You may ask, in the face of sizeable deficits, can we afford all these projects? Let me tell you, after detailed study and analysis, we are confident that the deficit will be resolved in the next few years, and sufficient resources will be available to bring all these projects to fruition. - Chief Executive Tung Chee-hwa WELL, MR TUNG, that is indeed the question I ask about your HK$600-billion expenditure programme and, what is more, I think I shall call your bluff. Show me. If you really have done detailed study and analysis to prove that you can spend all this and still resolve your deficit over the next few years, then let us see this work. I say it is all just numbers spun out of hope and thin air to match expenditure that has spun out of control. Go on, sir. Your cards on the table, please. Let us look at just one aspect. The wild card in the Government's hand is land sales revenue. Mr Tung can smooth out his capital expenditure from year to year but capital revenue is hugely volatile. For instance, he can expect HK$15 billion from land sales this fiscal year if he is lucky. Four years ago it was HK$66 billion. So right away he is dealing with one big uncertainty that can mock all detailed study and analysis. Government projections on land sales have routinely been way off the mark. Now of course you can say that a low figure this year is only to be expected as the property market is down. It is reasonable to assume that the market will improve within a year or two and land sales revenue rise. True. Mr Tung's expenditure plans, however, require not just a recovered property market to bring us back to a fiscal balance but a booming one and even then, a booming market may not bring in as much land sales revenue as it would previously have done. There are several reasons for this. Start with the fact that we now have only a handful of big developers who can provide that revenue and they have already built up their land banks quite sizeably in recent years. Only two months ago, for instance, Sun Hung Kai Properties won a lease conversion for 7.1 million square feet of floor area. The big developers also already have development rights on vast tracts of agricultural land for which the Government can expect nothing more. The next boom could be built on land sales revenue already booked. Then we have Mr Tung announcing in almost the same breath on Wednesday that he is thinking of relaxing land use restrictions on those acres of moribund industrial space we have. It is a good idea but easing demand pressures this way can hardly be something calculated to boost land sale revenues. What is more, he does not himself appear to appreciate the need to look everywhere he can for those revenues. He is thinking of using that prized Tamar site for government offices and said these would not be luxurious as he wants to maintain the principle of small government. It is backwards thinking. There could not be a better site for luxury space. Sell it to private users for the highest price you can get, sir, and move those government offices to Cyberport, that development flop of yours that the private sector does not want but is ideally sited for decentralised government offices. You could bring down your office costs plus ease traffic conditions in Central and make commuting easier for your employees. To use Tamar for third-rate government office space is not only to waste it but to make your deficit worse and make yourself look fiscally irresponsible. I simply don't buy it, Mr Tung. Show us those studies. I say they are full of holes.