2600224 C.S. 84
XCR(70)303
RESTRICTED
8.
T
26
Whilst it is felt that some temporary increase in the family income limit is justified at Kwai Chung, it is also felt that an increase to $700 per month is too high and that this would represent a fundamental change in the section of the community for which Government Low-cost Housing was designed to cater. Honourable Members may recall that the maximum monthly family income limit was originally $300, and that this was first raised to $400 and, more recently, in 1965, to $500. With the rise in the cost of living the current upper family income limit of the class for which Government Low-cost Housing caters is now probably of the order of $600. For this reason and since: (a) with rising construction costs, rents too are likely to rise; (b) if the recommendation at paragraph 12 is accepted rents may be further increased in more popular locations; and (c) it seems desirable to avoid stimulating the aided housing agencies to raise their own income limits, it is recommended that an increase in the maximum family income limit for Government Low-cost Housing should be raised to $600 a month and not $700 as recommended by the Board.
27
If the recommendation at paragraphs 25 and 26 are approved, the Finance Committee of the Legislative Council will also be asked to accept the possible long-term financial implications of lower occupancy rates, in terms of increased capital cost and higher total subsidy, for the housing of a given number of persons.
E.
Squatters on clearance to be given an opportunity to opt for Government Low-cost Housing or Housing Authority accom- modation
28
It is understood that the Board's intention is that (a) the normal minimum warning of a clearance should be 4 months to allow the Housing Division of the Urban Services Department to examine family in- comes in case families are eligible and interested in opting for such Govern- ment Low-cost Housing accommodation as may be available; and (b) families subject to a clearance notice should also be notified of any vacancies in Housing Authority accommodation.
29
The Urban Council has expressed the view that all squatters involved in a clearance should be compelled to opt for subsidised housing according to their incomes and should not be automatically resettled. The Housing Authority has endorsed the Board's recommendation provided no priority is intended over applicants already on the Combined Waiting List for Government Low-cost Housing and Housing Authority accommodation and that only such accommodation as may be available at the time will be allocated.
30
Since the Board's recommendation is really one affecting the timing of notices of clearance rather than affecting priority between squatters and the normal Combined Waiting List, there seems to be no objection to endorsing this recommendation in respect of the timing of clearances with the qualification that while clearances should be planned as far ahead as possible it would be unrealistic to undertake to give 4 months' notice of every clearance.
RESTRICTED