<轉載自2014年6月27日 明報 社評>
新界東北新發展區受影響的居民與發展局長陳茂波對話，居民索取巨額賠償之餘，還提出要求政府以平房換寮屋。對於居民的訴求，有人形容為「開天索價」。以寮屋的性質，居民的訴求絕不合理。政府處理新界東北發展賠償，從人性化出發，若個別居民有特殊情，以特殊恩恤酌情處理，可以理解；但是特例絕對不應該具普遍性，整體賠償仍然要按現行法規框架辦理，若過分偏離，除了對其他市民不公平，而所謂特殊往往成為先例、慣例，將會後患無窮。
東北居民開天索價 求償200萬元撥地建屋
據陳茂波發表的文章披露，受新發展區影響的居民初步估計約有1000戶，有居民代表提出政府要給每戶賠償200萬元，另外，政府要給每戶撥地500平方呎，讓住戶可以興建400方呎、高兩層的平房；對於這兩項訴求，陳茂波表示政府不可能接受。這個回應及時而恰當。受影響的民居，其中不少是非法搭建在官地上的寮屋，未經批准，住戶並無業權，也不可轉讓；這些寮屋，因為政府未發展相關土地而存在，即使如此，並未因而改變它們的非法實質。過去，政府清拆這類寮屋，合資格住戶（包括居港年期或入息審查）會獲安置上樓住公屋，有特殊恩恤需要的，可獲個別處理或安排入住中轉屋。
當年政府興建高鐵，為了息事寧人，對菜園村村民的賠償以特例方式處理，當時，不少人已經擔心特例變成先例慣例，成為後來者索償的依據，果然不幸言中。新界東北受影響居民視賠償60萬元只是「最低消費」，現在一下子提高到200萬元，充分反映此例一開，層層加碼，以至貪得無厭的實質。居民代表提出的撥地建平房換寮屋，更是「離晒大譜」，因為寮屋本屬非法，這個訴求實際上是以非法寮屋換合法平房，居民平白得到500方呎土地和60萬元賠償，要是政府答允這樣的要求，其他市民不反彈才怪。
弱勢政府推動政策極其困難，受影響持份者趁機牟取私利，政府為求減低反對聲音，採取寬鬆處理，可以理解，但是無論怎樣，政府仍然要顧及善用公帑的原則，絕對不應該成為黃大仙，有求必應；也絕對不應該害怕人多勢、懼於聲大夾惡而屈服於不合理要求。政府必須基本上按現行法規框架辦事，然後視特殊情酌情處理。
受影響居民上樓的安排，據知有居民要求毋須符合資格審查，都可以一律上樓，以陳茂波透露的「原區復村」說法，看來傾向以特例方式滿足居民的要求。以菜園村優厚賠償的先例，政府萬萬不可有這個想法。公屋是珍貴資源，資格審查目的為確保不會被濫用，而是用於有需要的人士；另外，居民住寮屋的日子，實際上佔用了公共資源，已經得益，若無條件讓他們上樓，對於公屋輪候冊超過20萬的申請人，絕不公平；還有，若豁免資格審查此例一開，日後清拆寮屋，住戶也可以提出同樣要求，那是沒完沒了的額外負擔。因此，毋須資格審查而上樓，只能以個別特例處理。
財委會拉布方興未艾 未知前期撥款能否表決
例如有老弱居民，住寮屋的日子得以連年儲蓄，資產或許超逾規定，他們又缺乏工作能力，不可能掙取收入，積蓄是作為養老之用，這類居民，當局應該行使酌情權，以特例恩恤方式安排他們入住公屋單位。其他並無特別需要照顧的居民，則要按一貫程序處理，以彰顯政策之公平。
上周五的會議，有立法會議員認為既然安排了發展局官員與受影響居民對話，財委會應該等待對話有結果才再討論。陳茂波到粉嶺與居民對話，堅持不遷不拆、反對發展東北的居民及團體表態之後離場，留下來與陳茂波對話的就包括開天索價的居民。政府當然要與居民繼續溝通，賠償方案也要繼續商討，但是在新界東北發展必要性的大前提下，目前財委會出現的拉布情況，阻撓新界東北發展前期撥款表決，究竟是為了什麼，難以理解。
今日財委會第7次討論前期撥款，立法會大樓仍然保安森嚴，預期東北居民、反對團體會在大樓外示威，而財委會會議，除了可能原有拉布議員繼續行動，另有議員事先張揚要對主席吳亮星提出不信任動議，建制派議員認為這是另類拉布；從情看來，議題今日能否表決，只有天曉得。圍繞前期撥款，事態發展已經離題萬丈，實在想不明白：即使拖垮了東北發展，究竟對誰有好處？立法會是做事的地方，還是不做事的地方，愈來愈使人迷糊、搞不懂，因為看不到有任何積極意義和作用。現在的立法會，真的不知道究竟是一個怎麼樣的東西！
Government
should say no to unreasonable demands
AT A MEETING with Secretary for
Development Paul Chan Mo-po, residents affected by the North East New
Territories New Development Areas project demanded sky-high compensation. They
also demanded that the government have their squatter structures replaced with
cottages.
