2600224
C.S. 84
RESTRICTED
- 7
XCR(70)303
22
The Housing Board itself has also stressed, in correspondence with the Secretariat, that it is mindful of the narrow margin between $700 a month and the normal upper income limits for the housing agencies (normally $900 a month, for example, for the Housing Authority) and that it is keeping the situation under constant review so that, if the Housing Agencies plan to provide housing at Kwai Chung, it will immediately consider the need for readjustment to bring the Government low-cost housing limit back into line with that ruling in other more central areas. In this connection the Housing Society has commented that it may well in any case decide to raise its income limits at its new Tai Hang Estate and might well do the same at Kwai Chung if Government low-cost housing limits are raised.
23
It will be noted from the foregoing recommendations and com- ments that the Housing Board and the Housing Authority are at one in their wish to increase demand for space at Kwai Chung by raising the income limit and in their view that the change should be temporary and kept under constant review. However, whilst the Board proposes to limit this con- cession to Kwai Chung, the Authority would also support a similar concession at other outlying estates such as Yau Tong. As regards family size, the Authority feels that the change should be kept at three, two of whom must be a married couple, and confined to the Kwai Chung estates.
24
Honourable Members may recall that when the rules for the Combined Waiting List were approved in February 1969, approval was given for a minimum family size of four, which had previously only been used on a temporary basis to assist in clearing off the previous waiting list for Government Low-cost Housing. Since the present proposal has the effect of subsidising appreciable each family so accommodated, in that 2 persons would be housed in a five-person room (the minimum size in Government Low-cost Housing), and since the Housing Authority, which is in charge of the management of Government Low-cost Housing, is known to feel that the Board's proposal is too drastic at this stage, it is felt that at Kwai Chung estates only the minimum family size should be reduced to three, of whom two should be a married couple. The Commissioner for Resettlement would have preferred the minimum of two, because it would encourage young men in resettlement households to leave their own families, on marriage. How- ever, in view of the Housing Authority's advice the Commissioner is content to accept that there should be a minimum family size of three. Implementation of this recommendation will also take account of the fact that, assuming re- settlement clearance provide a typical cross-section of family sizes, 3-person families and below comprise some 26% of families eligible for resettlement.
25
As regards the raising of the qualifying income limit, it is felt that any change, if approved, should also be confined to the Kwai Chung estates, notwithstanding the Housing Authority's views. This is because (a) at Wong Chuk Hang the 963 flats in Phase I have been occupied and Phase II will not be ready until 1971 so that a concession in respect of this estate is premature; (b) the only other outlying estate, namely Ko Chiu Road Estate at Yau Tong, is not yet ready for occupation; and (c) as the Kwai Chung con- cession will be kept under regular review, it will always be possible for the Housing Board to recommend extension of the Kwai Chung changes to other more outlying estates if they see at any time that this would be justified.
RESTRICTED
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.