On the lawmakers’ agenda: Building controversy

In the period before commencement of the agenda of yesterday’s plenary meeting at the Legislative Assembly (AL), several lawmakers addressed topics related to buildings and development projects that, in their opinion, are influencing public opinion about the government’s lack of transparency.
The Coloane Hill skyscraper development, the infectious diseases building project and the demolition of part of the São Francisco Barracks were the most cited examples of the lack of transparency in terms of the government’s actions towards land use, and the needs and expectations of the general population.

Chan Meng Kam was one of the first to address the topic, stating that “there has to be a balance between progress and preservation and that is a serious question that must be tested by several government departments.”
Chan also added that in the case of the Coloane Hill development and “since it involves the interest of all of the population, the transparency of the government’s actions should be high so it can achieve the consensus of the people,” urging the government to release the information from the environmental impact assessment report.
“Between the alleged privacy, the public interest and the right to information, which factor is the most important?” Chan Meng Kam put forward.

Ng Kuok Cheong also addressed this topic, urging the Chief Executive (CE) to make use of his powers to submit the project to the Urban Planning Council (CPU).
“The CE is not exercising his legal powers. I call on the CE to submit the process of this building to the CPU. That is his responsibility. It cannot be passed on to the secretary,” Ng Kuog Cheong demanded.
Chan Meng Kam also thinks that in terms of the cases of the infectious diseases building and the demolition of part of the São Francisco Barracks, what is at risk is the lack of a timely disclosure of information. “The height limit for the location has changed and the government has remained silent. It is normal for people to now say that the government has ‘two mouths’,” he said refering to the Health Bureau project.

Song Pek Kei added voice to Chan Meng Kam’s cries about the lack of protection of monuments and buildings of public interest. He questioned why the government applied different measures. One set of measures when deciding on the demolition of the “two grey buildings”, basing it on “public interest” to build the infectious diseases building and raising the case of Hotel Estoril. Then they used a different criteria on the Instituto Salesiano when it was considered necessary to protect and maintain its façade. “It left an impression that the value and the preservation of a monument is not dependent upon the nature of the monument itself, nor on a set of objective criteria, but instead, on the will and decision of the government,” Song Pek Kei said.