1979 — Page 104

Urban Council Proceedings 市政局議事錄 All AI Reviewed

Page 104 of 136

174

HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL

The success of removing hawkers into markets relies on two factors: firstly, there must be sufficient stalls to resite all hawkers in the vicinity, and secondly, there must be an effective control not to allow other hawkers to occupy the vacant hawking sites.

The problem for the Urban Council is how to acquire a piece of land big enough for a market to accommodate all hawkers nearby, and to get effective enforcement to keep hawkers off-street afterwards.

Licence Fees

The estimated expenditure for the control of hawkers for 1980-81 amounts to $50,785,000. With the newly introduced licence fees effective on 1 March 1980, the estimated revenue will be about $16,195,000. There is still a deficit of $34,590,000 for the control of hawkers for this year.

The proposal for the increase in hawker licence fees gave rise to some discussion by the public, particularly among the hawkers themselves.

The focal points for discussion are:-

(a) It is unfair for the licensed hawkers to pay for the control of the unlicensed hawkers;

(b) The Urban Council should get sufficient sites for all licensed traders; and (c) The increase is too high a figure.

Examining the resolution for the increase for hawker fees, it shows that there is a subsidy of 70% towards the estimated cost of hawker management. The licensed hawkers only pay 30% of the total cost.

According to the statistics supplied by the Urban Services Department, there are 31,000 licensed hawkers and about 11,000 unlicensed hawkers in the urban area. Another 12,000 hawkers are now trading in public housing estates.

From the above figures, it indicates that both the licensed and the unlicensed hawkers are subsidized by ratepayers in street trading management.

As for the problem to build more markets and bazaars, it depends on whether adequate spaces for the projects can be obtained. The allocation of land is not under the jurisdiction of the Urban Council.

The new licence fee for an itinerant hawker is $120 per annum. That is $10 a month. If a hawker cannot afford to pay 34¢ a day for licence fee, he might be better off to find a job in a factory.

The new licence fee for a cooked food stall is the highest fee in the schedule. It seems not too hard for them to pay $373 per month.

Hawker Permitted Areas

The Hawker Permitted Areas were founded in 1974 to tackle the problem of unemployment. It was thought that when the economic situation becomes better, these temporary hawkers would go back to factories or business firms. But for one reason or another, they stay on the Hawker Permitted Areas with no intention of changing jobs. That is why the number of hawkers in the Hawker Permitted Areas becomes rather static.

These Hawker Permitted Areas create a lot of problems for the community. Besides street cleansing, obstruction of traffic and allocation of sites, there is another problem, and that is: any unlicensed hawker can trade legally in these areas.

In order to have better control of these hawkers, the question arises as to whether licences should be issued to them: it was a hot issue for discussion for the Urban Council last year.

There are about 23,000 unlicensed hawkers in the urban area, including those in Housing Estates. If there is no plan to control them more strictly, the number tends to increase because, generally speaking, the income of a hawker is better than that of a worker who finds a job in a factory.

There are several good reasons to license these unlicensed hawkers :—

(a) The exact number of hawkers in each area will be available;

(b) If the magnitude of the problem is known, it is easier to estimate how big a control force should be employed to deal with the area;

(c) The Urban Council would be in a better position to plan to resite them to off-street sites, markets and bazaars;

(d) The licence fees help to reduce the amount of subsidy for hawker management; and

(e) It is fair to the licensed hawkers if the unlicensed hawkers will also have to pay licence fees in Hawker Permitted Areas as both types of hawkers are enjoying street trading in the same way in these areas. If the Urban Council comes to an agreement that unlicensed hawkers should be licensed in the Hawker Permitted Areas, then the problem of what are the criteria to issue licences will be pursued.

It may not need to wait long to have a conclusion.

The U.C. Budget

The U.C. Budget may be in deficit after 1981.

From the estimated budget for 1980-81, it is found that there is an estimated deficit of $205,937,600 for 1980-81, and the estimated excess of Liabilities over Assets on 31 March 1981 is $64,990,756.

Even this year the actual revenue may be increased due to re-assessment of the rateable value of all properties; and the actual expenditure may be reduced due to the delayed action on the construction of the proposed projects. But the difference is easily off-set by the unpredictable increase in staff cost.

