3.
In the Report of the Committee on Housing Subsidy to Tenants of Public Housing 1986, it was recommended that only income from income-generating assets should be used in
In other words, calculating the household income. non-income-generating assets would be excluded from the calculation of household income. I frankly do not see the logic in this recommendation. Whilst accepting income as a criterion to eligibility, I am of the opinion that possession of assets, whether they are income-generating or not, must be taken into consideration at the same time. In other words, the income and the wealth possession of a household should be considered in total in order to establish its true eligibility.
4.
To illustrate my point, let us consider three
hypothetical applicants:-
5.
(a) Household A has only an income which satisfies
the WLIL;
(b) Household B like household A but in addition he
has a non-income-generating asset of some value, say, HK$1,000,000; and
(c) Household C like household A, but in possession
of a property worth HK$1,000,000 which generates an annual income of, say HK$70,000 80,000.
-
In considering these three applicants, a common-sense judgement would no doubt rule that the need of household A is greater than households B or C. Yet, if the recommendation of the Report were to be followed, A and B are equally eligible as they both have the same income which satisfies the WLIL, and moreover, if B happened to be longer on the waiting list, he
In the cases would most probably get an allocation before A. of applicants B and C, although they both have the same income that satisfies the WLIL and possess assets of equal value, B