CLP did invite comment
I REFER to the letter by U. P. Heggli, a resident in Clearwater Bay/Sai Kung (South China Morning Post).
I would like to clarify various statements to ensure readers are given accurate information.
On the design of 400kV transmission routes, we always place emphasis on technical and environmental considerations and invariably use the best option. The Government-led Steering Group overseeing the transmission project study ruled out tunnelling and undergrounding options in the Clearwater Bay-Fei Ngo Shan area in 1993.
The reasons were primarily technical and environmental constraints. CLP carried out tunnelling and undergrounding of cables wherever practicable, for example in the case of some lower voltage circuits such as 132 kV, referred to by Mr Heggli.
Between 1992 and 1993 consultations were held with a full range of concerned bodies, from area committees and rural committees to district boards, environmental groups and Legco panels.
This is, of course, the recognised consultative mechanism in the territory. On top of that, advertisements were also placed in the four most widely circulated English and Chinese newspapers to invite public comment.
The liability of CLP to pay compensation under Section 10 (I) of the Electricity Networks (Statutory Easements) Ordinance is confined to owners of land affected by the registration of the Order given by the Governor-in-Council in March 1994, enabling CLP to carry out the works.
The order was registered on March 21 upon the gazetting of the order. In accordance with Section 6 of the Ordinance, CLP advertised the registration of the order in two Chinese newspapers and one English newspaper on March 24 and 31.
The owners of land affected by the registration of the order were informed, by mail, of the ex-gratia compensation offer made by Government on behalf of CLP in June 1994.
CLP has never shirked its obligations in the past, and will not do so in future.
SANDRA MAK Public Affairs Manager China Light and Power