高鐵浪費資源恐成機鐵翻版 專家組擬助立法會獨立評估

高鐵浪費資源恐成機鐵翻版 專家組擬助立法會獨立評估 機場鐵路被揭發，在過去十二年來，位處中環地王的香港站，竟然有22萬平方呎的月台一直荒廢，而機場快線客運量則在十二年來並無實質增長，每日平均只有29,000人次，不及原來預測2011年75,000人次的四成。

機場鐵路耗資350億元建成，按比例推算，约有200億元的資產一直荒廢棄置，政府卻從未向立法會和公眾交待。 「新高鐵專家組」指出，自從機場鐵路在1998年落成後，赤臘角機場客運量至今增長了五成，機場快線客運量卻沒有實質增長。若果按照政府規劃的高鐵方案，把人流集中在西九總站，200億元的機場鐵路資產將一直荒廢下去，香港市民卻要負擔高昂車資，確保港鐵公司盈利。香港市民變成政府規劃失誤的最大受害者。

為了充份利用機場鐵路的剩餘運載力，「新高鐵專家組」提出了高鐵「貫通南北方案」，從錦上路加建一條支線接駁機場快線的青衣站(稱為「港島快線」)，使香港島和九龍區的居民，將來使用高鐵的錦上路總站時，猶如使用赤臘角機場一樣方便。 「新高鐵專家組」今天發表了兩份技術文件，駁斥了政府在11月6日立法會會議上的質疑，詳細解釋為甚麽「港島快線」不但在技術上可行，更能同時容許機場快線的載客量較現時增加八成，東涌線的載客量增加六成，應付未來的需求綽綽有餘。

「新高鐵專家組」更列舉了兩份政府在九十年代初提交立法局的文件，指出機場鐵路的最高運載力是每小時40班車，與政府在11月6日聲稱只有每小時32班車的說法不符。 「新高鐵專家組」的文件提出了詳細的造價和收地分析，對於政府曲解了新方案，聲稱需要把錦田河和三號幹線改道，從而跨大了造價和收地估算的做法，表示遺憾。「新高鐵專家組」對於新方案造價250億元，再加上路面交通工程20億元的估算，維持不變。

「新高鐵專家組」成員，資深鐵路工程師泰萊(Ronald Taylor) 先生指出：「由於新方案充份利用機場鐵路的剩餘運載力，因此比政府652億元的方案節省300億元以上，即使按政府大輻跨大的估算，在11月6日立法會會議上聲稱需款430億元，新方案仍然比政府方案節省220億元。」 公共專業聯盟的義務司庫高德禮(George Cautherley) 先生指出：「我們贊成興建高鐵，但高鐵是龐大投資。驗證事實、找出真相，是政府和立法會對市民大眾的起碼責任。公共專業聯盟願意提供一切協助，包括專業支援和籌措資金，使立法會能夠聘請獨立專家評估方案，再作最後決定。立法會若果貿然以造成兩個月拖延為借口，放棄一個節省幾百億元公帑的機會，實在辜負市民所託。」

 由於政府一直拒絕公開高鐵項目的可行性研究和經濟分析報告，公共專業聯盟已於上週五正式向申訴專員公署投訴，運輸及房屋局違反公開資料守則的規定，未有在規定時限內公開資料。運輸及房屋局一方面拖延公開資料，另一方面卻要求立法會加快審批高鐵撥款，是變相的愚民政策，更企圖把立法會變成橡皮圖章。

附件一： 立法會可考慮聘請進行獨立評估的顧問清單

附件二：「新高鐵專家組」有關「機場快線容量」技術文件

附件三：「新高鐵專家組」有關「收地及造價預算」技術文件

 Press Statement Nov 15, 2009

Express Rail on track to repeat Airport Railway wastage

Expert Group ready to assist Legco in Independent Review

 It was recently discovered that the Airport Railway has a platform of 220,000 square feet lying idle for 12 years at its Hong Kong Station, under a prime site in Central. The patronage of the Airport Express has remained practically unchanged since its opening. The current daily passenger volume of around 29,000 is less than 40% of the forecast volume of 75,000 by 2011. The Airport Railway cost $35 billion to build. On a pro rata basis, about $20 billion of railway asset has been laid waste – a fact that the Government has never fully explained to Legco or the public.

