1243
Page 164 of 243
Page 164 of 243
402
MR. HU:
HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL
Mr. Chairman, I would ask Mr. ASERAPPA to confirm that there is no specific mention of Class II Licensed Areas in the White Paper?
COMMISSIONER FOR RESETTLEMENT:-That is quite correct, Sir. This was a decision which was taken in the general terms of the White Paper, but in fact some modifications were made to those recommenda- tions.
MR. HU: Is it correct to say that people living in a Class II Licensed Area shall pay $9 as initial licence fee, and $3 per month for rent of the site?
COMMISSIONER FOR RESETTLEMENT:-That is not correct, Sir. The policy is that they have to pay $3 a month rent for the site. It is normally collected quarterly. That amounts to $9 at any one time.
MR. HU: So that there is no initial payment of $9?
COMMISSIONER FOR RESETTLEMENT: -Yes.
MR. HU: Only $3 per month? Thank you very much. Mr. Chairman, do I correctly understand that, hitherto, people living in a Licensed II Area will be resettled elsewhere if they are asked to move?
COMMISSIONER for ResettlEMENT:-I am not quite sure what the point of this question is, Mr. Chairman. As I have said in the reply, if the sites within the Licensed Areas are required for a public purpose, they are offered resettlement. They are not normally moved from a Class II Licensed Area for any other purpose.
MR. HU:-For example, Mr. Chairman, if a hut on a hill was destroyed by a natural disaster, could they be resettled or must they be moved to another resite area to build their hut?
COMMISSIONER FOR RESETTLEMENT:-This rather depends on circumstances, and it is not easy to give a simple answer to this. I think, possibly, Mr. Hu is referring to the situation at a Licensed Area after the rainstorms last year, where there were some landslides in a particular Class II Licensed Area, and it was necessary to clear the site in order to rebuild the sections of it that were damaged by these landslides. In this case the occupants were in fact resettled.
MRS. ELLIOTT:-Mr. Chairman, may I ask the Commissioner for Resettlement if his statement in the last sentence is invariably true, or could he confirm whether or not there has been some shuffling around with people living in Ma Chai Hang and Kowloon Bay?
COMMISSIONER FOR RESETTLEMENT: I am not aware of these cases that Mrs. ELLIOTT refers to, Sir, but if she gives me some details I will certainly look into them.
HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL
403
MR. BERNACCHI:-Surely it is Government's including this Coun- cil's, ultimate aim to clear and resettle all squatters and, perhaps, to make a question after this statement, I would add is this not so?
(Dr. Denny M. H. HUANG left the meeting at this point). COMMISSIONER FOR RESETTLEMENT:-Mr. Chairman, I suggest we are getting a little bit far away from the Class II Licensed Areas.
MR. BERNACCHI:-But we are dealing with Class II Licensed Areas, and the Commissioner for Resettlement says at the end of his answer "However, as in the case of tolerated squatters, if the sites they occupy are required for a public purpose, they are offered resettlement". Is it not the purpose to ultimately aim to clear and resettle all squatters? COMMISSIONER FOR RESETTLEMENT:-I think the only answer I can give on that, Mr. Chairman, is that the present policy is "no".
MR. HU:-Mr. Chairman, am I correct in understanding that people who are genuinely homeless should only live in a resite area once, not twice? That is the understanding which I get from reading your answer. Is it correct?
COMMISSIONER FOR RESETTLEMENT: It is correct to this extent, Sir, that if a person is genuinely homeless, and if they are offered a site in a Class II Licensed Area, they are not normally required to move from that Licensed Area unless in the circumstances which I outlined.
MR. HU-If that is the general principle, I would be grateful if that principle could have a general application. For example, a hut is destroyed by a natural disaster. Surely, if this principle applies, they are entitled to live in a resettlement estate?
COMMISSIONER for ResettlEMENT:-This discussion has gone on for quite some time, and I am not sure that I understand Mr. Hu's point.
MR. HU:-I will clarify it. You said in the last paragraph "Families in these areas have no priority over tolerated squatters and they are not entitled to resettlement. However, as in the case of tolerated squatters, if the sites they occupy are required for a public purpose, they are offered resettlement", and you further said "that they were not asked to move elsewhere unless the site is required for public purpose", so that reading from your answer given to-day, I would say If that people living in Class II Licensed Areas, only live there once. they are asked to move elsewhere, then they would be resettled. That is the principle, so that the general principle is that they only live in a Class II Licensed Area once.