A repeat of the Cyberport saga does not begin to describe the West Kowloon cultural district project. For a start, it is twice the size of the Cyberport. Not only has the principle of fair competition been violated, just as in the Cyberport case, but the government has set a precedent by putting itself above the current planning process.

The Tung administration plans to hand the $24 billion project to a single consortium which will develop the 40-hectare site and run it for 30 years, on the grounds that profits from commercial and residential developments would be needed to subsidise the cultural facilities. This has resulted in unfair competition.

The invitation for proposals for the development contains requirements which only the two largest developers in Hong Kong can meet. It says that the consortium or joint venture company should have relevant, direct experience within 15 years in building at least one development with a total construction cost of not less than HK$3 billion, and managing office space with a total gross floor area of not less than 250,000 square metres. It also requires the participants of a consortium to be liable for their performance.

By making the Town Planning Board amend the draft South West Kowloon outline zoning plan to provide greater flexibility for change of use, and reduce the need for a planning application, the government has set a bad precedent in bypassing the usual town planning processes.

The mega project is a land sale, and therefore is out of the Legislative Council's control, as no approval of funds, nor amendment of legislation, is needed. Thus, another Cyberport or cultural district can be created in the same way, by making it part of a land-sale programme.

The subsequent policymaking process, following the Town Planning Board's amendment, will be a black hole. The lack of transparency, together with the requirements in the invitation for proposals, has given rise to fears that the administration is working against the principle of fair competition. While the Town Planning Board usually sets the maximum plot ratio of a site, the invitation for proposals sets only the minimum ratio.

Apart from requiring the developer to provide core arts and cultural facilities, such as a theatre complex, performance venue and museum cluster, as well as the canopy proposed in Sir Norman Foster's scheme, the single consortium can decide the extent of commercial and residential development to be built.

This means the West Kowloon cultural district could become another Tseung Kwan O, where hundreds of thousands are housed, or another Sai Kung, featuring low-rise buildings - all at the whim of the single consortium.

While all other projects have to go through stringent procedures and meet stringent requirements, including how the land will be used and the maximum plot ratio, the single consortium which wins the West Kowloon contract will be given greater flexibility. Not only is the government making an uneven playing field, but the project also contravenes existing planning procedures.

The fear among arts groups that the development of the cultural hub will play second fiddle to other needs and priorities is not unfounded. A land developer has little experience in managing cultural facilities, yet it will be given great flexibility to determine how many cultural facilities will be built.

There is a risk that the project could turn into a fiasco, in much the same way that the Harbour Fest did, if it is managed by a land developer.

For arts groups to thrive, they must be given a role in the operation and management of the cultural facilities. They have longed for a cultural hub, and by having a hand in its management, they would have a platform on which to realise their dreams in development of the arts.

The only way to set minds at rest would be to think twice about handing the whole project to a single consortium, and prove the government's commitment to maintaining a level playing field.

An alternative way to fund the cultural hub - without having to further strain the depleted reserves of the Treasury - would be to divide the project into several components, and use the proceeds from the land sale to fund the cultural centre.

This is the last major piece of land along the Hong Kong waterfront, and we should ensure that we make best use of it. Given the enormous stakes involved, the administration should make painstaking efforts to solicit the views of all parties concerned.

A thorough consultation, involving arts groups, land developers, town planners and architects, should be conducted to discover how many, and what kind of facilities should be built, and how the cultural hub should be funded and managed.

A level playing field and observance of well-established planning procedures are important pillars to support Hong Kong's efforts to be a metropolitan city. By putting itself above rules, and unilaterally handing the development of such a district to a single developer, the government will further turn Hong Kong into a developer's colony. The only way the government can save itself is to show us its unwavering commitment to making, and maintaining, a level playing field, and by observing planning rules - as do all other parties.

YEUNG SUM

Chairman of the Democratic Party and a directly elected Legislative

Councillor

[South China Morning Post, November 12, 2003]