1971 — Page 14

Urban Council Proceedings 市政局議事錄 All AI Reviewed

Page 14 of 242

HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL

MR. SALES: -Well, for whichever years the Commissioner is able to provide us with the information since the Working Party's report in 1964.

DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS: Shall I try and answer that, Mr. Chairman? I don't know whether I can or not. The first thing I must make clear is that you cannot have an annual target when you are building estates for some 100,000—150,000 people. When the 1964 party produced its paper, it was quite clearly stated that you have a six-year programme and you try to get your six-year target. You may succeed and you may not. The Director of Public Works at that time, Mr. WRIGHT, said he felt there was little chance of achieving the target because of the difficulties of sites and many other problems. However, the targets are reviewed annually by the Housing Board and if you just take the target for six years and divide by six that gives you a rough order of the annual construction programme and it seems to me

MR. SALES: -Mr. Chairman, may I have your permission to interrupt on a point of clarification. The explanation given by the Director of Public Works was accepted by this Council that the building programme must be spanned over a number of years, but that what the Council wanted to see was that the average would be substantial, of the order of between 100 and 150 thousand people per year. That was the Council's recommendation at that time if I am not mistaken.

DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS: -Mr. Chairman, am I answering this question on what the programme was or what the Council wanted?

MR. SALES: -I thought that what the Urban Council wanted was what the programme should be. (Laughter).

DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS: -The target laid down by the Housing Board was accepted by the Urban Council. If you take that target and divide by six then the construction was not far short of the programme. In other words, the annual production target in 1966-67 was 620,000 units over six years, say 110,000 a year, we produced 125,000 that year. In 1967-68 the programme was 550,000, for six years, say 90,000 a year, we produced 121,500. For 1968-69, the programme was 425,000 for six years, say 70,000 a year, we produced 113,000. For 1969-70 the programme was 300,000, say 50,000 a year, we only produced 10,000. The reason for this, as we know, was the failure of three major contractors. 1970-71 the programme was 350,000, over six years, say 60,000 a year, we produced 84,900. The figures quoted by the Commissioner for Resettlement differ from mine as he is referring to units he has in hand, whereas the figures I give are units I have completed ready for handing over.

HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL

MR. SALES: -Mr. Chairman, may I say that I appreciate very much the frankness the Director of Public Works shows to this Council when answering our questions and supplementaries. This attitude makes for a better understanding of the situation. Now I have just one supplementary to put to him. The figures which he has cited, do they include Government Low-cost housing units as well as resettlement blocks?

DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS: -No, Sir, they do not cover Government Low-cost housing units. As regards Government Low-cost Housing, we are well ahead of any programme which Government has set. I think in the White Paper the aim is to produce 170,000 over six years. In fact, we are producing 180,000 and we are producing many more than the average rate over the next few years.

MR. SALES: That is what I have been trying to establish and I would like to congratulate the Public Works Department on its achievement notwithstanding the failure of the building contractors. I can only hope that they will meet with equal success in building swimming pools. (Laughter).

MR. BERNACCHI: -Perhaps the Commissioner for Resettlement would clarify the missing 26,000 in the Statement of Progress, paragraph 214 "Combined authorized population of urban estates and cottage areas at the end of March was 1,156,102". In the answer to the question the Commissioner states "If the 45,906 persons who were rehoused in pre-1953 'resettlement areas' were also to be included the total would have been 1,124,018", so there is a difference of about 26,000.

COMMISSIONER FOR RESETTLEMENT: —I am afraid I am not able to answer that. I shall give you an answer later.

MR. SALES: -Perhaps the 26,000 were housed in March, Mr. Chairman, for which the figures were not provided in the Commissioner's answer but perhaps were given in the Statement of Progress?

MR. RAYMOND Y. K. KAN: -Mr. Chairman, I am wondering whether this figure of over 1.1 million persons includes those in the Licensed area and, if not, very roughly how many persons are in the Licensed area?

COMMISSIONER FOR RESETTLEMENT: -I have to answer that in a separate answer to a separate question. It would be too much research for me to do it now.

MRS. E. ELLIOTT: -Mr. Chairman, in the Commissioner for Resettlement's answer he said that "if the 45,906 persons were rehoused in the pre-1953 does he mean cottage areas, because are they not the people who have been housed again after the cottages were demolished so they shouldn't count?

