Page 47 of 154
62
HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL
out sites in Tung Choi Street and keep the centre of the street clear of hawkers, which is a major departure from the original scheme.
With regard to the final question, there are 7,815 fixed pitch hawkers in Hong Kong and 5,698 in Kowloon. Records are not kept for individual districts. Whilst it would be possible to find out their distribution by district, this would take time, and I am reluctant to ask the Department to produce figures for the sake of producing figures unless there are very good reasons.
Generally speaking, it is not possible for an itinerant hawker to become a fixed pitch hawker. However, in the case of itinerant hawkers who were registered in the 1970 survey as having stalls, they are given fixed pitch stalls when they are resited.
MR. TSIN (in Cantonese): -Mr. Chairman, may I thank Mr. Hu for his very detailed answer.
First of all, I am sorry to say that I make a mistake in the time. It should be one and a half years ago instead of half a year. I remember the answer given at that time was that when the records of hawkers are concentrated according to that district, then it would be possible to find out the figures. But after one and a half years, we haven't found out the actual figures and it seems that we'll never have such an opportunity. Why is such a problem existing because I received a number of complaints from hawkers? They hope that the hawking sites could be improved and, as a result, they discovered that they possessed two licences and they frankly admitted to the Urban Services Department that they possessed two licences. For those dishonest hawkers, they could have possessed three, four or more licences and they could have a property and they are never found out. So I feel that the Urban Services Department should realize that the hawkers should be given a fair deal, this is the first point.
The second point is, as Mr. Hu said, the problem of Tung Choi Street. The hawking order in that street, according to what I know during the early period of time, the hawkers were very orderly before 12 noon. But after the Urban Services Department marked the street or use some new methods, people started to hawk as early as seven o'clock in the morning. In other words, more new methods create more troubles. So I don't know what kind of constructive suggestions I can provide to solve this problem and I receive complaints from
HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL
63
shopowners almost every day and I've passed these complaints to Mr. Hu, and Mr. Hu was very sincere in answering their queries. Mr. Hu said that the marking would help to solve the problem, but the marking hasn't been done up to now. Hawking hours started as early as 6, instead of 12, so I hope Mr. Hu can consider this point and give us a reply.
The third question I hope to raise in the future.
MR. HU (in English):-I think we've taken notice of what Mr. TSIN said. As a matter of fact, Mr. TSIN did not ask me any specific question on it. (Laughter).
CHAIRMAN (in English): -Yes, thank you. Mr. TSIN might have given the impression that he was not asking a supplementary question, but I knew what he was thinking and so I admitted his very long speech in question-time because it was in the public interest. Mr. Hu has taken it in very good part. He has also answered your supplementary question, Mr. TSIN, although some of your colleagues doubted that it was a supplementary question. (Laughter). Thank you very much! (Laughter).
MR. PETER C. K. CHAN (in Cantonese): -Mr. Chairman, of course, I agree the "one licence, one family" rule, but I wonder if Mr. Hu remembers one or two years ago, when we started the scheme in North Point, a family owned two licences and because it was found out that led to a divorce, I don't know what was the result. That is a fact.
CHAIRMAN (in English):-That may have been a fact before; now it is a hypothetical question. (Laughter). Your question about what happens in the case of a divorce should have been put at that time. It will now be referred to Mr. Hu's Select Committee for a legal opinion when all expert legal opinions, including your own, will be brought into play. (Laughter).
MR. CHAN (in English):—I want to know who is prepared to answer that question which is of high human interest?
CHAIRMAN (in English):-Under Standing Order 12, supplementary questions must not be made the pretext to get legal opinions, not even one of "human" interest. (Laughter). Now I give the floor to Mrs. ELLIOTT, with your permission. (Laughter).
MRS. E. ELLIOTT (in English):—Mr. Chairman, just a clarification. Sometimes people have said that they are divorced in order to keep a licence, but in fact they are not divorced at all.
Page 47 of 154
62
...
63