****************************************************
Following is the transcript of the Chief Executive, Mr Tung Chee Hwa, at the English phone-in session on RTHK 3 this morning (Wednesday). The hosts of the phone-in programme are Mr Nick Beacroft and Mr Hugh Chiverton:
HOST: You're listening to RTHK's Hong Kong Today. A special edition of the programme now coming from the Central Government Offices. With us in the studio here is the Chief Executive Tung Chee Hwa. Mr Tung, good morning to you.
Mr Tung: Good morning, Nick.
HOST: Thank you for joining us this morning to answer all the questions from the citizens of Hong Kong. The phone number is 1878228. I want to quickly ask you about your feeling as a leader because you talked, at point number 50, saying that you wanted to make sure that Hong Kong was an important city bigger perhaps than New York or London. Do you see yourself as a leader if you compare yourself as, say, to Tony Blair, Bill Gates or Alan Greenspan or are you an innovator?
Mr Tung: Well, let me tell you this, Nick. To be a leader is about having a vision of where we want to be going next year, year after that, 10 years from now, a quarter of a century from now. To be a leader is to understand the pulse and the feelings of the community. To be a leader is to listen to all these views and consolidate your vision, and to be a leader is to organise a team of people to implement what you want to do. And to do all that, you have to be constantly listening to the people - not just people of Hong Kong - but to see what's happening around us. Where are the forces of competition coming from? So, no, I don't want to compare myself with all these very illustrious people you mentioned. I think I've just been at a job for three or two and a half years. I'm working very hard at it and I hope I get better each day.
HOST: Well, we'll see what the listeners think. We have a caller on the line now. Good morning.
Caller: Good morning.
HOST: Yes. You're through to the Chief Executive.
CALLER: Mr Tung, I'm Professor Kwan from City University. My focus is always on the elderly service. Now, I'm glad that you have a long term vision in your policy address, but another long term fact that we have in Hong Kong is the ageing population. Now, I'm quite disappointed this time because I didn't see much you talk about the elderly's welfare, how to increase it and how to meet the needs at this moment. And also another thing is you talk about the "three haves", about our sense of security, belonging, health and worthiness. Probably, you realise that in China, we have "five haves", okay? So why you select "three haves" instead of all the "five haves" to implement your welfare policy?
Mr Tung: Well, let me say this first, that the care for the elderly is a subject which I raised from the very beginning when I became Chief Executive. It is my concern today as it was then that there's no change of this, but what happened is that as you noticed yesterday's policy address was already two hours 20 minutes long. And from the very beginning, I decided that we would focus on a few subjects which are very immediately of concern to Hong Kong, which is a) how to get the economy going and in order to get the economy going, what we need to do and how do we sustain this growth of the economy, and we have chosen the two subjects which you know about. You know our living environment as well as education. It is not today we're not --we don't pay enough attention to care of the elderly, but it's just the sheer -- the time we have for delivering the policy address. The bureau secretary responsible for elderly will be spending time explaining to you what we are doing, and certainly we care about the problem of the ageing population and the delivery of service of the elderly, how we can do better and we will continue to do so.
HOST: Thanks very much for your call.
HOST: You're listening to a special phone-in on RTHK Radio 3 to the Chief Executive, Tung Chee Hwa. Our number once again is 1878228. We're facing up to Hong Kong's environmental problems and I think that's something of concern to our next caller, Mrs Abraham. Good morning to you.
CALLER: Good morning.
Mr Tung: Good morning, Mrs Abraham.
CALLER: Good morning to Chief Executive. This is just regarding the pollution in Hong Kong. It's one of those things which we can really tackle now. It's regarding the emission of idlising engines. When we go for a walk at Cameron Road, there is a car park -- there's a playing ground for the young children and the elderly come for a walk or brisk walk every morning, evening and night. And we just find the minibuses, the tourist buses and the drivers relaxing in their cars, idlising their engines. The police are just passing by, ignoring that the cars are idlised and nobody says anything to them. Whether the traffic police, if we are five minutes late, we get the ticket immediately. Isn't this very important, especially where the children are in the playground. The cars are idling and their drivers are just reading the papers or having their lunch, and the whole days are going on, especially Cameron Road, if one passes over there they will see this problem.
