Page 119 of 312
HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL
COMMISSIONER FOR RESETTLEMENT:-The building had been re-entered by the Crown. It was a building but it had not been completed. It was not illegal.
MRS. ELLIOTT:-Mr. Chairman, is it not splitting hairs to resettle people who are squatting illegally on Crown land and not resettle people who are, as far as it appears to us, also illegal squatters on Crown land?
COMMISSIONER FOR RESETTLEMENT:-Certainly it is a very unusual case. In my experience and that of officers of the department it was unprecedented, and as I explained in my reply to the original question, a large proportion of these people apparently had alternative accommodation to go to.
MRS. ELLIOTT:-I am afraid I still think it is splitting hairs, but may I ask another question? The Commissioner said that these people were given verbal notice on the 4th July. Does the Commissioner's experience show that these squatters are required to demolish the building?
COMMISSIONER FOR RESETTLEMENT:-Normally if there is an illegal structure which is required to be demolished, we serve a notice on that structure under a different section of the Resettlement Ordinance, which is section 13. In this case, we did not require anyone to demolish anything. Therefore, as I have said, we did not serve a notice on it.
MRS. ELLIOTT:-May I ask another supplementary? These squatters were given notice on letter paper which seemed to have no heading. I must admit that when I saw the notice, I thought it was some sort of a fake. I know there was a stamp on, but it did not look very authentic to me. Mr. Chairman, could the Commissioner tell us if there have ever been instances where officers of his Department have illegally served notices, in collaboration with the landlord, in order to get rid of the squatters?
COMMISSIONER FOR RESETTLEMENT:-I am not aware of any such instances and I must certainly deny any implication that this was an action in collaboration with the landlord. If there was a collaboration with the landlord, the landlord in this case is the Crown. (Laughter).
MRS. ELLIOTT:-May I ask if the Commissioner understands that I was not suggesting in this particular case that there was any collaboration? I was only suggesting that notices were written in such a way that the squatters themselves might have thought there was a collaboration, which they did, as far as I understand.
COMMISSIONER FOR RESETTLEMENT:-My information is to the contrary. According to the law, these notices were valid and in order.
HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL
MRS. ELLIOTT:-Mr. Chairman, may I ask and I have asked this many times before-that adequate notice should be given to the people who are in distress, in order to give them a chance to find some place?
COMMISSIONER FOR RESETTLEMENT:-Mr. Chairman, I shall certainly be glad to do the best we can to give as much advance notice as possible, but it must be appreciated that I am under an obligation under the Resettlement Ordinance to demolish illegal structures.
MRS. ELLIOTT:-I am sorry to ask another question, as this raises another point. Did Government just find out suddenly that this was illegal? Could they not have given notice six months beforehand?
COMMISSIONER FOR RESETTLEMENT:-I am not fully apprised of the background to this case. I was merely asked to remove the trespassers from what had become Crown property.
MRS. ELLIOTT:-Thank you.
MR. CHEONG-LEEN:-Mr. Chairman, I am rather reluctant to ask this question of the Commissioner, but I know he is very sympathetic and he does, wherever possible, try to help. Could an assurance be given by the Commissioner that as far as possible all notices in future should be given on official letterhead? I think that is very important because these people are open to all sorts of illegal activity, especially people living in squatter areas, and I think official notices would help to put the situation across to them very clearly and without any cause for suspicion.
COMMISSIONER FOR RESETTLEMENT:-Yes, Sir, I am very glad to give that assurance. What was done on this occasion was an unfortunate accident. Nevertheless, the persons concerned were perfectly well aware of the true nature of the position.
MR. CHEONG-LEEN:-One final question, Mr. Chairman. Since clearance took place on 23rd July, can the Director of Social Welfare state whether any decision has already been taken in regard to the old lady mentioned in the last paragraph of the Commissioner's reply?
DIRECTOR OF SOCIAL WELFARE:-I am afraid I cannot say, Sir, but I will be pleased to inform Mr. CHEONG-LEEN afterwards.
MR. CHEONG-LEEN:-Thank you. I believe the Director is aware of the time-factor involved.
(18) DR. P. F. Woo asked the following question:-
Mr. So Kam-tong, one of the park-attendants attached to the Gardens Division of the Urban Services Department, has won the championship of the Round-the-Island Walking
214
215
Page 312
312
Page 119 of 312
214
HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL
COMMISSIONER FOR RESETTLEMENT:-The building had been re- entered by the Crown. It was a building but it had not been com- pleted. It was not illegal.
