Legitimacy of consultation During the non-public
consultation in July 2015, the Town Planning Board received opinions concerning decrease in
pedestrian flow during the construction period, disturbance to neighbourhoods, the privatization of public space, etc. However, despite the widespread opposition, the Planning Department decided in the meeting that they did not oppose the Plan. Civil Renaissance criticised that the district council ignored the public opinions and reluctant to hold public consultation. As the later public engagement exercises were co-hosted by the New World Development, the Victoria Waterfront Concern Group argued that the government, for its first time, allowed
property developer to exercise government power. Alfred Lai, member of the concern group, said it was ridiculous to ask the public to express their opinions to a business corporation who had not signed any contracts with the government. In addition, he also criticized the public engagement exercise was not a genuine consultation as public tender was not an option in the agenda. “The engagement only aimed at discussing the operational arrangement of the decision previously made by the government. Work first, then consultation,” he noted. In addition, Harbourfront Commission told the media that they had not been consulted properly in the process. ‘“Only the general idea of revitalization had been presented in the previous meeting.” said
Vincent Ng, member of Harbourfront Commission.
Indirect commercial benefits for New World Development Although New World Development promised the waterfront would be run by non-profit-making organisation, the Victoria Waterfront Concern Group questioned that the Plan could provide New World Development an unfair indirect commercial benefits. New World Development owned three commercial projects nearby, including New World Millennium Hong Kong Hotel and New World Centre. The new exit of Avenue of Stars, shopping facilities and restaurants would bring more customers for shopping malls and more guests for the hotels owned by New World Development. Member of the concern group,
Tanya Chan Suk-chong, commented that considered the total area of new site reached 400,000 sq ft of which 80 percent is government land, the Plan was to utilise public space to generate indirect commercial profits for New World Development . Private companies cooperate with government for financial interests. There cannot be a “not-profit-making” project.
Possible collusion between the government and business sector The Secretary for Home Affairs
Lau Kong-wah commented that it was reasonable for New World Development to lead the plan as it had already been managing the AoS.
Michelle Li Mei-Sheung, director of the Leisure and Cultural Services Department said that the New World Development was granted the franchise because it had a proven track record and experience in running the Avenue of Stars and making it a world class attraction. Considered that the total area of new site reached 400,000 sq ft and was five times larger than the AoS, and the fact that AoS was once named one of the world’s 12 worst “tourist traps”, public criticised that these reasons provided by the government were invalid to support its decision to entrust the plan directly to the New World Development instead of opting for an open tender. Legislative Councilor
Claudia Mo said the government’s decision to give the project to New World Development raised suspicions of collusion. Two committee members of TPB’s Metro Planning Committee, Clarence Leung and Wilton Fok, have raised concerns about allegations of the government colluding with New World Development, which currently manages the Avenue of Stars attraction on the promenade. As the chairman of New World Development,
Henry Cheng Kaw-Shun, is considered as a supporter of the
Chief Executive Leung Chun-Ying. People questioned that the entrustment might involve possible collusion between government and business sector, being a tactic of Leung to prepare for his succession. == References ==