Mr Tung: Yes. Well, Mrs Abraham, I am entirely sympathetic to the issue you raised. You know, the unfortunate thing is that there's no such law at this moment.
HOST: And why not?
Mr Tung: I have said in the policy speech yesterday that we are going to move ahead with public consultation with the view to pass legislation to stop this from happening. These are all very important and...
CALLER: But this has been talking for so many years and something very simple.
Mr Tung: I know.
CALLER: With the traffic, I mean, they can just patrol to places like these, joggers and where the children are playing. This doesn't take, I mean, a big legislation doing that.
HOST: They were saying why don't you just pass the law? Why do you need public consultation?
HOST: The public have actually spoken out pretty clearly.
Mr Tung: Nick, you know, I'm probably more impatient than you and Mrs Abraham on these subjects and actually on a whole lot of other subjects, but in Hong Kong we have our way of doing things. Public consultation is part of the process and this is part of our success story, and I think, you know, if we are going to be a successful place, the rule of law, the consensus seeking is all very important part of that process.
HOST: I think the people are saying, Mr Tung, that the public consultation has already taken place. Now, it's time to pass the law.
Mr Tung: Well, there are a lot of voices speaking out on this issue. We try to move as fast as we can.
HOST: Let's move on in this phone-in. The number is 1878228. We've got a caller on the line now. I think it's something about harbour reclamation. Good morning.
CALLER: I'm Winston CHU and I'm the president of...
MR TUNG: I know who you are. How are you?
CALLER: Thank you so much.
MR TUNG: I haven't seen you for a bit but how are you?
CALLER: A pleasure to have the chance to talk to you now.
MR TUNG: Yes.
CALLER: And thank you for taking my call. Your Policy Address mentions your decision to protect Victoria Harbour and to reduce the scale of reclamation. Is this changing policy intended to be permanent and if so, how would you ensure this?
MR TUNG: Well, let me tell you firstly that I enjoy chatting with you. Soon after I became the Chief Executive, and you brought along to my office a map of the harbour and everything else and made a very strong case of what we should do.
CALLER: Thank you.
MR TUNG: Victoria Harbour is part of our heritage. It's a reflection of Hong Kong and I want the harbour to be very beautiful, and I want the harbour to be a place where all the citizens of Hong Kong, as well as tourists from overseas, can enjoy ourselves and this is the objective. Part of the reclamation is necessary because we have to move people through mass transit, building roads, railways underneath where we reclaim, but we will try to make sure that the harbour is truly a place we can all gather and enjoy and have a good time, and that is the objective: make Victoria Harbour truly a place where all the Hong Kong people can feel very proud of.
CALLER: The public seems to be very concerned that with the reclamation, there will be no harbour left.
MR TUNG: Well, I'm very concerned about that, too, because as I said, that is part of our heritage and that's why we have taken the views of the public after extensive consultation to reduce the size of the reclamation to the extent that it's now reasonable. I think it's being accepted by the public at large.
CALLER: We think that the harbour is already too small and we hope that your administration will, as far as possible, reduce reclamation to an absolute minimum.
MR TUNG: Winston, I assure you this is what we are trying to do.
CALLER: Will you consider setting up...
HOST: Mr CHU, thank you very much indeed for your call. That's an ongoing debate. I'm sure the subject of the reclamation, exactly what to do with our harbour front or the possibilities that are open to us being in Hong Kong. And it's your chance to put your questions and comments now to the Chief Executive principally in relation to his Policy Address. Just give us a call, 1878228. 1878228, and you can put your questions or comments to Mr Tung Chee Hwa. I think Mr Lloyd has done that now. He's on the line. Mr Lloyd, good morning.
CALLER: Hi, this is David Lloyd. Thank you very much taking my call. My question concerns the government's policy on gambling. Recently, one of your representatives went to Las Vegas, I believe, and I can't believe there was no smoke without fire. Can you tell me a little bit about what the government's plans are in respect of casinos in Hong Kong?
