FQA 常見問題：Country Parks郊野公園

Title: Whether country park land should be used for building estates?

題目：郊野公園適合建屋?

1. What is your view towards the issue of building houses on country park land? Why?

你對郊野公園興建房屋有甚麼看法？為甚麼？

The existence value of country parks are high – the money to create the country parks once they have been built over is unaffordable. Moreover, the amenity value of country parks continues to increase as our population grows and we increase the density of our city.

郊野公園本身的價值很高，不能用錢去衝量，一經發展便難以復原和彌補。此外，隨著城市的人口增加和密度越來越高，郊野公園的消閒價值更顯重要。

2. Is it an efficient solution to the problem of housing shortage in Hong Kong?
在郊野公園建屋是否有效解決香港房屋短缺問題的方法？

Most lands in country parks are government land and there are few existing uses on top or below land. This would make it cheaper than developing brown fields in the NT as long as the sites are close to infrastructure.

許多郊野公園土地屬於政府用地，以及這些土地及附近用地已有既定用途。新界的棕地（已荒廢的農地，被改用作露天貯物場、貨櫃場、倉庫或回收場等與環境不協調的用途）接近已興建基礎設施的地區，發展棕地更為有效和便宜。

3. How would the biodiversity be affected if we use country park land to build houses? Will they become endangered? Are these type of species in the IUCN Red List?
如果在郊野公園興建房屋，會對生物多樣性造成甚麼影響？牠們會否因此而瀕臨滅絕？當中有沒有物種屬於國際自然保護聯盟(IUCN) 瀕危物種紅色名錄？

Development and associated infrastructure and slope stabilisation, as well as associated spill over pollution (e.g. poaching, light pollution, noise, air pollution, flight path obstruction, waste water run-off, etc.) destroys and impacts habitats for an extensive area – and reduce the area available for biodiversity to flourish, including protected species.

發展房屋、興建相關的基礎設施、平整斜坡，尤其是各種污染的蔓延（例如 打獵、光污染、噪音、空氣污染、飛行航道的阻礙、污水徑流等）都會破壞和影響鄰近廣泛地區生物的棲息地，以及減少該地生物多樣性發展的機會，包括受保護動物。

4. Will nature conservation be affected by building houses on country park land?
自然保育會否受到郊野公園興建房屋影響？

See Q3.
答案見題三。

5. Apart from sacrificing country parks, can you suggest an alternative solution to the problem of housing shortage?
除了犧牲郊野公園外，有沒有其他解決方案處理房屋短缺的問題？

Develop brown fields in the NT. (See Q2)
發展新界的棕地（見題二）。

6. Some people believe that it is reasonable to sacrifice things for the better good. Do you agree to sacrifice country park land to achieve sustainable development of Hong Kong? Do you think that sacrificing Country Park for residential use is justified?
有人認為需要犧牲才可換取更好的事物。你認為犧牲郊野公園可以換取香港的可持續發展嗎？為了住屋需要而犧牲郊野公園是否合理？

No. Once given up the Country Park, you can’t get it back. See Q1.
不認同。當你放棄了郊野公園，便沒可能彌補。見題一。

7. To what extent do you agree that economic development is more important than environmental conservation?
在多大程度上你認為經濟發展比環境保育更為重要？

The Country Parks are a legacy of decisions made in the past. That legacy is unique to HK. It is also what sets HK apart from Singapore, Shanghai, London, NY, etc. It defines the quality of life in HK. A key factor in people’s decision to live and work in HK.

郊野公園是因為香港過去的人留下的寶貴資產。這資產使香港與別不同，比其他城市，如新加坡、上海、倫敦、紐約等更為獨特。郊野公園的存在提升了香港的生活質素，不少人因此決定留在香港生活和工作。

8. What do you think can be done to balance both economic development and environmental conservation so that sustainable development can be attained?

你認為可以怎樣平衡經濟發展和環境保育，以達致可持續發展？

Re-develop the industrial areas. Develop the brown fields. Reconsider our immigration policies. Don’t panic for no reason. Other cities in China will grow faster as they are catching up. That does not mean that HK will sink. Our location, topography, and life style guarantee HK a very long and healthy life as a city.

重新開發工業地區、發展棕地，以及重新審視我們的移民政策。不應因為其他中國城市看似發展迅速，迎頭趕上而驚慌。這不代表香港會因此而落後。我們的地理位置、地形和生活方式都確保了香港作為一個城市仍然有很漫長而穩健的生命力。