In recent years, the supply of land in Hong Kong is seriously inadequate. The Hong Kong Government plans to recover part of the land of the Fanling Golf Stadium to build public houses.Unexpectedly, the Environmental Consultation Committee failed to vote after the two meetings of this month, and the project will be postponed at any time.The incident made the Fanling Golf Stadium re -entered the public perspective, and once again set off a controversy in the struggle of different interest forces in the society.

The Fanling Golf Course is the oldest golf course in Hong Kong, which has been used for more than 100 years.In recent years, a house in Hong Kong has been difficult to find, and many people have put their attention to this 170 hectares.In 2018, the then Chief Executive Lin Zheng Yue'e of Hong Kong launched the "Land Debate", and most of the public opinion supported the use of the Fanling Golf Course to build a house.

The last government finally followed the suggestion of the "Land Supply Specialty Team", and announced that it would take 32 hectares of land for the Fanling High Court next year, but it will only use 9.5 hectares of 9.5 hectares of low ecological value for it.Construction of 12,000 public housing units.The remaining 60 % of the land will be classified as an ecological park.

According to normal practices, since the relevant policies have been determined, the official will be promoted in accordance with the original plan.However, after the current SAR government came to power, a political and business community appeared in the political and business community to change the lobbying power of recovering the stadium, including inviting people from all walks of life to inspect the Fanling High Stadium, and sell advertisements on TV, invite legislators and scholars, etc.The sale of the stadium has conservation value and has historical and cultural relics.

By the beginning of this month, Ye Liu Shuyi, the convener of the Executive Council of the Fanling High Court, joined the "Battle League" in person, saying that the high court has ecological and conservation value.Consider whether to recover the land to build a house.

Hong Kong's political and business circles have always had a voice dissatisfied with the high court and was recovered.For a long time, the Fanling Golf Club and some business people have questioned the official recovery of the court to build a house, which seriously underestimate the conservation value of the court.

Some groups will use the new Special Economic Zone Government to change to use conservation reasons to lobby everywhere, hoping that the new government will change the original plan.

Another deeper reason is related to the political climate in recent years.In the early years of the social atmosphere of Hong Kong, the people generally believed that the supply of land in Hong Kong was insufficient.However, the Hong Kong Government proposed the concept of the "Northern Metropolitan Area". More and more people believe that there are other places in Hong Kong that are more suitable for building houses. Therefore, it is sold to the government as a "turning case" to the project.

The question is that land development can be done in a moment and three times. There must be long -term and stable planning.Since the return of Hong Kong in 1997, land issues have been in the land for more than 20 years.If the plan to recover the house of high stadium is pushed down, another major debate will be delayed to solve the timetable of Hong Kong housing problems.

What's more, in the eyes of Beijing's officials, house problems have become the largest deep -seated contradiction in Hong Kong, and it needs to be resolved urgently.Nowadays, some people have proposed to "turn the case" for the high course of high courts for a few people, which will inevitably make the official greatly fight the liver and feel that the Hong Kong institutional mechanism has been abducted by a few interest groups.

So the Hong Kong media in Beijing have continued to speak up for the past few days, asking the Hong Kong government to eliminate the consolidation of interests in the high -level event incident.The Hong Kong Grand Press published on Friday that if the development plan of the high stadium was frustrated, it would only deepen the impression of the highly criticized "government and business collusion" and exacerbate social tear.The prestige of the SAR Government will be hit, and any territorial plan will be difficult in the future.

It is said that the mainland blog "Jinghai Hou", which has the background of the mainland government, also wrote a warning that after Hong Kong's political disorder returned, the anti -Chinese chaos was out, the patriotic love Hong Kong,With a firm position, we should also bring the greatest public opinion.The words of public opinion in Beijing may be relatively tough. To some extent, it really reveals the controversy of the use of the Fanling Golf Stadium in Hong Kong. In fact, there are different interest groups in the game.

This side of this side, Hong Kong grass -roots families go upstairs, and the poor people who live in hundreds of thousands of houses hope to have a residence early; on the other side, the vested interests represented by the high ball will hopeThe official completely retains the court land.

But in any case, the use of the high -quality use of the high stadium in Hong Kong is a normal phenomenon.

The interest group is also known as the pressure group. It is a social organization that some members in the society combine together for the interests of common groups and achieve common purposes through active actions.In a diversified society, the government should encourage and support the development and voice of the "interest groups" representing different classes and groups.

Of course, once a "interest group" is too powerful, it affects the government's administration, and even ignores the general interests of the public, and should be taken care of.The Hong Kong Government is also the same in dealing with the use of high stadiums.When the official makes a decision, on the one hand, be careful of the influence of populism, and suppress the power of legal voices of different interest groups for its own interests; on the other hand, it should never sacrifice the public in public issues, but to maintain a minority of nobles.Benefit.