I was shocked by a university professor's recent public comments on housing for new immigrants. During the television interview, the professor talked about the Housing Authority's policy to require non-citizens or new immigrants to leave government housing once the designated occupants of the government flat were dead or had left the flat. The comments related to the adult relatives of the designated occupants of the Government flats. The professor commented against the policy saying that those who were being asked to leave within two months may 'be forced to live in cramped places or become cage people', and said that such treatment of new immigrants would be unacceptable. Why, may I ask, is it acceptable for Hong Kong's tax-paying citizens to live in those 'cramped places', become 'cage people' or even street sleepers, while new immigrants are protected by academics who live in cosy neighbourhoods, own luxury cars and have maids? If these academics bothered to look around them and really see the world as it is, rather than as it is represented in academic books and research papers, they would note that poverty-related social problems are not reserved for new immigrants. I would not be surprised if the watchmen or rubbish collectors in these academics' neighbourhoods or colleges live in cramped-condition places with spouse and children. I am not against new immigrants. My father was once a 'new' immigrant. But, while we may want to help these people, we cannot make irresponsible remarks and demand overnight solutions from the Government, missionaries or anyone. As well as sociology, this is about basic economics. NAME AND ADDRESS SUPPLIED
