Page 81
155
154
HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL
stated in Mr. LAU's speech. But Mr. LAU also said that probably it would be difficult to further reduce the number. In other words, we have exhausted all possible means and we are still left with 4,000 odd hawkers who are not tempted at all. If we can't come up with anything new and yet we have set ourselves a time frame of three years that would mean we are going to force them to give up their business by mandatory means. If that is the case, that it needs to be further deliberated by the Markets and Street Traders Select Committee. In principle, I do think that we should eliminate IHL but how do we go about it, that is the difficult point and I think we need to discuss it very carefully. There is also a shortfall in the original motion. We have a decision—we need to eliminate them within three years and yet we have no proposals how to solve the problem in the motion. Perhaps the Markets and Street Traders Select Committee should take that up, otherwise people would gain the impression that the Urban Council is resorting to very high-handed means to solve a problem. I don't think this is the image that we would like to create. I support Mr. Joseph CHAN's motion. In other words, I would like to see that all IHLs can be surrendered voluntarily, but how we should go about it has to be discussed by the Markets and Street Traders Select Committee. I would like to tell the Council there are still 4,000 odd IHLs despite all possible means have been employed.
MR. PETER C. K. CHAN (in Cantonese):—Mr. Chairman, Mr. FUNG has already covered part of my points and he has expressed himself very well. We would like to have natural wastage so that itinerant hawkers can retreat from the job naturally. If they want to continue, we can have suitable places for them. The original motion seems to create the impression that we are exerting pressure upon them and are ill-treating them and this is not what we want to do. Very often, we have encouraged them to go out of business, for instance, cooked food stalls licensees have been given tens of thousands of dollars in order to encourage them to go out of business and we have been very successful. Perhaps we should come up with fresh incentives. After informal discussion among ourselves, we think that it should be referred back to the Markets and Street Traders Select Committee to solve the problem effectively so that we will not create the impression that we want to set an arbitrary date for IHLs to be eliminated. So may I very sincerely appeal to Members to support Mr. Joseph CHAN's motion to allow the matter to be referred back to the Markets and Street Traders Select Committee for further deliberation.
MISS CECILIA L. Y. YEUNG (in Cantonese):—Mr. Chairman, we have heard with such natural wastage and compulsory measures, to eliminate the 4,000 odd hawkers. It reminds me of something that happened years ago that we have eliminated cooked food stalls. We also gave them compensation. So it is reasonable to give them compensation for their loss if we want to eliminate IHLs that might create management problems. Should the matter be referred back to Markets and Street Traders Select Committee, may I suggest the following. We should try to negotiate with them how to phase out their licences by giving them reasonable compensation. Tell them this is the only way.
HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL
Another point I would like to make is that they will be heavily penalised if they continue to hawk illegally after receiving ex-gratia payment.
MR. STEPHEN M. L. LAU (in Cantonese):—Mr. Chairman, after I have heard a number of Urban Councillors who have spoken on the subject and I think that Dr. TU in fact has a very deep understanding of the hawker problem and she has my full admiration. I have been in the Urban Council for about thirteen years and I have participated in work related to hawkers for more than ten years. I have been Members of many of those working groups under the Markets and Street Traders Select Committee. I am sure the records will bear me out. In 1985, Mr. Walter SULKE at the Annual Conventional Debate suggested that a Working Party be set up to look into the hawker problem. At that time, there were six members including Dr. TU, Mr. TONG, myself, Mr. Kenneth Lo and Mr. L. H. KWAN. Six years later, only three Members remain here in the Urban Council. At that time, Dr. TU and myself went to ten district boards and I had attended at least seven district board meetings. It was agreed then that if we wanted to be able to implement the policy smoothly, we needed support from the Central Government, other government departments, district boards and local organisations particularly Urban Councillors because as far as resources, land and manpower are concerned, the Urban Council cannot solve this problem which is a legacy of the past. After having worked for a couple of years, we have got a number of very thick reports, just like this one. It has been distributed to all Members. I am not blaming Members for not reading this document because they are too busy. But if you tell us today that you have been given inadequate information, I am very amazed as a lot of documents have been distributed to them already. Unfortunately, I would like to tell Members that when we look at our finances and the current labour market, can we afford to spend our resources without limit on hawker management? To put it simply, in our five-year forecast, in subsidizing hawker management, it will cost more than two hundred and thirty-six million dollars. In 1992, it is two hundred million dollars. In 1993, it is two hundred fifty-four million dollars. In 1995, it is almost three hundred million dollars which is ten percent of our total expenditure. Whilst we have to discuss priority on capital works requested by District Boards and local organisations at our different meetings, but on the other hand, we are spending unlimited resources on hawkers. If we sit here today and just give a lot of empty talks and then refer the whole thing back to the Select Committee, this is not being decisive enough and this is not acceptable. The Urban Council has already appointed a working party which has been working for years and made a number of proposals. There is at least one chapter in the Working Party's Report devoted to IHL and IHLs cannot be allowed to continue because technically it cannot be done, they can't go around in a basket and sell their ware. In moving my motion, I did not say that we want to make them victims. We are suggesting that they be given fixed pitches or even offered stalls in market complexes. If they are too old and cannot continue with their trade then we offer them with ex-gratia payment. Perhaps in moving my motion, I did not elaborate on that point and did not give Members
Page 81 of 95
Page 81 org
155
154
HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL
stated in Mr. LAU's speech. But Mr. LAU also said that probably it would be difficult to further reduce the number. In other words, we have exhausted all possible means and we are still left with 4 000 odd hawkers who are not tempted at all. If we can't come up with anything new and yet we have set ourselves a time frame of three years that would mean we are going to force them to give up their business by mandatory means. If that is the case, that it needs to be further deliberated by the Markets and Street Traders Select Committee. In principle, I do think that we should eliminate IHL but how do we go about it, that is the difficult point and I think we need to discuss it very carefully. There is also a shortfall in the original motion. We have a decision-we need to eliminate them within three years and yet we have no proposals how to solve the problem in the motion. Perhaps the Markets and Street Traders Select Committee should take that up, otherwise people would gain the impression that the Urban Council is resorting to very high-handed means to solve a problem. I don't think this is the image that we would like to create. I support Mr. Joseph CHAN's motion. In other words, I would like to see that all IHLs can be surrendered voluntarily, but how we should go about it has to be discussed by the Markets and Street Traders Select Committee. I would like to tell the Council there are still 4 000 odd IHLs despite all possible means have been employed.