MRS. ELLIOTT:-Mr. Chairman, is it not splitting hairs to resettle people who are squatting illegally on Crown land and not resettle people who are, as far as it appears to us, also illegal squatters on Crown land?
COMMISSIONER FOR RESETTLEMENT:-Certainly it is a very un- usual case. In my experience and that of officers of the department it was unprecedented, and as I explained in my reply to the original question, a large proportion of these people apparently had alternative accommodation to go to.
MRS. ELLIOTT:-I am afraid I still think it is splitting hairs, but may I ask another question? The Commissioner said that these people were given verbal notice on the 4th July. Does the Commissioner's experience show that these squatters are required to demolish the building?
COMMISSIONER FOR ResettlemenT:-Normally if there is an illegal structure which is required to be demolished, we serve a notice on that structure under a different section of the Resettlement Ordin- ance, which is section 13. In this case, we did not require anyone to demolish anything. Therefore, as I have said, we did not serve a notice on it.
MRS. ELLIOTT:-May I ask another supplementary? These squatters were given notice on letter paper which seemed to have no heading. I must admit that when I saw the notice, I thought it was some sort of a fake. I know there was a stamp on, but it did not look very authentic to me. Mr. Chairman, could the Commissioner tell us if there have ever been instances where officers of his Department have illegally served notices, in collaboration with the landlord, in order to get rid of the squatters?
COMMISSIONER for ResettlemENT:-I am not aware of any such instances and I must certainly deny any implication that this was an action in collaboration with the landlord. If there was a collaboration with the landlord, the landlord in this case is the Crown. (Laughter).
MRS. ELLIOTT:---May I ask if the Commissioner understands that I was not suggesting in this particular case that there was any col- laboration? I was only suggesting that notices were written in such a way that the squatters themselves might have thought there was a collaboration, which they did, as far as I understand.
COMMISSIONER FOR RESETTLEMENT; My information is to the contrary. According to the law, these notices were valid and in order.
HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL
215
MRS. ELLIOTT: Mr. Chairman, may I ask and I have asked this many times before-that adequate notice should be given to the people who are in distress, in order to give them a chance to find some place?
COMMISSIONER FOR RESETTLEMENT:-Mr. Chairman, I shall cer- tainly be glad to do the best we can to give as much advance notice as possible, but it must be appreciated that I am under an obligation under the Resettlement Ordinance to demolish illegal structures.
MRS. ELLIOTT:-I am sorry to ask another question, as this raises another point. Did Government just find out suddenly that this was illegal? Could they not have given notice six months beforehand?
COMMISSIONER FOR RESETTLEMENT:-I am not fully apprised of the background to this case. I was merely asked to remove the tres- passers from what had become Crown property.
MRS. ELLIOTT:-Thank you.
MR. CHEONG-LEEN:-Mr. Chairman, I am rather reluctant to ask this question of the Commissioner, but I know he is very sympathetic and he does, wherever possible, try to help. Could an assurance be given by the Commissioner that as far as possible all notices in future should be given on official letterhead? I think that is very important because these people are open to all sorts of illegal activity, especially people living in squatter areas, and I think official notices would help to put the situation across to them very clearly and without any cause for suspicion.
COMMISSIONER FOR RESETTLEMENT:-Yes, Sir, I am very glad to give that assurance. What was done on this occasion was an unfor- tunate accident. Nevertheless, the persons concerned were perfectly well aware of the true nature of the position.
MR. CHEONG-LEEN:-One final question, Mr. Chairman. Since clearance took place on 23rd July, can the Director of Social Welfare state whether any decision has already been taken in regard to the old lady mentioned in the last paragraph of the Commissioner's reply?
DIRECTOR OF SOCIAL WELFARE:-I am afraid I cannot say, Sir, but I will be pleased to inform Mr. CHEONG-LEEN afterwards.
MR. CHEONG-LEEN:-Thank you. I believe the Director is aware of the time-factor involved.
(18) DR. P. F. Woo asked the following question:-
Mr. So Kam-tong, one of the park-attendants attached to the Gardens Division of the Urban Services Department, has won the championship of the Round-the-Island Walking
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.