Page 158 of 194
280
HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL
A few years ago, I was sent by this Council to visit London and one of our jobs was to study their ways and means of dealing with hawkers. The immediate improvement we made then was to call these small businessmen STREET TRADERS, not hawkers, I think that was a right decision.
I NEVER AGREED that we spend HK$70 million per annum SUBSIDIZING street traders, we might have spent a lot of money on street traders related activities for the good of the community. If there is any element of subsidy, it is a subsidy for those people who can only afford to buy from street traders, and not from the comparatively more expensive shops.
It is a fact that some of us do not know enough about the facts underlying the street traders problem, one just has to keep on learning. To me, street traders related matters is a very lively subject which every new councillor should try to learn more and more about them.
Mr. SULKE may be interested to know that some street traders have become very rich, some have retired, some are still street trading, others decided to operate from expensive commercial premises. Of course, there are many who would like to keep on street trading for the rest of their lives with an admirable philosophy in life; be your own BOSS, take HOLIDAYS whenever you like, don't have to look at the facial gesture of your employer, be poor and happy.
I strongly believe that street traders fill a social need. Let me give you one example: on more than one occasion when I needed a belt, I went to a shop. Very often they did not have my size, when you want an extra hole for the belt, they do not have the equipment to facilitate an extra hole for the belt. Invariably I end up in the Temple Street hawkers bazaar in the evening, those belt selling hawkers have the holes in the belt made to my size within ten seconds. Of course, the price suited me as much as the size.
Years ago, when we cleared certain hawkers conglomerations in North Point, we arranged for officers from the Labour Department to help those displaced hawkers to find jobs; as far as I can remember, only one person bothered to register.
Yes, we have made good effort to channel them into our markets that we have built and are still building. If the particular market is viable, they stay put, if not, back to the street again. What we must do is to make sure that the markets that we are going to build are viable.
If you call Street Traders as a problem, the problem has been with us for a number of decades, it has been so for parts of London which have learned something and New York and many many other cities. Why should we spend half a million which has been reduced to about $300,000 now of our much needed cash for the fancy idea of getting a study about it.
It is very kind of Mr. SULKE to introduce this subject for a debate in this Council so that we can all express what we know about the subject and attract more attention from the public who may in turn offer more ideas for us to continue our endeavour in tackling this thankless job of trying to improve the situation.
With the permission of the Markets and Street Traders Select Committee, I strongly urged that it is high time that we should arrange more site visits to areas where street traders are offering their good services to the community, whether you call it BLACK SPOT or otherwise.
I always listen to Mr. SULKE's speeches with great interest and find them stimulating and persuasive. Although he has not persuaded me to support his motion, I must put on record that I have a lot of respect for his sincerity and courage in moving this motion before Council.
It was my original intention to amend Mr. SULKE's motion so that what he wants to be done will be done without causing the unnecessary waste of money and with much better effect. Trying to amend his motion poses some technical problems, after consulting some other colleagues in this Council, I have decided to second a new motion in order to achieve what we all want to achieve. If there is any credit in this endeavour, the credit goes to Mr. SULKE and other colleagues.
(Mr. Augustine CHUNG left at this point-4.55 p.m.)
MR. YOUNG (in English):—Mr. Chairman, I support the spirit of Mr. SULKE'S motion and what has been said by Mr. PAO who seconded it. In fact, I do agree that hawking is a big problem indeed. According to my memory of seeing departmental papers, I believe there are about 27,000 licensed hawkers alone in the urban areas and unlicensed hawkers range between the ratio of 1:1 or even more than that, bringing the total in the urban area to 60,000 people which is equivalent to about 2% of the urban population, or approximately 7 to 8% of the households in the urban area. I believe that apart from Mr. SULKE, all other 29 members or 27 who are here today have at one time or another equally pondered the question of how we are to solve this problem. Why there are hawkers? How many hawkers are there, etc.? On the other hand, I feel in a way it is a bit unfortunate today that there are two very close motions before the Council. It appears to me that although one would find it very difficult to disagree with the spirit of the first motion, if we pass that one, we are effectively tying the hands of the Markets and Street Traders Select Committee. Should we vote on the second motion? I am a bit sorry that there is no way that could be found that these two very closely related motions could be combined into one so that we could find some scientific way of looking into the hawker problem. However, even if we do a survey, I would like to mention that when I first joined the Council, I did read a booklet that was titled 'A survey on the hawker situation in Hong Kong', and in fact, I believe it was done by the Hong Kong University or at least one of the intellectuals who does projects of that nature in that institute. Unfortunately, I have not been able to find that survey. In any case, it would need up-dating.
