Skip to content

高鐵廿三條 政府還在隱瞞甚麽?

政府本週將向立法會申請撥款668億元,興建只有一個西九龍總站,卻比全球最貴鐵路還貴三倍的高速鐵路。下列23條基本問題,政府卻仍一直未能解答: 

1. 政府一直聲稱高鐵帶來巨大經濟效益,卻違反政府自己的「公開資料守則」要求,拒絕公開可行性研究和經濟分析報告,使市民無從評估政府的分析存在多少水份。為甚麽? 

2. 政府估計有九成半旅客抵達西九總站後,必須轉車才能到達目的地,可是接駁不便,有半數旅客將被迫使用路面交通工具,但政府竟然聲稱這是最方便市民的車站,製造「市中心迷思」。為甚麽? 

3. 政府明知交通專家測算車站用量時,不會考慮超過五百米步行距離的人流,但卻聲稱西九總站最方便,是因為在五公里的半徑範圍內,有二百萬市區人口(包括須游泳至對岸的港島區市民),掩飾西九只是一個設於市區的接駁站的事實。為甚麽? 

4. 政府聲稱西九總站的吸引力,在於為內地旅客提供一個良好的第一印象,卻未有說明四成旅客須在地底轉車,一成旅客須步行12分鐘穿過商場轉車,四成半旅客在地面轉車時須面對連翔道的廢氣排放口;政府電腦模擬圖的園林景觀明顯誤導。為甚麽? 

5. 政府明知西九道路規劃失誤,造成塞車死症,難以容納西九總站每天五萬多的地面人流,更何况西九文化區還未完成設計,難以預測車流。政府建議多花118億元改造道路,聲稱能解決塞車,卻又在開會前幾天才容許議員查閱交通評估報告,使民間專家無法參與評核。為甚麽? 

6. 高鐵須征用西九文化區約三份一土地作為施工用地至2015年,以及近半的海濱地段,用來搬運相當於六楝國金二期體積的泥頭,但政府卻聲稱文化區將於2014年落成。互相矛盾的時間表,引證了西九總站與文化區根本不宜並存。為甚麼? 

7. 高鐵的延伸隧道座落在西九文化區地底,列車造成的震動和噪音使地面難以興建表演劇場,但政府卻拒絕解釋詳情,更禁止負責設計的三組建築師向外透露半點訊息。為甚麽? 

8. 政務司司長兼西九管理局主席唐英年在11月26日的會議中,對高鐵工程將會佔用西九文化區用地,向運輸局和路政署表達強烈不滿;既然政府內部仍未解決對高鐵工程的重大分歧,卻急於申請撥款。為甚麽? 

9. 專家組建議的新方案把高鐵總站設於錦上路,另從機場快線的青衣站新建一段支線直達錦上路,估計較政府方案節省逾300億元。即使政府曲解專家組建議,也承認新方案能節省238億元,但政府卻拒絕聘請獨立顧問深入研究。為甚麽? 

10. 機場鐵路中環站有22萬平方呎的月台荒廢12年,而機場快線的客運量在1998年啓用以來沒有增長,以致相等於200億元的資產廢置了12年。政府至今沒有提出改善方法,反而聲稱未來11年機場快線客運量會激增一倍,因此不能開展由香港站至錦上路的新服務。為甚麽? 

11. 專家組的新方案利用新建的港島快線,使香港站和九龍站的旅客可以在市區辦理登車手續,然後乘快線直達錦上路轉乘高鐵。政府明知這方案可以充份利用廢置了12年的200億元機場鐵路資產,卻寧願繼續容許港鐵公司增加車費,以補貼虧本的機場快線。為甚麽? 

12. 政府聲稱每日9 9,000人次的預測已經很保守,卻拒絕公開客運估算的詳细報告,又沒有交待今天直通車只有9000人次,和過去交通流量估算的敗績:深港西部通道的車流量只有原先估算的兩成,西鐵及機場快線的乘客量分別只有一半及四成。為甚麽? 

13. 政府聲稱啓用後的營運利潤率達31%,但有關估算是以完全不回收668億元投資及永遠不計利息為前提,更何况有關估算是假設跨境客運量從2008年至2016年間,每年須有5.4%增長,若果增長率輕微下降0.5%至4.9%,高鐵便很可能出現虧損,需要市民每天補貼。為甚麽? 

14. 由深圳去尖東,無論經西九龍還是錦上路,旅客同樣需轉一次車,同樣要坐西鐵接駁。比較而言,經西九龍只不過比經錦上路快七至十分鐘。政府寧願為了少量九龍區的旅客節省幾分鐘的時間而多花300億元。為甚麽? 

