Planners hardly inspire confidence

BIO

Alex Lo is a senior writer at the South China Morning Post. He writes editorials and the daily “My Take” column on page 2. He also edits the weekly science and technology page in Sunday Morning Post.

Most Popular

Viewed
Shared
Commented

Edward Yau Tang-wah (left), Director of Chief Executive's Office and Chief Executive Leung Chun-ying. Photo: Sam Tsang

Here's a political puzzle I don't have the answer to. People are mad at Leung Chun-ying, our chief executive. Many also object to a plan to convert a century-old heritage mansion into a boutique hotel. Now, why haven't they connected the dots?

The director of the company that owns the site and is behind the hotel plan is Yau Tang-tit, brother of Chief Executive Office director Edward Yau Tang-wah, who is also the former - and I may add, highly mediocre - environment bureau chief. That does not seem to have raised too many eyebrows. We are sure Leung and Yau never took a personal interest in the project. But given the membership of the Town Planning Board, the project has had a remarkably easy time getting approval this month. This is despite vocal objections from the Central and Western District Council and more than 150 objections raised with the board.

Let's see who sits on the board. The Permanent Secretary for Development is the chairman. Other government members include: the Director of Planning; Deputy Secretary Transport and Housing; Director of Home Affairs; Director of Environmental Protection, which is under the Environment Bureau; Director of Lands; and Deputy Director of Planning. These are backed by alternate members who are also senior government officials. The Chief Executive appointed most of the other non-government members.

Given their membership, it's little wonder they rarely cast a critical eye over most projects, however controversial. The surroundings near the house on Lugard Road have an open view of Victoria Harbour, so many visitors and hikers go there on weekends and holidays. The neighbours are worried that the narrow road would not be able to accommodate more traffic if the hotel is built.

The board has praised the owner for taking the initiative to protect the heritage mansion, which has grade-two historic status. After all, a board spokesman said, "An owner could tear it down any time." Well, how nice of them! Perhaps the developer should get an award, not just the green light.

The board is key to making our city world-class and liveable. But often its decisions do little to inspire confidence.

This article appeared in the South China Morning Post print edition as Planners have questions to answer

PrintEmail

After reading this article, people also read

26.33
Pricing domestic helpers out of reach good for Hong Kong in the long run
Oct 03, 2013
23.91
The case of the missing hordes of misbehaving Chinese tourists
Oct 03, 2013
20.38
Appalled by school pupils' behaviour
Oct 02, 2013
15.73
Dr Doom Marc Faber spells out the end game at CLSA Forum
Oct 03, 2013
13.65
For breathable air, China must reduce the costs of its growth
Oct 02, 2013

Comments

caractacus Sep 26th 2013
2:00pm

Edward Yau is not just highly mediocre, he is totally incompetent and ethically questionable, but so is Hong Kong's entire planning regulatory framework.
Town Planning Board is colluding with the property developers and is complicit in the wilful destruction of large areas inside our Country Parks.
Dig deeper and find the real dirt, Alex.

wwong888 Sep 26th 2013
8:54am

good piece alex. this is the kind of reporting we value. your best piece in a while.

PCC Sep 26th 2013
8:08am

The Lugard Road hotel decision is more evidence of Hong Kong's accelerating descent down the toilet.
This previously wonderful city is dying fast. So sad.

jve Sep 26th 2013
11:58am

Indeed. But why would they not act like the kleptocrats they are? In this semi-democratic, semi-authoritarian political system that Mr Lo supports so vocally every other day, they can. For they know that at the next electoral moment, the only key thing is to gain support from a 1,500 strong committee in which their fellow cronies hold an easy majority. Popular support is an afterthought with some bread (HKD 6k hand-outs) and circuses (West Kowloon Budgetary Disaster District) thrown in.

The public won't be given much of a choice anyway, so why care? Party discipline is absent too, since there is only one party with a realistic chance of getting into power, and they have made an art out of using that power to enrich themselves.

The answer to Mr Lo's puzzle is simple: it's the system, stupid.

By the way, we knew all of this weeks ago. And yet, Mr Lo went to have dinner with these 'gentlemen.' At best, this makes him a hypocrite, at worst, a collaborative pawn in their game.

John Adams Sep 26th 2013
8:44am

Why does having dinner with CY make Alex Lo complicit with government / private sector collusion ?!
But I agree that the system is stupid and that the TPB is just a lap dog of the property cartel

jve Sep 26th 2013
9:15am

It did not say Mr Lo was complicit in government / private sector collusion.

I said he is a hypocrite. Talk is cheap; actions speak louder. If Mr Lo finds the CE and his appointees unethical, then why accept their dinner invitation?

Or, and this is the worst case scenario, is he just bolstering their legitimacy by mixing a little bit of soft-edged criticism on a relatively minor project (the hotel) with his overall rather staunch almost daily defence of the status quo?

John Adams Sep 26th 2013
12:23pm

it's not hypocritical to engage those one disagrees with in discussion to better understand them - if only the better to eventually undermine them

jve Sep 26th 2013
1:08pm

True in principle, but it becomes a different ballgame if you have them pay for your dinner. Furthermore, this was an official government dinner, with the sole purpose of giving CY & Co's pre-public (ie, private backdoor) fig leaf consultation about the 2017 electoral reform a whiff of legitimacy.

johnyuan Sep 26th 2013
7:45am

Everyday Tao is not Tao -- Lao Tzu, Tao Te Ching.
......
Looks like every official department and authority in Hong Kong that should bear a task to provide a service to the public according to its mission statement has eventually existed only as a representative for some private interests. At least from their performance I receive such perception.

johnyuan Sep 26th 2013
7:37am

I am no friend with the Town Planning Board as long as I can remember.
.....
Collusion is at work right in front our eyes, The Town Planning Board works more like a power broker to achieve profit (stealing money) for friends and connected at the expanse of the general public. So,must Hong Kong abide what comes out of the Board? I suggest first use the court halting the hotel project. Second, start reform the Board so decision must weight in opposite view as well.
.....
Rule of law, Hong Kong style? Every law is good and just law?