175

Page 104 of 136

Edit History

2026-05-15 08:42:52 · NVIDIA / meta/llama-4-maverick-17b-128e-instruct
Live
View comparison
AI Proofread
Page 104 of 136 174 HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL The success of removing hawkers into markets relies on two factors: firstly, there must be sufficient stalls to resite all hawkers in the vicinity, and secondly, there must be an effective control not to allow other hawkers to occupy the vacant hawking sites. The problem for the Urban Council is how to acquire a piece of land big enough for a market to accommodate all hawkers nearby, and to get effective enforcement to keep hawkers off-street afterwards. Licence Fees The estimated expenditure for the control of hawkers for 1980-81 amounts to $50,785,000. With the newly introduced licence fees effective on 1 March 1980, the estimated revenue will be about $16,195,000. There is still a deficit of $34,590,000 for the control of hawkers for this year. The proposal for the increase in hawker licence fees gave rise to some discussion by the public, particularly among the hawkers themselves. The focal points for discussion are:- (a) It is unfair for the licensed hawkers to pay for the control of the unlicensed hawkers; (b) The Urban Council should get sufficient sites for all licensed traders; and (c) The increase is too high a figure. Examining the resolution for the increase for hawker fees, it shows that there is a subsidy of 70% towards the estimated cost of hawker management. The licensed hawkers only pay 30% of the total cost. According to the statistics supplied by the Urban Services Department, there are 31,000 licensed hawkers and about 11,000 unlicensed hawkers in the urban area. Another 12,000 hawkers are now trading in public housing estates. From the above figures, it indicates that both the licensed and the unlicensed hawkers are subsidized by ratepayers in street trading management. As for the problem to build more markets and bazaars, it depends on whether adequate spaces for the projects can be obtained. The allocation of land is not under the jurisdiction of the Urban Council. The new licence fee for an itinerant hawker is $120 per annum. That is $10 a month. If a hawker cannot afford to pay 34¢ a day for licence fee, he might be better off to find a job in a factory. The new licence fee for a cooked food stall is the highest fee in the schedule. It seems not too hard for them to pay $373 per month. Hawker Permitted Areas The Hawker Permitted Areas were founded in 1974 to tackle the problem of unemployment. It was thought that when the economic situation becomes better, these temporary hawkers would go back to factories or business firms. But for one reason or another, they stay on the Hawker Permitted Areas with no intention of changing jobs. That is why the number of hawkers in the Hawker Permitted Areas becomes rather static. These Hawker Permitted Areas create a lot of problems for the community. Besides street cleansing, obstruction of traffic and allocation of sites, there is another problem, and that is: any unlicensed hawker can trade legally in these areas. In order to have better control of these hawkers, the question arises as to whether licences should be issued to them: it was a hot issue for discussion for the Urban Council last year. There are about 23,000 unlicensed hawkers in the urban area, including those in Housing Estates. If there is no plan to control them more strictly, the number tends to increase because, generally speaking, the income of a hawker is better than that of a worker who finds a job in a factory. There are several good reasons to license these unlicensed hawkers :— (a) The exact number of hawkers in each area will be available; (b) If the magnitude of the problem is known, it is easier to estimate how big a control force should be employed to deal with the area; (c) The Urban Council would be in a better position to plan to resite them to off-street sites, markets and bazaars; (d) The licence fees help to reduce the amount of subsidy for hawker management; and (e) It is fair to the licensed hawkers if the unlicensed hawkers will also have to pay licence fees in Hawker Permitted Areas as both types of hawkers are enjoying street trading in the same way in these areas. If the Urban Council comes to an agreement that unlicensed hawkers should be licensed in the Hawker Permitted Areas, then the problem of what are the criteria to issue licences will be pursued. It may not need to wait long to have a conclusion. The U.C. Budget The U.C. Budget may be in deficit after 1981. From the estimated budget for 1980-81, it is found that there is an estimated deficit of $205,937,600 for 1980-81, and the estimated excess of Liabilities over Assets on 31 March 1981 is $64,990,756. Even this year the actual revenue may be increased due to re-assessment of the rateable value of all properties; and the actual expenditure may be reduced due to the delayed action on the construction of the proposed projects. But the difference is easily off-set by the unpredictable increase in staff cost. 175 Page 104 of 136
