HONG KONG LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL - 20 January 1988
665
June 1997. Since the sovereignty of the New Territories will be returned to China after 1997, the tenure of private land in the New Territories should be reinstated to the pre-1898 conditions as well. In order to solve this problem, the Chinese and the British Governments, in the signing of the Joint Declaration, agreed that land held by a person who was a resident of an established village in Hong Kong in 1898 or a lawful successor of that person in the male line should be exempted from the payment of the new rent. I hope the above explanation will clarify some people's misunderstanding that 'the indigenous villagers of the New Territories are enjoying special privileges.'
Clause 9(2) of the Bill gives rise to the question of the application of rent concession to properties in the New Territories held by t'sos and t'ongs and whether the holders of such properties are required to pay the new rent (equivalent to 3 per cent of the rateable value of the properties). The Heung Yee Kuk brought the issue to the attention of the ad hoc group which subsequently took it up with the Administration. The Administration brought it up with the Land Commission. After discussion and deliberation by the Land Commission, it was decided that the rent for properties held by t'sos and t'ongs should remain unchanged. Appropriate amendments will be moved later at Committee stage so that problems in this respect will be satisfactorily resolved. I would like to take this opportunity to express, on behalf of the people in the New Territories, my sincere gratitude to hon. F. K. Hu, convener of the ad hoc group, and other hon. Members of the ad hoc group.
There are some discrepancies between the definition of 'established village' under clause 9(3) of the Bill and the original meaning of the term in Annex III to the Joint Declaration, which may seriously affect the interest of the indigenous villagers who were unable to possess land at the time when the Block Lease was made. In view of this, the Heung Yee Kuk put forth its views to the ad hoc group and requested for an amendment to the definition. The matter was taken up for discussion with the Administration. However, no satisfactory resolution has been made so far because the Administration insists that the land survey on which the Block Lease was based was extensive and comprehensive enough to include all the established villages in the New Territories. However, it is necessary for me to point out that the Block Lease is only a unilateral leasehold agreement made by the Government by which all resumed private land in the New Territories was leased to its original owners. It is only one of the documents that may be used as evidence to prove an established village and should not be regarded as a comprehensive list of the villages. Nor can it be taken as the only evidence for validating the status of an established village. I am aware that the Bill will have implications on other related issues and that the passage of the Bill should not be further delayed. However, I have every reason to believe that the Administration will take appropriate action to amend the definition of 'established village' in the near future. On this understanding, I support the motion.