15. 政府認為多花300億元投資,讓少量九龍區的旅客節省七至十分鐘,是物有所值;卻不願投入同等資源解決過海塞車的問題,或者回購東隧和西隧,使數量更多的旅客省回更多時間。為甚麽? 

16. 專家組方案不但方便新界三百多萬市民,更使轉乘高鐵的機場旅客節省十分鐘;政府棄而不用,認為方便內地來港旅客更重要,即使他們只佔全部旅客的三成,而且大部份並非以西九龍為目的地,也在所不計。為甚麽? 

17. 政府明知專家組方案可以帶動新界發展,為元朗、屯門、天水圍區民提多更多就業機會,有助降低貧窮率,卻堅持遷就權貴,把總站設在欠缺發展空間的西九,使市區與新界的發展更加失衡。為甚麽? 

18. 政府在提交立法會的文件內…認只需要6至7個長途車月台,但又堅持要興建9個長途車月台,自相矛盾,又沒有交代很多樓面面積的具體用途,造成西九站的體積比旺角站龐大30倍之多。為甚麽? 

19. 專家組的新方案不用回收菜園村,因興建錦上路站而受影響的零散村民少於50户,不及政府方案的三份之一,但政府卻蓄意曲解走線,聲稱要把錦田河改道,誇大影響範圍至300多户。為甚麽? 

20. 政府明知菜園村村民「不遷不拆」的訴求,和他們多年來對土地的感情,並非用金錢賠償可以簡單解決,卻拒絕考慮毋須遷拆菜園村的專家組方案。為甚麽? 

21. 政府方案須鑽隧道入市區,影響大角咀14楝舊樓,5座葵涌及葵芳屋苑,更對西九豪宅造成噪音汚染,官員卻一直淡化影響和迴避居民質詢,更根本的問題是政府拒絕考慮能夠避免所有上述影響的專家組方案。為甚麽? 

22. 政府明知工程標價趨勢正在回落(例如鋼筋價格已在過去一年內下跌四成半),工程界亦不希望政府工程過份集中,引致勞工短缺和推高標價,但政府卻以延誤開工會抬高造價和導致每天損失五百萬元為理由,以不符合經濟邏輯的空話唬嚇市民。為甚麽? 

23. 政府一方面表示了解市民憂慮,不願見到樓價過高,卻另一方面把幾百億資金硬塞在西九龍,間接推高市區樓價,讓市民百上加斤。為甚麽? 

高鐵廿三條 通通未解決

立法會三思 向市民負責 
 
 
 

專家組「貫通南北方案」

詳細資料:www.betterrail4hk.org

High Speed Rail “Article 23”

What is Government still hiding from the general public?

This week, the Government will submit to the Legislative Council for funding of the HK$66.8 billion Express Rail Link. With only one station (in West Kowloon) it is three times the cost of the world’s most expensive railway. We have compiled 23 basic questions on the railway, which the Government has been unable to answer:

1. The Government claims that the Express Rail Link will bring huge economic benefits, but the Government is breaking its own “Code on Access to Information", by refusing to disclose details included in its feasibility study and details of the economic analysis, thus the public cannot assess whether there is a waste or unnecessary costs by Government during the construction of this railway. Why?

2. The Government estimates that on arrival at the West Kowloon Terminus 95% of the passengers will have to take another mode of transport to reach their final destinations, but the connections to this other transport is very inconvenient. Government’s own estimates are that half of the passengers will use road transport, but the Government has claimed that the West Kowloon Station is the most convenient location for the public and have created a myth that is “central". Why?

3. The Government fully appreciates that the catchment area of a station only extends to 500 metres from station, but they claim that the terminus at West Kowloon is the most convenient location because, within a radius of five kilometres, there is an urban population of two million. This includes population from Hong Kong Island on the other side of the harbour with no direct access to West Kowloon, to attempt to hide the fact that the West Kowloon Terminus is just an interchange station. Why?

4. The Government claims that the attractiveness of the West Kowloon will create a good first impression, while they have not explained that 40% passengers will make a transfer below ground level, 10% of the passengers have to take a 12-minute walk through the shopping malls, 45% of the passengers transferring at the ground level will be subject to exhaustion fumes from traffic on Lin Cheung Road. The Government computer simulation diagram of the green landscaping is clearly misleading. Why?

