Government Proposes Keeping Tai Lam Tunnel Tolls Unchanged, Lawmaker Michael Tian Criticizes Policy Reversal
HK01 · 1 SOURCESabout 1 hour ago2 MIN
Summary
The government has proposed keeping tolls at the Tai Lam Tunnel unchanged, sparking criticism from Legislative Council member Michael Tian Bei-chen who argues this decision contradicts the original policy justification. Tian disclosed that peak-hour toll revenue of approximately HK$240 million nearly covers the tunnel's annual operating costs of HK$320 million, leading him to assert that non-peak tolls could be eliminated. He demanded the government honor its public commitments and not renege on stated policies.
Key Points
- The government initially justified toll increases by citing Hong Kong's fiscal deficit and the need to generate additional revenue for tunnel operations .
- According to Tian, the Tai Lam Tunnel generates approximately HK$600 million in annual revenue after government takeover, with peak hours accounting for about 40% of this amount .
- Peak-hour revenue of roughly HK$240 million compares to operating costs of HK$320 million, leaving only an HK$80 million gap .
- Tian stated that during non-peak hours, there is no traffic congestion at the tunnel, yet the government refuses to reduce tolls during these periods .
- The lawmaker emphasized that the government must keep its word when making public statements, warning that going back on commitments constitutes a breach of trust with the public .
Why It Matters
This controversy highlights broader concerns about government credibility and fiscal transparency in infrastructure policy decisions. As tunnel tolls directly affect daily commuters and logistics costs across the territory, any perception of inconsistent policy-making could erode public trust in future infrastructure planning initiatives .
This controversy highlights broader concerns about government credibility and fiscal transparency in infrastructure policy decisions. As tunnel tolls directly affect daily commuters and logistics costs across the territory, any perception of inconsistent policy-making could erode public trust in future infrastructure planning initiatives .