He also warned in a commentary for a local newspaper that framing the discussions as a clash between socio-economic classes could serve a political agenda to divide Hong Kong’s society, urging the government to be wary of such talk.

Losing control of land will not hurt Hong Kong’s chances of hosting major golf events: sources

He argued that the plan to build on 32 hectares which will return to government hands in September, was proposed by the previous administration under Carrie Lam Cheng Yuet-ngor amid “fears of populist sentiments” stoked by the pro-democracy camp.

At the time, the city had yet to propose any megaprojects to combat the housing shortage, Tong added.

“It was okay to say there was a need for public housing but [the pro-democracy camp] should not have added in colours of hatred against the rich or fostered class division,” he said.

The executive councillor and veteran lawyer denied being privately wealthy and expressed dissatisfaction with critics and local media, accusing them of characterising affluent residents as neglecting the needs of grass roots families.

Asked to respond to Tong’s remarks, Secretary for Development Bernadette Linn Hon-ho rejected concerns that the housing plan for the Fanling course was being viewed through the lens of wealth inequality.

“Personally speaking, I will not view the issue from the distinction of social classes and elite. Regardless of the previous and current administration, we are pragmatic. We want to take back the 32 hectares of land,” she said.

Secretary for Culture, Sports and Tourism Kevin Yeung Yun-hung on the same day confirmed authorities from mid-September to mid-November would lend the 32 hectares from the 172-hectare course to organisers of the Aramco Team Series (ATS) and Hong Kong Open golf tournaments in October and November.

The minister did not share future details about the rent agreements reached with the event organisers.

Hong Kong doesn’t need another public golf course, development chief says

Yeung also said the land would be designated as a park for residents in December. Authorities would reveal more about the launch next month but had no plans to run a public golf course, he added.

“As long as the situation permits, the government is willing to temporarily lend the land for large-scale golf tournaments. The club can consider whether to hold large-scale tournaments according to the latest status of the site,” he said. “The department’s gardening experts will maintain the land for recreational and conservation uses, such as they do in public parks.”

The club, which hopes to host a leg of the Saudi-backed LIV Golf League tournament next year, said it was willing to help coordinate between the two event organisers and authorities.

A government insider denied that comments by the three Exco members were part of plans by authorities to go back on the housing plan.

Officials knew that dropping the scheme at this stage would be a “serious blow” to the government and undermine future negotiations over land for development projects, the source said.

It was wiser for the government to observe whether organisers of the ATS event used the land efficiently before coming to any conclusions, the insider said.

“By that time, public sentiment may change or Beijing could break its silence on the issue. We don’t have to rush a decision for the time being,” the source added.

‘A joke around the world’? Tycoon warns Hong Kong against housing on golf course

The government initially aimed to build 12,000 public flats on nine of the 32 hectares, with the remainder for conservation and recreational uses. Officials have called for the housing site’s status to be changed to “undetermined” to buy time for amendments to the layout and density, as requested by environmental authorities.

Chan Kim-ching, the founder of Liber Research Community, an NGO that focuses on land and development policy, said Tong’s remarks reflected he was speaking for more affluent members of society.

“The government has a mechanism for listening to public opinion. When the opinions do not fit, they say it is populism. It is quite disrespectful to public opinion,” he said.

Additional reporting by Willa Wu