5. The Government is well aware of the fallacies of the road planning in West Kowloon, which is causes congestion gridlock. It will be difficult to accommodate the estimated daily 50 000 passenger flow from the West Kowloon Terminus, let alone that from the West Kowloon Cultural District where there is as yet no design, and hence difficulties in the prediction of the traffic flow. The Government proposes to spend HK$11.8 billion to improve the roads, claiming that it could solve the problem of traffic congestion, but it only allowed the legislators to view the traffic assessment reports a few days before the meeting, so that the members of the general public were unable to participate in the evaluation. Why?

6. One-third of the total land area of the West Kowloon Cultural District is required until 2015 for the construction of the railway. In addition nearly half of the water frontage is required for construction access for the Railway Terminus, for the disposal of excavated material and the delivery of concrete equivalent in volume to six blocks of IFC II. Nevertheless the Government claims that Culture Areas will be completed in 2014 without addressing the conflicting schedules which show that the construction of the West Kowloon Cultural District Terminus and the High Speed Rail Link cannot co-exist. Why?

7. An extension of West Kowloon Terminus will be located underneath West Kowloon Cultural District. The vibration and noise created by trains make construction of theatres difficult, but the Government has refused to explain the details. It also prohibits the three architectural consortia responsible for the design to disclose the any information. Why?

8. During a meeting on November 26 2009, the Chief Secretary for Administration-cum- Chairman of the West Kowloon Cultural District Authority, Henry Tang, expressed strong discontent to the Transport Department and the Highways Department that the Express Rail Link project will occupy part of the West Kowloon Cultural District site. While the Government has not resolved the significant differences of views and requirements relating to the Express Rail Link project, even within the Government itself, they have already hastily applied for funding. Why?

9. The Expert Group has recommended that the terminus for the Express Rail Link be located at Kam Sheung Road, and for the construction of an extension of the Airport Railway from Tsing Yi to Kam Sheung Road. It is estimated that it this would save Government funding of HK$30 billion. Even with Government’s distortion of the Expert Group’s proposal, it admits that the proposal would save HK$23.8 billion, but the Government has refused to hire an independent consultant to conduct an in-depth study. Why?

10. There are 22 million square feet of space in the Airport Railway Hong Kong Station that has been unused for 12 years, while there has not been any growth in the number of passengers using the Airport Express Line since its opening in 1998. This is equivalent to abandoning HK$20 billion of assets for 12 years. So far, the Government has not proposed any measures to change the situation, but has claimed that, during the next 11 years, the patronage of the Airport Express Line will doubled, therefore there is no spare capacity for a new service between Hong Kong Station and Kam Sheung Road. Why?

11. The Expert Group’s proposal is to use the Hong Kong Island Express, so that passengers from the Hong Kong and Kowloon stations in urban areas can proceed for boarding formalities, and then take the “Hong Kong Island Express” with direct access to High Speed Rail via Kam Sheung Road. The Government is well aware that this proposal could fully utilize the HK$20 billion of railway assets, but would prefer to continue to allow the MTRC to increase their fares to subsidize the loss of the Airport Express Line. Why?

12. The Government claims that the forecast of 99,000 trips per day has been very conservative, but refused to disclose the detailed report concerning the estimated passenger volumes, while the Government has failed to provide an explanation of why the daily patronage of the through train is merely 9,000 passengers, and its past poor records regarding the estimation of traffic flows: The current vehicular flow on the Hong Kong-Shenzhen Western Corridor is merely 20% of the original estimate, while the current passenger flows on West Rail and the Airport Express Line are merely 50% and 40% respectively of the original estimates. Why?

13. The Government claims that after the opening of the Express Rail Link, the operating profit would reach 31%, but this estimate assumes that the HK$66.8 billion of investments is not to be recouped, and that no interest should ever be repaid, and in addition the estimates are made on the assumption that the cross-boundary passenger traffic from 2008 to 2016 would have a 5.4% growth annually. If the growth rate slightly declines by 0.5% to only 4.9%, there is a high probability that the Express Rail Link would record a loss, which would require daily subsidies from the general public. Why?

14. Passengers from Shenzhen to Tsim Sha Tsui East, will have to change trains no matter if they made the journey via West Kowloon or Kam Sheung Road. Travelling via West Kowloon would be only faster than via Kam Sheung Road by a mere 7-10 minutes. The Government would apparently rather save a small number of passengers to Kowloon a few minutes, than to save HK$30 billion. Why?

15. The Government position results that by spending HK$30 billion more investment in return for a small number of tourists to Kowloon saving 7-10 minutes is value for money. It is unwilling to invest the same amount of resources to solve the problem of the traffic congestion for the traffic across the harbour, or to buy-back of the EHC and WHC franchises, to facilitate more passengers saving more time. Why?

