126
HONG KONG Legislative COUNCIL.
furnished an argument in refutation of its own inference. In last week's Press were published the figures of the Colony's water supply for the month of July. These figures show that the consumption in the city and Hill District during the month of on an estimated July was 344.38 million gallons; and this,
population of 383,500, works out at 29 gallons per head per day. The consumption in Kowloon was 177 million gallons, which works out at 18.9 gallons per head per day, on an estimated population of 302,250.
The comparison does establish the fact that the consumption in Hong Kong is considerably higher-about 53 per cent. higher —than that in Kowloon; but how are we to account for this vast difference? Whatever the causes, the rider-mains were not one of them, for during the whole of July they were completely closed! This, then, demolishes the point, of which the Government and others have made so much, that the higher consumption on the Island should be laid at the door of the rider-main users.
Now, the Government is proposing to replace the rider-main system with the principle of compulsory meterage, a principle the economical quality of which has by no means been demonstrated. It may not be known to some honourable members that in 1923 the Government contemplated a similar change, with only this difference, that water was to be charged for from the first gallon consumed.
At a meeting of leading and representative members of the Chinese community, numbering about 40, convened by the Secretary for Chinese Affairs and held in his office on the 22nd June, 1923, the question was exhaustively discussed.
In order to justify the proposal of the Government to make a charge from the first gallon used, the Hon. Secretary for Chinese Affairs informed the meeting that certain test meterings made in the year 1921-22 in six houses chosen at random, had revealed considerable waste. This test conclusively proves that metering does not conduce to economy. It was submitted by several speakers at the meeting that it was exceedingly difficult for employers to control effectively their servants in the use of water, and that servants were more inclined to be extravagant when they did not have to carry the water from the street themselves.
Here, I may draw attention to an important remark of Mr. Osbert Chadwick, the expert sent out by the Secretary of State for the Colonies, to study and report on the water problem of the Colony in 1902. That remark is contained in para. 21 of Sessional Paper No. 4, and is this: "I maintain that the meter system is the only system of rating which is thoroughly efficient and equitable." It is significant that Mr. Chadwick used the word "rating," and did not say that the meter system was the most economical.
332