[1] The event was billed as "a dazzling series of live shows catering to all tastes and ages, encompassing rock n' roll, family entertainment, blues and jazz, classical, theatrical performances and a Vegas Night,"[2] Its organisation, which resulted in massive cost overruns, was heavily criticised.
In its efforts to rebuild Hong Kong's image after the SARS outbreak, the government asked Legco for and obtained approval for a HK$1 billion package to finance certain initiatives.
Jim Thompson of the American Chamber of Commerce (AmCham) proposed a three-week waterfront music extravaganza, and concerts by popular local and international acts.
[4] It was billed as "a dazzling series of live shows catering to all tastes and ages, encompassing rock n' roll, family entertainment, blues and jazz, classical, theatrical performances and a Vegas Night", to be staged outdoors at Admiralty's Tamar site over four weekends, from 17 October to 9 November 2003.
[2] The declared objective was to attract people from North America, Europe and other countries in the region back to Hong Kong, with the Walt Disney Company screening a one-hour highlights package of the concerts in the United States over Christmas 2003.
[10] In June 2004, a legislative council Public Accounts Committee report criticised InvestHK for improper stewardship of taxpayers' money over the organisation of Harbour Fest music festival, a post-SARS event held in an attempt to restore business confidence in Hong Kong.
[12] Legislator Cheung Man Kwong criticised the government for making Rowse a scapegoat for ministerial failure: "...ministers, including the Finance chief, only apologised without any punishment".
[13] During an Economic Relaunch Working Group meeting on 31 October 2003 and during an independent inquiry in May 2004, then financial secretary Henry Tang is alleged to have said Michael Rowse, Director General of InvestHK, had not acted improperly and that there had been no irregularity in the implementation of the event.
[15] The judge found there to have been a breach of the rule of fairness: as the threshold of the burden of proof was not sufficiently high, the committee's findings should not have been relied on by the Secretary for the civil service.