According
to an article Paul Chan has published, a preliminary estimate puts the number of households
affected by the project at about 1,000. The representatives of the residents
demanded that the government pay each household $2 million in compensation and
allocate to each household 500 square feet of land for building a
400-square-foot, two-storey cottage. Paul Chan said, quite rightly and
opportunely, that the government could not possibly yield to such demands.
The
representatives say their claim is based on what Choi Yuen Tsuen residents
affected by the Guangzhou-Shenzhen-Hong Kong Express Rail Link project received
several years ago, which was $600,000 per household. They claim that the
government ought to offer them more in compensation now as property prices are
high and it is difficult to buy a flat.
When
the construction of the Express Rail Link was being debated, the government
offered Choi Yuen Tsuen residents a special ex-gratia rehousing package to
pacify them and settle the dispute. Back then some observers were worried that
such a "special" treatment would become a precedent on which people
affected by development projects might base their claims for compensation. Such
a prediction has, unfortunately, turned out to be correct. People affected by
the North East New Territories New Development Areas project regard $600,000 as
a "minimum charge". They have suddenly demanded $2 million. It is
evident that the Choi Yuen Tsuen precedent has promoted those people's
insatiable greed, encouraging them to ask for more and more. Even more
outrageous is their demand for land for putting up cottages (as compensation
for the squatter structures they gave up) - these structures are themselves
illegal. It would be very strange indeed if the government granted such a
demand and other citizens raised no objections.
A
weak government always has difficulty carrying out its policies, and this gives
affected stakeholders a chance to make gain. That the government should try to
minimise opposition by extending generosity to those affected is
understandable. Still, the government must have regard to the principle of
making good use of taxpayers' money. It should never grant whatever is
demanded. Nor should it feel intimidated by the sheer volume of opposition (and
the fact that the opponents are loud and vicious) and give in to their
unreasonable requests.
Today
(June 27), at the seventh meeting on the matter, the Finance Committee is to
debate the funding for preliminary works of the North East New Development
Areas project. The Legco Complex remains heavily guarded, as northeast New
Territories residents and groups opposed to the project are expected to protest
outside it. Inside, the filibuster against the project is expected to go on,
while some legislators have declared that they will table a motion of no
confidence in Ng Leung-sing, chairman of the Finance Committee.
Pro-establishment legislators regard such a motion as an alternative form of
filibuster. God knows whether the matter will be put to the vote today. In
respect of the funding, things have so developed that they now deviate
substantially from what should be focused on. We are baffled. Will it benefit
anybody for the development plan to fall through? Is Legco a place for action
or inaction? The situation is getting more and more puzzling because we see no
things or functions of positive significance. It is really not known what Legco
has now become.
新界東北發展賠償 勿再開不合理先例
據陳茂波發表的文章披露，受新發展區影響的居民初步估計約有1000戶，有居民代表提出政府要給每戶賠償200萬元，另外，政府要給每戶撥地500平方呎，讓住戶可以興建400方呎、高兩層的平房；對於這兩項訴求，陳茂波表示政府不可能接受。這個回應及時而恰當。
當年政府興建高鐵，為了息事寧人，對菜園村村民的賠償以特例方式處理，當時，不少人已經擔心特例變成先例慣例，成為後來者索償的依據，果然不幸言中。新界東北受影響居民視賠償60萬元只是「最低消費」，現在一下子提高到200萬元，充分反映此例一開，層層加碼，以至貪得無厭的實質。居民代表提出的撥地建平房換寮屋，更是「離晒大譜」，因為寮屋本屬非法，要是政府答允這樣的要求，其他市民不反彈才怪。
弱勢政府推動政策極其困難，受影響持份者趁機牟取私利，政府為求減低反對聲音，採取寬鬆處理，可以理解，但是無論怎樣，政府仍然要顧及善用公帑的原則，絕對不應該有求必應；也絕對不應該害怕人多勢、懼於聲大夾惡而屈服於不合理要求。
沒有留言:
張貼留言