Page 188 of 237
352
HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL
and Food Premises Committee in 1961; since that time the standard of living in Hong Kong has improved and may I suggest that this point be borne in mind when the Committee does consider this matter again.
MR. Lo: Yes, we will do that.
MOTION.
(1) CHAIRMAN:-Ladies and gentlemen, we will now resume the debate on the Motion "That this Council endorse the Statement of Aims for 1970". Today, Official Members will reply to the points raised by the Unofficials at the meetings held on the 27th and 28th November, 1969. The first speaker today is Mr. ASERAPPA, the Commissioner for Resettlement.
COMMISSIONER FOR RESETTLEMENT:-Mr. Chairman, as usual in these annual debates a wide variety of subjects have been discussed but the emphasis this year, particularly in the field of resettlement, has been less on criticism than on constructive proposals for the future. I shall be commenting on these proposals but first I should like to refer to a criticism that was made.
Mr. P. C. K. CHAN deplored the fact that Resettlement Assistants were unable to advise tenants on decantation policy. This policy is complicated and the details of the densities qualifying for internal and external decantation in particular estates are changed from time to time to keep pace with fluctuations in the population. I should not like any resettlement officer therefore to give offhand advice on this matter without consulting the latest instructions and without working out in detail the qualifying density of the family concerned.
The complications that have arisen in the decantation are of course due to the overcrowding of estate rooms, particularly in the older estates. Because of the numbers involved a system of priorities has had to be evolved for those willing to move to a room in another estate; and, on a much more strict basis, for the many families who demand a room in the same estate. This system has brought about a steady improvement in the position: since 1st April this year the number of persons living at a density of 24 square feet for each adult or worse has been reduced from 350,000 to 288,000. But progress has been slow and the present policy cannot by itself bring about the result that we are aiming at, that is, the housing in decent conditions of all resettlement tenants.
Mr. Kenneth Lo has referred to the difficulties involved, which mainly stem from what might be called the selectivity of tenants. Most tenants would like to have a larger room and there are few that
HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL
353
could not afford it. But they are only prepared to move on their own terms. They are generally reluctant to move to another estate, unless it is a popular central one; and in many cases rooms offered in the same estate are, for one reason or other, regarded as unacceptable. Families living in the worst degree of overcrowding, many of them in conditions which we would regard as quite intolerable, have been offered larger rooms. So far as we can tell they can afford the increased rent that would be payable but they have decided to remain where they are. They clearly regard their reasons for this decision as sufficiently compelling but it seems to indicate that better living conditions, as such, do not rank high among their priorities.
The same pattern can be seen among squatters and among overcrowded tenement dwellers. They are free to apply for accommodation in Housing Authority or Housing Society estates, or in Government Low Cost Housing. But while the central estates are heavily over-subscribed there are comparatively few applications for the estates in the more outlying areas. There are of course reasons for this. It is more convenient to live closer to the place of work with the added attraction of the bright lights of the town; and the additional transport charges from outlying areas can be a considerable burden on the budget of lowly-paid families. But the fact remains that many of those who could afford to move have made the choice to stay in their present surroundings however unpleasant they may be.
Mr. BERNACCHI has proposed that to meet this situation more subsidized housing should be built in the central areas. Sites have become scarce in these areas and there are competing demands for any site remaining for open space, for Police and Fire Stations, schools, clinics, and all the other amenities that are urgently required. It is proposed to continue building subsidized estates on any site in the central area that can be made available; but quite obviously the scale of such building must be extremely limited and it cannot come anywhere near to the scale of the potential demand. If living standards are to be improved more families must be moved away from the central areas.
Mr. Lo proposed that there should be differential rents for subsidized estates, that is, that there should be higher rents for the central, and more popular estates, and lower rents for those in outlying areas. This is certainly a possibility and it would provide an incentive for people to accept outlying accommodation; but the present evidence suggests that many families would still be willing to pay more, even for worse accommodation, if it was centrally located.
Mr. FORSGATE wondered if anything could be done about the more affluent families now living in resettlement estates that could well afford to live elsewhere. As Members are aware, there is no means
Page 189 of 237
354
...
