian corridor which another Member had proposed before the meeting. Since the comments given by the Members on his motion were exactly those which he raised before the meeting, he would accept their comments and amend his motion to conform to the nature of discussion.

- 61 -

209. Mr YIU Kwok-wai said he supported the THB in continuously applying for funding through LegCo FC. The crux of the problem was that the YLDC did not have the power to consider the government’s funding requests, thus compelling him to focus on asking whether the project could cater for residents’ needs. The YLDC had spent a lot of time considering the elevated corridor proposal, and finally confirmed the project was important to the residents. He suggested the YLDC consider scrutinising the government’s finances as a long-term goal, and achieve a short-term goal at this stage by confirming the construction of the elevated corridor.

210. Mr LEE Yuet-man, MH said building one corridor cover would cost $10 million, so $1.7 billion would be enough for construction of 170 covers. He asked whether the Government would spend the reserved funding on 170 covers in the district if the elevated corridor proposal was vetoed. He also said the representatives of the professional groups might have meddled with the legislative process by discussing the proposed elevated corridor with the Acting Chief Executive and the S for T&H, while LegCo was scrutinising the funding request.

211. The Hon KWONG Chun-yu reiterated the crux of controversy was the project cost of the elevated corridor, and other Members such as Mr LEE Yuet-man, MH had also asked about the project cost. Many Tin Shui Wai residents would benefit from the $1.7 billion if it was spent on social welfare. He also hoped the department would respond to questions about the estimated costs and schedules of the nullah-decking project, and about how the department would tackle the stench from the nullah and the noise during the corridor construction.

212. Mr KWOK Keung, MH said the HyD had pointed out the idea of decking the nullah was undesirable, and that the improvement works for the nullah would be carried out in conjunction with the elevated corridor project. On the other hand, some Members had proposed reprovisioning of Light Rail tracks from Yuen Long Main Road, but the point was whether there would be other means of transport for use by the public after reprovisioning. He said many residents in the district took LRT to the east of Yuen Long Town. If Light Rail tracks were reprovisioned, it would become more imperative to construct the elevated corridor. It was not until there was another railway in the future to divert West Rail passengers that the West Rail would have sufficient capacity to carry passengers from Tuen Mun and Tin Shui Wai to Yuen Long Town. Therefore, he did not think the Light Rail tracks should be reprovisioned before the elevated corridor was completed.

213. Mr CHOW Wing-kan said the most contentious issue was the construction cost of the elevated corridor. He said relying less on public money would be a practical solution. First of all, he suggested the HyD consider adopting the bridge deck design while putting the foundation design to tender, so that contractors would put forth less expensive proposals because of competition. He also suggested the Government contract out the management of the elevated corridor. For example, the monthly construction cost for a lease term of 20 years would be $7 million. The method would be financially viable as long as net income from shop rents and advertising fees received during the lease period were higher than the construction cost after discounting the cost, inflation and profit (permitted returns). He hoped the HyD would respond to the viability of the proposal.

214. The Vice-chairman said many residents of Yuccie Square, Tai Kiu Tsuen and Long Ching

- 62 -

Estate had relayed to him that there were no lifts at the exit of the nearby Long Ping Station for wheelchair users and people with reduced mobility. He had also repeatedly reflected the issue to the MTRCL, but it responded barrier-free facilities were already available at West Rail Long Ping Station. However, the facilities the MTRCL referred to were located at the exit near Long Ping Estate, and there were no such facilities near On Ning Road. Therefore, he asked the HyD about the feasibility of providing lifts at the connection point between the elevated corridor and West Rail Long Ping Station, so as to optimise the proposal as long as the cost was not affected accordingly.

215. Mr LEUNG Fuk-yuen said the works project had been discussed for more than a decade and many consultation sessions held so far. The corridor was urgently needed and the project should be implemented as soon as possible. When the HyD started consulting the YLDC, he started lobbying for extension of the elevated corridor to Ma Tong Road and Shap Pat Heung Road to tie in with the development of Yuen Long South. He compromised and agreed with the proposal that the elevated corridor be extended only to Kau Yuk Road, because he understood the importance of the elevated corridor to Yuen Long residents. However, he hoped the HyD would listen to his demands of confirming the project as soon as possible and extending the corridor, as there would be more housing estates near the Shap Pat Heung Road and the road traffic in the district would be busier.

216. Mr LEUNG Ming-kin said he was dedicated to striving for the rights and interests of Shap Pat Heung Road residents, who were also Yuen Long residents. He demanded the HyD confirm as soon as possible the proposal of extending the elevated corridor to Ma Tong Road and Shap Pat Heung Road for the benefit of more residents.