MR. PETER C. K. CHAN (in Cantonese):—Mr. Chairman, Mr. FUNG has already covered part of my points and he has expressed himself very well. We would like to have natural wastage so that itinerant hawkers can retreat from the job naturally. If they want to continue, we can have suitable places for them. The original motion seems to create the impression that we are exerting pressure upon them and are ill-treating them and this is not what we want to do. Very often, we have encouraged them to go out of business, for instance, cooked food stalls licensees have been given tens of thousands of dollars in order to encourage them to go out of business and we have been very successful. Perhaps we should come up with fresh incentives. After informal discussion among ourselves, we think that it should be referred back to the Markets and Street Traders Select Committee to solve the problem effectively so that we will not create the impression that we want to set an arbitrary date for IHLs to be eliminated. So may I very sincerely appeal to Members to support Mr. Joseph CHAN's motion to allow the matter to be referred back to the Markets and Street Traders Select Committee for further deliberation.
MISS CECILIA L. Y. YEUNG (in Cantonese):-Mr. Chairman, we have heard with such natural wastage and compulsory measures, to eliminate the 4 000 odd hawkers. It reminds me of something that happened years ago that we have eliminated cooked food stalls. We also gave them compensation. So it is reasonable to give them compensation for their loss if we want to eliminate IHLS that might create management problems. Should the matter be referred back to Markets and Street Traders Select Committee, may I suggest the following. We should try to negotiate with them how to phase out their licences by giving them reasonable compensation. Tell them this is the only way.
HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL
Another point I would like to make is that they will be heavily penalised if they continue to hawk illegally after receiving ex-gratia payment.
MR. STEPHEN M. L. LAU (in Cantonese):-Mr. Chairman, after I have heard a number of Urban Councillors who have spoken on the subject and I think that Dr. Tu in fact has a very deep understanding of the hawker problem and she has my full admiration. I have been in the Urban Council for about thirteen years and I have participated in work related to hawkers for more than ten vears. I have been Members of many of those working groups under the Markets and Street Traders Select Committee. I am sure the records will bear me out. In 1985, Mr. Walter SULKE at the Annual Conventional Debate suggested that a Working Party be set up to look into the hawker problem. At that time, there were six members including Dr. Tu, Mr. TONG, myself, Mr. Kenneth Lo and Mr. L. H. KWAN. Six years later, only three Members remain here in the Urban Council. At that time, Dr. Tu and myself went to ten district boards and I had attended at least seven district board meetings. It was agreed then that if we wanted to be able to implement the policy smoothly, we needed support from the Central Government, other government departments, district boards and local organisations particularly Urban Councillors because as far as resources, land and manpower are concerned, the Urban Council cannot solve this problem which is a legacy of the past. After having worked for a couple of years, we have got a number of very thick reports, just like this one. It has been distributed to all Members. I am not blaming Members for not reading this document because they are too busy. But if you tell us today that you have been given inadequate information, I am very amazed as a lot of documents have been distributed to them already. Unfortunately, I would like to tell Members that when we look at our finances and the current labour market, can we afford to spend our resources without limit on hawker management? To put it simply, in our five year forecast, in subsidizing hawker management, it will cost more than two hundred and thirty six million dollars. In 1992, it is two hundred million dollars. In 1993, it is two hundred fifty four million dollars. In 1995, it is almost three hundred million dollars which is ten percent of our total expenditure. Whilst we have to discuss priority on capital works requested by District Boards and local organisations at our different meetings, but on the other hand, we are spending unlimited resources on hawkers. If we sit here today and just give a lot of empty talks and then refer the whole thing back to the Select Committee, this is not being decisive enough and this is not acceptable. The Urban Council has already appointed a working party which has been working for years and made a number of proposals. There is at least one chapter in the Working Party's Report devoted to IHL and IHLs cannot be allowed to continue because technically it cannot be done, they can't go around in a basket and sell their ware. In moving my motion, I did not say that we want to make them victims. We are suggesting that they be given fixed pitches or even offered stalls in market complexes. If they are too old and cannot continue with their trade then we offer them with ex-gratia payment. Perhaps in moving my motion, I did not elaborate on that point and did not give Members
Page 81 of 95
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.