1965 — Page 373

82

I

|

724

Page 373 of 382

HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL

I think the matter is very urgent. We are probably living in better buildings, but if you look at the Wan Chai or Sham Shui Po areas- in the last five years these so-called building developers have put up their buildings as quickly and cheaply as possible to get their money in their pockets. I was in and out of these buildings in connexion with tenancy tribunals for exemption proceedings. I did make constant criticisms and comments on these flats. I say it would be impossible to live in these kinds of buildings if these conditions are allowed to continue. Now it is a very unhappy thing in this Colony; if you look at these buildings, it is really terrible. There is lack of facilities- lack of everything, even lifts, even the corridors, it is disgraceful. And these so-called builders, so long as they can sell their flats, once they are sold, they think once they have their money in their pockets, every- thing is alright, and they leave everything like that. In my respectful submission, Mr. Chairman, the Government made a mistake in allowing these buildings to develop in that way, and I think it would be a good thing to have this mistake corrected, and that we should have these so-called voluntary organizations to look after these multi-storeyed build- ings. This is a very good thing suggested by Mr. BERNACCHI in his motion. It is a very urgent matter, especially in these so-called com- munal multi-storeyed buildings. The matter cannot be delayed, there- fore I support this motion.

I would further like to add that at the very beginning it probably would be very easy to remedy these circumstances. For example, if Government had legislation to compel the developers, saying that if you want to sell a flat to a person, you are compelled to ask that person to sign a mutual covenant, and if that was the case then there would be no problem of so-called voluntary organizations, because once you sold a flat to a person who wanted to buy, that person should sign the mutual covenant, the organization naturally would be there. But that has not been done, so to remedy this lamentable condition, I would say that Mr. BERNACCHI'S motion is very good to remedy the mistake which we have already committed.

I think it is our duty now to look into this affair for the sake of the people who are living in these lamentable conditions.

I support the motion.

MRS. ELLIOTT:-Mr. Chairman, I have not prepared a speech, but it occurred to me as others were speaking, a great deal of money is collected monthly by landlords for work that is never done, and that would fully pay for the work of cleansing and maintaining the facilities of these multi-storeyed buildings. Any profit could go to the public revenue for public use, instead of into the pockets of the landlords.

HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL

725

I agree with all my colleagues have said, and I cannot but support the

motion.

MR. SALES: Indeed Sir, we cannot but support the sentiments (Laughter) which inspired the motion. I am sure that nobody will deny the sincerity with which this motion has been put forward by Mr. BERNACCHI. Even before I listened to the eloquent arguments put forward by my colleagues across the table, I had already made up my mind that we must concern ourselves with this vexed problem, as Dr. LEE has pointed out.

In point of fact when a similar motion was introduced by Mr. BERNACCHI Some time ago, I put forward my reservations, and I felt at that time I could not support the suggestion made by my colleague, beacuse certain points of principle were involved and they had first to be clarified. Today these points of principle are in fact still in exist- ence, and they must be clarified. I am in full agreement with Mr. Henry Hu that before such great encouragement was given to land developers in Hong Kong to put up these structures, many of which are jerry built, the law should have been clearly defined as is done in other countries, where the situation is closely governed by statute. Why Hong Kong has not followed this example I don't know, but this again is a matter for the Government to determine, not for myself. I would like to see this matter given further consideration by the partic- ular committee concerned, which is that of Dr. Raymond LEE'S Environmental Hygiene Select Committee. Government has given to the Urban Council the text of legislation which Government intends to introduce. We have all been given an opportunity of studying it; we should make our comments on that draft legislation so that the control of these multi-storey structures should be clearly established. We should not anticipate a set of circumstances arising which would prejudice or vitiate the control which at this eleventh hour Government is intending to introduce. I believe Sir there are many problems of practice which are involved. I can see that you will be involved in commanding another 6,000 scavengers. I can also see the need to introduce mechanical sweepers, not only along the streets, but into the arcades and perhaps even into the markets to chase turkeys. (Laughter).

There are, in point of fact, problems which must be faced, and these problems must be faced by the Select Committee. We agree with Mr. BERNACCHI that something must be done, and in fact the Council ought to take action where the situation endangers the health of the people. In one instance I brought to your attention, Sir, you had action taken by your Department.

On two secondary issues, I agree entirely with Mr. BERNACCHI that whenever a bill is to be introduced its text should first be circulated to this Council. On that we are in full agreement. I am also in entire