82
HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL
say, there are many genuine wall-stalls not on this survey, and yet, in my opinion, their operators should be licensed. I therefore move accordingly.
MR. L. H. KWAN seconded (in Cantonese):-Mr. Chairman, hawkers has all along been a serious problem in Hong Kong, particularly for illegal hawkers. Under the existing U.C. Policy, we would prefer to move these hawkers into market complexes, but of course, these market complexes are quite costly and it takes time to build them. Before we have adequate provision of these market complexes, we would still very much like to issue licences to these hawkers so that they would no longer be hawking illegally. Take the example of the wall stall operators. If we issue them with licences, it would be easier for the U.S.D. departmental staff to control and lay restrictions over them. Moreover, if we legalize these wall stall operators, the revenue of the Urban Council will be increased. Though some shop-keepers might object to the existence of these wall stalls, I think it is much better than allowing illegal hawkers to operate in front of their shops. If they operate at the side lane or rear lane, it would be much better. Once we have all the market complexes completed, we can put all these wall stalls into them. So, I support Mr. BERNACCHI's motion.
MR. YOUNG (in English):-Mr. Chairman, I personally do agree that wall stalls can be licensed and in principle should be licensed, but of course subject to certain conditions and criteria. Having said that, I feel that I am unable to vote in favour of this particular motion in the form it stands. I am not entirely decided whether I should abstain or vote against it. I would much rather listen to the arguments on the pros and cons of this before making a final decision. However, should any member or if the Chairman or Vice-Chairman of the Markets and Street Traders Select Committee propose to put the whole matter to the Standing Committee or the select committees for consideration, then of course, I would be in favour of that. The main reason I cannot agree to this motion at present is that I feel there are one or two points that leave it too open-ended:
(1) There has been no mention of what consideration we should take of objections from owners. Now, in this respect, Mr. Chairman, I would like to quote from the text of a letter that we looked at in the Markets and Street Traders Review Sub-Committee last Saturday morning, and I shall quote in Cantonese as definitely the interpreters are much better than me in interpreting. This is a letter from the Incorporated Owners of the Chartered Bank Building, San Po Kong in relation to their objection to the application of wall stall operators who want the licences. It said (in Cantonese): if the department does not pay attention to the objection from the property owners and issue the licence, the Urban Council will be interfering on the premises of the private sector and I shall represent my clients to take legal actions against the Urban Council and the wall stalls. Mr. Chairman, I would be loathed to be at the wrong end of such legal action and I think it would not be good for the Council to be sued because
HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL
Page 56 of 194
83
we have done something that violate the rights of property owners. Although admittedly, wall stall operators should have their rights also. (2) I hesitate about the third point which mentioned that family income is entirely or largely dependent on the stall. I feel that operating a wall stall is a business and if someone meets all the criteria such as no objection from owners and no obstruction, then I see no real reason why one should not allow a licence to be issued even if the family's income did not depend entirely or mostly on the wall stall, because we are looking at businesses. We are not running a charity.
So, these are the points I think ought to be considered, and I am not sure whether Mr. BERNACCHI's motion implies that as long as one does have a business registration certificate, one can operate for 3 years, then, no matter when he started to have this business registered, he should be licensed. I am not clear on this point, but should that be so, then it will appear that in theory anyone including the thirty of us sitting here, could probably apply for a business registration licence tomorrow and sit back for 3 years, and then get a wall stall licence which I believe would not be in the best of public interest. I also would like to quote from the text of a question asked by one member today that says quote 'local residents are becoming extremely impatient over the inability of the Council in bringing about early improvement to the hawker situation.' fear that if we have something that is open-ended and opens the door for more licences to come into existence or more wall stalls to come into existence in future, then it would not get the support of residents and many district boards which over the last few months have done a very good job in trying to clear out many of the side lanes in the districts. So therefore Mr. Chairman, as I have stated, I am unable to support this motion as it stands although I do believe wall stalls can be licensed provided they meet certain criteria. Thank you.
MR. SHUM (in English):-Mr. Chairman, I would like to propose that Mr. BERNACCHI'S motion be referred to the Markets and Street Traders Select Committee for further consideration and in-depth study.
MRS. ELLIOTT (in English):—Mr. Chairman, I would like to second Mr. SHUM'S motion.
MR. SULKE (in English):—I would like to support Mr. SHUM's motion because the hawker problem is not unique in Hong Kong. It occurs in every large city where there is free enterprise and freedom of trade and quite often even in those large cities which are living under dictatorships of one sort or another. Hawkers exist because they fill an economic need and social need. In Hong Kong, at one time or another, hawkers were even officially encouraged as one of the solutions to the ever-increasing tide of refugees.
It seems to me however that within recent years with the growth of chain stores, supermarkets and the control of the refugee problem, the social need to support hawkers has somewhat diminished.