Baseline (Original)
Page 104 of 136 174 HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL The success of removing hawkers into markets relies on two factors: firstly, there must be sufficient stalls to resite all hawkers in the vicinity, and secondly, there must be an effective control not to allow other hawkers to occupy the vacant hawking sites. The problem for the Urban Council is how to acquire a piece of land big enough for a market to accommodate all hawkers nearby, and to get effective enforcement to keep hawkers off-street afterwards. Licence Fees The estimated expenditure for the control of hawkers for 1980-81 amounts to $50,785,000. With the newly introduced licence fees effective on 1 March 1980, the estimated revenue will be about $16,195,000. There is still a deficit of $34,590,000 for the control of hawkers for this year. The proposal for the increase in hawker licence fees gave rise to some discussion by the public, particularly among the hawkers themselves. The focal points for discussion are:- (a) It is unfair for the licensed hawkers to pay for the control of the unlicensed hawkers; (b) The Urban Council should get sufficient sites for all licensed traders; and (c) The increase is too high a figure. Examining the resolution for the increase for hawker fees, it shows that there is a subsidy of 70% towards the estimated cost of hawker management. The licensed hawkers only pay 30% of the total cost. According to the statistics supplied by the Urban Services Department, there are 31,000 licensed hawkers and about 11,000 unlicensed hawkers in the urban area. Another 12,000 hawkers are now trading in public housing estates. From the above figures, it indicates that both the licensed and the un- licensed hawkers are subsidized by ratepayers in street trading management. As for the problem to build more markets and bazaars, it depends on whether adequate spaces for the projects can be obtained. The allocation of land is not under the jurisdiction of the Urban Council. The new licence fee for an itinerant hawker is $120 per annum. That is $10 a month. If a hawker cannot afford to pay 34¢ a day for licence fee, he might be better off to find a job in a factory. The new licence fee for a cooked food stall is the highest fee in the schedule. It seems not too hard for them to pay $373 per month. Hawker Permitted Areas The Hawker Permitted Areas were founded in 1974 to tackle the problem of unemployment. It was thought that when the economic situation becomes HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL Page 104 of 136 175 better, these temporary hawkers would go back to factories or business firms. But for one reason or another, they stay on the Hawker Permitted Areas with no intention of changing jobs. That is why the number of hawkers in the Hawker Permitted Areas becomes rather static. These Hawker Permitted Areas create a lot of problems for the community. Besides street cleansing, obstruction of traffic and allocation of sites, there is another problem, and that is: any unlicensed hawker can trade legally in these areas. In order to have better control of these hawkers, the question arises as to whether licences should be issued to them: it was a hot issue for discussion for the Urban Council last year. There are about 23,000 unlicensed hawkers in the urban area, including those in Housing Estates. If there is no plan to control them more strictly, the number tends to increase because, generally speaking, the income of a hawker is better than that of a worker who finds a job in a factory. There are several good reasons to license these unlicensed hawkers :— (a) The exact number of hawkers in each area will be available; (b) If the magnitude of the problem is known, it is easier to estimate how big a control force should be employed to deal with the area; (c) The Urban Council would be in a better position to plan to resite them to off-street sites, markets and bazaars; (d) The licence fees help to reduce the amount of subsidy for hawker management; and (e) It is fair to the licensed hawkers if the unlicensed hawkers will also have to pay licence fees in Hawker Permitted Areas as both types of hawkers are enjoying street trading in the same way in these areas. If the Urban Council comes to an agreement that unlicensed hawkers should be licensed in the Hawker Permitted Areas, then the problem of what are the criteria to issue licences will be pursued. It may not need to wait long to have a conclusion. The U.C. Budget The U.C. Budget may be in deficit after 1981. From the estimated budget for 1980-81, it is found that there is an estimated deficit of $205,937,600 for 1980-81, and the estimated excess of Liabilities over Assets on 31 March 1981 is $64,990,756. Even this year the actual revenue may be increased due to re-assess- ment of the rateable value of all properties; and the actual expenditure may be reduced due to the delayed action on the construction of the proposed projects. But the difference is easily off-set by the unpredictable increase in staff cost.
2026-05-15 08:42:52 · Baseline
View content

