1962 — Page 76

HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL

housing shortage, there is a lot of common sense for amending the 1954 Policy to stop the demolition of illegal structures by the Squatter Patrol where it can be established that they have been erected and used as domestic premises for more than 12 months, and the same should also apply to non-domestic premises converted to domestic use. I honestly feel, Mr. Chairman, that this amended policy is less rigid and more humane. If the huts have escaped the detection of the Squatter Patrol for more than a year, it demonstrates beyond a shadow of doubt that the occupants are bona fide squatters, and it would be cruelty itself to demolish such a structure, to say nothing of the Staff whose job it is to see that they should not be there in the first place. In view of the gigantic squatter problem confronting us, Mr. Chairman, we have to be realistic and try to exclude as much abuse and corruption from its administration as possible. In view of the demand for resettlement accommodation, the temptation is great indeed. If people pay out money for the possession of a pigsty and then convert it for human habitation, and put up with the ghastly discomfort of living for months on end in this hot and humid climate, as a human being, Mr. Chairman, I cannot see the reason for refusing resettlement to these pitiful cases. It is not the case of Government losing money on these projects, but a valuable contribution is being made towards municipal health, order and stability. I know a lot of public expenditure has gone into these schemes, but we get in return, Mr. Chairman, valuable land which otherwise would have been sterilized by the continuous presence of dangerous and insanitary hovels.

In view of the gross hardship in which most of these hard working squatters are living, and the apparent insecurity and hopelessness that it engenders, now beg to move the Motion that stands in my name.

DR. A. M. S. BELL:- Mr. Chairman, It gives me pleasure to rise to second this motion which Dr. LEE has just moved on behalf of Mr. BERNACCHI, who is regrettably absent owing to illness. In doing so I would like to review a little of the history of the position as it has been to date. As Dr. LEE has pointed out, our present policy with regard to squatter control is based upon the 1954 Policy Statement upon which the operation of the whole Resettlement Department has been based. Eight years ago in 1954 the Committee formulating Policy was anxious that there should be prevention of "New" squatter structures and that all possible measures should be taken to prevent further erection of illegal structures on Crown or private land, and that all resources should be engaged in containing the position at that time. But it was stated by the Committee that they hoped that this would be a temporary commitment because once it was widely recognized that squatting was being controlled, then laws relating to illegal occupation of land would be respected. The Committee realized and stressed that effective control must be accompanied by effective Resettlement. Far be it from me to say that Resettlement has not been effective but I would say that it is still not effective enough.

HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL

I doubt if the 1954 Committee ever visualized the constant and continued swelling of population which has been ours here in Hong Kong over the past eight years—both by natural increase and by a continued steady stream of refugees into our midst. It is a publicly stated fact that between 60,000 70,000 known refugees have been absorbed by the Colony in the past few months. Can we build Resettlement or other accommodation as fast as these unfortunate people come to join us? So far we cannot and therefore what, in any other circumstances would be fully effective Resettlement is simply maintenance of an existing position, so that it becomes no worse but probably not much better than it was eight years ago. In other words "temporary commitment" as envisaged by the 1954 Committee becomes permanently more temporary.

In January 1961 the Resettlement Department issued standing orders to officers in the Squatter Control division. These orders state amongst other things that for the purposes of squatter control (1) a "new" structure is defined as one built after the aerial survey in October 1954. (2) An “old" structure is one which existed at the time of the aerial survey (3) a "tolerated" structure is either an "old" structure or it is a "new" structure which the Commissioner for Resettlement has specifically authorized or allowed to remain. These standing orders also state that tolerated illegal structures are only tolerated on condition that their use is not changed from non-domestic to domestic, that is to say if they were originally used for pig breeding or drying clothes under, they could not be converted for domestic use at a later date. However this point was never discussed by the policy committee of 1954 or the policy committee of 1961 when these standing orders were issued by the Department. These standing orders also state that there shall be patrol areas, each area being divided into six zones and each zone to be thoroughly inspected once per week. One would think that with such thorough inspection there would be no new premises erected and no conversion of non-domestic to domestic use, but this has not been the case and there have been frequent cases where for 2 or 3 years huts have been erected and used, or converted and used, and have escaped detection until the time of screening of that particular area for clearance into Resettlement blocks, or until a more zealous officer has discovered their existence, then the law has pounced on the unfortunate occupants who have had their miserable homes pulled down around their ears and been refused any form of Resettlement. In order to prevent such tremendous hardship Mr. BERNACCHI has suggested a slight modification of policy under such circumstances. He has put forward in his motion that where an occupier can establish that the premises have been erected and used as domestic premises for twelve months or more then these premises, although they are illegal structures, should not be demolished, and that this new policy should also apply

Page 76 of 150

136

137

Page 150

150