Search
But...👂👂👂
//There is no shortage of ideas to boost land for affordable homes in Hong Kong.
--
🙏 研究土地 靠哂你地 月捐支持本研民間研究工作
https://liber-research.com/support-us/
📱新設本研 Telegram Channel 立即追蹤! https://t.me/liberinfo
明明可以用的地還有
明明要從需求落手，又不去做
一定要開發郊野公園，是何居心?!
.
一寸都不能少!!
【環保團體聯合聲明】
【Joint Statement from Green Groups】
反對開發郊野公園 不接受「可加可減」
郊野公園具重要旅遊康樂及規劃功能 港人重要綠色寶庫
應先善用棕土、軍營及閒置土地
Objection to Developing Country Parks and the Adjustment Mechanism
Make Use of Brownfield Sites, Military Camps and Spare Land
行政長官梁振英向傳媒公開表示，已指示政府部門就發展郊野公園作研究。環保團體對此感到十分憤怒，因為社會有眾多聲音明確反對開發郊野公園，政府當局仍然一意孤行，更為此目的投放資源作具體行動，是蓄意與社會製造矛盾。
.
香港仍有不少可作發展的土地，過去房屋問題只源自「分配不均」。政府多年來逃避檢討「丁屋政策」（為丁屋預留土地）、未有動用閒置的軍營、未有以「棕土優先」發展等，為導致目前情況的主要原因。政府亦沒有正視大量住宅單位空置及私樓單位成為投資工具的問題，是政府的政策出錯，卻以缺地作掩飾。明明有其他可行及有共識的可用土地，政府仍以老人家及公屋輪候冊上的人為人質，提出發展郊野公園，是絕不可接受。
.
郊野公園是香港重要的特色，亦是重要綠色寶庫，除包含保護珍貴生態的環境價值，亦有旅遊（香港的郊野公園世界聞名）、社會（供大眾休憩）、規劃（限制城市過度擴張）等重要功能。郊野公園亦是重要集水區，讓足夠雨水流入周邊的水塘，提供港人生命之源。郊野公園有大量樹木，吸收二氧化碳，抵銷部份因燃燒化石燃料產生的溫室氣體，紓緩全球暖化。郊野公園亦有無以彌補的珍貴地質地貌。
.
梁振英指可選取「生態價值較低」的地帶發展，我們並不同意。郊野公園的一草一木、花鳥蟲魚皆是生命，她們亦有自身存在的意義與價值，而生態價值亦沒有百份百客觀標準衡量。梁振英提出郊野公園「可加可減」機制，更是保育的「語言偽術」，。現存的每一片郊野公園的地理位置、地勢、環境及生態本來就獨一無二，不應被任何藉口取締，以另一處新郊野公園「面積」作交換是誤人耳目。
.
梁振英在未有善用棕土、軍營及閒置土地之前，就提倡開發郊野公園邊陲，是規劃目標錯誤。房屋問題亦不能單靠盲目覓地處理，亦需要同時透過人口政策，控制房屋需求來解決。大自然一旦遭破壞將無法復原，絕不應發展香港人引以為傲的郊野公園。
.
2017年1月26日
.
The Chief Executive Mr. CY Leung told the media that he has instructed relevant departments to conduct a study on developing country parks. Green Groups are furious and strongly opposed to this, as the public has already voiced opposition to the development of country parks. However, the government still insists on doing so and, furthermore, devotes more resources to this, deliberately leading to conflict within our community.
.
In fact, there is still a lot of land available for development in Hong Kong. The housing shortage problem has originated from “Uneven Distribution”. Over the years, the government has avoided reviewing the “Small House Policy” (land designated for New Territories Exempted Houses), unused Military Camps and Brownfield sites. These are the main reasons for the present situation. Moreover, the government has failed to address the problem of vacant housing units and private flats used for investment and speculation purposes, falsely presenting the situation as a “lack of land”. As there are other land resource options, it is totally unacceptable for the government to use the welfare of the elderly as an excuse for developing country parks.
.
