A study recently published by Liber Research Community has exposed the Hong Kong government’s seriously outdated understanding of brownfield sites in the New Territories and its abject failure to keep abreast of the rapid expansion of these sites in recent years. As the study shows, some newly created brownfield sites have even encroached on country parks, a damning indictment of the government’s haphazard enforcement of the law and failure to protect Hong Kong’s precious land resources. Contrasting Liber Research Community’s report with the recent war of words between Carrie Lam and Leung Chun-ying on the issue of land, it becomes evident that the belief of those in power - that it is possible to shun controversies about the political system and achieve social stability by tackling bread-and-butter issues despite Hong Kong’s abnormal political system – is nothing but a pipe dream.

It was in 2019 when the government published official data on brownfield sites for the first time. But the source of data was seriously outdated, and the data was not updated in time. For example, large areas of brownfield sites that had already been developed by 2017 have not been included in the official database. When data is outdated and incomplete, two problems arise. First, the government has insisted that the development of brownfield sites alone will be insufficient to meet the demand for land in Hong Kong, which is why the “Lantau Tomorrow Vision” development plan is necessary. However, if the government does not even have a clear grasp of the proliferation of brownfield sites, how can it convince the public to subscribe to the conclusion that “Lantau Tomorrow Vision” is necessary? Second, the government has always insisted that it can manage the environmental consequences of land reclamation from the sea, so there is no need to worry about environmental damage. However, if the government does not even know that existing country parks are being encroached upon by brownfield sites, how can citizens believe that the government can manage a land reclamation project worth a hundred billion dollars?

The methodology of Liber Research Community’s study is transparent and straightforward, and most people can verify the findings themselves. This shows how perfunctorily the government’s data was compiled. After all, the raw geographic data of Hong Kong is quite open to the public. High-altitude pictures dated between the 1960s and December 2020 can all be downloaded for free from government websites. If even the public can easily monitor the expansion of brownfield sites in Hong Kong using public data from the government, while the government has been so slow to realize the situation, ordinary people cannot help but ask: Is it that the government cannot do it, or is it that the government has chosen not to do it? Just imagine what would have happened if the government had tackled the issue of brownfield sites with the same vigor with which it has enforced the National Security Law, and if it had put in as much effort in the investigation of illegal land development as in tracing and tracking dissidents. Hong Kong’s land problem would have been pretty much resolved long ago.

These findings have interestingly coincided with the bitter arguments between Carrie Lam and Leung Chun-ying over the airwaves on the issue of land. In a high-profile manner, Leung has recently proposed the development of 70 hectares of land in Tai Lam Country Park in order to build Home Ownership Scheme (HOS) housing to address public demand for homeownership. It is generally believed that Leung has put forward his housing proposal to prepare for the next Chief Executive election. In mainland China, the mainstream view is that Hong Kong’s problems stem from bread-and-butter issues, and the political problems are merely the result of citizens being incited. Now that the political problems have been “resolved”, no doubt the bread-and-butter issues must be rooted out. When Leung proposed the development of country parks, he also pointed out that as there was no more filibustering in the Legislative Council, his suggestions would be feasible. Responding to Leung’s offensive, Carrie Lam said that long-term planning would be needed, and it was not possible to make a conclusion by simply looking at a single piece of land or a certain number of flats that a plan purported to be able to supply.

To be frank, it does not seem that ordinary citizens would feel particularly engaged in the head-on clash between the two politicians on the land issue. After all, the last Chief Executive election has clearly shown that the preferences of the people have absolutely no bearing on the election result. The new round of amendments to the electoral system will even take away the hard-won seats of pan-democratic District Councilors in the Election Committee, a blatant act of trampling on public opinion. That citizens are totally uninterested in the next Chief Executive election is completely understandable.

Even if we really analyze the views held by the two sides, it is not difficult to see that the debate is a complete sham that is more about creating disagreements than about solving problems. Here we return to Liber Research Community’s report: there is still a lot of land waiting to be developed, and it is just that the land is poorly managed and not used properly. In Yuen Long District alone, brownfield sites that have slipped under the government’s radar exceed 200 hectares in area. These sites can be requisitioned by the government anytime. There is no need to spend one hundred billion dollars to reclaim land from the sea off Lantau Island or bulldoze Tai Lam Country Park and destroy the environment.

While making a big fuss about land, these politicians are paying no regard to brownfield sites, which contribute to the most serious waste of land resources in Hong Kong. What does such differential treatment show? Why is the issue of brownfield sites untouchable? Today, even ordinary citizens clearly understand the complex, tangled web of power relations behind land interests in the New Territories. To make good use of New Territories land, it is necessary to straighten out such power relations. But this happens to be the very issue on which politicians are completely silent.

Back in the last Chief Executive race, Carrie Lam did an about-turn and suspended work on tackling the illegal structures of “Small Houses” in the New Territories. What she got in return was the Heung Yee Kuk’s bundled nomination for her Chief Executive campaign. If even the illegal structures of “Small Houses” can be that tricky, what about the much bigger hornets’ nests? Citizens have no illusions about the government’s willingness to reverse existing land politics under such a political system, nor do they believe that any so-called “great debate on land” will be comprehensive or sincere. As the public no longer expects the government to solve the problem, property prices continue to soar. How can politicians make the public believe that they have the resolve to tackle the land issue? “No bullshit, let’s go” is the answer. Just begin by straightening out land politics.

Hold on a second. I forgot to tell you that although all seats for District Councilors will be canceled in the new Election Committee, the Heung Yee Kuk will have all of theirs retained.

(Leung Kai-chi, current affairs commentator)

This article is translated from Chinese by Apple Daily.

Click here for Chinese version

We invite you to join the conversation by submitting columns to our opinion section: [email protected]

Apple Daily reserves the right to refuse, abridge, alter or edit guest opinion columns for accuracy, length, clarity, and style, and the right to withdraw and withhold columns based on the discretion of our editorial page editors.

The opinions of the writers do not necessarily reflect the opinions of the editorial board.

---------------------------------

Apple Daily’s all-new English Edition is now available on the mobile app: bit.ly/2yMMfQE

To download the latest version,

iOS: bit.ly/AD_iOS

Android: bit.ly/AD_android

Or search Appledaily in App Store or Google Play