HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL
158As the Motion is worded, Mr. Chairman, I am opposed to it. As far as mini-markets are concerned, I assure Mr. BERNACCHI and Mrs. ELLIOTT that this is nothing new. It is something which we have discussed in the Hawker Policy Select Committee quite a few times. It is a matter which is very much in our minds. I assure them that urgent steps are being taken to establish such mini-markets, particularly in Resettlement Estates, and to license fresh meat stall holders in such mini-markets, but definitely I am not in favour of licensed meat hawkers as such.
MR. BLAKER: Mr. Chairman, I am afraid I have to oppose this Motion also. If it were worded that the Council appreciates the need for cheap distribution of fresh meat, then I think that would be acceptable, but we are taken a step further.
"appreciates the need for hawkers of fresh meat". We are asked to conclude that because we want cheap fresh meat, therefore it must come through hawkers. Are there not other methods of distributing fresh meat cheaply, by shops, in markets, by bazaars? Surely, the distribution of fresh meat through hawkers lends itself most to unhygienic conditions and is least able to be controlled. I go along with their thinking that the present state of affairs, whereby the facts are that fresh meat is sold on a wide scale illegally, is a most unsatisfactory state of affairs and cannot be accepted in perpetuity, lending itself to corruption as it does. But, because this present situation is unsatisfactory, therefore do we necessarily have to legitimize it? If this argument were applied to other offences, we would have to legitimize parking offences, civil offences, all sorts of offences. I do not see that because we have in the past been unable to contain this unsatisfactory state of affairs, therefore the solution is to step backwards and legitimize. Surely, there is a possibility of stepping forwards? The Hawker Committee has in the past been unable to contain this problem, but there has been a change in the construction of this Hawker Policy Committee, and the Government is now willing to stand behind the policies being worked out by this Hawker Policy Committee. Therefore it seems to me that the evidence of the past that this problem could not be improved does not necessarily lead one to suppose that the newly-formed policies of the moment cannot deal with this matter satisfactorily. I oppose the motion on these grounds.
MR. SALES: Mr. Chairman, when, direct to Mr. BERNACCHI in your presence, I asked what purpose he had in view by the introduction of this Motion, I think the immediate answer was that the sale of chickens had been tolerated. The supplementary question I had at that time was whether the fowl had its feathers plucked by the Reform Club or not. The procedure to my mind, if Mr. BERNACCHI feels as strongly as he does over this matter and, in particular, where Resettlement Estates are involved, is that as chairman of the Resettlement Policy Select Committee it could be discussed in the first instance in that Select Committee and a proper recommendation be made to the Markets Select Committee and the Hawker Policy Select Committee. That would have been the procedure that I would have advocated in the circumstances. Mr. Chairman, knowing this matter in the way that I do, having been chairman of the Markets Select Committee some years ago, I would suggest that this programme of constructing two markets and redeveloping old ones per year should be revived and pursued vigorously. At the time that this policy was adopted, we had the assurance that it would be pursued, but for some reason unknown to me when the Hawker and the Markets Select Committees were combined, the policy was not followed. The suggestion of mini-markets is a good one which would suit our local circumstances but, as my friend Mr. BLAKER has pointed out, the reason for the setting up of such mini-markets should be to put on a proper basis the sale of foodstuff to the public in certain areas not served by the markets which are in existence. But that policy should be pursued because it is the right thing to do, not because the situation at the present lends itself to an unsatisfactory state of affairs involving corruption. That in itself is no reason, why a variation of the policy, which involves public health, should be adopted. Sir, in the circumstances, just as I said at the time, when virtually an identical motion was introduced over the sale of fresh fish, that the subject was too fishy for intervention on my part, with emphasis on the word "fishy", to-day I do not think the subject has enough meat for us to vote in favour of it.
CHAIRMAN: --Does any other Member wish to speak? No? Then, Mr. BERNACCHI, would you like to exercise your right of reply?
MR. BERNACCHI: Mr. Chairman, Mr. Hilton CHEONG-LEEN has, of course, been riding old horses again, including the dead horses. (Laughter). He is, of course, ignoring that meat will be sold illegally, ignoring our contention that the details for cleanliness will be worked out where none exist at the moment at all, and ignoring our statement that markets, even mini-markets, are years ahead. If illegal hawkers can get interior meat cheaply, then surely he cannot guarantee that legal ones would not do so also. As for the threat of cholera, in so far as it is contained in fresh meat, it is because we leave these illegal food hawkers to operate illegally, instead of licensing them and properly inspecting them with regular inspections. As for more staff, we have just been told earlier on this afternoon that it will take months even to train them, and years before our staff on the ground is adequate to control illegal hawking. So, in my submission, the persons that have spoken against the motion are just sticking their heads into the ground, into the sand like ostriches, and saying: "well, we oppose it on principle and it is up to the Government and the Urban Council
HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL 159Page 90 of 237
Page 90
Page 91
237
|
158
HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL
As the Motion is worded, Mr. Chairman, I am opposed to it. As far as mini-markets are concerned, I assure Mr. BERNACCHI and Mrs. ELLIOTT that this is nothing new. It is something which we have discussed in the Hawker Policy Select Committee quite a few times. It is a matter which is very much in our minds. I assure them that urgent steps are being taken to establish such mini-markets, partic- ularly in Resettlement Estates, and to license fresh meat stall holders in such mini-markets, but definitely I am not in favour of licensed meat hawkers as such.