Country Parks are important features and treasures in Hong Kong. Apart from the environmental value of preserving our precious ecology, they are also well-known for eco-tourism, community enjoyment (for public recreation) and even have a role to play in urban planning (for preventing over-expansion of the urban areas). Country parks are also important water catchment areas, which allow rainwater to flow into surrounding reservoirs. Furthermore, trees in country parks can absorb carbon dioxide and offset some of the greenhouse gas emissions from burning fossil fuels, which relieves global warming.
.
Mr. CY Leung pointed out that low ecological parts of country parks can be developed. We totally disagree with his claims. All the plants, flowers and birds in the country parks have their own meaning and value to the natural environment. Ecological value cannot be measured in objective criteria. He further suggested the “Adjustment Mechanism” in Country Parks, which we consider to be “weasel words” designed to mislead the public about conservation. The geographical location, the terrain, environment and the ecology of each existing country park are unique and should not be replaced by any excuses. The exchange of another “new” country park area is totally a mistake.
.
Mr. CY Leung hasn’t made good use of brownfield sites, military campsites or spare land before advocating the development of country park borders. Hong Kong’s housing problem could also be solved not just by finding land but also by controlling housing demand through a population policy. Once the natural environment is destroyed, it cannot be restored to what it was before. Therefore, the government should not develop our country parks, which are the pride of Hong Kong people.
.
＊＊＊聯署團體（不分先後，按名稱字母排序）＊＊＊
＊＊＊Co-sign Parties (Alphabetical Order)＊＊＊
伊甸方舟 Ark Eden
Association for Geoconservation, Hong Kong 香港地貌岩石保育協會
Clear The Air 爭氣行動
創建香港 Designing Hong Kong
香港大學學生會理學會環境生命科學學會 HKU Environmental Life Science Society
Friends of the Earth (HK) 香港地球之友
海下之友 Friends of Hoi Ha
大浪灣之友 Friends of Tailongwan
綠領行動 Greeners Action
綠色社區 Green Community
綠色大嶼山協會 Green Lantau Association
綠色和平東亞分部 Green Peace East Asia
綠色力量 Green Power
環保觸覺 Green Sense
香港自然生態論壇 HKWildlife.net
Hong Kong Bird Watching Society 香港觀鳥會
島嶼活力行動 Living Islands Movement - LIM
群峰學會 Range Education Centre
長春社 The Conservancy Association
綠惜地球 The Green Earth
香港自然探索學會 Society of Hong Kong Nature Explorers Kong Nature Explorers
香港需要填海及開發郊野公園以解決房屋需求只是偽命題！
今日有團體發表報告，話香港土地嚴重不足，指出香港人口未來將達八百萬，建議應進一步填海及開發郊野公園以取得額外土地作建屋用途。事實上根據政府統計處最新公布嘅香港家庭住戶推算，喺未來35年，香港住戶數目只會增加約48萬戶，住戶數目會於2044-2049 年間減少，對房屋需求並非持續增加。另外，結合政府已出台嘅短中長期土地供應措施，能於未來20年提供超過50萬個單位。計一計，單位供應比需求仲多咗5%添！如果再加埋一系列尚在研究中嘅規劃項目，如新界北發展、棕地研究等，香港土地供應係綽綽有餘，點解仲要拎彌足珍貴嘅海洋同郊野公園嚟開刀呢？
熊貓會回應及詳細土地供應項目：wwf.hk/Relandsupplyreport2015
There’s no need to reclaim land from the sea and develop within country parks to meet housing demand
A report released today suggested land reclamation and country park development as solutions to land supply shortage as Hong Kong’s population hits eight million in the near future.
Truth is, according to Hong Kong Domestic Household Projections announced by Census and Statistics Department, in the next 35 years, there’ll only be 480,000 more households in the city and the numbers will drop between 2044 and 2049, thus the pressure for housing will ease. Besides, the government has already rolled out short, medium and long term measures to tackle the issue and create more than 500,000 housing units in the next 20 years. With plans to develop northern New Territories and brownfield sites underway, there should be more than enough land to build on.
If you do the maths, land supply will exceed demand by more than 5 per cent. So why don’t we leave our oceans and country parks as they are?
WWF’s response and the detailed land supply plan (Chinese only): wwf.hk/Relandsupplyreport2015