Page 158 of 194
281
HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL
Page 158 of 194
280
HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL
A few years ago, I was sent by this Council to visit London and one of our jobs was to study their ways and means of dealing with hawkers. The immediate improvement we made then was to call these small businessmen STREET
TRADERS, not hawkers, I think that was a right decision.
I NEVER AGREED that
we spend HK$70 million per annum SUBSIDIZING street traders, we might have spent a lot of money on street traders related activities for the good of the community. If there is any element of subsidy, it is a subsidy for those people who can only afford to buy from street traders, and not from the comparatively more expensive shops.
It is a fact that some of us do not know enough about the facts underlying the street traders problem, one just has to keep on learning. To me, street traders related matters is a very lively subject which every new councillor should try to learn more and more about them.
Mr. SULKE may be interested to know that some street traders have become very rich, some have retired, some are still street trading, others decided to operate from expensive commercial premises. Of course, there are many who would like to keep on street trading for the rest of their lives with an admirable philosophy in life; be your own BOSS, take HOLIDAYS whenever you like, don't have look at the facial gesture of your employer, be poor and happy.
I strongly believe that street traders fill a social need. Let me give you one example: on more than one occasions when I needed a belt, I went to a shop. very often they did not have my size, when you want an extra hole for the belt, they do not have the equipment to facilitate an extra hole for the belt. Invariably I end up in the Temple Street hawkers bazaar in the evening, those belt selling hawkers have the holes in the belt made to my size within ten seconds. Of course the price suited me as much as the size.
Years ago, when we cleared the certain hawkers conglomerations in North Point, we arranged for officers from the Labour Department to help those displaced hawkers to find jobs; as far as I can remember, only one person bothered to register.
Yes, we have made good effort to channel them into our markets that we have built and are still building. If the particular market is viable, they stay put, if not, back to the street again. What we must do is to make sure that the markets that we are going to build are viable.
If you call Street Traders as a problem, the problem has been with us for a number of decades, it has been so for parts of London which have learned something and New York and many many other cities. Why should we spend half a million which has been reduced to about $300,000 now of our much needed cash for the fancy idea of getting a study about it.
It is a very kind of Mr. SULKE to introduce this subject for a debate in this Council so that we can all express what we know about the subject and attract
HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL
Page 158 of 194
281
more attention from the public who may in turn offer more ideas for us to continue our endeavour in tackling this thankless job of trying to improve the
situation.
With the permission of the Markets and Street Traders Select Committee, I strongly urged that it is high time that we should arrange more site visits to areas where street traders are offering their good services to the community, whether you call it BLACK SPOT or otherwise.
I always listen to Mr. SULKE's speeches with great interest and find them stimulating and persuasive. Although he has not persuaded me to support his motion, I must put on record that I have a lot of respect for his sincerity and courage in moving this motion before Council.
It was my original intention to amend Mr. SULKE's motion so that what he wants to be done will be done without causing the unnecessary waste of money and with much better effect. Trying to amend his motion poses some technical problems, after consulting some other colleague in this Council, I have decided to second a new motion in order to achieve what we all want to achieve. If there is any credit in this endeavour, the credit goes to Mr. SULKE and other colleagues.
(Mr. Augustine CHUNG left at this point-4.55 p.m.)
MR. YOUNG (in English):—Mr. Chairman, I support the spirit of Mr. SULKE'S motion and what has been said by Mr. PAO who seconded it. In fact, I do agree that hawking is a big problem indeed. According to my memory of seeing departmental papers, I believe there are about 27 000 licensed hawkers alone in the urban areas and unlicensed hawkers range between the ration of 1:1 or even more than that, bringing the total in the urban area to 60 000 people which is equivalent to about 2% of the urban population, or approximately 7 to 8% of the households in the urban area. I believe that apart from Mr. SULKE, all other 29 members or 27 who are here today have at one time or another equally pondered the question of how we are to solve this problem. Why there are hawkers? How many hawkers are there, etc.? On the other hand, I feel in a way it is a bit unfortunate today that there are two very close motions before the Council. It appears to me that although one would find it very difficult to disagree with the spirit of the first motion, if we pass that one, we are effectively tying the hands of the Markets and Street Traders Select Committee. Should we vote on the second motion? I am a bit sorry that there is no way that could be found that these two very closely related motions could be combined into one so that we could find some scientific way of looking into the hawker problem. However, even if we do a survey, I would like to mention that when I first joined the Council, I did read a booklet that was titled 'A survey on the hawker situation in Hong Kong', and in fact, I believe it was done by the Hong Kong University or at least one of the intellectuals who does projects of that nature in that institute. Unfortunately, I have not been able to find that survey. In any case, it would need up-dating.
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.