82
HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL
say, there are many genuine wall-stalls not on this survey, and yet, in my opinion, their operators should be licensed. I therefore move accordingly.
MR. L. H. KWAN seconded (in Cantonese):-Mr. Chairman, hawkers has all along been a serious problem in Hong Kong, particularly for illegal hawkers Under the existing U.C. Policy, we would prefer to move these hawkers into market complexes, but of course, these market complexes are quite costly and it takes time to build them. Before we have adequate provision of these market complexes, we would still very much like to issue licences to these hawkers so that they would no longer be hawking illegally. Take the example of the wall stall operators. If we issue them with licences, it would be easier for the U.S.D. departmental staff to control and lay restrictions over them. Moreover, if we legalize these wall stall operators, the revenue of the Urban Council will be increased. Though some shop-keepers might object to the existence of these wall stalls, I think it is much better than allowing illegal hawkers to operate in front of their shops. If they operate at the side lane or rear lane, it would be much better. Once we have all the market complexes completed, we can put all these wall stalls into them. So, I support Mr. BERNACCHI's, motion.
MR. YOUNG (in English):-Mr. Chairman, I personally do agree that wall stalls can be licensed and in principle should be licensed, but of course subject to certain conditions and criteria. Having said that, I feel that I am unable to vote in favour of this particular motion in the form it stands. I am not entirely decided whether I should abstain or vote against it. I would much rather listen to the arguments on the pros and cons of this before making a final decision. However, should any member or if the Chairman or Vice-Chairman of the Markets and Street Traders Select Committee propose to put the whole matter to the Standing Committee or the select committees for consideration, then of course, I would be in favour of that. The main reason I cannot agree to this motion at present is that I feel there are one or two points that leave it too open- ended:
(1) There has been no mention of what consideration we should take of objections from owners. Now, in this respect, Mr. Chairman, I would like to quote from the text of a letter that we looked at in the Markets and Street Traders Review Sub-Committee last Saturday morning, and I shall quote in Cantonese as definitely the interpreters are much better than me in interpreting. This is a letter from the Incorporated Owners of the Chartered Bank Building, San Po Kong in relation to their objection to the application of wall stall operators who want the licences. It said (in Cantonese): if the department does not pay attention to the objection from the property owners and issue the licence, the Urban Council will be interfering on the premises of the private sector and I shall represent my clients to take legal actions against the Urban Council and the wall stalls. Mr. Chairman, I would be loathed to be at the wrong end of such legal action and I think it would not be good for the Council to be sued because
HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL
Page 56 of 194
83
we have done something that violate the rights of property owners. Although admittedly, wall stall operators should have their rights also. (2) I hesitate about the third point which mentioned that family income is entirely or largely dependent on the stall. I feel that operating a wall stall is a business and if someone meets all the criteria such as no objection from owners and no obstruction, then I see no real reason why one should not allow a licence to be issued even if the family's income did not depend entirely or mostly on the wall stall, because we are looking at businesses. We are not running a charity.
So, these are the points I think ought to be considered, and I am not sure whether Mr. BERNACCHI's motion implies that as long as one does have a business registration certificate, one can operate for 3 years, then, no matter when he started to have this business registered, he should be licensed. I am not clear on this point, but should that be so, then it will appear that in theory anyone including the thirty of us sitting here, could probably apply for a business registration licence tomorrow and sit back for 3 years, and then get a wall stall licence which I believe would not be in the best of public interest. I also would like to quote from the text of a question asked by one member today that says quote 'local residents are becoming extremely impatient over the inability of the Council in bringing about early improvement to the hawker situation.' fear that if we have something that is open-ended and opens the door for more licences to come into existence or more wall stalls to come into existence in future, then it would not get the support of residents and many district boards which over the last few months have done a very good job in trying to clear out many of the side lanes in the districts. So therefore Mr. Chairman, as I have stated, I am unable to support this motion as it stands although I do believe wall stalls can be licensed provided they meet certain criteria. Thank you.
MR. SHUM (in English):-Mr. Chairman, I would like to propose that Mr. BERNACCHI'S motion be referred to the Markets and Street Traders Select Committee for further consideration an in-depth study.
MRS. ELLIOTT (in English):—Mr. Chairman, I would like to second Mr. SHUM'S motion.
MR. SULKE (in English):—I would like to support Mr. SHUM's motion because the hawker problem is not unique in Hong Kong. It occurs in every large city where there is free enterprise and freedom of trade and quite often even in those large cities which are living under dictatorships of one sort or another. Hawkers exist because they fill an economic need and social need. In Hong Kong, at one time or another, hawkers were even officially encouraged as one of the solutions to the ever increasing tide of refugees.
It seems to me however that within recent years with the growth of chain stores, supermarkets and the control of the refugee problem, the social need to support hawkers has somewhat diminished.
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.