MR TUNG: Well, Mr Lloyd, let me say this, that we have no plans to establish casino here in Hong Kong. I have said yesterday at the press conference that we have to take in the views of the public, and there's a great deal of concern what a casino will bring to us from a culture point of view. There's also concern from a security point of view, from a crime point of view. And of course, also, you know, Macau having just about to be returned to China is also something we have to take into consideration. But on overall basis, you know, thinking of Hong Kong's own interests, we have no plans to move ahead with the casino. One of my colleagues visited Las Vegas. It is because Las Vegas is not only a centre for gambling which we all know about, but it's becoming a very successful convention centre, a centre where families go there, enjoy and have a good time. So from a tourism point of view, we want to understand what was happening, and that was the purpose of the visit.
HOST: Is it not true that a think tank, though, has been looking at the possibility of establishing a casino in Hong Kong?
MR TUNG: Well, I think, you know, the government needs to look at all the things.
HOST: So they were looking at that.
MR TUNG: Not in a way that was a very serious look. It was -- you know, if the government do not look at things, we get criticised of why don't we look at these? If we look at things, we also get criticised but what we need to do is to make sure everything is looked at properly, and it was a low level review.
HOST: Okay. Apart from a low level review of a casino in Hong Kong, probably a higher level review of Disneyland. We have a caller on the line now on that topic. Good morning.
CALLER: Good morning, Mr Tung. I hope that I raise this Disneyland issue not too late because it is like that the negotiation is going on very well. I don't think the US tourists will come here because they have two in their own country. The European customers or tourists also won't come here. Japan, they have their own; for Taiwan, they can choose either Hong Kong or Japan, and Japan is a little closer to them. So thinking about customers, we are left with the Southeast Asian countries. So what the Disneyland can offer? The attractions are all the games, all the roller-coasters, children's kind of machinery games, and the next one is the scientific amusement or entertainment showing 3-D movies and 360 degrees kind of movies, all this hi-tech kind of things. And then the third kind is the Disneyland figureheads. So this is the only one that probably we cannot duplicate, but we have our own movie stars. Their figureheads are also very welcome by the Southeast Asian tourists. They are probably very well-known even in the United States and in other western countries. So thinking about that, why do we have to spend so much to take in Disneyland? If we help our own...
HOST: If we can just -- thank you very much indeed for that call. I think the essence of the call is why spend so much money on Disneyland when we have our own stars here or movie heroes here in Hong Kong.
MR TUNG: Well, let me first tell you this. I think you probably have been to Disneyland more times than I have. The last time I was in Disneyland was some 30 years ago when my daughter was 6 years old and I have to confess: at that time I enjoyed very much in Disneyland also. Let me say this. Hong Kong Government, when we undertake any of these things, we obviously have to make impact study as to what Disneyland would bring to us in terms of economic benefits. It is after very careful study we have decided to pursue this. We're by no means there yet. We're still negotiating but negotiation is making good progress. I understand your concern but our study shows we can attract large numbers of tourists from Asia as well as from mainland China and as well as from some other places. So we feel quite comfortable if we succeed in this, we will move ahead. Now, this is not to say we will not pay attention to those people, to those very big names here in Hong Kong, like Jackie Chan etc, and we will try to do those also because we do need to attract as many tourists to come to Hong Kong as possible.
HOST: Well, you have, like, Sammo HUNG, so successful in America. You want to make sure they are as successful here in Hong Kong and to exploit that.
MR TUNG: Absolutely. Absolutely. In fact, I had a one- hour discussion with Jackie Chan just a few days ago about what we can do together.
HOST: Good. Thank you very much indeed. Thank you for that, caller. You're listening to the Chief Executive's phone-in. It's 1878228.
HOST: Good morning to you, Mr Wong.
CALLER: Hello, Mr Tung.
MR TUNG: Mr Wong, good morning.
