＃領展
Albert 's concern is about "the politicians should have targeted the Link instead." First, as the one who drafted the motion, I have the greatest responsibility on this. Yet I could say with great confidence that he has extremely twisted the truth. The motion is strongly related to the Link. It has directly indicated the consequence of its disposing non-profitable properties act caused by government policy.
\\This Council objects to the Government’s relaxation of the Code on Real Estate Investment Trusts, which encourages the Link REIT’s resale of shopping centres divested by the Housing Authority (HA) previously...This Council does not wish to have any further resale of the remaining shopping centre properties by the Link REIT\\(本會反對政府放寬《房地產投資信託基金守則》，鼓勵領展轉售前房委會商場，包括南區華貴及田灣商場，令區內商舖銳減，無法切合居民需要。本會不希望領展進一步拆售南區其餘商場物業。)http://www.districtcouncils.gov.hk/…/DDHC_2017_10_EN_Annex_…
As a notable representative of anti-linkreit movement, I hope he could think twice about what he said. And coincidently, I have written an article about this on Appledaily. Hopefully, a more established explanation could be provided.
這讓我對排緊隊的蘋果日報投稿，有更大更興奮的期待。
房委會商舖 在 房委會商舖- Explore 的推薦與評價
房委會 商業樓宇小組委員會通過將本年度第四季嘅進一步差餉寬減轉惠予非住宅樓宇租戶/暫准證持有人，當中受益嘅包括零售商舖、福利用途單位、整體承租街市同工廠大廈， ... ... <看更多>