217. Mr LUI Kin, MH thanked Mr Kelvin LO, JP, Project Manager/Major Works Project Management Office of the HyD, for attending the meeting and explaining the proposal in detail. He also hoped the departmental representatives could interact with the public more frequently and explain the higher cost of the elevated corridor, so that incomplete and misrepresented information would not affect the public’s judgment. He also hoped the HyD could respond to the five points of criticism the professional groups raised against its proposal, and explain the flaws of their alternative proposal, so that the public could know the merits and demerits of the two proposals.

218. Mr Kelvin LO, JP gave a consolidated reply as follows:

(1) In response to the Member’s enquiry about the feasibility of the arch-bridge design, he said the design was mostly used for long-span structures (such as the Tsing Ma Bridge and the Kap Shui Mun Bridge), where cables would be used to hoist the bridge deck to focus the load on the piers of both sides. The corridor of this design would be built in the shape of a parabolic arch, with the bridge decks hoisted by cables on both sides, as there would be no pillars in the middle of the corridor to support it. For this reason, the foundation needed to have a higher load-bearing capacity. After two on-site investigations, the HyD found the arch-bridge design was more risky, and thus switched to the current design, where 11 piles were used for supporting the structure to share the load-bearing capacity, thus reducing the load on the foundation. He said the proposal had been devised with a professional judgment based on the results of the on-site investigations;

- 63 -

(2) Regarding the provision of lifts, Mr LO said the proposed elevated corridor would span across three major roads, including Yuen Long On Ling Road, Castle Peak Road (Yuen Long Section) and Kau Yuk Road, with pedestrian connectivity platforms to be provided on both sides of the roads for pedestrian access to and from the corridor. The platforms would consist of lifts, two-way escalators and staircases to facilitate access for people with disabilities and the elderly between the corridor and at-grade footpaths; and

(3) The proposed pedestrian connectivity platforms must be fully functional as they were designed to encourage the use of the elevated corridor in order to improve at-grade level pedestrian traffic. The trees on both sides of the nullah had to be removed as the pedestrian connectivity platforms would be built on both sides of the three main thoroughfares and span across the nullah. However, he stressed the HyD would try to minimise the impact on the trees in the vicinity. According to the project, the HyD would retain 87 trees, remove 37 trees, and replant 37 trees and more than 28 000 shrubs to expand the greening area by about 2 000 square metres.

219. The Vice-chairman said he hoped the HyD would respond to the feasibility of providing lifts inside West Rail Long Ping Station to connecting with On Ling Road. He noted the pedestrian connectivity platform at On Ning Road alone would not be enough to cater for the needs of the elderly and persons with disabilities.

220. Mr Kelvin LO, JP said there were already lifts at West Rail Long Ping Station Exit A.

221. The Vice-chairman said the YLDC had previously discussed the idea of providing a lift inside West Rail Long Ping Station to connect with On Ling Road. As the design of the elevated corridor was still underway, he took the opportunity to convey the public’s request to the HyD for provision of a lift inside the rail station, as long as this would not affect the construction cost of the corridor.

222. Mr Kelvin LO, JP gave a consolidated reply as follows:

(1) The HyD would consider the Vice-chairman’s suggestion, but hoped Members would understand provision of a lift there would inevitably increase the construction cost; and

(2) The HyD had kept a close watch on the issue of pedestrian congestion in the district. In addition to the proposed elevated corridor, the HyD had completed nine small- and medium-sized projects under the Pedestrian Environment Improvement Scheme in Yuen Long Town between 2011 and 2015 (such as the road widening works at Fau Tsoi Street near Tai Tong Road and at the pedestrian crossing of Tai Tong Road) and a large-scale improvement project. The department had also carried out traffic improvement measures, such as widening of footpaths and pedestrian crossings as early as practicable, and according to the actual environment in the district.

223. Mr LAU Shing-cheong said Yuen Long Town Nullah was the most important drainage

- 64 -

channel in the district with many tributaries. The catchment area was so large that it could hold more than 2 000 hectares of water, rendering it undesirable to deck the nullah. While the existing proposal was a joint design between the DSD and HyD, the former had provided the latter with advice on ways for improvement, such as building a 1.1-metre-high flood wall and erecting piles to ensure the nullah’s flood control performance. The DSD also agreed with the HyD’s suggestion that the works be carried out in three dry seasons because the nullah might overflow in almost half an hour in case of heavy rains. Therefore, the timing of the works must be handled with care.

