58
have been re-erected thereon. Unless Government were to pay for all removals of debris already carried out as well as to be carried out-and to state this is sufficient to show the impracticability of such a step both financially and administratively---it would obviously be unfair for Government to incur the cost of removal of debris from land owned by those who up to date have done nothing to rehabilitate their properties when owners who have made some contribution to the general good by early rehabili- tating their properties have had to assume the burden of removal on their own account.
8. I therefore conclude that there is a social obligation on an owner to clear his land of debris, so as not to constitute a public nuïsance. I submit that if the nature of this social obligation is not sufficiently expressed, or if the machinery for its enforce- ment is not provided for, in existing legislation, there can be no real objection to passing special legislation to attain both ends.
9. I feel however that there shall be no personal liability imposed on the owner, but that the liability should be a liability imposed on the land. (Since his liability is co-extensive with and should not exceed the value of the ownership of that land).
10. I suggest that there shall be a short Bill to the following effect:
(1) Definitions
Debris
Land
(demolished building material, rubbish, etc.?)
--
(any land (in the whole of the Colony?) which is not Crown Land on which no building which is assessed to or exempted from rates exists.)
(2) From and after the
day of
1
1947, the D.P.W. may enter upon and remove from any land and debris thereon.
(3) For the purpose of (2) the D.P.W. may appoint any officer or agent to do the work on his behalf, and in particular may employ such con- tractors, workmen and labourers as he may think fit.
(4) There shall be no claim against D.P.W. or Government or any person mentioned in (3) in respect of such entry or removal or any material so removed.
(5) The cost of removal to be a charge on the land.
(6) In case where a piece of land comprises portions belonging to different owner, D.P.W. may apportion the cost of removal from the land amongst the various portions as in his sole discretion shall consider equitable.
(7) A certificate (in the form set out in the schedule?) signed by the D.P.W. and registered in the Land Office (or District Office as regards New Territories?) that he has entered upon the land in question under (2) shall operate as a charge on the land or any portion thereof in respect of costs and expenses to be incurred for the removal of debris.
(8) Any certificate (in the form set out in the schedule) signed by the D.P.W. and registered (as above) certifying the amount of the costs and expenses incurred for the removal of debris in respect of the land or (having been apportioned under (6) in respect of any portion thereof shall be a charge on such land or portion for the amount stated in such certificate with interest thereon at the rate of
%. (Compare Estate Duty Ordinance No. 3 of 1932 Section 14.)
(9) Provisions for enforcing the charge, including application to Court for an order for the sale of the property--see Finance Act 1874 sec- tion 8 (13) and section 10 of the Estate Duty Ordinance, 1932.