Hong Kong housing: the buck stops with Carrie Lam, not the Housing Authority

Whatever one’s views of our chief executive, nobody questions her confidence in her own considerable competence and capabilities. This attribute was on full display during the policy address when she outlined her vision for a new metropolis to be built on Hong Kong’s border with mainland China.

Chief Executive Carrie Lam Cheng Yuet-ngor gave a clear assurance that the new urban area – for which there is as yet no plan, no notion of how much it will cost and by whom it will be financed and how much of it will, if built, be completed after she leaves office – would nonetheless be completed within budget. Some may call this optimism. Others may call it delusion or fantasy.

This has made the front-page story in the Post on October 11, “Deliver on housing or pay subsidy, Lam says”, all the more surprising. Her threat was that the Housing Authority, instead of the government, could be required to pay monthly allowances to people who have been queuing for government housing for three years or more. She later told the media the remark had been made off the cuff and was not to be taken as a serious proposal.

Whether reducing the funds available – a novel incentive – would result in the authority building homes more quickly – Lam’s expressed wish – is for others to determine, but it does raise serious issues of accountability.

The chief executive appoints members of the Housing Authority. The chairman of the authority has been the Secretary for Transport and Housing, a senior member of the government. The Housing Department acts as the executive arm of the authority.

So, the buck stops with the chief executive. It invites the question of who should be paying financial penalties for widely perceived incompetence.

Of course, Lam will not have her pay cut for poor performance in respect of housing supply, probably the greatest concern in Hong Kong.

Nevertheless, a holiday break from her customary frenetic activity could give her an opportunity to meditate on the limits as well as the responsibilities that come with executive power, a pause that would work to the considerable benefit of the people of Hong Kong.

David Hall, Mid-Levels

Carrie Lam’s ‘funny’ mistake

Hong Kong’s leader Carrie Lam Cheng Yuet-ngor recently shared her “funny idea” of shifting the responsibility for offering subsidies to public housing applicants from the government to the Housing Authority.

It might have been just a “funny idea”, but I find it necessary to point out the error in her thinking. Building public housing is a shared responsibility involving various government departments and policies. The Housing Authority is not solely accountable.

Perhaps the comment was meant to highlight how the Housing Authority had failed in its mission. But all government officials involved should be accountable, starting with the top boss.

Did Lam stop to consider why the mission failed? As the leader of Hong Kong, her role is most critical, and she shouldn’t be shifting the burden to others. A successful leader would point out the reasons for failure and find solutions to the problem.

Jack Chung, Sham Shui Po

Get liaison office to help unlock military land for use

I feel sure the main impetus for the Northern Metropolis came from Beijing and this must be greatly welcomed. However, it will obviously take some years before the new housing will become available and thus the Northern Metropolis will not alleviate the housing shortage in the near term.

A practical way to boost housing output in the short term is to build on unused military land and barracks.

This proposal would need Beijing’s approval but with its goodwill, this could be achieved speedily. Approval would allow access to these prime building sites which already enjoy road access and services. No need for lengthy (and expensive) delays in land resumptions or negotiations with vested interests such as the Heung Yee Kuk and property developers.

It’s probably a forlorn hope expecting our timid government to take up this issue with Beijing, but possibly the central government’s liaison office could do so? Such a move would surely add to the positivity towards Beijing over its backing of the Northern Metropolis.

Doug Miller, Tai Po

To build more flats, make them smaller

Despite the call by the State Council’s Hong Kong and Macau Affairs Office director Xia Baolong for Hong Kong to “bid farewell” to subdivided flats by 2049, and Hong Kong Financial Secretary Paul Chan Mo-po’s follow-up comment on eradicating them within two decades, there’s no plan yet for how to achieve it.

Nowhere in her policy address did Chief Executive Lam Cheng Yuet-ngor indicate how subdivided flats would be eradicated, nor did she set a timeline.

She offered only a temporary relief measure – the provision of an additional 5,000 units of transitional housing to take the total to 20,000. The number is still a far cry from what is needed – there are more than 200,000 households in the queue for public housing, with many living in small, dingy subdivided flats of only 100 to 200 sq ft, usually in poor condition.

Other relief measures such as cash allowances may well be offset by rent increases, as officials themselves admitted.

What Hong Kong lacks is a more creative approach. In this case, the easiest way out is to reduce the existing area of each public flat by half.

For argument’s sake, if 20 years are required for 200,000 families to each acquire a public flat of 400 sq ft, then if this area is halved to 200 sq ft, the time required would be just 10 years. This means at least 100,000 families can be moved into public housing in five years.

Such a scheme also offers flexibility in expansion. Future expansion can easily be done by combining the existing two or three units into a bigger flat with minimal work. A bigger unit would be in line with Hong Kong’s grand plan for people to live in bigger and better housing.

Dr Wong Hong-yau, Happy Valley