Page 14 of 242

Edit History

2026-05-14 13:31:22 · NVIDIA / meta/llama-4-maverick-17b-128e-instruct

Live

View comparison

AI Proofread

Page 14 of 242 8 HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL MR. SALES: -Well, for whichever years the Commissioner is able to provide us with the information since the Working Party's report in 1964. DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS: Shall I try and answer that, Mr. Chairman? I don't know whether I can or not. The first thing I must make clear is that you cannot have an annual target when you are building estates for some 100,000—150,000 people. When the 1964 party produced its paper, it was quite clearly stated that you have a six-year programme and you try to get your six-year target. You may succeed and you may not. The Director of Public Works at that time, Mr. WRIGHT, said he felt there was little chance of achieving the target because of the difficulties of sites and many other problems. However, the targets are reviewed annually by the Housing Board and if you just take the target for six years and divide by six that gives you a rough order of the annual construction programme and it seems to me MR. SALES: -Mr. Chairman, may I have your permission to interrupt on a point of clarification. The explanation given by the Director of Public Works was accepted by this Council that the building programme must be spanned over a number of years, but that what the Council wanted to see was that the average would be substantial, of the order of between 100 and 150 thousand people per year. That was the Council's recommendation at that time if I am not mistaken. DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS: -Mr. Chairman, am I answering this question on what the programme was or what the Council wanted? MR. SALES: -I thought that what the Urban Council wanted was what the programme should be. (Laughter). DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS: -The target laid down by the Housing Board was accepted by the Urban Council. If you take that target and divide by six then the construction was not far short of the programme. In other words, the annual production target in 1966-67 was 620,000 units over six years, say 110,000 a year, we produced 125,000 that year. In 1967-68 the programme was 550,000, for six years, say 90,000 a year, we produced 121,500. For 1968-69, the programme was 425,000 for six years, say 70,000 a year, we produced 113,000. For 1969-70 the programme was 300,000, say 50,000 a year, we only produced 10,000. The reason for this, as we know, was the failure of three major contractors. 1970-71 the programme was 350,000, over six years, say 60,000 a year, we produced 84,900. The figures quoted by the Commissioner for Resettlement differ from mine as he is referring to units he has in hand, whereas the figures I give are units I have completed ready for handing over. HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL 9 MR. SALES: -Mr. Chairman, may I say that I appreciate very much the frankness the Director of Public Works shows to this Council when answering our questions and supplementaries. This attitude makes for a better understanding of the situation. Now I have just one supplementary to put to him. The figures which he has cited, do they include Government Low-cost housing units as well as resettlement blocks? DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS: -No, Sir, they do not cover Government Low-cost housing units. As regards Government Low-cost Housing, we are well ahead of any programme which Government has set. I think in the White Paper the aim is to produce 170,000 over six years. In fact, we are producing 180,000 and we are producing many more than the average rate over the next few years. MR. SALES: That is what I have been trying to establish and I would like to congratulate the Public Works Department on its achievement notwithstanding the failure of the building contractors. I can only hope that they will meet with equal success in building swimming pools. (Laughter). MR. BERNACCHI: -Perhaps the Commissioner for Resettlement would clarify the missing 26,000 in the Statement of Progress, paragraph 214 "Combined authorized population of urban estates and cottage areas at the end of March was 1,156,102". In the answer to the question the Commissioner states "If the 45,906 persons who were rehoused in pre-1953 'resettlement areas' were also to be included the total would have been 1,124,018", so there is a difference of about 26,000. COMMISSIONER FOR RESETTLEMENT: —I am afraid I am not able to answer that. I shall give you an answer later. MR. SALES: -Perhaps the 26,000 were housed in March, Mr. Chairman, for which the figures were not provided in the Commissioner's answer but perhaps were given in the Statement of Progress? MR. RAYMOND Y. K. KAN: -Mr. Chairman, I am wondering whether this figure of over 1.1 million persons includes those in the Licensed area and, if not, very roughly how many persons are in the Licensed area? COMMISSIONER FOR RESETTLEMENT: -I have to answer that in a separate answer to a separate question. It would be too much research for me to do it now. 53 MRS. E. ELLIOTT: -Mr. Chairman, in the Commissioner for Resettlement's answer he said that "if the 45,906 persons were rehoused in the pre-1953 does he mean cottage areas, because are they not the people who have been housed again after the cottages were demolished so they shouldn't count? Page 14 of 242

