41
HONGKONG LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL
¡
Rents Bill-that of 1921. These Objects and Reasons were read by the Attorney General on the first reading of this Bill and to a great extent are repeated by him on the second reading of this Bill. The net result was that the Government in passing the Rents Bill had two objects
view. The rss object was to keep a roof over the heads of present occupiers and the second object was to protect them from excessive exploitation i.e. from having to pay more than the fair rents. Now, Sir, in order to make it clear that these were the objects which the Government had before them when the Ordinance for 1922 was passed I propose to read to this Council some extracts from the Objects and Reasons which were read out on the first reading of the Rents Ordinance 1921. The remarks of the Hon. Attorney General which I am going to refer to in the first place will be found in page 79 of Hansard and I begin with a quota- tion from paragraph 8 and the first part of paragraph 9 of the Objects and Reasons of the Rents Ordinance 1921. That part of the Objects and Reasons is stated as follows: Tenants cannot ba turned out so long as they pay the standard rent. Immigrants who wish to acquire a residence in Hongkong will have to build for themselves. Tenants now in occupation will practically have their tenancies extended on the old tenancy terms so long as they pay the standard rent and if they are turned out, it will be due either to fault of their own or to their failure or inability to pay the standard rent. There is one ex- ception to this statement e. that when the landlord requires the premises for his own occupation (see clause 4 (1) (c), but even in that case the tenant will not be turned out unless the Court is satisfied that alternative accommodation reasonably equivalent as regards rent and suitability in all respects is available." So much.
C
Sir, for the Objects and Reasons read out by the Hon. Attorney General on the first reading of the 1921 Bill. On the second reading of that Bill the Hon. Attorney General said:-I am quoting from Hansard half down the first columm. page 85 of Hansard for 1921— The need for some legislation on the subject has been widely recognised. The main objects are the power to protect tenants from unreasonable increases of their rents and from arbitrary termination of their tenancies. In other words to keep
14
an
a roof over the heads of present occupiers and to protect them from ex- cessive exploitations." And again in the second column of page 85 the Hon. Attorney General after referring to the shortage occasioned by the influx of strangers says The two weapons which it (the Bill) provides are the provision of standard rent and the principle of no ejectment. While the Bill remains in force the standard rent alone will be payable and as long as the tenant pays that rent and complies with the other terms of his tenancy he cannot be turned out. With regard to the influx of strangers from elsewhere the Bill pro- vides that the present occupiers who are permanent residents of the Colony shall not be turned out of their houses to make way for people coming from out- side." And again the hon. Attorney General says in the middle of the first column of page 87 The object of the. Bill is to keep a roof over the heads of existing occupiers, to give them some where to live and sleep." The same principle is stated in the speech by your Excellency declaring that emergency exists for dispensing with the standing orders. I read from page 97 Hansard 1921. “The grounds for this declaration are that as the object of the Bill is to protect the tenants of domestic tenements from unreasonable increases in their rentals and ́from arbitrary termination of their tenancies and as rents have been and are being raised unreasonably and as attempts have been made and are being made to eject tenants who are unwilling and unable to pay such increased rents it is desirable to pass the Bill immediately so as to afford relief to as many as possible of the classes which the Bill proposes to protect." The above quotations, Sir. I think are amply sufficient to show that it was the clearest intention of the Govern- ment to protect tenants, the existing oe- cupiers, in their then holdings absolutely and completely and without exception so long as they pay the standard rent. Infortunately. Sir, clause 4 (1) (f) slip- ned into the Bill. It is referred to by the Attorney General in page 88 of Hansard: "It is proposed to add a fur- ther paragraph to sub-clause 1 of clause 4 providing that if a lessor bona fide requires possession of a domestic tene ment to pull it down or reconstruct it so as to make it a new building under the Public Health Ordinance then he shall be
HONGKONG LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL
entitled to turn the tenant out on giving three months' notice." This new clause was not commented on further by any body, but was formally inserted on the motion of the Attorney General. (see Hausard p. 97.) And indeed this particular clause 4 (1) (f) seemed to have given no trouble whatever so far as can be ascertained whilst the Rents Ordinance of 1921 was in force. In the middle of last year the Kents Ordinance of 1921 was superseded ed by the Rents Ordinance of 1922 and so far as I can gather even a few months after the Rents Ordinance of 1922 was passed this clause 4 (1) (f) practically occasioned no trouble at all, and it is only during the last few months-since, I think, the beginning of this year-that events on the mainland of China coupled with the glut of easy money and a rather wild spirit of land speculation have caused the present deplorable state of affairs. Let us consider now briefly the position which exists at the present time. Thousands of tenants who are perfectly willing and able to pay the standard rent have been evicted or are being threatened with eviction through no fault of their own and even in cases where fresh premises are available they are compelled, I should say in practically all cases, to pay a higher rent than they have been paying hitherto. Another factor in the present situation is that hundreds of persons at the present moment are sleeping in the streets. Well. Sir. I have heard the observation made that it is a nice, healthy thing to sleep out in the open air in the street. but I think that observation hardly applies to weather such as we are experiencing at the present. Another drawback of these reconstruction schemes is that they have the immediate effect and nobody can help them from having that effect of reducing the existing housing accommodation and they thereby increase the housing shortage, The fourth point to be considered in connection with the schemes of reconstruction is that they induce competition for skilled labour and building materials, thereby increasing both the difficulty and cost of carrying out one of the main objects the Govern- ment has at heart for the purpose of re- lieving the present shortage Le, the erection of new buildings upon sites that have not been previously built upon.
There can be no doubt, Sir, that this reconstruction has hit the people of all races in the Colony. It has hit the Chinese working man, it has hit
craze
for
42
the Chinese clerk, it has even hit the Chinese business man carrying on an old established business. It has hit members of the Portuguese community, who find themselves being displaced from premises which they have occupied for very many years past and it is beginning to hit, and in the near future unless some steps are taken. it will very seriously hit, numbers of British residents over on the Kowloon Peninsula, for it is common knowledge that several properties in the middle of the central part of the Kowloon Penio- changed hands at very high prices. There sula have during the past few months,
is one well-known property practically in the middle of the European residential believe, has changed hands at soaring area on the Kowloon Peninsula, which, I prices something like seven times during the past three months.
IS
Now, Sir, I should like to give a few instances to this Council, of the way
in which this reconstruction which going on is affecting different classes of the Chinese community, I will mention certain instances. Of course, I do not pretend to say that these instances are exhaustive. but I think that they are very significant and they show that there is a certain class of reconstruction going place because the premises sought to on which ought not to be allowed to take be reconstructed-although old in some Authority as being either in a good con- cases-are reported by the Bui ding dition or in a fair condition as the case may be. Let me take first of all the in- stances which affect the Chinese business man. The first case I will take is that of 216 to 234, Des Voeux Road Central, nearly opposite the Wing On premises. These buildings were erected in the year 1901 and they are stated by the Building Ordinance officer to be in a fair condi- tion. These tenants have sent in a letter to me quite recently on the 8th June- with the chops of 17 firms upon it. The letter reads as follows:-
"Sir,-We have the honour to inform you that we, being house holders of ten premises, No. 216 to 231, Des Voeux Road Central, have been notified to remove on the 13th inst.. which date is drawing very near, We have pleaded with the Chinese Protector to do what he can to protect us.-but yet with no result. It is quite evident that these ten premises have no reason to be rebuilt
·
350