224. Asked about whether the elevated corridor construction would affect the progress of the improvement works for the nullah, Mr Thomas WONG said the DSD and HyD had been closely coordinating with each other to ensure the two projects would go well. As the two projects overlapped in some locations, the improvement works for the nullah would be carried out in phases. The works outside the area of the elevated corridor would be carried out first, with the remaining phases to commence after completion of the elevated corridor.

225. Regarding the Members’ suggestion of relocating the Light Rail tracks off Yuen Long Main Road, Mr CHOW Bing-kay pointed out the THB had proposed a series of measures to improve the LRT service, which were published in the Public Transport Strategy Study in 2017. One of the long-term measures proposed was to improve the long-term operational mode of the Light Rail service in the Yuen Long Main Road section by reprovisioning one of the two Light Rail tracks northwards. An in-depth study would be conducted on the feasibility of the measure.

226. Mr Mark FU said the maximum pedestrian flow at the pedestrian crossing of Castle Peak Road (Yuen Long Section) near Yuen Long Hong Lok Road in 2015 was 5 120 people per hour, which was estimated to reach 6 620 people per hour in 2027. The proposed elevated corridor could effectively divert pedestrian flow as the maximum at-grade pedestrian flow after its completion would fall to 4 350 people per hour, a drop of more than 2 000 people per hour. The THB had also estimated that the maximum at-grade pedestrian flow in 2027 after completion of the elevated corridor as proposed by the professional groups would exceed 5 000 people per hour, 1 000-plus people more than in the HyD’s proposal. The data reflected the professional groups’ alternative proposal was less effective in diverting the pedestrian flow, which was because of the differences between the two designs.

227. The Chairman said Mr Zachary WONG had added a phrase “Regarding the construction of a corridor above Yuen Long Town Nullah” at the beginning of his original motion, but it did not suggest the motion was related to the proposed elevated corridor. The Chairman suggested Mr WONG revise the motion to make it more relevant to the issue under discussion, after Mr TO Ka-lun had expressed objection to the construction of the elevated corridor and proposed reprovisioning of Light Rail tracks.

228. Mr Zachary WONG said he moved the motion based on the motion of constructing a pedestrian corridor above Yuen Long Town Nullah.

229. Mr LEE Yuet-man, MH said a motion must clearly indicate YLDC’s position and should not be ambiguous. He also thought LegCo FC had revised the agenda and postponed discussion

- 65 -

on the works project, but the Government hoped the local community would continue to support its proposal. Therefore, he hoped THB’s representatives would explain why LegCo FC revised the agenda.

230. The Chairman said he believed the Government would be clear about the YLDC’s stance on the matter after a vote on the motion, and would deal with it as soon as possible.

231. Mr KWOK Keung, MH said that Mr Zachary WONG should make clear of his stance through his motion given his consistent opposition against the construction of the proposed elevated corridor.

232. Mr Zachary WONG responded he would not amend his motion, and said he would respect the Chairman’s decision if he considered his motion irrelevant to the item under discussion and did not put it to voting. He said he would propose amendments to the motion moved by Mr LEUNG Ming-kin.

233. Mr CHING Chan-ming said Mr Zachary WONG just urged for relocation of Light Rail tracks and did not oppose the construction of an elevated corridor above Yuen Long Town Nullah.

234. The Chairman said reprovisioning Light Rail tracks would be irrelevant to the discussion and would not be discussed together if the Members were not opposed to the construction of elevated corridor above Yuen Long Town Nullah and proposed reprovisioning of Light Rail tracks as an alternative proposal. However, reprovisioning Light Rail tracks would become relevant to the discussion if the Members made clear it was an alternative proposal.

235. Ms CHIU Sau-han, MH agreed with the Chairman, and asked whether Mr Zachary WONG’s motion was suggesting the construction of the elevated corridor should be carried out simultaneously with reprovisioning of Light Rail tracks.

236. Mr TANG Ho-nin suggested Mr Zachary WONG withdraw his motion with Mr LEUNG Ming-kin’s motion put to a vote as an amended motion.

237. The Chairman decided the motion moved by Mr Zachary WONG would not be put to a vote, saying he hoped Members would understand reprovisioning of Light Rail tracks was irrelevant to the discussion if it was not put forth as an alternative proposal after construction of the elevated corridor. Meanwhile, Mr Zachary WONG amended Mr LEUNG Ming-kin’s motion, by replacing “This Council urges the LegCo FC to pass expeditiously the project of Yuen Long’s elevated corridor to connect with Long Ping Station to relieve congestion on pedestrian paths in Yuen Long Town” at the beginning of LEUNG’s original motion with “This Council urges the Government to deck Yuen Long Town Nullah and build the pedestrian corridor above the nullah, instead of building an elevated corridor.” The Chairman said Mr Zachary WONG’s motion became relevant to the discussion after amendment, and could be put to a vote, as the amended motion reflected Wong’s support for the construction of the pedestrian corridor, other than its form as an elevated

- 66 -

corridor.

