I am writing with reference to the proposed Landlord and Tenant (Consolidation) (Amendment) Bill 2021. The bill still does not address some core issues. It does not seem to consider affordability, the loss of jobs during the pandemic, and the safety and hygiene conditions of subdivided flats. First, let’s focus on rent increases. Capping rent increases at 10 per cent might sound fine for someone who is on a stable income and expects to get a decent raise each year. Unfortunately, people who live in subdivided flats are on low incomes, often on minimum wage. A study found that 70 per cent of low-income families with children live below the poverty line. Hong Kong’s hourly minimum wage has remained flat at HK$37.50 (US$4.80) since 2019, which shows that even a 10 per cent increase is out of proportion. The pandemic has severely affected the hospitality and retail industries, which often employ people from low-income households as casual workers. Because many of these jobs are not permanent, there is no guarantee there will be a fixed income to pay the rent. Low as they are, these rents often do not cover the upkeep of the buildings since landlords themselves live off these rents, often as their primary source of income. These buildings slowly degenerate into potential safety and health hazards, putting the lives of their inhabitants at risk. The Buildings Department does conduct investigations and order removals, but that only means these hapless people move from one hellhole to another. With the average waiting period for government housing at a historic high of 5.8 years , what more can the amended bill do to alleviate these problems? One option could be to subsidise the rent increase. A monthly rent increase of HK$400 for a subdivided flat might sound like a pittance, but it could be the difference that means a family goes to bed hungry. Perhaps the subsidy can be up to 7 to 8 per cent of the increase. Another initiative could be to institute a cap on the rent, depending on the size of the tenement and its location. While some might argue that Hong Kong is a free market and such measures are uncalled for, this will bring relief to the thousands of people living in squalid conditions in subdivided flats. Living with dignity is a basic human right. Adding more generous measures to the bill would help restore our fellow Hongkongers’ self-esteem. Avisekh Biswas, Lantau Prioritise housing needs of low-income groups Hong Kong should prioritise the housing needs of grass-root communities over those of the upper-middle class, who, if they cannot afford to buy a property, can at least afford to rent a flat that offers reasonable living conditions. Without support, the underprivileged have minimal housing options. A large number of people living in housing with poor hygiene, ventilation and fire-safety equipment would have a direct adverse impact on public health and safety. Many members of the grass-root communities face economic hardship due to factors that are beyond their control, such as an unfavourable family background and other social determinants. Low-rent housing or housing subsidies would be a way to boost social equality. Without such measures, the gap between the wealthy and the poor will persist. Meanwhile, the upper-middle classes have enough financial resources to be self- reliant. Looking to address their housing needs first would widen the disparity between them and the poor. Moreover, responding to the housing needs of the poor can improve their upward mobility, which would only be better for Hong Kong’s socioeconomic development. If the housing needs of this group are met by increasing the supply of public housing units, these households would be able to save more and improve their economic status by financing occupational training. The newly emerged professionals or semi-professionals could better serve Hong Kong’s economy. Moreover, a favourable living environment could help alleviate the problems prevalent among grass-root families, such as the lack of study space for children. Family cohesion could be enhanced. With their higher income, the upper-middle classes are not eligible for public housing. If rents in the private housing market drop, the benefits of an increase in their disposable income would not be as significant as those that would accrue to the poorer classes. Adrian Lam, Tai Koo Let Sai Kung keep its rustic charm Your correspondent in the letter “Improve links to Sai Kung and make it a proper tourist attraction” (September 24) suggested that Sai Kung, dubbed the “back garden of Hong Kong”, be developed on the lines of the Gold Coast in Australia to attract tourists, but the financial debacle of Ocean Park and Disneyland does not support that argument. If a theme park is developed in Sai Kung, one can expect a similar sombre outcome. A holiday ferry service could serve a traffic bypass function to ease the congestion resulting from a two-lane highway access to this small town. However, the indigenous and the wealthy local residents have privatised the rustic tranquillity and natural beauty, and see tourism as an annoying intrusion. The slow pace of infrastructural development suggests that the authorities have been paying due respect to Sai Kung’s rustic charm. Edmond Pang, Fan Ling