1969 — Page 142

£37

262

CHAIRMAN:

HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL

ADDRESS BY CHAIRMAN.

Ladies and gentlemen, the meeting is called to order. This is the first day of the 1969 Annual Conventional Debate, the Motion to be debated being "That this Council endorse the Statement of Aims for 1970". I call upon Mr. BERNACCHI to move the Motion.

MOTION.

MR. B. A. BERNACCHI moved the following Motion:----

"That this Council endorse the Statement of Aims for 1970".

He said:-Mr. Chairman, I propose the adoption of the Statement of Aims for 1970. I am not unaware of the convention whereby a speaker at the Conventional Debate may refer to subjects not within the jurisdiction of this Urban Council. I shall not therefore be out of order if I mention some of them today. Nevertheless, as a proposer of the Motion, I think it is only right to mention first the fact of the important work that we are already called upon to do within the present limit of our jurisdiction. In fact these limits are both as to area of our operations and as to the scope of our endeavours. The latter point is dealt with in our Aim No. 22 namely, to continue pressing for an early decision by Government on the enlargement in 1970 of the Council's scope in accordance with the Ad Hoc Committee's Report on the Future Scope and Operation of the Urban Council in August 1966 and in the Urban Council Report on Reform of Local Government March 1969. As a member of the Urban Council, I heartily endorse this, and I would call upon Government to make their intention known to this Council at the earliest opportunity. When a year ago members of this Council criticised the Government for not making their intention known, the Government by the Governor, by the Colonial Secretary and indeed by our own Chairman said, in effect, that they were waiting for our more detailed report which was eventually issued in March 1969. There has therefore been 9 months since this more detailed report was passed and yet not even a whisper has come out from Government as to what are their intentions and I would accuse Government of being extremely dilatory in this connection and state clearly that in our opinion these tactics at this time will only result in trouble for Hong Kong in the future.

I want however to comment also over the strict limits of area to which this Council has been subjected, which just does not work in a city state like ours. Thus as the Urban Council we are only the "Authority" for Resettlement Estates in urban areas and in New Kowloon, On the other hand changing our clothes to the Housing Authority, we have the management of all housing authority and low cost housing flats throughout Hong Kong. Besides which, almost

HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL

263

invariably, for the sake of conformity, the Commissioner for Resettlement carries our policies regarding Resettlement Estates in the Urban areas to Resettlement Estates in the New Territories. Likewise we have authority over beaches in urban areas but we are asked to advise on beaches in the New Territories. I could give many other examples of this anomaly. I think the time has come when this Council should have jurisdiction over Public Housing and Urban Services in the New Territories. This does not mean that we want in any way to infringe on the very good work being done, in an advisory capacity, by the Heung Yee Kuk, let alone by the Rural Committees. But when the town people go out into the New Territories for pleasure on public holidays or are found to live there, like in Resettlement Estates, then it is ridiculous to have a divided authority and this Urban Council being called in merely in an advisory capacity. Now, coming back to my reference to the important work at present within the purview of this Council, in particular to resettlement policy of which I have the honour to be Chairman of the Resettlement Policy Select Committee, we have been particularly worried about overcrowding in old estates and the reluctance of individual families to move in to new estates on the outskirts of the urban areas or even in the New Territories. This does not simply stem from a reluctance to move to a new district but largely from the difficulty that the settlers have over transport generally, and I call upon Government to get on with implementing the report on transport, but, in the meanwhile, I would suggest that additional areas be found adjacent to Resettlement Estates both in the island of Hong Kong and in Kowloon to meet the needs of overcrowding for at least another few years. I also urge that in future we treat resettlement as part and parcel of Government assisted housing for the lower and middle income groups. Not merely as a means of clearance of squatters from land required by the Government either for public purposes or sometimes indeed to fetch a high price at a land auction.

I repeat what I have said last time that the Government should set up a Housing Department with a Commissioner of Housing being a member of this Council and his Department under this Council and have resettlement, low cost housing and housing authority under one Department with a co-ordinated policy, even if we have subdivided into three divisions. Above all we must not allow Resettlement Estates to degenerate into the worst possible slums and we must concentrate on our present tenants and give further accommodation to our present tenants as a high priority.

Sometimes even more slummy still are the conditions inside a large number of our privately owned multi-storey buildings. The voluntary Association of co-owners scheme has hardly got off the ground, despite the high hopes which some people have held for it for years. I again urge this Council, through the Urban Services Department which is its executive limb, to go into multi-storey build-

Page 142 of 237