HK Needs More Public Housing

A fire in this building in Kwai Chung killed three people in subdivided flats

A fire in a subdivided flat in a warehouse building in Kwai Chung killed three people on Saturday, raising more questions again about the safety of people living in these unhealthy spaces, though they cannot afford anything else.

The owner of the space had subdivided 6,000 square feet of space into 17 rooms and did not submit the application to make minor alternations to the Buildings Department, nor did the changes meet fire safety standards.

The 1953 Shek Kip Mei fire led to building public housing

In addition, the 45-year-old Ma Sik Industrial Building didn't have any sprinklers because it was built before 1973 and was thus exempted from retrofitting.

Security minister John Lee Ka-chiu said on Sunday that police, buildings and fire services department officials were investigating whether the fire was a result of breaches in safety or fire regulations.

That's all fine and well for the government to look into the technical breaches in terms of fire safety, but can we look at why we are having subdivided flats in the first place?

There is not enough affordable or low-income housing in Hong Kong and the government has a duty to do something about this. We cannot have people living in horrible conditions and pay much more in rent per square foot than the average middle class flat owner.

In 1973 the government pledged to house 1.8 million people

Subdivided flats are notorious for being unhygienic, cramped, noisy and fire hazards waiting to happen. Low-income earners have no choice but to live in these places to have a roof over their heads. This is unacceptable -- it is 2017.

And the government can play an important role in this.

It built public housing in 1954 after a fire in Shek Kip Mei destroyed makeshift homes of mainland Chinese immigrants the year before. The concrete buildings weren't perfect, with communal washrooms and kitchens, but at least they were solid structures for people to live in.

In 1973 the government announced a 10-year plan to provide 1.8 million people in Hong Kong with "satisfactory accommodation". The authorities felt it was their responsibility to provide accessible housing to the poor.

How much longer can people live in subdivided flats?

Today the government hasn't done a comprehensive assessment of subdivided flats in Hong Kong -- how many are there, who lives in them, how much money do they make or receive each month, and more importantly what can be done about the situation?

These inhabitants are not dirt poor, but they cannot afford even the cheapest microflat. Shouldn't that be a sign that the city needs more public housing? Hong Kong is so wealthy and yet it has no compassion for people who need a decent roof over their heads.

Can our relatively new Chief Executive Carrie Lam Cheng Yuet-ngor please look into this and solve this issue? It would definitely bring more harmony to the city...

Photo of the Day: A Slice of Blue Sky

Taking in the view from this angle at the JACCAC

Yesterday I went to the Jockey Club Creative Arts Centre in Shek Kip Mei in Kowloon. I was there on assignment and it was my first time visiting the place, a 10-minute walk from the MTR station.

The building is former factory and about eight years ago was turned into the JCCAC with 150 studios for artists, arts groups, and students. On the walls were posters advertising for various art classes, like ceramics, painting, photography for all ages.

As a result many of the rooms are studios, or offices related to the arts. Perhaps PMQ should have been turned into something like this than focusing on just retail.

It was quite hot yesterday and so by the time I arrived for my appointment, I was dripping with sweat.

But outside on the balcony, there was a cool breeze and I saw this slice of blue sky in between two tall residential buildings.

It kind of sums up Hong Kong -- if you are privileged enough to have any kind of view...

Paul Chan: Earnest or Full of Hot Air?

Does Development Secretary Paul Chan Mo-po really mean what he says?

We like rags-to-riches stories, and Hong Kong Development Secretary Paul Chan Mo-po is no exception.

Yesterday he told secondary students near Shek Kip Mei about his impoverished life growing up in a squatter camp.

"Not only did we have to share a kitchen, but we didn't have our own toilets either," he recalled. "We had to walk quite the distance to use a public toilet. I still remember that when I first saw toilets with seats... I couldn't get used to them. I remember that if you looked down into the public toilets, you could see insects crawling around. To this day, thinking about those toilets makes me shudder."

Hmmm, too much detail!

While gambling and drugs were rife, he said he had to work after school and struggled to keep up in university because he had not been taught in English before. His family also lost their home in one of many fires that affected the camps.

"Because I come from a poor family, my parents couldn't give me much of a leg up in my career," he said. "But it doesn't matter, because we have friends: in secondary school, we studied in groups; at university, we collaborated on student organizations. People you meet outside work... these people are your assets."

Chan became an accountant and lawmaker before joining government.

But as a government official he has faced a number of scandals, including ties to a firm that owned subdivided flats; conflict-of-interest accusations over farmland that would rise in value due to a scheme his bureau was pushing through, and last year he and his wife were defeated in a libel trial after he and his wife accused their daughter's classmates of cheating.

When he was challenged about the farmland, Chan quoted the Bible to defend his record of public service. And as he ended his speech to the students, he quoted evangelist Rick Warren.

"If we come into money, it's not meant for us or our family. We should share it with those in need," he said. "We should share our blessings with other people... If we get into positions of power, we shouldn't forget that that power should be used to help the least privileged."

Oh really? Are you going to share what you've made? Or how about getting Financial Secretary John Tsang Chun-wah to loosen the public purse strings?

While Chan had it tough going to school in the 1960s, things in Hong Kong were still relatively egalitarian. These days students that don't have laptops and know how to use the internet, are completely left behind in the digital divide.

We wonder if he realizes this, but perhaps he's been too busy claiming his daughter's classmates were cheating...

Chan seems to prefer sending out trial balloons of policy ideas on his blog than have discussions with the public, and then gets into trouble with possibly benefiting handsomely from his own department's policies.

Many don't believe he's the right person for the job.

But we're wondering that if he believes "we shouldn't forget that power should be used to help the least privileged", then how about giving us a leg-up on democracy and granting us true universal suffrage?