CALLER: Good morning. I want to make it short. In fact, I'm in support of the Government charging a duty on the export -- all the ports around Hong Kong and especially on Lo Wu. The only thing I consider is that we have actually paid for the duty already, and that duty has actually gone to the pocket of KCR, okay? What I consider is that the Government is trying to open up the telecommunications market, the bus market, the ferry markets. How could the Government allow a wholly owned subsidiary to charge a monopolistic price on Lo Wu port, and I think that's something we can consider opening up.
HOST: Sorry, Mr Wong. What charge are you speaking of exactly?
CALLER: The fare charges.
HOST: The fare charges on the KCR.
CALLER: Right.
HOST: To Lo Wu.
CALLER: Yes.
MR TUNG: The fare charges of KCR to Lo Wu have been historic charges. It has always been at this level.
CALLER: Right.
MR TUNG: And it has enabled KCR to actually develop a whole lot of other projects which is very important to us in Hong Kong, and I think it is difficult to single out a sector of the charges to look at the whole thing. But your point is well taken. Insofar as the other issues are concerned, we are really moving ahead with a whole lot of the regulations to improve competitiveness of Hong Kong and we'll try to do better.
CALLER: Okay. So will the Government be considering opening up that market for the bus service such as...
MR TUNG: Well, the bus service has always been open and there are other bus services going back and forth, providing the alternative competition. So there are ferry services, too.
HOST: Let's move on now, if we can. Thank you very much indeed. Another caller on the line. Another issue which has taken up much time in "Hong Kong Today", I must say, and that's the abolition of the municipal councils. So we have a caller on the line now. Good morning. You're through to Mr Tung.
CALLER: Good morning, Mr Tung.
MR TUNG: Good morning.
CALLER: Yes. I've lived and worked in Hong Kong for just over 30 years and now I'm retired here. During this 30-year period, I've witnessed a gradual increase in democracy and human rights here, particularly during the final five years of the colonial era. But certainly, since the handover on 30 June 1997, many of these gains have been reversed. And one reversal in particular springs to mind, involving both democracy and human rights. That is the abolition of the Urban and Regional Councils due to take place at the end of this year, not yet agreed by Legco. Now, this reversal is only very briefly mentioned, almost in passing in your Policy Address, Mr Tung.
My question to you is this: Can you confirm that the real reason for the abolition of the two municipal councils, as many people in Hong Kong suspect, is to take away some of your only recently gained democracy, replacing it with executive-led government control, in particular, control of culture, as it happens in many non-democratic authoritarian regimes where culture propaganda and censorship go hand in hand.
HOST: Well, let Mr Tung answer that question.
MR TUNG: Well, let me say this. You care about democracy. I care very much about democracy. So it is not anybody's monopoly. Hong Kong is a place of about six and a half million people. The question we need to ask ourselves is: Do we need a three-tier structure -- a Legislative Council, the municipal councils and the District Councils. And we have come to the conclusion, having listened very carefully to the voices of the people of Hong Kong, that a two-tier structure is a better one. It's more efficient. It becomes more cost-effective and it permits those people who are informed in culture, in sports, in museum, to participate more in these areas. And you know that Hong Kong's spending as per capita on culture and performing arts is one of the highest in the world today.
And the question we ask is that: Are we getting good value for money? Now, and it is with this sort of purposes we have in mind. That's why we're moving ahead with it. It's not a question about being democratic, more democratic or less democratic. Now, of course, there are always these people with conspiracy theory, thinking that "Ah, that's the reason why we're doing all this." But it is not so. And I want to assure you of this and even more so, I want to tell you that, you know, we are moving forward. We can only move forward with the support of the community as a whole.
HOST: But, Mr Tung, you are simply removing a level of government, a level of representative government. That must be bad for democracy. That must mean a less representative government overall.
MR TUNG: I don't agree with you because we're strengthening the role of the District Councils all at the same time. So at the very grassroots level, the 18 District Councils will have a much greater voice.
HOST: But they will still have a lot of their functions taken away, won't they? The functions that were under the control of the municipal councils -- hygiene, and some of the culture functions -- will be ...