Baseline (Original)

Page 14 of 242 8 HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL MR. SALES: -Well, for whichever years the Commissioner is able to provide us with the information since the Working Party's report in 1964. DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS: Shall I try and answer that, Mr. Chairman? I don't know whether I can or not. The first thing I must make clear is that you cannot have annual target when you are building estates for some 100,000—150,000 people. When 1964 party produced its paper, it was quite clearly stated that you have a six-year programme and you try to get your six-year target. You may succeed and you may not. The Director of Public Works at that time, Mr. WRIGHT, said he felt there was little chance of achieving the target because of the difficulties of sites and many other problems. However, the targets are reviewed annually by the Housing Board and if you just take the target for six years and divide by six that gives you a rough order of the annual construction programme and it seems to me MR. SALES: -Mr. Chairman, may I have your permission to interrupt on a point of clarification. The explanation given by the Director of Public Works was accepted by this Council that the building programme must be spanned over a number of years, but that what the Council wanted to see was that the average would be substantial, of the order of between 100 and 150 thousand people per year. That was the Council's recommendation at that time if I am not mistaken. DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS: -Mr. Chairman, am I answering this question on what the programme was or what the Council wanted? MR. SALES: -I thought that what the Urban Council wanted was what the programme should be. (Laughter). DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS:-The target laid down by the Housing Board was accepted by the Urban Council. If you take that target and divide by six then the construction was not far short of the programme. In other words, the annual production target in 1966-67 was 620,000 units over six years, say 110,000 a year, we produced 125,000 that year. In 1967-68 the programme was 550,000, for six years, say 90,000 a year, we produced 121,500. For 1968-69, the programme was 425,000 for six years, say 70,000 a year, we produced 113,000. For 1969-70 the programme was 300,000, say 50,000 a year, we only produced 10,000. The reason for this, as we know, was the failure of three major contractors. 1970-71 the programme was 350,000, over six years, say 60,000 a year, we produced 84,900. The figures quoted by the Commissioner for Resettlement differ from mine as he is referring to units he has in hand, whereas the figures I give are units I have completed ready for handing over. HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL 9 MR. SALES: -Mr. Chairman, may I say that I appreciate very much the frankness the Director of Public Works shows to this Council when answering our questions and supplementaries. This attitude makes for a better understanding of the situation. Now I have just one supple- mentary to put to him. The figures which he has cited, do they include Government Low-cost housing units as well as resettlement blocks? DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS:-No, Sir, they do not cover Government Low-cost housing units. As regards Government Low- cost Housing, we are well ahead of any programme which Government has set. I think in the White Paper the aim is to produce 170,000 over six years. In fact we are producing 180,000 and we are producing many more than the average rate over the next few years. MR. SALES: That is what I have been trying to establish and I would like to congratulate the Public Works Department on its achieve- ment notwithstanding the failure of the building contractors. I can only hope that they will meet with equal success in building swimming pools. (Laughter). MR. BERNACCHI:-Perhaps the Commissioner for Resettlement would clarify the missing 26,000 in the Statement of Progress, paragraph 214 "Combined authorized population of urban estates and cottage areas at the end of March was 1,156,102". In the answer to the question the Commissioner states "If the 45,906 persons who were rehoused in pre 1953 'resettlement areas' were also to be included the total would have been 1,124,018", so there is a difference of about 26,000. COMMISSIONER FOR RESETTLEMENT:—I am afraid I am not able to answer that. I shall give you an answer later. MR. SALES: -Perhaps the 26,000 were housed in March, Mr. Chairman, for which the figures were not provided in the Commis- sioner's answer but perhaps were given in the Statement of Progress? MR. RAYMOND Y. K. KAN:-Mr. Chairman, I am wondering whether this figure of over 1.1 million persons include those in the Licensed area and, if not, very roughly how many persons are in the Licensed area? COMMISSIONER FOR RESETTLEMENT:-I have to answer that in a separate answer to a separate question. It would be too much research for me to do it now. 53 MRS. E. ELLIOTT:-Mr. Chairman, in the Commissioner for Resettlement's answer he said that "if the 45,906 persons were rehoused in the pre 1953 does he mean cottage areas, because are they not the people who have been housed again after the cottages were demolished so they shouldn't count?

