Page 56 of 237
94
HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL
I think perhaps there is some justification for our senior Member and our learned Member and our most knowledgeable Member to move the Motion. However, we have been guided by so many experts about the hazards, and we have been reminded of the question of protecting the interests of licensed fresh provision shops, and looking at both sides very carefully, I examine my conscience very carefully, and I think at this stage, when we are trying very hard to control the hawker, and he has not proved to be uncontrollable, I feel that my conscience directs me not to support the Motion as yet which I do respect.
MRS. C. J. SYMONS:-Mr. Chairman, I have not come prepared to make a speech, but I must say that I feel in Mr. BERNACCHI's Motion a deep concern for the need for hawkers of "fresh fish". The apparently very great value is the reason why fish merchants should be opposed. I would like to suggest that "fresh fish" is a mere myth, if I measure the freshness it will soon become not fresh fish, but stale fish, and very stale fish as the hawker proceeds down the road. The ice will melt and he will, I think this is a point which has not been mentioned, endeavour to sell the fish in whatever condition it is. It is at the tail end of his transaction, that the very poor will be tempted to buy, because the fish will not attract anyone else. I think that will affect those whose resistance is lowest because of poor food and lack of food that we all enjoy. It is the very, very poor who will suffer most from this very stale fish as food.
MR. SALES: -Mr. Chairman, the whole subject is too fishy for words so I call for the question to be put. (Laughter).
MR. BERNACCHI:-Mr. Chairman, Mr. Hilton CHEONG-LEEN first. He says only 300 to 400 hawkers are selling fresh fish illegally, then they must all be selling it at the Chai Wan Reclamation, and the same 300 or 400 must all be selling it at the same time at Wong Tai Sin and in other large areas in Hong Kong. I maintain that there are thousands of illegal fresh fish hawkers and that we are only kidding ourselves to imagine that this problem is only 300 or 400.
(Dr. Denny M. H. HUANG left at this point).
In my submission there is no evidence of any danger if properly controlled and there is no control unless we do license them.
Mr. LOBO spoke of more markets. How many? I agree, if there were a hundred more markets in the next six months, this motion would then not be necessary. But I do not imagine that that would be so. Mr. Lo, I would ask him a question. Does not Singapore also have a high standard of public health? How else can the illegal hawking of fresh fish be eliminated than by properly controlling it, which is licensing it.
HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL
95
Mrs. ELLIOTT is indeed right when she said that my Motion is, in effect, to introduce a strong measure of control where there is at present no control whatsoever. Dr. HUANG said that the hawkers of fresh fish are very messy. Is any market stall any better? In fact, I would say that, at a very conservative estimate, about half a million people eat fresh fish bought from illegal hawkers every day in Hong Kong.
Dr. CHEUNG does not distinguish between cut fish and whole fish and the argument about flies surely does not apply as both meat and fish are cooked before eating. All the opponents of the motion miss this point that you can only control the present situation if you license it, and at present it is out of control. Corruption is rife and we are only digging our heads in the sand if we allow the present situation to continue.
Mr. Wu considers that hawking fish is equivalent to hawking of dangerous drugs or prostitution. I consider that there is no need even to reply to that statement but, incidentally, the legalization of dangerous drugs has been to the front in the treatment of drug addicts. Some people consider that if there was a method of selling drug addicts these drugs there would be no need for the dangerous position, that is at present in Hong Kong where there is a minimum of 80,000 drug addicts, and every day growing bigger especially amongst the young. But that is another subject altogether and I express no opinion either way, except to say that the hawking of fish cannot be equalled or equated to the hawking of dangerous drugs.
Mr. Peter CHAN, the lawyer, because there are two Peter CHANS on this Council, says that the Motion is too early. Well, I moved it 17 years ago, and what has been done in the meantime? Have there been enough markets, has the market development kept pace with the population development? No. As regards Mrs. SYMONS' remarks, she expressed concern that fish would become staler as hawkers proceeded down the road. Again, with control comes a static hawker in bazaars. That is in fact a type of mini-market, but as the mini-market programme will take years to complete, it is now that we need to license hawkers and to hawk in bazaars with proper controls. For these reasons I ask Members of this Council to vote in favour of the Motion.
MR. CHEONG-LEEN: --Mr. Chairman, on a point of personal explanation. Since you have borne with Mr. BERNACCHI for so long when he was talking about drug addiction, I would like to make a point of personal explanation on what has been raised by Mr. BERNACCHI in regard to the Motion itself. First of all, the number of illegal fish hawkers, as far as the Department is aware the number is between 300 to 400 and until it can be proved otherwise, I am prepared to accept that figure. Now, as regards Chai Wan, which Mr. BERNACCHI
Page 57 of 237
Page 56 of 237
94
HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL
I think perhaps there is some justification for our senior Member and our learned Member and our most knowledgeable Member to move the Motion. However, we have been guided by so many experts about the hazards, and we have been reminded of the question of protecting the interests of licensed fresh provision shops, and looking at both sides very carefully, I examine my conscience very carefully, and I think at this stage, when we are trying very hard to control the hawker, and he has not proved to be uncontrollable, I feel that my conscience directs me not to support the Motion as yet which I do respect.
