1967 — Page 198

of 259

Page 198 of 259

370

HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL

at regular intervals, it is based on a misconception. Perhaps Mr. Hu is confusing the position with that of the Housing Authority which, in September 1965, adopted a policy of modest rent adjustments at regular intervals, to be automatically effective up to 1971 unless varied by intermediate reviews. In the case of resettlement there have only been three adjustments since 1955, all relating to rents in Mark I and II estates. The first was in 1962 when, instead of a flat charge of $100 for shops, the system of grading according to location was introduced and this incidentally, had the effect of reducing the rents of some shops while increasing those of others. Then in 1965, as forecast in the 1964 White Paper, domestic rents in Mark I and II estates were increased in two stages. Recently, domestic tenants of Hung Hom estate have been informed that they will soon be required to pay an additional $1 a month per room to meet the cost of providing and maintaining electric wiring which is now being installed at public expense. This will replace the worn out and dangerous wiring which tenants themselves installed over ten years ago. These changes were all approved by the appropriate select committees. It will be evident that resettlement rents have been remarkably stable. That is not to say that further increases will never be necessary. Since the very beginning of resettlement, Government's declared policy has been that the rent to be charged (exclusive of rates and water charges) should cover the capital and recurrent costs. This policy has, I believe, always had the support of this Council. It follows that if, with the passage of time, recurrent costs of management and maintenance increase be- yond the amounts allowed for in the rent calculations, an increase in rent would be appropriate. This and the initial cost of rewiring are the justification for the impending increase at Hung Hom. The rents for shops and factory units are supposed to be closer to commercial levels and the former are designed to subsidize domestic rents to a limited extent, while the amortization formula for the latter is less generous than in the case of domestic blocks.

Mobile medical teams

Mr. Hu made an interesting suggestion that mobile medical teams including doctors and nurses should visit the settlers' homes from time to time. I wish he had elaborated his idea and hope that he will do so in committee, for I am not sure what exactly he had in mind. It does seem however that, in general, the provision of clinics to which patients come themselves for treatment is a more effective way of ensuring that the doctors' skills reach the largest possible number. Mr. Hu will be aware that there have been charitable clinics in many of the estates for some time, and that there are Government clinics in the vicinity of some of them. Mobile medical vans have also been a feature of our estates for some years, although they have mainly been mobile only in name, and Government has decided that they should cease to

HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL

371

operate at the end of this year. To replace them, rooms are being set aside for use by private practitioners, and there can be no doubt that the facilities which they offer will be superior to any that it was possible to provide in the vans. At a recent count, premises for 27 such new clinics have already been allocated to registered doctors and 10 to the sponsors of unregistered ones, and others will follow as quickly as accommodation can be made available. Registered doctors in charge of these clinics will also be able to visit patients in their own homes.

Toilet Facilities in Mark I Estates

At our August meeting Mr. Peter NG asked some searching ques- tions about toilet and other facilities in the Mark I estates. Of all the questions which I have had to answer over a period of four years, I think this was one of the most useful. In my reply and subsequent correspondence, I provided him with some ammunition for his speech three weeks ago, and I am grateful to him for turning the spotlight on an aspect of our older estates of which few of us had previously been sufficiently conscious. In the course of his speech Mr. NG said that of about 1,000,000 settlers, 40% live in Mark I and II estates where, on average, there is one water-closet to every 50 people. Now these figures are a little misleading. In fact, some 570,000 people, or about 61% of the estate population, live in Mark I and II blocks which number 240. In October this year only 32 out of these 240 blocks had one water- closet to 49 or more residents, and these 32 blocks then housed about 87,000 people or a little over 9% of our estate population. In many of the Mark I and II blocks we are well within the ratio of water- closets to people laid down in the Buildings Ordinance, although in others the provision is certainly below that standard but not so serious as Mr. NG's brief summary suggests. Nevertheless, the situation in the worst blocks is most disturbing and a remedy must and will be found. When all that is said, it is only fair to see the situation in perspective. Multi-storey resettlement was, at its inception, emergency housing, and the object was to provide the maximum amount of accommodation in the minimum of time. I am told that, in the provision of lavatories, the yardstick in those early days was one place to roughly ten rooms, corresponding to the scale for dry latrines provided in the cottage areas. It was soon appreciated that this number was insufficient and the provi- sion was very quickly increased after experience had been gained from the earliest blocks. As might be expected therefore, the worst situation is found in the three oldest estates, namely, Shek Kip Mei, Tai Hang Tung and Lei Cheng Uk. Members will be aware that there were in 1954, and still are, a great many pre-war buildings in the older parts of the town which were even worse off, many of them being without any flushing system whatever.