Page 189 of 237
Page 188 of 237
352
HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL
and Food Premises Committee in 1961; since that time the standard of living in Hong Kong has improved and may I suggest that this point be borne in mind when the Committee does consider this matter again.
MR. Lo: Yes, we will do that.
MOTION.
(1) CHAIRMAN:-Ladies and gentlemen, we will now resume that the debate on the Motion "That this Council endorse the Statement of Aims for 1970". Today, Official Members will reply to the points raised by the Unofficials at the meetings held on the 27th and 28th November, 1969. The first speaker today is Mr. ASERAPPA, the Commissioner for Resettlement.
COMMISSIONER FOR RESETTLEMENT:-Mr. Chairman, as usual in these annual debates a wide variety of subjects have been discussed but the emphasis this year, particularly in the field of resettlement, has been less on criticism than on constructive proposals for the future. I shall be commenting on these proposals but first I should like to refer to a criticism that was made.
Mr. P. C. K. CHAN deplored the fact that Resettlement Assistants were unable to advise tenants on decantation policy. This policy is complicated and the details of the densities qualifying for internal and external decantation in particular estates are changed from time to time to keep pace with fluctuations in the population. I should not like any resettlement officer therefore to give offhand advice on this matter without consulting the latest instructions and without working out in detail the qualifying density of the family concerned.
The complications that have arisen in the decantation are of course due to the overcrowding of estate rooms, particularly in the older estates. Because of the numbers involved a system of priorities has had to be evolved for those willing to move to a room in another estate; and, on a much more strict basis, for the many families who demand a room in the same estate. This system has brought about a steady improvement in the position: since 1st April this year the number of persons living at a density of 24 square feet for each adult or worse has been reduced from 350,000 to 288,000. But progress has been slow and the present policy cannot by itself bring about the result that we are aiming at, that is, the housing in decent conditions of all resettlement tenants.
Mr. Kenneth Lo has referred to the difficulties involved, which mainly stem from what might be called the selectivity of tenants. Most tenants would like to have a larger room and there are few that
HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL
353
could not afford it. But they are only prepared to move on their own terms. They are generally reluctant to move to another estate, unless it is a popular central one; and in many cases rooms offered in the same estate are, for one reason or other, regarded as unacceptable. Families living in the worst degree of overcrowding, many of them in conditions which we would regard as quite intolerable, have been offered larger rooms. So far as we can tell they can afford the increased rent that would be payable but they have decided to remain where they are. They clearly regard their reasons for this decision as sufficiently compelling but it seems to indicate that better living con- ditions, as such, do not rank high among their priorities.
The same pattern can be seen among squatters and among overcrowded tenement dwellers. They are free to apply for accommoda- tion in Housing Authority or Housing Society estates, or in Government Low Cost Housing. But while the central estates are heavily over- subscribed there are comparatively few applications for the estates in the more outlying areas. There are of course reasons for this. It is more convenient to live closer to the place of work with the added attraction of the bright lights of the town; and the additional transport charges from outlying areas can be a considerable burden on the budget of lowly-paid families. But the fact remains that many of those who could afford to move have made the choice to stay in their present surroundings however unpleasant they may be.
Mr. BERNACCHI has proposed that to meet this situation more subsidized housing should be built in the central areas. Sites have become scarce in these areas and there are competing demands for any site remaining for open space, for Police and Fire Stations, schools, clinics, and all the other amenities that are urgently required. It is proposed to continue building subsidized estates on any site in the central area that can be made available; but quite obviously the scale of such building must be extremely limited and it cannot come any- where near to the scale of the potential demand. If living standards are to be improved more families must be moved away from the central
areas.
Mr. Lo proposed that there should be differential rents for subsidized estates, that is, that there should be higher rents for the central, and more popular estates, and lower rents for those in outlying areas. This is certainly a possibility and it would provide an incentive for people to accept outlying accommodation; but the present evidence suggests that many families would still be willing to pay more, even for worse accommodation, if it was centrally located.
Mr. FORSGATE wondered if anything could be done about the more affluent families now living in resettlement estates that could well afford to live elsewhere. As Members are aware, there is no means
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.