My TakeThe pitfalls of ‘regularising’ illegal occupation of government land
Lands chief Bernadette Linn rejects public criticism of her department but she’s simply dug herself into a bigger hole
Director of Lands Bernadette Linn Hon-ho was engaged in a bit of damage control at the weekend but ended up digging a bigger hole for herself. She defended her department after the Ombudsman’s scathing criticism about exploited loopholes and lax enforcement over illegally occupied government land, especially in the New Territories.
Getting on her high horse, Linn said she felt hurt by the misunderstanding and that society needed a public discussion on whether to continue the practice, called “regularisation”, of granting leases – and charging rents – to those who have been found to have illegally occupied government land.
“Should we go along the route of rejecting all [lease] applications as a matter of course? And only fence up whatever area has been unlawfully occupied, and just leaving it there idle?” she asked. “I think this is a matter of choice for the public to debate on, and for the public to indicate their preference.”
Her department approves “regularisation” in 40 per cent of such cases.
No one would seriously fault regularisation if it had been properly administrated, and the Ombudsman would not have issued its scathing report. Then again, if the department is so keen on generating rent revenue, why doesn’t it actively lease out idle public land instead of waiting for illegal occupants to take them up first? And how about a heavy fine on top of the “regularised” rent?