MR TUNG: Well, let's talk about the hygiene. Do you think we have done a very good job over the last few years? The answer is "No". You're concerned about it. I'm concerned about it and these are the areas we have to do better on.
HOST: Environment is very important and it's something which is highlighted in your Address, Mr Tung. We have a caller on the line now on that issue. Good morning to you.
CALLER: Good morning.
HOST: You're through to Mr Tung.
CALLER: I'm ... from Open University. I'd like to congratulate you on a bold and positive budget, probably the best in Asia Pacific in terms of the environment. Very exciting to be here. I have a question. It's because based on my experience with some very practical people - the taxi drivers - Mr Tung. The question relates to paragraph 97, I think, in your well-organised Address. It's about the infrastructure for LPG, and I wonder if there will be networks covering the urban areas to facilitate this. I can remember in my country New Zealand, this was a key issue in the 70's when we pushed it very hard. So the question is about the infrastructure and the practicalities of the taxis being motivated to jump on the LPG system.
Mr TUNG: Well, thank you very much for the question. I was in your country only recently to attend the APEC leaders' meeting. And I'm very envious of how much you have achieved in terms of environment. It's enormous. We really need to do more here in Hong Kong. Insofar as a network for LPG supply stations is concerned, it's the one thing which has -- that's why it has taken so long to come to this final solution.
CALLER: Right.
Mr TUNG: But we are working very closely with the suppliers of LPG to make sure there will be stations in the urban areas also.
CALLER: Yes. Well, that's excellent news and good luck and thank you very much for that answer. It's very encouraging. Thank you.
Mr TUNG: Thank you.
HOST: Mr Tung, we have heard of initiatives and promises before on cleaning up the air in Hong Kong, and they have failed often because of the transport lobby and their problems. How much tougher are you going to be this time? How will the approach be different?
Mr TUNG: I think the approach is very different in a number of senses. Firstly, it's that we have been very comprehensive in approach, looking at it from A to Z, everything that needed to be done. Secondly, it's that we are putting money on the table to say, 'This is the money there and let's make it work.' And thirdly, I hope with your help, we can mobilise public opinion to get it done. We still need to mobilise a lot more public opinion to get it done. Just now, a caller who lived here for 30 years has expressed concern about democracy. I understand that. But do you know in the latest public opinion poll, the concern on environment is only two per cent? And what we need to do as a community, with your help, is to get these things going.
Host: We've got a caller on the line now about pollution. Let's hear from him. Good morning to you.
CALLER: Good morning, Mr Tung.
Mr TUNG: Good morning.
CALLER: May I go from a slightly different tag because I feel during this talk about pollution, we're missing the point. I wonder if anybody in Hong Kong today has the courage to say, "Go ahead and use the hydrogen engine." I know you're an engineer or have an engineering background, but as early as 1935, a US patent was given for hydrogen use. The mayor of Stuttgart City in 1978 was offered by Dr Helmut ... of Mercedes-Benz hydrogen-powered buses and this is generating their own hydrogen. And he stated, "We could save you millions of marks. We save you 1 million gallons of petroleum a year, and we have 300 buses running on hydrogen." And he said, "Forget it." I wonder if anybody in Hong Kong has the courage to say, "Okay, let's go ahead with hydrogen." There are hydrogen-powered cars running in the States today. In fact, even one Cadillac ran during President Carter's general parade, running on hydrogen, generating its own hydrogen.
HOST: Okay. Let's put that question to Mr Tung. Hydrogen power for Hong Kong, Mr Tung.
Mr TUNG: Well, I think for anything that reduces pollution, we will look at it very seriously. But I would like to make one point. Whatever alternative power to drive vehicles, it must be commercially viable. If it is not commercially viable, it won't be commercially -- in producing commercial volume to enable our demand to be met.
HOST: You've got to sell it, in fact, to those people who run taxis...
Mr TUNG: That's right.
HOST: ...and minibuses and whatever.
Mr TUNG: And for instance, I rode in a perfectly good minibus which is powered by electric batteries, you know, but commercially it's not quite there yet. And I know they're all working very hard to make sure it works. So we've got to make sure it's commercially viable.