238. Mr LUI Kin, MH said he hoped Mr Zachary WONG would provide the full text of his amended motion for Members’ reference.

239. Mr LEE Yuet-man, MH said he hoped the Members would read the amended motion more seriously, and requested provision of the full text of the amended motion.

(The Chairman declared the meeting was adjourned for five minutes)

240. The Chairman said he had received an amended motion raised by Mr Zachary WONG and seconded by Mr TO Ka-lun. The full text of the amended motion was as follows:

“This Council urges the Government to deck Yuen Long Town Nullah and provide a corridor above the nullah, instead of building an elevated corridor. This Council also strongly requests the Government to promise a study would be conducted immediately after the first phase of the project to explore the possibility of constructing the corridor and linking it to Ma Tong Road and Shap Pat Heung Road, in order to cater for the existing needs of the residents of Shap Pat Heung Road and to tie in with the growth of population and pedestrian flow brought by the development of Yuen Long South.”

241. Mr Zachary WONG said he thought money could be saved because the elevated corridor or arch-bridge design would be no longer needed after the HyD had said piles could be used to construct a corridor. He stressed the former Director of Drainage Services, during his visit to the YLDC, had said no piles could be used in the project, but changed his tones, after being transferred to become the Director of Highways, saying that piles could be inserted into the nullah to support the corridor. Today, some Members urged for expeditious implementation of the proposal, probably because they feared the Government might suddenly change its stance and turn to the alternative proposal of the professional groups.

242. Mr LEE Yuet-man, MH expressed worries Mr Zachary WONG’s proposal might hike up the construction cost. Unless Mr WONG still supported the proposal after decking of the nullah sent the cost higher, he would then worry the HyD might put forward another corridor design, thus causing the Members to discuss the cost once and again. He said he would not support any costly designs.

243. Mr LUI Kin, MH said the costs of building the pedestrian corridor either through decking of the nullah or in the form of an elevated corridor would be the same, as discussed during an YLDC meeting a few years ago. Yuen Long Town Nullah was 30 metres in width on average, but the construction cost of the proposed 6-metre-wide elevated corridor was already $1.7 billion. The cost would surge beyond $10 billion if the nullah was completely decked for the corridor project. Some Members branded the proposed $1.7 billion corridor a “white elephant”, while proposing another design that would cost more than $10 billion, which he considered unreasonable.

- 67 -

244. Mr YIU Kwok-wai said the amended motion was not clear enough, and thus could not understand the mover’s stance.

245. Mr MAN Kwong-ming said the DSD had pointed out at YLDC meetings a few years ago that Yuen Long Town Nullah was used to discharge floodwater during heavy rains. The DSD also said at the time that the nullah should not be decked or might incur repair and maintenance costs, so he did not think the suggestions in the amended motion could work.

246. Mr KWOK Keung, MH said decking the nullah was not a feasible option, while asking which stage the so-called “first phase of works” as mentioned in the amended motion referred to. He suggested the amended motion be put to voting as soon as possible.

247. Mr TO Ka-lun said what Mr Zachary WONG and he were suggesting was provision of a pedestrian corridor above the nullah after it was decked, instead of constructing an elevated corridor. He said there was room for discussion about whether the nullah should be fully or partially decked. He also pointed out the first phase of the project would be decided according to the stages of the current proposal.

248. Ms WONG Wai-ling said the Members who raised the amended motion were against the Government’s proposal as they proposed the elevated corridor be replaced with a pedestrian corridor above a decked nullah. She requested the amended motion be presented in more detail for Members to decide whether to support it. She also suggested the amended motion should not be put to a vote until after clarification by the mover.

249. Ms CHIU Sau-han, MH said Members could find it difficult to support the idea of decking the nullah for construction of the pedestrian corridor, instead of building an elevated corridor. She said Yuen Long Town Nullah was used for flood control and thus could not be decked.

250. Mr TANG Ka-leung said words could be interpreted in different ways. Members could choose to oppose the amended motion which they considered inappropriate, and vice versa. He opined the focus should not be on how the motion was presented, or on asking for amendment of the wording in the amended motion. He said Members had the freedom to discuss and express their views, and hoped the Chairman could help resolve the row.

