WE HAD another case on Tuesday of officialdom puffing up a bubble of self-praise and, as this one involves public housing, it particularly needs a pin stuck into it.
Speaking to a select committee on building problems in public housing (problem is spelt s-c-a-n-d-a-l, by the way) former deputy housing director Fanny Law Fan Chiu-fun defended the Housing Authority's record by saying 'the public housing programme in Hong Kong is the envy of many other countries and territories'.
Okay, it is not much to get worked up about and, if it was only Ms Law saying it, not worth pulling out the pin. But this sort of claim is made repeatedly. Housing Secretary Dominic Wong Shing-wah, for instance, is also on the record as saying the programme 'has become a model for other cities and territories'.
Right then, which ones?
Name them, Mr Wong. Tell us all, Ms Law. If other cities stand in awe of our achievements in public housing and are doing their best to emulate them surely their housing officials would be more than happy to give us our due. Why give yourselves a pat on the back if others will do it? It would be much better that way, don't you think?
Let's tot up the record here. Yes, the programme has succeeded in providing needed homes. It has provided almost 50 per cent of our housing stock. There is your due. On the other hand, our gross domestic product per capita has risen to US$25,000, a very high figure, while the average size of a home remains under 500 square feet, a very low figure, lower yet in the public sector, and it won't do for the Government to deny responsibility for this anomaly when it has such a massive direct presence in housing.
Yes, the newer of these public sector shoeboxes are now quite nice but there are still many older ones and they are, shall we say, distinctly comfort challenged.
