The following is the transcript of a press briefing by the Secretary for Environment, Transport and Works, Dr Sarah Liao, after attending a meeting of the Advisory Council on the Environment (ACE) tonight (October 13):
I am very pleased that we have a very sensitive and reasonable debate on the Central Reclamation with the ACE this afternoon. The ACE had actually heard about the project many times through the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) process in 2001 and this time the Housing, Planning and Lands Bureau colleagues came round here and made another presentation in the light of the Judicial Review and also clearly explained what the Government position is.
There has been a lot of misunderstanding as to the extent of the reclamation, on whether it has actually been changed. But there's no change since the time that the EIA is approved. So the ACE, based on its past analysis and evaluation and in the bigger picture of sustainable development, has to balance the needs of the society in terms of social and economic development as well as minimization of environmental impact. They felt that their position on the reclamation has not changed.
However, they did point out that the Government should communicate better with the public in explaining exactly what we are trying to do and that they also proposed that there should be a basket of measures to solve traffic congestion rather than just building roads. This will involve, in my opinion, traffic management methods. I actually agree with them that we can use these methods. Well, the railway is another one to improve the traffic situation in Hong Kong, rather than providing roads and on the demand mode of operation.
From the discussion, I also realized that there is either misunderstanding or distrust of the Government commitment on minimal reclamation over our harbour and for that we owe the public a better explanation. We should share with the public as to what we are trying to do and give them opportunities to express their feelings.
My own attitude towards the whole issue is that it is a very emotional subject. It is beyond what we traditionally understand as an environmental issue. It is a more emotional tie to the harbour. However, I would urge people not to use emotional appeal over reasonable and sensitive analysis because it is only with a cool head and a level-minded attitude that we can find solutions to such a very controversial problem that we are facing with.
Question: .....Do you think you should go ahead with the Central/Wanchai Reclamation as planned, but do a better job of selling?
SETW: The decision of HPLB is to do the minimum disturbance to the harbour by rearranging the project process so that they are only doing the dredging work. Obviously, the decision rests with that bureau as to whether they would push ahead. However, I think the Government has adopted a very pragmatic attitude towards it. From the legal side, I think, there is a very clear judgement from the Wanchai Reclamation Project although we are going through an appeal. However, from the public reaction point of view, we still need to be very cautious of the fact that there are public sentiments to deal with and we have to convince the public of any permanent and drastic actions that we will take. So I think we are taking a very careful approach on this.
Question: On the basket of traffic management techniques, would you support congestion fees?
SETW: I have said that I am now looking into it. In fact, this is something that I have been looking at for a year and as you know, nobody likes the term electronic road pricing. From the 80's, any Secretary who mentioned this term, his or her career will be at stake as the saying goes. But I have been looking at the privacy issue very carefully, I think that was the crux of the matter at that time and whether modern technology has already overtaken that issue, I am asking my professional staff to look into it.
(Please also refer to the Chinese text of the transcript)
End/Monday, October 13, 2003
NNNN