TNAG-0911-FCO40-1121-Policy-on-housing-and-resettlement-in-Hong-Kong-1979 — Page 24

1

COAST U TESAUDA

it

of

he

of

n.

ર

er

ill

er

to

ere

ry,

at-

en

at

My

an

on

ed

es-

ere th.

er-

of

to

cir-

urs

the

brk

og- ise.

nen

ng.

267

[7 MARCH 1979 ]

Hong Kong: However, when the awlers came they We no longer able to carry out their a ties. For more than seven years now they and their families have lived in boats under shelters on the shores of the main- land. They have had to live there because, despite the fact that they have asked for housing accommodation, it has nc? been provided. With their wives and their children—and children are being born continually the number of them now reaches 5,000. More than a half of them work on the mainland. Their children go to schools on the mainland; but they are still limited to living on their boats. The housing department of the Government of Hong Kong has stated that many of them are immigrants, illegal immigrants, living in these conditions because they wish to claim houses.

There was a survey by Social Action which interviewed the residents of 474 of the boats accommodating over 4,000 people. That survey showed that 70 per cent. of the residents of these boats had been there for seven years. That is a sufficient answer to the Housing Depart- ment so far as at least 50 per cent. of the residents are concerned. The conditions under which they live are appalling. Boats are becoming old and rotten. If they moved they would sink. There is no fresh water supply or artificial light. There is no sanitation. The water round | the boats is filthy and stinks. In the past year alone 12 children from these boats have drowned. Over the years the boat- men have sent many petitions to Govern- ment departments. They recently decided that they would petition the Governor himself. I should remark that in Hong Kong petitions are the accepted method of bringing pressure from the population to the legislature and the Governor. There is no elected member of the legisla- ture; all are appointees or nominees of the Government. It is the only method by which the people can express their differences.

I want to recognise at once that the first action of the boatmen was provocative. They held a Press conference and an- nounced that 1,000 of them would march to the Governor's residence. Such a march without seven days' notice and without a licence from the Government would have been illegal. I think it very likely indeed that it was the announcement of that march which provoked the police-no❘

H.L. 14 K

268

Arrest of Petitioners doubt justifiably with the authority of the Governor-to take action. However, this project was cancelled. Undoubtedly there were consultations between the leaders of the community and with representatives of the boatmen. A decision was taken to cancel the proposed march and that instead there should be a deputation which would present a petition to the Governor. As a result of the discussions, the deputa- tion was to represent community leaders and to present the human problems of the families living on these boats by representa tion of the women and children there. A deputation was selected of 76 persons including a Catholic priest, a doctor, two social workers, 48 women and 10 children.

When one considers whether that de- putation was illegal or not one has to recognise this. Undoubtedly they were accompanied by a number of people to the pier where they entered two coaches. However, the significant fact in the issue which I am raising tonight is this. No charge was made against any illegal pro- cession on the mainland before the deputation of 76 entered their coaches. They had to travel, as those who know Hong Kong will realise, by a tunnel which joins the mainland to the main island of Hong Kong and its harbour. When they reached the entrance to the island, they were arrested-the deputation of 76 travelling in these two coaches. They were arrested because they were said to have taken part in an illegal procession and an illegal assembly. I wonder how two coaches with occupants can be held to be "a procession". I wonder how 76 people in those two coaches can be held to be "an assembly ".

When I raised this question in this House on 12th February 1979, the noble Lord, Lord Goronwy-Roberts, said at col. 971 of Hansard:

"No charges were made against the ten juveniles, and the adults were released on bail pending trial".

A word about bail: it was 200 dollars and the men are earning 150 dollars. I think that is unreasonably high; but I want to draw particular attention to the statement that no charges were made against the 10 juveniles. I want to make it perfectly clear that I am making no suggestion that the Minister sought to mislead the House on this matter. There is no one in this House that I more regularly believe than the noble Lord, Lord Goronwy-Roberts.