TNAG-0873-FCO40-1083-Employment-of-children-in-Hong-Kong-1979 — Page 118

-2-

Legislation to regulate child labour in factories started

in Hong Kong in 1922 in respect of children under 10 and this age limit was raised to 12 in 1932 and 14 (its present limit) in 1936. (2)

Extent of Child Labour. It can be easily shown that in the

recent past there has been considerable incidence of child labour

in the Colony. Working from the official reports of the Labour

Department and the detailed tables of the 1971 Census, Professor

Robin Porter showed that at least 36000 children between the ages

of 10 to 14 inclusive were working, several thousand of whom were doing so illegally (i.e. in breach of current legislation). (3)

There is every reason to believe that even this figure does

not disclose the full extent of the problem. A lengthy and

detailed correspondence in the Hong Kong press followed the

publication of Porter's results without shaking any of his

conclusions. (4) Taking a different approach in December 1975

the Hong Kong Christian Industrial Committee Committee (HKCIC)

conducted a door-to-door survey from a list of 2,000 addresses

and found that out of 109 home visits there were 87 cases of

child labour in the sample. (5) This was during a time of

recession and widespread unemployment in Hong Kong and yet

the results extrapolated for the Colony as a whole still show an

estimated 25,000 children at work. Of the HKCIC survey 19 were

boys (22%) and 68 girls (78%). Of the 87 children interviewed,

65 had gone straight into full- time memployment immediately after

laving their sixth primary school year. 55 of them turned over

more then 75% of their earnings to their parents, 35% worked in the garment industry (HK's largest single employer), 26% in

electronics and in metal works. 63% of the children earned

between HK$301-500 per month compared with a Government-computed

average industrial wage of HK$699 per month. 37 of them worked

in small establishments (1 to 45 workers), 44 in medium ones

(50 to 499 workers) and 22 in large concerns (500+ workers).

Those interviewed stressed the lack of subsidized middle school

(secondary) places and family financial hardship as the causes