Proposal to site a Superprison on Hei Ling Chau Island

14 July 2004

Chief Engineer/Land Works
Land Works Division
Civil Engineering and Development Department
2/F Civil Engineering and Development Building
101 Princess Margaret Road
Homantin, Kowloon

Dear Sir/Madam,

Proposal to site a Superprison on Hei Ling Chau Island

We are writing with our comments on the above proposal.

We consider that it is totally inappropriate to site a Superprison on Hei Ling Chau. We strongly object to the proposal and urge that it be reconsidered.

Not Hei Ling Chau

If a Superprison is needed, Hei Ling Chau is a highly unsuitable choice. To build a Superprison there will be extremely expensive, at HK$14 billion including the bridge. The location of the Hei Ling Chau site is operationally highly disadvantageous. It is remote from the rest of Hong Kong, necessitating lengthy journeys for staff and suppliers. Access via a single bridge is not acceptable from a risk management point of view. There should be a second fixed access route so that in case of disaster, or uprising by prison inmates, there is a line of escape. So in all probability a second bridge or tunnel will be needed, which will further increase the cost. Once built, the cost of operating Hei Ling Chau will also be very high because of its remote location and limited access. Thus any supposed economies of scale will prove illusory.

Secondly, Hei Ling Chau is an area of natural beauty which has already been earmarked for tourism and incorporates the Disney site. From an environmental and aesthetic point of view locating a prison in such an area is completely inappropriate. There will also be an economic loss, from loss of tourism and recreational potential. This means that the total economic cost of siting the prison in Hei Ling Chau will be even greater.

Locating the prison at such an isolated spot will also make rehabilitation difficult, thus potentially increasing recidivism and attendant social problems in the future.

Alternative sites

There are alternative sites for a Superprison. We are aware of Pak Nai and the Ha Tsuen Range, both of which should be viable; however, a search should be made for other sites, preferably on derelict land.

The best option would be for the Mainland authorities to release a small part of the thousands of hectares of military land, most of which is unused. A small part of the 2,260 hectare Ha Tsuen Firing Range would be a good example. Such gesture by the Mainland authorities would be positively viewed by Hong Kong people, and would relieve the People's Liberation Army of part of an unnecessary burden - a win:win solution. We believe that if properly approached, the Mainland authorities would quickly understand the benefits of such proposal for all sides. 

Alternatives to a Superprison

However, we doubt that there is a need for a Superprison, or that the Superprison strategy is a wise one. 

An alternative would be a modular strategy. For example, the present overcrowding could be relieved by building a new medium-sized prison, for say 2,500 prisoners, on the Burma Lines ex-military site which is of 25 hectares and owned by the Government. And some of the older prisons can be refurbished (although in fact some of them are modern - Ma Hang was built in 1999). Such modular strategy will be much less expensive than the Superprison.  Moreover, adjustment can be made more easily if the projections on prisoner numbers turn out not to be correct. It is a highly risky strategy to make one big bet on prisoner numbers by building the Superprison.

The overcrowding of the existing prisons arises in part because of sentencing policy regarding Mainland illegal immigrants, prostitutes and short term offences.  The policy should be reconsidered. Some offences can be dealt with in other ways, for example by electronic tagging and reporting, community service, etc.  This is the trend in some developed overseas countries.  Reforms of sentencing policy would relieve overcrowding, and have other benefits for the community as well.

Even if the present sentencing policy remains, these low risk offenders can be detained in a low security facility, which would be cheaper and more flexible.

We hope that our comments are helpful, and that the proposal to site a Superprison on Hei Ling Chau will be reconsidered.

Yours sincerely,

Alan Lung Ka-lun
Chairman

Cc: Secretary for Security
Security Bureau
Government Secretariat

Reproduction of this paper is permitted with proper attribution to the Hong Kong Democratic Foundation