HOST: Okay. It's a good point taken. And education is also something you highlighted in your speech yesterday. We have a caller on the line now about education. Good morning to you.
CALLER: Hello. Good morning.
HOST: You're through to Mr Tung.
CALLER: I'm Miss Tang.
Mr TUNG: How are you?
CALLER: Good morning, Mr Tung.
Mr TUNG: Good morning.
CALLER: I appreciate very much your support for education and you have been concerned about school libraries and teacher training. I would also mention about the IT education that you have supported two years ago. But do you still know that there are some schools which not even have a computer in the library? And as long as we are talking about this life-long learning, I think library is a very important education sector, isn't it? Do you agree with me?
Mr TUNG: I totally agree with you that the computers in library are very important. As I said yesterday in the policy speech, we expect in five years Internet will be the thing for the schools also. And all students would be able to have the skill to use Internet. So all this will move forward. Now, there are some schools who have performed exceptionally in the area of adapting themselves to IT, and there are others who are not adapting very well.
And to those who are not adapting well, the Government will try to do as much as possible to help.
HOST: Which school is it, Miss Tang, which does not have a computer in its library?
CALLER: You want me to mention the name of this school?
HOST: Yes, sure.
CALLER: That will not be too good.
HOST: This is Radio Hong Kong. You can tell us what you want.
CALLER: What I mean, I'm a retired teacher. I've been working in the library for 17 years and I think that we have to spend more money. Although we have spent a lot of money in library running, we didn't do well for teacher training. Even in this school, you know, even in our universities, you're not offering information library science for students. We have to learn it from outside, and this is very bad.
Mr TUNG: Yes. Well, I think let me say this. We started this two years ago and from the very beginning, there was a lot of hesitation, resistance, from some of the schools and the teaching profession and understandably so. But I'm very pleased that of late, the attitude has changed. The schools mostly want to get on with it. They're moving very fast to get on with it, and I hope that attitude will continue to change. If there are any specific names you want to raise to me - you don't want to mention now - I'd be very happy to receive your letter.
HOST: Thank you very much, Mr Tung.
HOST: Three main areas covered in the 1999 Policy Address by the Chief Executive's cultivating talents, that is education, positioning and building an ideal home reflecting, as I said, Hong Kong's concerns about our environment, and I think our next caller wants to bring up that subject again.
CALLER: Yes. Good morning, Mr Tung. This is Lisa Hopkinson from Citizens Party. In your address, you talked a lot about community participation and collaboration which are very important parts of achieving sustainable development and making Hong Kong a world-class city, but government has not got a very good track record on consulting the public. Major policies and programmes like Disney, Cyberport and even major reclamation projects until recently were unveiled without any discussion with the public. So if government is going to develop a ... policy on consultation and involving the public in a meaningful way. And also, you talked about mobilising public opinion, but you need to give people a lot more information if you want to get them on board and, you know, still getting information on the government is like getting blood out of a stone. So are you going to commit to making Hong Kong government much more open?
MR TUNG: Well, Miss Hopkinson, I was a businessman before and I had to deal with governments in many countries. I'm now the Chief Executive of Hong Kong. What I see is that it's a whole lot easier to get information out of Hong Kong government than any other government I have seen. That is not to say we are perfect. We will continue to do better and we really will try. Secondly, it's that, you know, consultation process is very important to achieve a common vision and, yes, there are areas we haven't done well and we try to do as much as we can, but in areas such as environment which I know the Citizens Party is very concerned about, it's an area we will work very hard in consultation with all of you. We intend to do that.
CALLER: But, Mr Tung, does it make sense to consult the public on idling engines but not on Disney?
MR TUNG: Well, you know, we are talking about it is important to consult people on idling engines. Disney, you know, is a subject which has been widely debated and discussed and we are moving forward with that too. So yes, you know, consultation is part of our process.
HOST: I suppose Lisa Hopkinson is saying who have you consulted about Disney.