2026-05-14 13:31:22 · Baseline

View content

Page 14 of 242

HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL

MR. SALES: -Well, for whichever years the Commissioner is able to provide us with the information since the Working Party's report in 1964.

DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS: Shall I try and answer that, Mr. Chairman? I don't know whether I can or not. The first thing I must make clear is that you cannot have annual target when you are building estates for some 100,000—150,000 people. When 1964 party produced its paper, it was quite clearly stated that you have a six-year programme and you try to get your six-year target. You may succeed and you may not. The Director of Public Works at that time, Mr. WRIGHT, said he felt there was little chance of achieving the target because of the difficulties of sites and many other problems. However, the targets are reviewed annually by the Housing Board and if you just take the target for six years and divide by six that gives you a rough order of the annual construction programme and it seems to me

DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS: -Mr. Chairman, am I answering this question on what the programme was or what the Council wanted?

MR. SALES: -I thought that what the Urban Council wanted was what the programme should be. (Laughter).

DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS:-The target laid down by the Housing Board was accepted by the Urban Council. If you take that target and divide by six then the construction was not far short of the programme. In other words, the annual production target in 1966-67 was 620,000 units over six years, say 110,000 a year, we produced 125,000 that year. In 1967-68 the programme was 550,000, for six years, say 90,000 a year, we produced 121,500. For 1968-69, the programme was 425,000 for six years, say 70,000 a year, we produced 113,000. For 1969-70 the programme was 300,000, say 50,000 a year, we only produced 10,000. The reason for this, as we know, was the failure of three major contractors. 1970-71 the programme was 350,000, over six years, say 60,000 a year, we produced 84,900. The figures quoted by the Commissioner for Resettlement differ from mine as he is referring to units he has in hand, whereas the figures I give are units I have completed ready for handing over.

HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL

MR. SALES: -Mr. Chairman, may I say that I appreciate very much the frankness the Director of Public Works shows to this Council when answering our questions and supplementaries. This attitude makes for a better understanding of the situation. Now I have just one supple- mentary to put to him. The figures which he has cited, do they include Government Low-cost housing units as well as resettlement blocks?

DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS:-No, Sir, they do not cover Government Low-cost housing units. As regards Government Low- cost Housing, we are well ahead of any programme which Government has set. I think in the White Paper the aim is to produce 170,000 over six years. In fact we are producing 180,000 and we are producing many more than the average rate over the next few years.

MR. SALES: That is what I have been trying to establish and I would like to congratulate the Public Works Department on its achieve- ment notwithstanding the failure of the building contractors. I can only hope that they will meet with equal success in building swimming pools. (Laughter).

MR. BERNACCHI:-Perhaps the Commissioner for Resettlement would clarify the missing 26,000 in the Statement of Progress, paragraph 214 "Combined authorized population of urban estates and cottage areas at the end of March was 1,156,102". In the answer to the question the Commissioner states "If the 45,906 persons who were rehoused in pre 1953 'resettlement areas' were also to be included the total would have been 1,124,018", so there is a difference of about 26,000.

COMMISSIONER FOR RESETTLEMENT:—I am afraid I am not able to answer that. I shall give you an answer later.

MR. SALES: -Perhaps the 26,000 were housed in March, Mr. Chairman, for which the figures were not provided in the Commis- sioner's answer but perhaps were given in the Statement of Progress?

MR. RAYMOND Y. K. KAN:-Mr. Chairman, I am wondering whether this figure of over 1.1 million persons include those in the Licensed area and, if not, very roughly how many persons are in the Licensed area?

COMMISSIONER FOR RESETTLEMENT:-I have to answer that in a separate answer to a separate question. It would be too much research for me to do it now.

MRS. E. ELLIOTT:-Mr. Chairman, in the Commissioner for Resettlement's answer he said that "if the 45,906 persons were rehoused in the pre 1953 does he mean cottage areas, because are they not the people who have been housed again after the cottages were demolished so they shouldn't count?

1971 — Page 14

Edit History

Comments

Private Research Note