251. Mr Zachary WONG said he would like an opportunity to explain his amended motion as requested by a number of other Members.

252. The Chairman said that, according to his interpretation, the amended motion was not in favour of constructing the elevated corridor, and instead proposed decking the nullah for provision of a pedestrian passage and extending it to Ma Tong Road. He said Mr Zachary WONG could add a point if he misunderstood the amended motion or showed an inadequate understanding of it. As the amended motion was relevant to the discussion, he hoped Members would cast their votes as soon as possible.

- 68 -

253. Mr Zachary WONG confirmed the Chairman’s understanding was correct.

254. The Chairman invited the Members to vote on the amended motion.

255. Members voted on the amended motion by a show of hands and open ballot. The Hon KWONG Chun-yu, Mr TO Ka-lun, and Mr Zachary WONG voted for it, Ms CHIU Sau-han, MH, Mr KWOK Keung, MH, Ms LAU Kwai-yung, Mr LEE Yuet-man, MH, Mr LEUNG Fuk-yuen, Mr LEUNG Ming-kin, Mr LUI Kin, MH, Ms MA Shuk-yin, Mr MAN Kwong-ming, Mr SIU Long-ming, Mr TANG Cheuk-him, Mr TANG Ka-leung, Ms WONG Wai-ling, Mr YIU Kwok-wai, Mr YOUNG Ka-on and Ms YUEN Man-yee voted against it. Mr CHING Chan-ming and Mr CHOW Wing-kan abstained from voting.

256. The Chairman announced the amended motion had been rejected by an absolute majority of the Members, with 3 votes in favour, 16 votes against and 2 abstentions.

257. The Chairman invited Members to vote on the original motion and read again its full text as follows:

“This Council urges the LegCo FC to pass the project of the Yuen Long elevated corridor connecting with Long Ping Station as soon as possible to alleviate serious pedestrian congestion in Yuen Long Town. This Council also strongly requests the Government to promise a study will be conducted on the possibility of extending the elevated corridor to Ma Tong Road and Shap Pat Heung Road immediately after the first phase of the project, in order to cater for the needs of the existing residents of Shap Pat Heung Road and to tie in with the growth of population and pedestrian flow brought by the development of Yuen Long South.”

258. Members voted on the motion by a show of hands and open ballot. Mr CHING Chan-ming, Ms CHIU Sau-han, MH, Mr KWOK Keung, MH, Ms LAU Kwai-yung, Mr LEUNG Fuk-yuen, Mr LEUNG Ming-kin, Mr LUI Kin, MH, Ms MA Shuk-yin, Mr MAN Kwong-ming, Mr SIU Long-ming, Mr TANG Cheuk-him, Mr TANG Ho-nin, Mr TANG Ka-leung, Mr TSANG Shu-wo, Ms WONG Wai-ling, Mr YIU Kwok-wai, Mr YOUNG Ka-on, and Ms YUEN Man-yee voted for the motion. The Hon KWONG Chun-yu, Mr TO Ka-lun and Mr Zachary WONG voted against it. Mr CHOW Wing-kan and Mr LEE Yuet-man, MH abstained from voting.

259. The Chairman announced the original motion had been passed by an absolute majority of votes cast by Members, with 18 votes in favour, 3 against and 2 abstentions.

260. The Chairman concluded the YLDC had discussed many times the HyD’s pedestrian corridor design, and had already adopted it. Yuen Long residents mostly hoped the elevated corridor would be completed as soon as possible. The proposal met with opposition when the Government recently applied for funding through LegCo FC, because of its high construction cost and as the professional groups put forth their alternative proposal. Infrastructure projects in Yuen

- 69 -

Long District often incurred higher construction costs as underground cavities necessitated the use of longer piles. Members were generally of the view that it would take longer to complete the corridor if the proposal was rejected or if the corridor had to be re-designed because of the high cost. If this happened, the residents would be disappointed. On the other hand, the YLDC rejected the undesirable alternative proposal of the professional groups. The HyD’s proposal had met with no objection when it was gazetted, and, more importantly, included a joint for extension of the corridor to Yuen Long South to cope with the growing population. He learned there had been cases where works projects passed by other DCs had eventually been rejected by LegCo FC, so he would like to take the opportunity to say he hoped LegCo would respect YLDC and residents’ wishes, and would not be influenced by non-stakeholders’ views. He urged LegCo to endorse the elevated corridor proposal as soon as possible, so as to alleviate the problem of pedestrian congestion in the district. He thanked the representatives of the government departments for attending the meeting and explaining in detail the costs and design of the proposal.

