Following is a transcript (English portion) of a media session by the Secretary for Housing, Planning and Lands, Mr Michael Suen, on the Report by the Independent Committee of Inquiry on Sai Wan Ho Development today (May 9):
Secretary for Housing, Planning and Lands: I am grateful to the Independent Committee of Inquiry for its careful and in-depth inquiry. We accept the conclusions and recommendations of the Committee on the Building Authority's exercise of discretion. We are taking follow-up action on the other observations and views in the report.
First, some of the recommendations in the report have already been implemented, for instance, public transport terminus would count towards GFA. Second, as regards the ICI's suggestion of imposing a maximum GFA in land leases as one of the measures to govern the height, bulk and density of development, we agreed to review whether the imposition of maximum GFA in land leases was appropriate at an earlier hearing of the Public Accounts Committee (PAC) of the Legislative Council.
Work in this regard has already started. Third, the report touches on the policy to promote green and innovative buildings. Although it falls outside the terms of reference of the ICI, we are grateful to the committee for its views in this area. At the Special Finance Committee meeting of the Legislative Council in March this year, we already agreed to conduct a review of the efficacy of promoting green and innovative buildings. This is currently under way. In the light of the ICI's views on the matter, we will expand our existing internal review committee working on these matters and will expedite our work with a view to completing the review in six to nine months. The review will include an examination of the effectiveness of the GFA concessions for green features, their effect on building height, bulk and density and the appropriateness of imposing a maximum GFA clause in land leases.
Reporter: Why is this report clearing Mr Leung considered so important by the Government? Did it go to the Secretary for Justice and seek legal advice and whether to go public like this even though the case between the Director of Buildings and the Director of Audit is subjudice?
Secretary for Housing, Planning and Lands: It is precisely the question of subjudice which is the main point of contention. As you know, there is a JR (judicial review) outstanding. And clearly if the publication of the report prejudices the case of the JR either way, it would not be appropriate for us to publish the report. And therefore it is important for us to seek a clear view from the lawyers to show that by publishing this report there is no prejudicial effect on either party in terms of the JR.
Reporter: There is a chance of prejudice and why you consider this......
Secretary for Housing, Planning and Lands: This report was commissioned because we want to find out whether the Building Authority in exercise of his discretion had done his work properly. You recalled that the Public Accounts Committee, their remit is not concerned about the exercise of discretion by the Building Authority. They are more concerned about the working of the system and whether there is anything to be learnt in terms of the way we deal with things but don't really deal with individuals. And so, this particular report aims to find out whether the Building Authority in exercise of his discretion had committed any wrongful actions.
Reporter: Secretary, about the report, will the Government consider taking steps to perhaps clarify the role of Director of Buildings and Building Authority to avoid a repetition of this sort of thing or issue?
Secretary for Housing, Planning and Lands: I think the report makes it very clear that the Director of Buildings wears two hats. In his role as the Building Authority, he is acting as an independent judge on applications to the Building Authority in respect of some appeals or maybe, some applications. He is acting on his own. He is confined by the provisions of the Buildings Ordinance. He can't exceed the remits given him under the Ordinance. In this examination by the ICI in this report, we see very clearly that members of the ICI are satisfied that the Building Authority in his exercise of discretion has not exceeded the acceptable limit.
Reporter: How could we see to repeat this in future if these rules are in any way clarified with the provisions perhaps made narrower?
Secretary for Housing, Planning and Lands: There are bound to be differences of views. If there are differences of views, I don't think it's an indication of a failure in the system. I think we are more concerned about shortcomings in the system. If there are shortcomings in the system identified in the report, we will certainly take action.
(Please also refer to the Chinese portion of the transcript.)
Ends/Tuesday, May 9, 2006
Issued at HKT 18:45
NNNN
Related Links