10
28.
The decision that compensation should be in the form of housing
was taken by the Water Resources Development Committee in 1972. This
decision was reached on the strength of two considerations: first, the desire
to give the fishermen the same sort of treatment that was to be given
to the land people, and second, the belief that housing for fishermen
was in itself a Government policy objective. Although no fisherman
was actually to lose a house, and although boats could be moved, fishermen
and their families who had spent a considerable part of their lives in
the environment of Kwun Mun were bound to suffer some disturbance or
social disruption.
The only means of compensating for this disruption
was through the provision of housing
reprovisioning one form of
habitation for the loss of another.
20.
The cash compensation to which the Director of Audit refers
is apparently the maintenance allowance intended to help the fishermen
in adjusting to the different living environment in Sai Kung town. This
allowance covered both the loss of income and the cost of temporary rented
accommodation. It was logical in these circumstances that the allowance
should be based on the size of the family, and eventually a rate of $3,500
per person was agreed, subject to the resettlement houses being completed
within 12 months. The payment of this maintainance allowance was stopped
on 31st July 1975 as soon as the resettlement houses were completed, although
it was not until Cctober 1975 that the fishermen took up occupation.
As regards the second point, Group B were fishermen who were
not physically displaced by the construction of the High Island water
scheme, but who lost part of their livelihood because of it. The award
of resettlement houses to this Group was decided after careful consideration
by the Water Resources Development Committee. Other alternatives, including
a cash allowance, were proposed but were rejected by the fishermen.
30.
There
/were.....