XN000022-1985-03-27 — Page 16

15

WEDNESDAY, MARCH 27, 1985

HE SAID THERE HAD BEEN A GROWING TREND OF OPINION THAT THESE TENANTS SHOULD MOVE OUT OF PUBLIC HOUSING IN ORDER TO ALLOW THE HOUSING AUTHORITY TO ALLOCATE HOUSING TO THOSE WHO REALLY NEEDED SUBSIDY.

THE HOUSING AUTHORITY HAD RECENTLY SET UP A SPECIAL COMMITTEE TO LOOK INTO FIRSTLY THE QUESTION OF IDENTIFYING THOSE TENANTS WHO DID NOT NEED HOUSING SUBSIDY AND SECONDLY WAYS OF IMPLEMENTING REDUCTION OF SUBSIDY, MR HU SAID.

MR HU FORSAW THAT THIS ARRANGEMENT WOULD INEVITABLY INCREASE RENT FOR CERTAIN SECTIONS OF THE PUBLIC HOUSING TENANTS.

+HIGHER RENT WILL MEAN LESS SUBSIDY FROM OTHER TAX-PAYERS AND INDEED WILL BE AN INCENTIVE FOR THESE TENANTS TO CONSIDER SERIOUSLY TO BUY H.O.S. FLATS WHICH ARE LESS SUBSIDISED.

+SUCH ARRANGEMENT WILL ENABLE THE HOUSING AUTHORITY TO CONTRIBUTE MORE TOWARDS CAPITAL EXPENDITURE FOR RENTAL HOUSING AND TO BE MORE INDEPENDENT IN CARRYING OUT ITS AMBITIOUS AND LONG TERM PLANS,+ HE SAID.

HE SUGGESTED THAT CONSIDERATION COULD BE GIVEN TO RENTING OUT H.O.S. FLATS WHICH THE HOUSING AUTHORITY BOUGHT BACK OR COULD NOT DISPOSE OF AT UNSUBSIDISED RENT TO TENANTS WHO COULD MEET. SET CONDITIONS, BUT FOR VARIOUS REASONS PREFERRED TO STAY IN RENTED FLATS.

MR HU BELIEVED THE SAME ARGUMENT FOR REDUCING HOUSING SUBSIDY COULD ALSO BE APPLIED TO THE STUDENT TRAVEL SCHEME WHICH WOULD COST $248 MILLION IN 1985-86.

HE CONSIDERED THAT IT WAS ABOUT TIME FOR THE ADMINISTRATION TO RE-EXAMINE THE CONTINUED JUSTIFICATION FOR THE SCHEME SO AS TO DECIDE WHETHER THE SCHEME SHOULD BE TERMINATED OR ALLOWED TO CONTINUE BUT WITH REVISED ARRANGEMENTS.

MR HU ALSO SAID HE FULLY SUPPORTED THE IDEA OF REGULAR UPDATING OF ALL GOVERNMENT FEES AND CHARGES AS SERVICES SHOULD BE PAID BY THOSE WHO USED THEM.

BESIDES CONSIDERING VALUE FOR MONEY FOR THESE SERVICES, CONTROLLING OFFICERS SHOULD ALSO CONSIDER WHETHER SUCH SERVICES COULD BE PROVIDED MORE COMPETITIVELY THROUGH CONTRACTING OUT, AS

IT WOULD NOT BE FAIR FOR THOSE WHO PAID FOR SERVICES TO PAY EXORBITANT FEES OR CHARGES BECAUSE OF GOVERNMENT'S OWN PROVISION OF THESE FACILITIES AT A HIGHER COST WHILE AN ALTERNATIVE CHEAPER ARRANGEMENT WAS AVAILABLE, HE SAID.

HOWEVER, MR HU DID NOT BELIEVE MONEY SAVING SHOULD BE APPLIED RIGIDLY.

/IN SOME