MRS. C. J. SYMONS:-Mr. Chairman, I have not come prepared to make a speech, but I must say that I feel in Mr. BERNACCHI's Motion a deep concern for the need for hawkers of "fresh fish". The apparently very great value is the reason why fish merchants should be opposed. I would like to suggest that "fresh fish" is a mere myth, if I measure the freshness it will soon become not fresh fish, but stale fish, and very stale fish as the hawker proceeds down the road. The ice will melt and he will, I think this is a point which has not been mentioned, endeavour to sell the fish in whatever condition it is. It is at the tail end of his transaction, that the very poor will be tempted to buy, because the fish will not attract anyone else. I think that will affect those whose resistance is lowest because of poor food and lack of food that we all enjoy. It is the very, very poor who will suffer most from this very stale fish as food.
MR. SALES: -Mr. Chairman, the whole subject is too fishy for words so I call for the question to be put. (Laughter).
MR. BERNACCHI:-Mr. Chairman, Mr. Hilton CHEONG-LEEN first. He says only 300 to 400 hawkers are selling fresh fish illegally, then they must all be selling it at the Chai Wan Reclamation, and the same 300 or 400 must all be selling it at the same time at Wong Tai Sin and in other large areas in Hong Kong. I maintain that there are thousands of illegal fresh fish hawkers and that we are only kidding ourselves to imagine that this problem is only 300 or 400.
(Dr. Denny M. H. HUANG left at this point).
In my submission there is no evidence of any danger if properly con- trolled and there is no control unless we do license them.
Mr. LOBO spoke of more markets. How many? I agree, if there were a hundred more markets in the next six months, this motion would Then not be necessary. But I do not imagine that that would be so. Mr. Lo, I would ask him a question. Does not Singapore also have a high standard of public health? How else can the illegal hawking of fresh fish be eliminated than by properly controlling it, which is licensing it.
HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL
95
Mrs. ELLIOTT is indeed right when she said that my Motion is, in effect, to introduce a strong measure of control where there is at present no control whatsoever. Dr. HUANG said that the hawkers of fresh fish are very messy. Is any market stall any better? In fact, I would say that, at a very conservative estimate, about half a million people eat fresh fish bought from illegal hawkers every day in Hong Kong.
Dr. CHEUNG does not distinguish between cut fish and whole fish and the argument about flies surely does not apply as both meat and fish are cooked before eating. All the opponents of the motion miss this point that you can only control the present situation if you license it, and at present it is out of control. Corruption is rife and we are only digging our heads in the sand if we allow the present situation to continue.
Mr. Wu considers that hawking fish is equivalent to hawking of dangerous drugs or prostitution. I consider that there is no need even to reply to that statement but, incidentally, the legalization of dangerous drugs has been to the front in the treatment of drug addicts. Some people consider that if there was a method of selling drug addicts these drugs there would be no need for the dangerous position, that is at present in Hong Kong where there is a minimum of 80,000 drug addicts, and every day growing bigger especially amongst the young. But that is another subject altogether and I express no opinion either way, except to say that the hawking of fish cannot be equalled or equated to the hawking of dangerous drugs.
Mr. Peter CHAN, the lawyer, because there are two Peter CHANS on this Council, says that the Motion is too early. Well, I moved it 17 years ago, and what has been done in the meantime? Have there been enough markets, has the market development kept pace with the population development? No. As regards Mrs. SYMONS' remarks, she expressed concern that fish would become staler as hawkers proceeded down the road. Again, with control comes a static hawker in bazaars. That is in fact a type of mini-market, but as the mini-market pro- gramme will take years to complete, it is now that we need to license hawkers and to hawk in bazaars with proper controls. For these reasons I ask Members of this Council to vote in favour of the Motion.
MR. CHEONG-LEEN: --Mr. Chairman, on a point of personal explana- tion. Since you have borne with Mr. BERNACCHI for so long when he was talking about drug addiction, I would like to make a point of personal explanation on what has been raised by Mr. BERNACCHI in regard to the Motion itself. First of all, the number of illegal fish hawkers, as far as the Department is aware the number is between 300 to 400 and until it can be proved otherwise, I am prepared to accept that figure. Now, as regards Chai Wan, which Mr. BERNACCHI
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.