Page 104 of 136

174

HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL

The success of removing hawkers into markets relies on two factors: firstly, there must be sufficient stalls to resite all hawkers in the vicinity, and secondly, there must be an effective control not to allow other hawkers

to occupy the vacant hawking sites.

The problem for the Urban Council is how to acquire a piece of land big enough for a market to accommodate all hawkers nearby, and to get effective

enforcement to keep hawkers off-street afterwards.

Licence Fees

The estimated expenditure for the control of hawkers for 1980-81 amounts to $50,785,000. With the newly introduced licence fees effective on 1 March 1980, the estimated revenue will be about $16,195,000. There is still a deficit of $34,590,000 for the control of hawkers for this year.

The proposal for the increase in hawker licence fees gave rise to some discussion by the public, particularly among the hawkers themselves.

The focal points for discussion are:-

(a) It is unfair for the licensed hawkers to pay for the control of the

unlicensed hawkers;

(b) The Urban Council should get sufficient sites for all licensed traders; and (c) The increase is too high a figure.

Examining the resolution for the increase for hawker fees, it shows that there is a subsidy of 70% towards the estimated cost of hawker management. The licensed hawkers only pay 30% of the total cost.

According to the statistics supplied by the Urban Services Department, there are 31,000 licensed hawkers and about 11,000 unlicensed hawkers in the urban area. Another 12,000 hawkers are now trading in public housing

estates.

From the above figures, it indicates that both the licensed and the un- licensed hawkers are subsidized by ratepayers in street trading management.

As for the problem to build more markets and bazaars, it depends on whether adequate spaces for the projects can be obtained. The allocation of land is not under the jurisdiction of the Urban Council.

The new licence fee for an itinerant hawker is $120 per annum. That is $10 a month. If a hawker cannot afford to pay 34¢ a day for licence fee, he might be better off to find a job in a factory.

The new licence fee for a cooked food stall is the highest fee in the schedule. It seems not too hard for them to pay $373 per month.

Hawker Permitted Areas

The Hawker Permitted Areas were founded in 1974 to tackle the problem of unemployment. It was thought that when the economic situation becomes

HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL

Page 104 of 136

175

better, these temporary hawkers would go back to factories or business firms. But for one reason or another, they stay on the Hawker Permitted Areas with no intention of changing jobs. That is why the number of hawkers in the Hawker Permitted Areas becomes rather static.

These Hawker Permitted Areas create a lot of problems for the community. Besides street cleansing, obstruction of traffic and allocation of sites, there is another problem, and that is: any unlicensed hawker can trade legally in

these areas.

In order to have better control of these hawkers, the question arises as to whether licences should be issued to them: it was a hot issue for discussion for the Urban Council last year.

There are about 23,000 unlicensed hawkers in the urban area, including those in Housing Estates. If there is no plan to control them more strictly, the number tends to increase because, generally speaking, the income of a hawker is better than that of a worker who finds a job in a factory.

There are several good reasons to license these unlicensed hawkers :— (a) The exact number of hawkers in each area will be available;

(b) If the magnitude of the problem is known, it is easier to estimate how

big a control force should be employed to deal with the area;

(c) The Urban Council would be in a better position to plan to resite them

to off-street sites, markets and bazaars;

(d) The licence fees help to reduce the amount of subsidy for hawker

management; and

(e) It is fair to the licensed hawkers if the unlicensed hawkers will also have to pay licence fees in Hawker Permitted Areas as both types of hawkers are enjoying street trading in the same way in these areas. If the Urban Council comes to an agreement that unlicensed hawkers should be licensed in the Hawker Permitted Areas, then the problem of what are the criteria to issue licences will be pursued.

It may not need to wait long to have a conclusion.

The U.C. Budget

The U.C. Budget may be in deficit after 1981.

From the estimated budget for 1980-81, it is found that there is an estimated deficit of $205,937,600 for 1980-81, and the estimated excess of Liabilities over Assets on 31 March 1981 is $64,990,756.

Even this year the actual revenue may be increased due to re-assess- ment of the rateable value of all properties; and the actual expenditure may be reduced due to the delayed action on the construction of the proposed projects. But the difference is easily off-set by the unpredictable increase in staff cost.

Comments

Approved members can add comments, bookmarks, and private notes.

No comments yet.

Private Research Note

Private notes are available after approval.