Time for kuk to forswear the clan for the collective
Political survival and longevity usually require adapting to changing circumstances. The Heung Yee Kuk is an exception. As the most powerful representative group in the New Territories, it has endured and prospered. It never deviates from its professed mission of representing the interests of indigenous villagers and their offspring. This needs to change, as an examination of the issues in our article on the facing page suggests. The kuk will only be recognised as the true voice of the New Territories when it is seen to represent all rural residents, rather than a small number of village clans.
The ordinance by which it was established as a statutory body gave the kuk a dual mission. On the one hand it represents 'the people of the New Territories' and is responsible for promoting their welfare and prosperity. On the other it is tasked with protecting 'the customs and traditional usages' of the New Territories. But the kuk's leaders have always folded its two constitutional duties into a single one: to protect and serve the customary or indigenous rights of villagers. This single-mindedness helps preserve its core constituents and maintain its influence, but increasingly it also alienates non-indigenous residents who now make up the majority in villages in the New Territories. It might have been more defensible long ago when most residents were villagers living in their ancestral homes. That is no longer the case. Over decades, there has been an influx of outside residents, partly driven by the population and urbanisation policies of the government.
The kuk's members enjoy disproportionate representation in district councils by virtue of council seats reserved for the rural committees under it. Its status as a functional constituency means its long-time chairman, Lau Wong-fat, is virtually guaranteed a seat in the legislature. Now he also sits on the Executive Council, the highest decision-making body within the government. The kuk has a significant role to play in almost all major issues confronting the New Territories today, yet it has not always been as constructive as it should be. The small-house policy, urban planning, widespread illegal dumping, environmental degradation, bullying and intimidation of non-indigenous residents, and inappropriate land use - these are just some of the problems that have held back some major rural areas from realising their full developmental potential. By virtue of its close ties to the villages, the kuk tends to turn a blind eye to such abuses and rarely takes the side of public interest and law enforcement. Hong Kong, collectively, pays a heavy price for that.
Such abuses are usually committed by long-time villagers, who sometimes seem to act with impunity. The small-house policy, for example, was intended as a temporary measure when it was introduced in the 1970s. Now this privilege, which enables male indigenous villagers to enrich themselves through the building of houses, is claimed by them to be a constitutionally protected right. The policy has ruined much of the New Territories landscape and made urban planning all but impossible. Many villagers - including many who no longer live in Hong Kong - may have profited handsomely from the policy, but the value of land in rural areas could have multiplied many times if the government had been able to conduct proper planning and infrastructure development.
The kuk is now into its second century of existence. It is time it fulfils its proper mandate, which is to work for all rural residents, not just those with the right clan name.
