Page 130 of 206
HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL
were willing to remove to the outlying estates; a later regulation ruled that they could not add their wives but could have a space for a hut: and now the latest regulation (which I challenge) is that they must just get out and make their own arrangements. So married life begins with eviction and no one wants their children.
I propose that the Council should rethink this policy of evicting married sons and return to the policy of housing them because of the acute shortage of housing in the private sector. Besides, do we want only old people to live in the estates and all young people and children in huts?
In view of this critical housing situation, I urge that the Governor's proposals be translated into speedy action without hedging by those Departments which have the task of translating orders into action, but which do not necessarily share the Governor's enthusiasm to get the job done.
I am glad that the need for more recreation has also been acknowledged, and at the risk of being ruled out of order by the Chairman who sits there ready to pounce on anyone who touches his bone, although I must say he has been very liberal with the previous speaker who went outside the Council's jurisdiction, I would like to say how glad I am for the proposed improvements in social welfare services. I can only hope that the government will make sure that there will be a new breed of civil servants who feel loyalty not only to the head of their Department but to the public they serve.
Having expressed some pleasure at this ray of light that the Governor has shed on some of our most critical problems, I should like to mention some deterioration I have seen in recent days in the Departments most closely connected with our work.
I have been alarmed at the Chairman's open admission that he does not believe in democracy, and to prove his point he has forced this limitation in speaking on this Council Debate. When he retires, if he lives in the British colony of Scotland, he will no doubt expect to enjoy some democracy. (Laughter). I am particularly alarmed to hear the Chairman constantly expressing the hope that Magistrates will pass more severe sentences on hawking offences. Surely he must know that the cases sent to court are not necessarily the worst offenders, but may be those who have not paid corruption. Do we really want to see heavier penalties imposed on a certain lady newspaper hawker in Tai Kok Tsui, who is operating according to the terms of her licence and getting frequent summonses, while others who are allowed to operate without licences get no summonses? I have not seen any action by this Council to protect our genuine hawkers from this prosecution.
Page 131 of 206
HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL
239
I believe as much as anyone that hawkers should not be allowed to take over streets and pavements that belong to the public—but the same laws should apply equally to all, including building contractors' obstructions and illegal garages in the gutters. I believe that hawking is a legitimate and essential occupation needed by the entire population, and that there can be no solution to the problem that does not recognize this need and provide the land on which to operate the trade. Heavier penalties will solve no problems but will cause social unrest; provision of sites for hawking is the only reasonable solution to the problem.
Today I am going to support the Motion, but my support excludes the provision for heavier penalties for hawkers. By imposing heavier penalties this Council is playing right into the hands of the gangsters who help some departments to collect corruption and protection money. And I should have thought that corruption, intimidation and the violence connected with these, were worse offences than hawking, yet, I repeat, I have not heard one word of protest from this Council when hawkers have been victimised and intimidated.
Coming to resettlement, I also have some qualms about the Department. The men at the head of this Department usually lack expertise and experience in housing, but their advisers include a few old hands at the game of corruption. The Department is well aware of this, but as usual no one is prepared to take action as no evidence is ever sufficient, and the continued presence of some of these men in positions of power is detrimental to the morale of the whole Department. The men at Headquarters believe all they are told by their officers and I am sure they make no proper checks. The rule is that what an officer says is right, and what a tenant says is wrong. When an officer is accused, the rule of British Justice is applied; but when a tenant is accused, he is punished without even a hearing. Yet it is common knowledge that millions of dollars have been squeezed in corruption from rooms and shops, and now from the new hawker stalls. Some corrupt officials have even been told to retire early, it is true, but that is no punishment to a man who has made millions of dollars before he retires. Heads of Departments who ask for strong action against hawkers and tenants are never heard asking for strong action against corrupt officers. I also find it strange that while strong action is urged by both departments against hawkers, the same heads are never heard asking for strong action against those gangsters who set up gambling stalls and rob small children, or against men who process drugs in resettlement rooms. Some months ago I reported drug-making in rooms on the Tsz Wan Shan Resettlement Estate, but no action was taken either by the police or the resettlement officers. If these tenants had had an argument with an officer they would have been evicted; but they were making drugs, and no action was taken.
Page 131