TNAG-0317-FCO40-353-Policy-of-housing-and-resettlement-in-Hong-Kong-problem-of-s-1971 — Page 100

Letter from the Worker Student Political Action Committee

to Lord Garner

The writer begins by paying tribute to the Hong Kong Government for providing inexpensive accommodation for very large numbers of people (in fact some 43% of the population is now housed in Government and Government-aided housing of one form or another and there must be few Governments anywhere in the world with such a record) and then goes on to point out the shortcomings of the accommodation provided. However, he fails to recognise that this accommodation represented at the time a great improvement on the conditions from which the people moved when they were resettled. (The writer incidentially displays his naivete by referring to the absence of central heating, a facility scarcely ever found even in the most luxurious private houses or high rise blocks in Hong Kong.) Of course the earlier types of resettlement blocks leave a lot to be desired in terms of today; this has long been recognised in Hong Kong. They were, however, built under great pressure to provide simple reaccommodation as quickly as possible, with communal washing and latrine facilities. Some 240 of these blocks were built, freeing land for all forms of development schools, clinics, road building and the development of new towns - before the design was superseded in 1964. It was never intended that the earliest blocks should be permanent in their original form; they were built in such a way that they could be converted into self-contained flats when the housing situation permitted. One such block in the Wong Tai Sin estate has already been converted as an experiment, and a scheme to convert the whole of the oldest estate, housing some 50,000 people at Shek Kip Mei, is now being processed.

2.

However, while some of our housing effort can be diverted to improving and converting the old estates it must be remembered that many people from over-crowded tenements and squatters on land required for development need rehousing. It is important that we get our priorities right. It also has to be remembered that much of the overcrowding derives from a fairly liberal, perhaps too liberal, policy of allowing the sharing of the allotted accommodation by near relations. Rents, too, in these early estates are low in the $18-$24 per month range the median income is around $500 and the amount spent on rent in proportion to total family income is therefore small. Indeed, many families have become relatively prosperous from this advantage, as will be apparent from any visit to these estates. As all the resettlement estates and Government- aided housing are heavily subsidised it could be argued that 57% of the population should not have to contribute to an extent which makes some tenants of this housing wealthier than the contributors. Similarly it could be argued that much of the shabby disorder in the old estates, the collections of hawker stalls and huts in the courtyards springs not from authoritarianism but from too great a degree of tolerance for those who build these illegal structures and too great a readiness to listen to critics who advocate the "rights" of minority groups usually against the interests of majority.

3.

The question of housing priorities is, of course, something which has to be kept under continuing review by the Housing Board and other authorities, We have to decide between the need to provide houses for those deprived of their homes by development clearances, for those in need of a home as a form of welfare assistance and for those made homeless by fire and other disasters. When this has been done, we have