(Post-meeting remarks: The Secretariat wrote on 10 July 2018 to the THB, HyD, DSD, TD, the HKIA, the HKIP, the HKILA, the HKIUD, and the HKIS, regarding the passage of the motion. Their replies were forwarded to the Members for reference on 27 August of the same year.)

261. The Chairman said it was time to address the motion which was raised before the meeting by Mr LEE Yuet-man, MH, and seconded by Ms CHIU Sau-han, MH, Mr LUI Kin, MH, Ms MA Shuk-yin, Mr SIU Long-ming, Mr Ronnie TANG and Ms WONG Wai-ling. The full text of the motion was as follows:

“The YLDC requests the five professional groups, based on their enthusiasm for the Yuen Long pedestrian corridor project and professionalism, to design a covered, spacious, convenient, value-for-money and barrier-free pedestrian passage in Tin Shui Wai to link up the whole district and connect it to West Rail . The YLDC also requests the THB to give them full support and confirm the project as soon as possible.”

262. The Chairman said Members were welcome to discuss the above item. He said the item had been put on the agenda just before the meeting, and drawn no response from department representatives.

263. Mr CHOW Wing-kan said the idea behind the motion was good but there were no structural engineers, civil engineers and cavern engineers among the stakeholders. He suggested inviting them to work out a more practical design, saying they knew well how to design a pedestrian passage.

264. Mr YIU Kwok-wai said he agreed the idea behind the motion was good, but did not think it would materialise. He said the YLDC and the professional groups had yet to forge a cooperative relationship, given that the YLDC had rejected the professional groups’ proposal on the Yuen Long pedestrian corridor to connect with West Rail Long Ping Station, while they “chickened out” and failed to send representatives to the meeting. Therefore, he would not support the motion and would abstain from voting.

265. Mr Zachary WONG said Members had kept saying the professional groups had “chickened

- 70 -

out” and failed to send representatives to the meeting. However, sources said the Secretariat invited them only one day before the meeting. With the invitation issued to the private groups at such short notice, it could be too harsh to accuse them of failing to arrange for their representatives to attend the meeting. In fact, the professional groups had already expressed their views in detail on the issue through a written reply. He asked Members whether they would accuse government departments of “chickening out” in the past, if they did not send representatives to DC meetings. In addition, he considered the motion unreasonable, saying the private groups gave comments only after government departments put forth the proposal on a pedestrian passage constructed above Yuen Long Town Nullah. He queried whether the Government had plans to invite the private groups to design a pedestrian passage for Tin Shui Wai. He did not think it was reasonable to invite the professional groups to design the pedestrian passage if they were not invited to serve as consultants. He also felt it strange that some Members criticised the professional groups’ proposal as unprofessional and then invited them to design a pedestrian passage for Tin Shui Wai.

266. The Chairman invited Members to vote on the motion.

267. Members voted on the motion by a show of hands and open ballot. Mr Daniel CHAM, BBS, MH, JP, Mr CHING Chan-ming, Ms CHIU Sau-han, MH, Mr KWOK Keung, MH, Mr LEE Yuet-man, MH, Mr LEUNG Fuk-yuen, Mr LEUNG Ming-kin, Mr LUI Kin, MH, Ms MA Shuk-yin, Mr SIU Long-ming, Mr TSANG Shu-wo, Ms WONG Wai-ling, Mr YOUNG Ka-on, and Ms YUEN Man-yee voted for the motion. The Hon KWONG Chun-yu, Mr TO Ka-lun and Mr Zachary WONG voted against it. The Vice-chairman Mr WONG Wai-shun, MH, Mr CHOW Wing-kan, Ms LAU Kwai-yung, Mr TANG Ka-leung and Mr YIU Kwok-wai abstained from voting.

268. The Chairman announced the motion had been passed by an absolute majority of votes cast by Members, with 14 votes in favour, 3 against and 5 abstentions.

269. The Chairman concluded he hoped government departments would listen to the YLDC’s views.

(Post-meeting remarks: The Secretariat wrote on 10 July 2018 to the THB, HyD, DSD, TD, the HKIA, the HKIP, the HKILA, the HKIUD, and the HKIS, regarding the passage of the motion. Their replies were forwarded to the Members for reference on 27 August of the same year.)

