• Fri
  • Aug 29, 2014
  • Updated: 11:22pm
NewsHong Kong
WELFARE

Asylum seekers 'forced to live in pigeon farm'

Government-funded ISS-HK faces probe amid claim refugees have been put in 'shanty town'

PUBLISHED : Sunday, 18 August, 2013, 12:00am
UPDATED : Sunday, 18 August, 2013, 9:56am
 

Poll

  • Yes: 46%
  • No: 54%
18 Aug 2013
  • Yes
  • No
Total number of votes recorded: 399

A government-funded group is facing investigation over claims it has forced asylum seekers to live in an illegally converted poultry farm described by a rights group as a "degrading slum unfit for human habitation".

Asylum seekers living in what they liken to a "shanty town'' say they were given a take-it-or-live-on-the-street offer by International Social Service Hong Kong (ISS-HK), which received HK$203 million from the government last year to help house, feed and aid Hong Kong's growing population of dispossessed.

A former pigeon shed has been turned into makeshift rooms, held together by flimsy pieces of wood, metal and breeze blocks. Amid the stench of excrement, the lingering smell of a farm persists. There is no drinking water and only cold showers, some of them outdoors. The rent is HK$1,300 a month per person, of which ISS-HK pays the bulk - HK$1,200; the rest is met by other charitable organisations.

The dire conditions at the site in Hung Shui Kiu, just north of Tuen Mun, which was a pigeon farm until late last year, were highlighted on Friday when one of eight asylum seekers from India and West Africa living there was rushed to hospital after drinking contaminated water. Medical staff had to carry the man to the ambulance because there is no vehicular access.

Growing concerns over bird flu on the mainland have also raised fears that living in a not-long-closed poultry farm could be a public health hazard.

Similar concerns have been expressed about another ISS-HK- funded development near Ping Che in the New Territories, which is still home to dozens of asylum seekers.

After being told of the Tuen Mun site - which is on land designated for agricultural use only - officials from the Agriculture, Fisheries and Conservation Department said they would visit it at the "earliest opportunity''.

Asylum-seeker rights group Vision First says it is considering legal action against ISS-HK over the ramshackle buildings.

"It's of concern that these new slums exist," said human-rights barrister and non-executive director of Vision First, Robert Tibbo. "ISS has been proactive in settling asylum seekers in inhuman and dangerous living environments. The ISS have sanctioned them as appropriate places to live.''

ISS-HK denies it has a policy of moving people into slum conditions. Its migrants' programme director, Adrielle Panares, said the payment of rent to landlords was only sanctioned after case workers who inspected a site approved the living conditions as being fit for purpose.

It is unclear who owns the Tuen Mun site. The landlord's identity in Land Registry documents differs from that on documents shown to the Sunday Morning Post by asylum seekers.

Panares said: "If there is anything about the site that could pose a danger to asylum seekers then it needs to be brought to our attention. It's possible the initial visits didn't show a problem. My social workers are not perfect but they are professional. If they have missed out on one thing, asylum seekers should be pushing for change."

However, asylum seekers said they feared speaking up about their conditions because of threats they allege were made by ISS staff, a claim Panares denies.

"Messi", a political refugee from West Africa, claims the ISS forced him to live in the Tuen Mun site after his case worker introduced him to it.

"This area is dehumanising, degrading. It is not fit for a human to live in," he said.

The ISS said one of its employees showed Messi what it could offer on a site visit, but said in a case note on June 3 it did not think it was suitable to live in.

Vision First executive director Cosmo Beatson said: "This [is] ISS slum policy … enough is enough, we need this practice to stop.''

The Lands Department confirmed the land, managed under a block government lease, was marked for agricultural use only and Chow Siu-ngor, an independent real estate lawyer from King & Wood Mallesons, said use of such land for housing was illegal.

ISS-HK chief executive Stephen Yau How-boa, a member of the Central Policy Unit during the Donald Tsang Yam-kuen administration and a veteran of a host of government advisory bodies, was not available for comment.

The government said 4,700 people were receiving assistance from ISS-HK, of whom 3,300 were being housed by the group.

The HK$203 million paid to ISS is intended to cover asylum seekers' rental assistance, a pack of groceries every 10 days and other basic necessities. However, they get no physical access to the cash and are not allowed to work.

Share

Related topics

More on this story

For unlimited access to:

SCMP.com SCMP Tablet Edition SCMP Mobile Edition 10-year news archive
 
 

 

25

This article is now closed to comments

aplucky1
let them stay with you
carmeledwin
I think many here misses the point. The Government has sent 203 Million Dollars on the refugees, and they are given such poor living conditions. What is happening? Has someone in ISS been pocketing money? It certainly seems that way.
maecheung
Hong Kong can't even provide decent living space for her own citizens as evidenced by the large number of people living in caged, coffin homes, and sub divided flats.
maecheung
Someone is making BIG bucks out of this.
N.A.T.C
To all of you who have commented against asylum seekers below , either you don’t know the history of Hong Kong or simply trying to ignore it, if you read the history of refugees in Hong Kong you will know that After the war, the 1950s began with a flood of refugees from mainland China, who were able to cross due to the lack of border controls until June 1951. As many as 100,000 people fled to Hong Kong each month under the new regime, By the mid-1950s, Hong Kong (then under British rule) had increased its population to a staggering 2.2 million and by 1956, Hong Kong's population density became one of the highest in the world. It’s safe to say that more than half of Hong Kong population today may trace its roots to immigrants from china or elsewhere. So if we could accept those refugees then why make noise now ?
I do not endorse economic refugees, but I like many other members of the public also do not have the expertise and knowledge to judge who is an economic refugee and who has a genuine case for protection and asylum.
It’s high time that this "World class City" we call home, should wake up and do its bit by making laws and issue guidelines to all govt dept’s to properly screen / investigate the asylum seekers requests (which they lack now) and offer protection if found genuine, Meanwhile all asylum seekers must be treated with dignity and respect while their cases are being investigated.
aplucky1
being a "world class city" is not a death wish
maybe you can provide some housing for the refugees yourself ?
why dont these refugees goto china? plenty of room there
blue
I agree with aplucky1. Give these economic migrants a room in your own flat. I immigrated to HK legitimately and don't appreciate these opportunists working the system.
sandersonc
Is there not a principle that if you are escaping persecution in your home country that you exit and enter the next safe country? If this is correct then HK should not be a destination for genuine refugees or asylum seekers. This is what happen with the UK, so called refugees would aim to arrive in soft touch Britain by hanging on to the underside of trucks heading to the Channel Tunnel. If they were really fleeing persecution in their home country they would be quite happy living in France or other countries nearer to their homes. These people are economic migrants and not refugees. HK tax payers should not be supporting these peolpe.
dynamco
"A former pigeon shed has been turned into makeshift rooms, held together by flimsy pieces of wood, metal and breeze blocks - HKD 1300 per month per head."
sounds like some the wife of some senior Government official is involved ?
sontan0917
i don't understand why the refugees are allowed entry in any country. they should not be given entry to any country. they should be given their rights in their own country with the help of UN on the humanity basis which is the duty of UN. why other countries have to bear their expenses when they have to cater the needs of their own people. charity begins from home. every country have their own problems. poverty is increasing everywhere. so stop refugees entering in any country and support them to fight for their rights in their own country.

Pages

 
 
 
 
 

Login

SCMP.com Account

or