The Hong Kong government has defended its monthly spending of HK$3.75 million to maintain defunct Covid-19 isolation centres after one legislator described the bill as “shocking.”
Secretary for Development Bernadette Linn addressed lawmakers in the Legislative Council on Wednesday as meetings to discuss the financial year’s budget continued.
As part of initial questions asked by lawmakers ahead of the meetings, legislator Chan Hoi-yan had asked the Development Bureau how much the city was spending on maintaining the Covid-19 isolation facilities.
The Development Bureau said in a written reply published before the meetings that the monthly spending on maintaining six facilities, which had yet to be converted for other uses, was HK$3.75 million.
The costs include utilities such as lighting, air-conditioning and electricity, as well as cleaning services, the bureau said.
Following up on Wednesday, Chan questioned why the government was not making use of the facilities – for example as housing – and instead spending millions to maintain them on standby.
“[An expenditure of] HK$3.75 million is just for one month. For a year, it’s beyond that. Why do we have to waste taxpayer money like this?” Chan asked, adding that the figures were “shocking.”
Linn said the city was “not wasting public money” and was exploring possible uses for the facilities in the meantime.
Hong Kong hastily built nine isolation centres during the fifth Covid-19 wave, using workers from mainland China as Beijing sought to help the city amid the outbreak.
The facilities were spread out across the city, with the biggest one at Penny’s Bay near Hong Kong Disneyland. Centres were also built in Kai Tak by the old airport and near the border with mainland China.
Many of the facilities, however, were left underused as soaring infection figures made the city’s “dynamic zero” policy – under which authorities closely tracked patients and close contacts and put them in quarantine – impossible.
‘Active discussions’
In its written reply, the Development Bureau said some centres had been repurposed for other uses. The isolation centre in Tam Mei, located in Yuen Long, now served as quarters for non-local construction workers. In Tsing Yi, the facility was being managed by the Hong Kong Army Cadets Association to hold training for youth groups.
Six facilities, however, were left unused and on standby, and incurred monthly expenses of HK$3.75 million a month. About half of that sum – around HK$1.7 million – went to the largest at Penny’s Bay.
Speaking on Wednesday, Chan asked why some facilities had not been converted for other uses.
“Kai Tak is so close to the cruise terminal. Why don’t [we] think about making it an arts and cultural centre? Young people can paint the exterior of the facility and attract tourists,” she said.
Chan added that at Penny’s Bay, authorities could build transitional housing more than ten times the size of the project in Kong Ha Wai, in Yuen Long, a short-term housing initiative which the government says is currently the city’s largest transitional housing development.
Linn said authorities were already in “active discussions” with government departments on setting up cultural facilities and collaborations with the cruise terminal, adding that such suggestions had been raised by political parties before.
Regarding the lawmaker’s Penny’s Bay suggestion, Linn said the government was bound by agreements with Hong Kong Disneyland, which owns the land.
“We cannot do things that will affect Disneyland’s business operations. [Building] short-term housing would definitely be in breach,” Linn said, adding that recreation facilities may be more feasible.
Lawmakers and government officials will continue discussions on the budget on Friday, with the commerce, innovation and labour chiefs slated to attend.
Support HKFP | Policies & Ethics | Error/typo? | Contact Us | Newsletter | Transparency & Annual Report | Apps
Help safeguard press freedom & keep HKFP free for all readers by supporting our team
LATEST FROM HKFP
HKFP has an impartial stance, transparent funding, and balanced coverage guided by an Ethics Code and Corrections Policy.
Support press freedom & help us surpass 1,000 monthly Patrons: 100% independent, governed by an ethics code & not-for-profit.