Item XII: Preliminary Report on YLDC’s Duty Visit to Tokyo 270. The Chairman said that the YLDC’s Duty Visit to Tokyo (“Duty Visit”) had been successfully conducted between 5 June 2018 and 8 June 2018. The delegation studied local policies on cycling, refuse treatment and recycling, which would provide Members with new inspirations on handling matters relating to district administration. The Chairman invited Mr CHING Chan-ming, the Chairman of the Duty Visit Working Group (“DVWG”) to report.

271. Mr CHING Chan-ming said that the delegation began the four-day duty visit to Tokyo in Japan on 5 June 2018. There were a total of 26 participants, including 23 DC Members, Miss Carren MAK, Assistant District Officer (Yuen Long) of YLDO, Mr CHAN Tze-ho, Chief Engineer

- 71 -

of CEDD, and Mr MOK Kit-hoi, Winston, Executive Officer of YLDC Secretariat. On behalf of the delegation, he thanked the Secretariat for approaching and liaising with receiving organisations including Hong Kong Economic and Trade Office (Tokyo) to make the visit programme enriching and the desired results were achieved. With the arrangement of the Hong Kong Economic and Trade Office (Tokyo), the delegation first visited the Tokyo Metropolitan Government to understand the policies on handling solid waste. In the afternoon on the same day, the delegation proceeded to the incinerators in Itabashi to learn about local facilities and arrangements for solid waste treatment. On the third day, the delegation paid a visit to Edogawa City Council in Tokyo. He pointed out that Tokyo Metropolis was similar to Hong Kong in a way that the former comprised 23 wards and the latter 18 districts, each with a council to monitor and give advice to the government. The delegation was honoured to be received by the Edogawa City Council in Tokyo to exchange on cycling policies. Through the Q&A session, the delegation had gained a deeper understanding of the cycling policies and relevant facilities in Tokyo in Japan. To show his gratitude for the reception of the Edogawa City Council, Mr SHUM Ho-kit, the delegation leader delivered a speech in Japanese. After the official visits, the delegation met with private organisations to study local land planning and bicycle parking facilities. They first went to JFE Engineering Co to understand the accommodation of operations in multi-level container storage, followed by Giken Ltd. where Members studied the underground parking system. Lastly, the delegation toured Prologis Park Ichikawa to learn about accommodation of brownfield operations in multi-storey buildings in Tokyo. He said that the delegation broadened Members’ horizons and allowed them to further understand the cycling policies in Tokyo after visiting official and private institutions. Given that underground bicycle parks taking up small area could accommodate more than 500 bicycles at a cost of around $10 million, he said Members hoped to introduce them in Yuen Long on a trial basis in the future. The delegation had also learnt the experience in policies on land planning and handling solid waste. Furthermore, during the Duty Visit, Members cultivated harmonious relationships among themselves and facilitated their communication with departmental representatives. Members came closer and the trip was filled with laughter. It was believed that the Duty Visit was useful in facilitating DC work in the future.

272. Mr Zachary WONG thanked the Chairman and the DVWG Chairman for leading the delegation to Tokyo, adding that the visit was well-planned and fruitful. He pointed out that there were many local policies that Hong Kong could make reference to. Since a work report would be compiled after the Duty Visit, he enquired about the arrangement for discussing the observations with the department. As matters on policy making would be involved, he held that discussion at a DC meeting would be more appropriate. Also, after the Duty Visit, he, together with Mr TO Ka-lun, Mr MAK Ip-sing and Ms CHAN Mei-lin, had already submitted a visit report to the Secretariat. He hoped the report would be handed with the work report of the Duty Visit to the department for reference.

273. Mr LEE Yuet-man, MH supported the Duty Visit to Tokyo in Japan as there were many local cycling policies that Hong Kong could make reference to. However, he held that it would be better if Members could bear the full cost or share half of the tour fee. Since the financial arrangement of the delegation was different from his expectation, he did not participate in the tour but would definitely join the next tour if Members had to pay by themselves. Also, he pointed out that he had visited Tokyo, Shinjuku, Harajuku and Shibuya in Japan to study local bicycle parking policies at his own expense in March 2018. The policies were very effective in managing bicycles in Tokyo within a short period of time. He held that the cycling policies in Hong Kong were rather backward in comparison with those in Tokyo.

- 72 -

274. Mr YIU Kwok-wai agreed with the content of the report. He also took the opportunity to thank the Chairman, Vice-chairman, the DVWG Chairman, Miss Carren MAK, Assistant District Officer (Yuen Long) and Mr Winston MOK, Executive Officer of YLDC Secretariat for joining the delegation. The Duty Visit was full of wonderful memories.