16. The proposal from the Expert Group will not only provide more convenience to three million residents in the New Territories, but also facilitate the passengers on the Express Rail Link to the airport to reduce their journey times by 10 minutes. The Government will not consider the proposal from the Expert Group, and considering that the facilitation of Mainland visitors to Hong Kong is more important, even though they only account for 30% of all the patronage, and the majority will not have West Kowloon as their destination, the Government is still willing to bear these costs. Why?

17. The Government is well aware of the Expert Group’s proposal, which can stimulate the development of the New Territories areas of Yuen Long, Tuen Mun and Tin Shui Wai thus giving the residents of these areas more job opportunities and help in reducing poverty. It nevertheless insists on accommodating the interests of the privileged by putting the terminus at West Kowloon, which does not have enough space to adequately accommodate the terminus; the imbalance of development between the urban areas and the New Territories would be further exacerbated. Why?

18. In the submission to the Legislative Council, Government admitted that only 6 to 7 long haul platform would be required in the terminus, while insisting to construct 9 such platforms. The Government has been both contradictory on what they have suggested, and they have failed to state the specific usage of the floor areas, resulting that the volume of the West Kowloon Terminus is 30 times larger that of, say, Mong Kok station. Why?

19. The resumption of the land in Choi Yuen Village is not required under the proposal from the Expert Group, as merely less than 50 fragmented households would be affected with the terminus located at Kam Sheung Road. The total number of households affected is less than one-third of that by Government’s alignment. But the Government has deliberately misinterpreted the alignment from the proposal of the Expert Group, claiming that the Kam Tin River Channel will have to diverted, exaggerating the extent of the affected areas to up to 300 households. Why?

20. The Government is well aware of the “no removal, no demolishment" call from the residents in Choi Yuen Village, and their feelings for the land over the years. The issue cannot be simply be resolved by monetary compensation, while the Government has refused to consider the proposal from the Expert Group in which the demolishment of Choi Yuen Village is not required. Why?

21. The construction of Government’s proposal includes the boring of tunnels into the urban area, affecting 14 blocks of old buildings in Tai Kok Tsui, five estate blocks in Kwai Fong and Kwai Chung, and creating a high level of noise pollution for the luxurious residential blocks in West Kowloon. The officials have downplayed the impact and avoided questions from by the residents, but a more fundamental problem is that the Government has refused to consider the proposal from the Expert Group, which could avoid all these issues. Why?

22. The Government is well aware that the tender prices of Government engineering projects are on a downward trend (for example, over the past year, steel prices have dropped by 45%). The engineering community does not wish to see the over-centralization of government projects, causing labour shortages and pushing up bidding prices, but the Government is using the excuses that a delay to the start of construction of the Express rail Link would raise costs by HK$5 million per day. They are using empty words which are not in line with economic logic to instil fear among the public. Why?

23. On one hand, the Government has indicated that it understands the concerns from the public and they do not wish to see an inappropriate surge in property prices, but on the other hand, the Government has funnelled tens of billions of funds into West Kowloon, indirectly pushing up property prices in the urban areas, which would add further burdens to the public. Why?

High Speed Rail Article 23 Every issue has not been resolved.

The Legislative Council have a responsibility to the public and have to think twice.

Details of the “Integrated Option” from the Expert Group can be found in the following link: http://www.betterrail4hk.org

2 則迴響 leave one →
  1. Edmond Leung permalink
    一月 6, 2010 3:08 上午

    首先感謝貴會一直向政府監察施政,本人十分同意貴會反對高鐵與建在西九及見議設站在錦上路的提出理由,本人就貴會提出反對理由補充一點,政府不顧一切在西九設站,是否為末來西九其它建設上因增加交通方便及人流增多給政府多一些公眾支持。若有上述目的,貴會應向公眾指出政府這套賭博心態規劃,只會不斷浪費市民血汗錢!!!

Trackbacks

  1. 反高鐵,不是說不要蓋,是為什麼「一定」要在西九? « Links

發表迴響

在下方填入你的資料或按右方圖示以社群網站登入:

WordPress.com Logo

您的留言將使用 WordPress.com 帳號。 登出 / 變更 )

Twitter picture

您的留言將使用 Twitter 帳號。 登出 / 變更 )

Facebook照片

您的留言將使用 Facebook 帳號。 登出 / 變更 )

Google+ photo

您的留言將使用 Google+ 帳號。 登出 / 變更 )

連結到 %s

%d 位部落客按了讚: