"Homes for Hong Kong People: The Way
Forward"
Comments by the Hong Kong Coalition of Service Industries
May 1997
The consultation paper is a timely document in highlighting the challenges. We are not
sure, however, if it has indeed provided a way forward. The main proposals such as
increasing flat supply, maximising the contribution of the private sector, encouraging
wider home ownership and providing public rental housing for those in need, are all
answers which we already know. The community seems to have been asked to accept that there
is no quick fix and to focus on the longer term.
On the other hand, the immensity of the problem - the fact that housing is consistently
ranked the top issue of concern for Hong Kong - calls for radical measures and innovative
solutions. Political pressure notwithstanding, radical but right policies, such as
requiring wealthy public housing tenants to move out, should be pushed with rigour and
conviction.
At the same time, more imaginative discussion and debate should be encouraged. Should
the public auction system for land disposal be reviewed? Should private treaty grants be
introduced so as to allow government a bigger measure of control? Should there be a
wholesale revision in the industrial land policy to release more land for residential
development? Should Kowloon Bay be reclaimed and to what extent should land thereon be
used for residential development? These are just some of the strategic issues which Hong
Kong should debate on.
A key issue of public concern is the high level of property prices. Aspiration for home
ownership is strong but the ownership rate in Hong Kong is relatively low compared with
advanced countries. This is not satisfactory. Buying a flat is not just an upgrading of
living condition; it also makes the home owner a more committed member of society. As an
important basis for social stability, home ownership should be encouraged.
In response to escalating property prices, government policy has often taken the form of
influencing the housing market through administrative measures which affect the sale and
marketing process of flats. What government has not done sufficiently is to look inward to
examine how the administrative process within government can be streamlined, and
bureaucratic hurdles removed, in order to speed up the development process and hence
increase flat supply. In this connection we would draw attention to a paper submitted by
the Hong Kong General Chamber of Commerce to the Chief Secretary in March 1997 on
overcoming bureaucratic hurdles to development.
At the current pricing private property is beyond the means of the ordinary people. But
a mass market for housing can be quickly created by simply pushing through the sale of the
current public housing stock. This would not only ease government burden on management and
maintenance but also contribute to social stability by increasing residents' stake in the
housing stock
Despite the assertion that the government's overall strategy would be "to create
the conditions to enable the private sector to make the fullest possible contribution
towards meeting the demand for housing" (para 2.2(a)), and despite devoting a full
chapter (Chapter 4) to discussing the private sector's role, there are not many proposals
in the consultative document which provide incentive for the private sector, especially
for those who have already accummulated considerable land holding. This is an area which,
again, should benefit from more lively discussion and debate.
The existing small house policy in the New Territories is an inefficient use of land. It
is also not in keeping with the rising aspirations for higher quality of life in the New
Territories. Perhaps the time has come for an overhaul of the policy. There is no reason
why more and better housing cannot be built in the village areas of the New Territories
without compromising the rights of indigenous villagers.
