• Thu
  • Dec 18, 2014
  • Updated: 6:41pm
CommentInsight & Opinion

Public's right of access to land used by private clubs must be upheld

PUBLISHED : Tuesday, 25 February, 2014, 4:44am
UPDATED : Tuesday, 25 February, 2014, 4:44am

Private institutions that benefit from government subsidies have to accept public scrutiny, and taxpayers are entitled to expect officials to be diligent about it. Lawmakers have rightly drawn attention to the Home Affairs Bureau's dilatory oversight of privileged land leases granted to 27 private recreation clubs decades ago and recently renewed for 15 years. These clubs have paid token or no consideration for the leases. Land revenue foregone amounts to de facto public subsidy.

Public Accounts Committee chairman Abraham Razack has told Legco it is inexcusable that the bureau began a comprehensive review of the private recreational lease policy only in September. The policy should have been reviewed from time to time, if you believe information given to the Executive Council in 1969. The Audit Commission looked into it last year and urged the government to consider taking back private clubhouses and putting the land to better use.

This newspaper put the leases under the spotlight in 2010. Not only were the sites granted on most favourable terms, but the requirement to open some facilities for public use had been ignored. Since then the clubs have been asked to provide greater public access, but there is little evidence of a long-term overhaul of the leases. The original policy was to provide more public sporting facilities and help train elite athletes. But the Audit Commission found that some clubs were allowed to operate non-sports facilities such as a mahjong room, massage, catering and barber shops. This raises questions whether subsidies are deserved.

The committee was told the clubs are sitting on 320 hectares, which is a lot considering a land shortage hinders the city's social and economic development. That is all the more reason not to dismiss the public's right of access as an anachronism of archaic leases.

Hopefully it will not be seen as necessary to revoke one or two leases to show the clubs the government is serious about the review.

Share

For unlimited access to:

SCMP.com SCMP Tablet Edition SCMP Mobile Edition 10-year news archive
 
 

 

 
 
 
 
 
2

This article is now closed to comments

rpasea
Give the private clubs 2 choices: make their sports facilities open to the public or pay market rent for use of the land. In particular, the private golf courses that take up so much valuable land should be made public courses without exception.
captam
Start with the Jockey Club, which spends hundreds of millions of dollars each year earned from their gambling monopoly on operating and renovating their own members' club private facilities.
They pull the wool over the Public's eyes by handing some of their "profits" to charity but not until a hefty chunk of this has been spent on their members.
They enjoy costly improvements to their luxurious subsidised sports club facilities with swimming pools, games rooms, restaurants and of course far more comfortable horse race viewing facilities, which the ‘hoi polloi” are unable to enjoy. Members pay very little towards these costs.
And as for their directors; it must be a great hardship for their nine directors having to scrape by on an average annual salary of only $7,000,000. Perhaps they should ask for additional transport subsidies such as a free pass to go to work by tram.
This should be the first club to pay fully for its land.

Login

SCMP.com Account

or