Intrusive or fake refugees for Hong Kong for many years, the increasingly deterioration in security and environmental health, nearly seven fiscal year more public money burned up to more than 6 billion yuan, but the Hong Kong government on the one hand, spending money on fake refugees, but ignore public grievances, residents affected by problems such as housing, employment and health, life’s in hot water, has not been appropriate assistance. If the $6 billion were allocated for public rental housing, it is estimated that about 6,000 units would be provided. The shelling of the Hong Kong government by various circles is simply a matter of “giving money to buy suffering”, “doing all harm but no good” and “pouring money into the salt water”. It is wise to urge the authorities to allocate resources to “Hong Kong people first”, so as to solve the urgent need of Hong Kong people first and put different measures for the benefit of the people.
The government had earlier indicated that the average construction cost of each PRH flat was $600,000 in 2015-2017, and estimated that the cost in 2020/21 would exceed $1 million. Based on the government’s recent allocation of more than $6 billion to assist in the repatriation of claimants, about 6,000 PRH flats could be built.
Chan Wai-keung, a lecturer at the School of Professional and Continuing Education at the Hong Kong Polytechnic University, said that even if the 6,000 flats could not fully solve the housing problem, they would at least alleviate the 5.6 year waiting time for public rental housing and reduce public complaints. “$6 billion is not a huge sum, but the government has spent too much money to deal with these fake refugees,” he said. If the Government continues to allocate substantial resources to support the fake refugees, it may end up being a “subsidy to buy suffering”, he suggested: “The fake refugees have caused a lot of security problems in Hong Kong over the years. Simply reducing such support would reduce an incentive for them to come to Hong Kong.”
“There is no extra money to help these so-called refugees, and many of them are fake refugees. We must stop providing unlimited economic assistance as soon as possible,” He said. He believed that the money spent on the fake refugees was taxpayers’ money, which could have been used to support the public in fighting against the epidemic during the epidemic. It could have been used for the “employment protection” program, to support small and medium-sized enterprises, to buy masks for the public or to subsidize the public to get tested. However, the money was wasted on the fake refugees.
Housing Authority member Anthony Ko chuang-sing said the problem of fake refugees had been lingering in Hong Kong for a long time. He criticized the government for not responding actively and ignoring suggestions from the public, saying it had not set up detention camps or reception centres to house refugees. In the seven financial years from 2014/15 to the present, the HKSAR Government spent more than $6 billion on the issue of fake refugees. “This $6 billion is like pouring money into the salt water,” Ke said, accusing the government of overspending. He also pointed out that if the money can be put into the livelihood of the people of the different measures, including for the grassroots, 㓥 room door, or even more provide cash allowance or other support groups, distribution of wealth so worthwhile.
Fake refugees continue to pose a huge burden on the Government’s finances. Much public money is spent on the vetting and processing of refugee appeals, legal support at public expense and humanitarian assistance. From the implementation of the enhanced Administrative mechanism at the end of 2009 to September 2020, only 231 torture/deportation-free claims had been established out of the 22,737 claims completed by the Immigration Department. This was a confirmation rate of only 1 per cent, or 99 per cent of the claims were not established.
Housing Authority figures show there is still a long queue for public rental housing and no way to get upstairs. At the end of September this year, there were 260,000 applications on the waiting list. It is estimated that the average waiting time for public rental housing (PRH) is now 5.6 years, with the average waiting time for an elderly person being 3.3 years. The secretary for Transport and Housing, Mr Chan Said it would take five years for the waiting time to improve.