MR. BLAKER: Mr. Chairman, I am afraid I have to oppose this Motion also. If it were worded that the Council appreciates the need for cheap distribution of fresh meat, then I think that would be accept- able, but we are taken a step further.
"appreciates the need for hawkers of fresh meat". We are asked to conclude that because we want cheap fresh meat, therefore it must come through hawkers. Are there not other methods of distributing fresh meat cheaply, by shops, in markets, by bazaars? Surely, the distribution of fresh meat through hawkers lends itself most to unhygienic conditions and is least able to be controlled. I go along with their thinking that the present state of affairs, whereby the facts are that fresh meat is sold on a wide scale illegally, is a most unsatisfactory state of affairs and cannot be accepted in perpetuity, lending itself to corruption as it does. But, because this present situation is unsatisfactory, therefore do we necessarily have to legitimize it? If this argument were applied to other offences, we would have to legitimize parking offences, civil offences, all sorts of offences. I do not see that because we have in the past been unable to contain this unsatisfactory state of affairs, therefore the solution is to step backwards and legitimize. Surely, there is a possibility of stepping forwards? The Hawker Committee has in the past been unable to contain this problem, but there has been a change in the construction of this Hawker Policy Committee, and the Government is now willing to stand behind the policies being worked out by this Hawker Policy Committee. Therefore it seems to me that the evidence of the past that this problem could not be improved does not necessarily lead one to suppose that the newly- formed policies of the moment cannot deal with this matter satis- factorily. I oppose the motion on these grounds.
MR. SALES-Mr. Chairman, when, direct to Mr. BERNACCHI in your presence, I asked what purpose he had in view by the introduction of this Motion, I think the immediate answer was that the sale of chickens had been tolerated. The supplementary question I had at that time was whether the fowl had its feathers plucked by the Reform Club or not. The procedure to my mind, if Mr. BERNACCHI feels as strongly as he does over this matter and, in particular, where Resettle- ment Estates are involved. is that as chairman of the Resettlement
HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL
159
Policy Select Committee it could be discussed in the first instance in that Select Committee and a proper recommendation be made to the Markets Select Committee and the Hawker Policy Select Committee. That would have been the procedure that I would have advocated in the circumstances. Mr. Chairman, knowing this matter in the way that I do, having been chairman of the Markets Select Committee some years ago, I would suggest that this programme of constructing two markets and redeveloping old ones per year should be revived and pursued vigorously. At the time that this policy was adopted, we had the assurance that it would be pursued, but for some reason unknown to me when the Hawker and the Markets Select Committees were combined, the policy was not followed. The suggestion of mini- markets is a good one which would suit our local circumstances but, as my friend Mr. BLAKER has pointed out, the reason for the setting up of such mini-markets should be to put on a proper basis the sale of foodstuff to the public in certain areas not served by the markets which are in existence. But that policy should be pursued because it is the right thing to do, not because the situation at the present lends itself to an unsatisfactory state of affairs involving corruption. That in itself is no reason, why a variation of the policy, which involves public health, should be adopted. Sir, in the circumstances, just as I said at the time, when virtually an identical motion was introduced over the sale of fresh fish, that the subject was too fishy for intervention on my part, with emphasis on the word "fishy", to-day I do not think the subject has enough meat for us to vote in favour of it.
CHAIRMAN: --Does any other Member wish to speak? No? Then, Mr. BERNACCHI, would you like to exercise your right of reply?
MR. BERNACCHI:-Mr. Chairman, Mr. Hilton CHEONG-LEEN has, of course, been riding old horses again, including the dead horses. (Laughter). He is, of course, ignoring that meat will be sold illegally, ignoring our contention that the details for cleanliness will be worked out where none exist at the moment at all, and ignoring our statement that markets, even mini-markets, are years ahead. If illegal hawkers can get interior meat cheaply, then surely he cannot guarantee that legal ones would not do so also. As for the threat of cholera, in so far as it is contained in fresh meat, it is because we leave these illegal food hawkers to operate illegally, instead of licensing them and prop. erly inspecting them with regular inspections. As for more staff, we have just been told earlier on this afternoon that it will take months even to train them, and years before our staff on the ground is adequate to control illegal hawking. So, in my submission, the persons that have spoken against the motion are just sticking their heads into the ground, into the sand like ostriches, and saying: "well, we oppose it on principle and it is up to the Government and the Urban Council
Page 90 of 237
Page 90Page 91
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.