The Express Rail Expert Group pointed out today that since the Airport Railway went into operation in 1998, the passenger volume of Chep Lap Kok Airport had risen by 50%. Yet there has been practically no increase in patronage for the Airport Express. If the Government goes ahead with its plan for Express Rail, passenger flows will be concentrated in West Kowloon and it is likely that this $20 billion asset will continue to remain idle. At the same time, Hong Kong people will continue to pay higher fares to prop up the profit level of MTRC.

 The public will become the biggest victim of Government’s planning errors. In order to fully utilize the excess capacity of the Airport Railway, the Expert Group has proposed an Integrated Option which comprises the construction of a spur line from Kam Sheung Road to connect to the Airport Railway at Tsing Yi (called the Island Express line). In future, passengers from Hong Kong and Kowloon, when using the Kam Sheung Road Express Rail Terminus, will enjoy the same level of convenience as they use the Chep Lap Kok Airport.

The Expert Group released today two technical documents to refute the accusations of the Government at the Legco meeting on November 6th. The documents explain in detail why the Island Express is not only technically feasible, but also it can accommodate at the same time an 80% increase in carrying capacity for the Airport Express over the present, and a 60% increase for the Tung Chung Line. These increases are fully adequate to cope with future demands. The Expert Group also tabled two documents which were submitted by Government to Legco in early 1990s. The documents showed that the maximum capacity of the Airport Railway was 40 trains an hour, in contradiction to the Government claim of 32 trains an hour at the Nov 6th Legco meeting. Another document released by the Expert Group set out a full analysis on construction cost and land resumption.

The Expert Group regrets that Government has made a distorted claim at the Legco meeting, arguing that Kam Tin River and Route 3 would need be diverted under the Integrated Option, hence jetting up the construction cost and land resumption requirements.

 The Expert Group maintains its estimate of $25 billion for the railway infrastructure, and $2 billion for roadworks under the Integrated Option. Ir Ronald Taylor, a member of the Expert Group and an experienced railway engineer, commented, “The Integrated Option can save at least $30 billion from the Government Option of $65.2 billion because it is able to fully utilize the reserve capacity of the Airport Railway. Even if we recognise the Government’s distorted estimate of $43 billion for the Integrated Option, we are also able to save $22 billion which is a substantial amount by any count.”

Mr George Cautherley, Treasurer of the Professional Commons, pointed out, “We support building the Express Rail but this is a huge investment. Seeking truth from facts – an independent review is of vital importance to the community. The Professional Commons is willing to provide all possible assistance, including technical and funding support, to enable Legco to appoint an independent consultant for impartial assessment of the options. If Legco casually gives up the chance for saving tens of billions of public money for the excuse of a two-month delay, it will have failed in shouldering its minimum responsibilities.”

Since the Government has so far refused to disclose the feasibility study reports and the economic analyses of the Express Railway project, the Professional Commons has filed a formal complaint to the Ombusdman last Friday. The complaint alleged that the Transport and Housing Bureau had violated the Access to Information Code by not releasing information within the specified dealines. On one hand the Bureau kept delaying disclosing information to the public, and on the other hand it urged Legco to speed up funding approval to the project. This has not only deprived the people its right to informed debate, but also laid bare its attempt to turn Legco into a rubber stamp.

Annex I: List of Possible Organisations with Experience who could conduct independent reviews for Legco

Annex II: Technical Document on “Airport Railway Capacity”, Express Rail Expert Group

Annex III” Technical Document on “Land Resumption and Construction Cost Estimates”, Express Rail Expert Group

附件一： 立法會可考慮聘請進行獨立評估的顧問清單 法國 – SNCF (法國國家鐵路公司) 日本 -日本鐵路集團 (新幹線營運商) 澳洲 -昆士蘭鐵路公司 (多元化鐵路營運商) 德國 – Deutsche Bahn (德國國家鐵路公司)

Annex I: List of Possible Organisations with Experience who could conduct independent reviews for Legco France – SNCF (French Railways) Japan – Japan Railways Group (Operator of the Shinkansen high-speed rail system) Australia – Queensland railways (Comprehensive railway operator) Germany – Deutsche Bahn (Operator of German Railway system)