Letters | Wang Chau yesterday, Fanling today: how policy failure continues to haunt Hong Kong housing quest

There’s much more to lose than gain with the decision to take back part of the Fanling golf club for a negligible number of public flats. But such shoddy decision-making is all too familiar
2,000-odd flats would have little impact on housing needs, but the concreting over of yet more greenery will be a disaster for future generations

Hong Kong housing

Letters

Published: 6:00pm, 14 Apr 2019

Why you can trust SCMP

I refer to your editorial on how necessity drives the plan to build public flats on the majority of the Old Course of the Fanling golf club (February 20). But that assumption cannot be correct. If only half the land taken is to be used for public housing providing 2,000-odd units – then where is the necessity, and why set aside space for private flats at all?

Is the golf club an easy target, just like the fully wooded green belts that were taken for private housing? Our need for public housing should be driving the government to resume and develop brownfield sites.

The attitude of the Leung Chun-ying administration, as reflected in its shambolic dealings in the Wang Chau case, continues with the current administration. In the case that made headlines in 2016, a rural area in Yuen Long on which three villages sit was earmarked for development to provide 4,000 housing units, even though a nearby brownfield site that would have provided more than 10,000 flats was left untouched.

An aerial photograph run on your front page clearly shows a substantial brownfield site adjacent to the golf course, so where was the environmental consideration in making this decision?

Short-sighted populist decisions will come back to haunt. A meagre 2,000 or so flats would have little impact on meeting our housing need, but the concreting over of yet more greenery in the New Territories will be a disaster for future generations and, in this case, the sporting community.

While the Fanling golf club in the past did not do enough to open up its facilities, that has changed in recent years. One course is open each weekday to members of the public, while one is used by members and a third closed for maintenance. This rotation is necessary to ensure the proper maintenance of the facility and taking back the Old Course will significantly affect this arrangement.

The government has nothing to be proud of in taking this action. Sport is an essential component of the social and economic fabric of any city, and this decision just takes Hong Kong another rung down the ladder as a place to live, hurts its reputation abroad and makes nonsense of its claim to be a “world city”.

The consultation by the Task Force on Land Supply served as an excuse for government to do nothing for another year, was not necessary, and brought out the divisiveness currently existing in society because the government has not looked after its people properly.

Allan Hay, Tai Po

Post