MR TUNG: Well, we are talking with a whole lot of people on Disney.
HOST: People of Hong Kong.
MR TUNG: Yes.
HOST: Okay. Let's move on to another caller on urban redevelopment. Good morning to you.
CALLER: Hello. Good morning, Mr Tung. Good morning, other guests. I have a question about redevelopment of Hong Kong. From Mr Tung's yesterday proposal, like one of the major solution to redevelopment of old areas by demolition and redevelopment with the participation of private developers. And I doubt one of the major disadvantages of such a solution is: would it, when redeveloping the old area, is it a kind of a knocking down or completely removing the old heritage of the old area by just a replacement of new, boring development like many other areas of Hong Kong, like a typical solution is with a podium shopping mall and then residential towers at the top? Would it only end up with -- because one of the successful point of Hong Kong is a very good mix of old development and new development. In such kind of urban redevelopment in areas like in the England and in Europe, they have many new ideas or they have invited participation of various architects and designers to put in new ideas. That means the redevelopment does not only mean demolition. It means also maybe the keeping of the old heritage of Hong Kong being one of the major of principles in terms of development.
HOST: Are you going to push forward that sort of idea, Mr Tung?
MR TUNG: I absolutely, but let me state this from the very beginning. The urban redevelopment is very important to Hong Kong. Buildings 30 years old, about 8,000 of these buildings, and out of that about 2,200 really needs to be redeveloped from a safety point of view. The other buildings we would hope that there would be a whole lot more improved maintenance so that all these buildings can be properly upkept and the heritage preserved. But even on those buildings which is going to be removed from the scene, we are trying to be very careful from a heritage point of view, and I've made this specific point in my Policy Address yesterday that we want to preserve our heritage. And also, the other point I want to make is that as distinctively different from previous efforts through the Land Development Corporation, the size of our urban renewal will be somewhat bigger so that we would not only take care -- we can also take care from an environmental point of view to make Hong Kong more green, to create more open space, to build better roadworks. So that generally, make Hong Kong a better place for all of us to live in. So no, we will take care of the heritage issue which you have raised.
HOST: Let's move on to one final call. If you can be brief, please. Good morning.
CALLER: Yes. Good morning.
HOST: Yes. You're through to Mr Tung.
CALLER: Mr Tung, good morning.
MR TUNG: Good morning.
CALLER: I'm very concerned about the low wage conditions as suffered by some semi-skilled labour. For example, some watchmen working on residential blocks, they earn merely $4,000 for 12-hour work every day. So I think one best way to solve this problem is to introduce collective bargaining in Hong Kong. I think the government should enforce legislation on collective bargaining. What do you think about this?
MR TUNG: We are all very concerned about the recent decline of wages at the lower end of the bracket. It is a major concern for us and this is why, as we look forward, as we move forward towards a more economy driven by knowledge. This is why education is so important. Otherwise, you know, at the lower end, you won't have an opportunity to move ahead in the community as a whole. So that, of course, is a long term. Short term, what we are doing is to make sure our economy is recovering so that more job opportunities will be available. Now, insofar as collective bargaining is concerned, well, Hong Kong has always been very successful in terms of labour/management relationship over the last 50 years. And when you are successful at this, do you really want to change something that's worked very well? I have my doubts.
HOST: If it ain't broke, don't fix it.
MR TUNG: Yes.
HOST: Tung Chee Hwa. Thank you very much indeed. The Chief Executive of Hong Kong very kindly joining us on a special edition of RTHK's Hong Kong Today. Very kindly of you to come along this morning. Thank you very much for giving us your views and answering the questions from the people of Hong Kong, and hopefully see you again next year.
MR TUNG: Thank you very much, or maybe sooner.
HOST: Tung Chee Hwa. Thank you very much indeed.
Photo: The Chief Executive, Mr Tung Chee Hwa, attended a joint radio phone-in programme with RTHK, Commercial Radio and Metro Radio on the Policy Address at Central Government Offices. Photograph shows Mr Tung chatting with the hosts before the programme started.
End/Thursday, October 7, 1999
NNNN