Hong Kong public wants contentious policy on rural housing overhauled

Most Hongkongers support reform of the small-house policy that gives indigenous male villagers in the New Territories the right to build their own homes, but there's no overwhelming consensus to abolish the practice immediately, an independent study has found.

About two-thirds of more than 1,200 people polled by the Civic Exchange think tank - half of whom had vested interests in maintaining the decades-old policy - felt there was a need for a review. About 8 per cent wanted to maintain the status quo.

But 42 per cent agreed the policy should be abolished immediately without extension or compensation to indigenous villagers, with some in a focus group study fearing that there could be "social destabilisation" if such a drastic step was taken.

The study polled 627 members of the public and 606 people with small-house interests - male indigenous villagers, their family members, relatives of men who have such rights but live overseas, and non-locals living in village houses. Organisers recruited 30 respondents for focus-group discussions in March.

Respondents in general supported curbing the resale of small houses and requiring residency in the city for a continuous period to qualify for applying, according to Civic Exchange, which was founded by environment undersecretary Christine Loh Kung-wai. Loh had criticised the policy before she joined the government.

Survey organisers also recommended a halt to the practice of periodically expanding village zones in a city where land for housing everyone else is so scarce. "There is broad support for change and only some opposition from a tiny minority," said Michael DeGolyer, director of Baptist University's Hong Kong Transition Project, one of the study's researchers.

"[Those] who don't think it should change may not have Hong Kong's best interests at heart. It is time for the government to modernise," he said.

According to the survey, only 10 per cent of Hong Kong households had small-house interests, and only 3 per cent had an actual male rights-holder living with them. These respondents mostly favoured keeping the system.

There were up to 91,700 outstanding small-house claims, requiring at least 11 to 12 sq km of extra land - about 1 per cent of the city's total area. In addition to the existing occupied village land, the amount of land needed for small houses accounts for 16 per cent of all built-up urban land.

The policy has been a lightning rod for criticism as indigenous villagers can claim, then sell, their land grants for profit. Female villagers are also discriminated against.

About 70 per cent of respondents expressed concern that villagers profited from land grants by selling their property and rights to outsiders, and that the policy was unfair to non-indigenous residents.

DeGolyer added: "Political will is needed to capitalise on this support to put pressure on entrenched rural interests."

But Li Yiu-ban, executive member of the Heung Yee Kuk, the powerful body that represents rural interests, argued that many of the report's recommendations were already in practice, and indigenous villagers already had their backs against the wall.

"Village zones are constantly being shrunken and there is just not enough space to meet future demand for houses," said Li. "There's really nothing more [indigenous villagers] can concede."

The Development Bureau said the government would not take a position but acknowledged a need to review the policy.

Correction: An earlier version of this story stated that around 42 per cent of respondents in the focus group wanted the small house policy to be abolished immediately. It should be around 42 per cent of all respondents in the poll.