275. Mr Daniel CHAM, BBS, MH, JP said that Members had to bear some of the costs even the Home Affairs Department had provided subsidies. He had studied the bicycle parking situation in Shinjuku with Mr MAK Ip-sing, Mr TANG Ka-leung, Mr WONG Cheuk-kin and Mr YOUNG Ka-on in their private time and noted that the illegal parking was sparse as the local government imposed a heavy fine on illegal parking of bicycles. It was a useful example that Hong Kong should learn from.

276. Mr LEUNG Fuk-yuen said that Members benefited a lot from the delegation. He held that the parking policies for vehicles or bicycles in Japan were very effective. With reference to the policies in Tokyo in Japan, it was suitable to set up underground bicycle park at crowded locations and in the stations. With construction costs of slightly more than $10 million, the facility could accommodate over 500 bicycles which could be collected efficiently. Many Yuen Long residents used bicycles as a mode of transport, but insufficient bicycle parking spaces caused a serious situation of illegal parking of bicycles. Therefore, he suggested the Government gave the facility a serious thought to solve the problem of illegal parking of bicycles.

277. To sum up, the Chairman thanked Members for their support to the delegation and the preparation work by the Secretariat. In particular, he thanked the YLDO and the Secretariat for sending representatives to participate in the delegation. As regards a Member’s enquiry on the arrangements for presenting the work report of the Duty Visit, he said that the purpose of setting up the DVWG was to discuss the details instead of the observations of the delegation. Considering that the diverse policies Members learnt during the delegation would involve various bureaux and departments, it would be more appropriate to discuss them at DC meetings. Also, according to Hong Kong Special Administrative Region District Council Manual on the Use of District Council Funds, the delegation was required to submit a report to the District Council. After the report was completed, the Secretariat would invite relevant bureaux and departments to attend the meeting and examine the observations.

Item XIII: Report on work progress of District-led Actions Scheme 278. The Chairman invited Mr Enoch YUEN, JP, District Officer (Yuen Long) and Mr Nixon NG, Assistant District Officer (Yuen Long)1 to report on the work progress of District-led Actions Scheme (“DAS”).

279. Mr Nixon NG introduced the work progress of DAS.

280. Mr YIU Kwok-wai appreciated the effectiveness of DAS achieved by the YLDO. He, together with Ms LAU Kwai-yung and Ms CHIU Sau-han, recently visited Caritas District Elderly Centre – Yuen Long which reflected the locations of illegal parking of bicycles and where pruning was needed. Photos of a frame of a shared bicycle at fences near the Light Rail station opposite

- 73 -

Grandeur Terrace Shopping Centre were shown. It was hoped that the department would clear it as soon as possible. Furthermore, some elderly people hoped the department would step up pruning. He understood the resource constraints of the department but he hoped the YLDO would continue to endeavor to improve the environment of the district.

281. Mr KWOK Keung, MH said that the number of illegally parked shared bicycles in the vicinity of housing estates had reduced greatly, which was the result of the enhanced clearance work by the YLDO. He hoped the YLDO would continue to combat illegal parking of bicycles.

282. Mr Enoch YUEN, JP thanked Members’ recognition on the work of the YLDO and the department. He was pleased to note that illegal parking of bicycles had been remedied. He understood that tackling illegal parking of bicycles was a long-term initiative. The YLDO would continue to step up publicity. He also hoped Members would continue to provide information on black spots of illegal parking of bicycles to YLDO. As regards the locations of illegal parking of bicycles just mentioned, Members were welcome to provide more information after the meeting so that the department could follow up.

283. The Chairman concluded that Mr YUEN, District Officer (Yuen Long) had formulated a number of new work strategies since his appointment. He hoped the DAS would achieve greater results in the future. The YLDC would fully cooperate with the YLDO to improve the environment of the district.

Item XIV: Progress reports of Committees Yuen Long District Management Committee (YLDC Paper No. 42/2018) District Facilities Management Committee (YLDC Paper No. 43/2018) Culture, Recreation, Community Service and Housing Committee (YLDC Paper No. 44/2018) Environmental Improvement Committee (YLDC Paper No. 45/2018) Finance Committee (YLDC Paper No. 46/2018) Town Planning and Development Committee (YLDC Paper No. 47/2018) Traffic and Transport Committee (YLDC Paper No. 48/2018) 284. The Chairman asked Members to take note of Paper Nos. 42-48 for the progress reports of Committees.

285. Members noted the progress reports of the Yuen Long District Management Committee and the YLDC Committees.

Item XV: Any other business 286. The Chairman declared that the meeting adjourned and thanked departmental representatives and Members for attending the meeting.

Yuen Long District Council Secretariat September 2018

- 74 -