MR YIU SI-WING (in Cantonese): Deputy President, the subject of the original motion is "Increasing housing supply in the short to medium term to rectify the problem of public housing shortage". How do we define "short to medium term"? According to government statistics, a public housing project generally takes about seven years from planning to completion, including three years for planning and design, half a year for tendering procedures, one year for foundation construction and two and a half years for superstructure construction. Even in urban areas where ancillary facilities are more readily available, a housing renewal project takes about eight years from land resumption to completion for occupancy. Therefore, "short to medium term measures" should be defined as measures that will bring results in five to 10 years.

The original motion proposed the resumption of brownfield sites. The process of land resumption, relocation, compensation negotiations, rezoning and disposing, installation of water and electricity supplies, increase of transport and other supporting facilities, and housing construction are expected to take more than 10 years. So, the option cannot be considered as a short-to-medium-term measure. The same applies to other options that require land resumption and rezoning, which can only be taken as medium-to-long-term measures.

The original motion points out that public housing supply in the short-to-medium term will fail to meet the expected target, yet the vast majority of the proposals focus on the medium-to-long term and relatively fewer on the short-to-medium term. This shows that solving the housing issue in Hong Kong in the short-to-medium term under resources constraints is not an easy task and the Government should step up its efforts.

Deputy President, as the supply of public housing cannot be increased in the short term, we can only tap into the existing resources in order to shorten the waiting time for public housing. Some effective or transitional measures should be introduced to help solve the housing problem of low-income households living in poor conditions. Some short-term measures in the Policy Address merit our support. First, under-occupation households whose family members are all aged 70 or above are allowed to enjoy lifetime full rent exemption upon their transfer to small units. There are 16 000 eligible under-occupation households according to estimation. If half of them can be freed up, more than 10 000 people will benefit from this initiative.

Second, I reckon that relaxing the lease requirements for industrial buildings and lowering the threshold for change of use are viable practices. The Government should provide sufficient incentives for conversion of industrial buildings to transitional housing for households on the public housing waiting list. For example, the Government may adjust the guidelines for the conversion of industrial buildings, simplify the application process, provide appropriate subsidies or even offer premium exemption in order to encourage owners to rent out their units at transitional housing rentals. Owners may rent their units out as they see fit after a specified period of time. Furthermore, the Government should make good use of vacant properties, such as vacant school premises or abandoned public housing units, by converting them into transitional housing. The above mentioned initiatives can free up many units with limited expenses to reduce the rental expenditures of some people on the public housing waiting list and the market's reliance on subdivided flats.

Of course, the key to solving the problem in the long run is still land supply. In regard to measures proposed in the original motion, my views are as follows. First, I have reservations about the proposal to fully resume the Fanling Golf Course for housing development. The Fanling Golf Course is a heritage site with over 100 years of history that accommodates more than 30 000 trees, including 160 probably ancient valuable trees and protected species, and a number of historical buildings and graveyards. It is of high ecological conservation value. The site also witnessed the development of golf locally and internationally as it has been the venue of the Hong Kong Open for nearly half a century. Some suggested relocation, but that means losing its historical and conservation significance. We should not sacrifice this historical site of Hong Kong simply because of improper use by the leasing organization. In comparison, I find developing periphery of country parks with no conservation value more viable. Indeed, the Fanling Golf Course is the subject of public criticism as it now, to a large extent, serves as a private club for wealthy people. The Government should rectify this unfair arrangement when renewing the lease in 2020.

The original motion also proposed to convert the site reserved for the second phase development of the Hong Kong Disneyland to public housing. According to the agreement signed between the Government and The Walt Disney Company ("TWDC"), the latter has an option to purchase the site planned for the second phase development, with the right to extend twice for a period of five years each time upon expiry of the option in September 2020. To show its respect for the spirit of contract, the Government cannot resume the land and The original motion also proposed to convert the site reserved for the second phase development of the Hong Kong Disneyland to public housing. According to the agreement signed between the Government and The Walt Disney Company ("TWDC"), the latter has an option to purchase the site planned for the second phase development, with the right to extend twice for a period of five years each time upon expiry of the option in September 2020. To show its respect for the spirit of contract, the Government cannot resume the land andchange its use unilaterally, unless TWDC gives up the option to purchase. The Government may certainly negotiate with TWDC, but I do not think that it would be an easy task, considering that the party is an American enterprise. Even if the negotiation is successful, the price to be paid will be high. I find this proposal neither viable nor realistic as a measure to increase land supply in the short-to-medium term.

The problem of land supply in Hong Kong is complicated. I think reclamation in East Lantau is a relatively more thorough solution to land shortage in the long run. The Government should formulate suitable plans and timetables expeditiously for gradual implementation, so as to relieve the public from the difficulties caused by land and housing shortage over the years.

Deputy President, I so submit.