top of page

Hong Kong Intelligence Report #116 港媒隱瞞劏房(不適切居所)是僭建物(違章建築)

Updated: Jan 23

Open-source intelligence (OSINT)

Hong Kong Intelligence Report #116 港媒隱瞞劏房(不適切居所)是僭建(違章建築)
FILE PHOTO: A Woman in UBW © Envato

🔻 IMPORTANT 【重要】劏房

 

現代大城市的擴張使其中某些地區的土地,尤其是那些位於中心地帶的土地,具有了一種人為的、往往在經濟上不斷增長的價值;而在這些地區建造的建築物則降低了這種價值............因為它們不再適應變化了的環境。. . . .其結果是,工人們被迫離開城鎮中心,向郊區遷移。


- 恩格斯

 

The expansion of the big modern cities gives the land in certain sections of them, particularly in those which are centrally situated, an artificial, often economically increasing, value; the buildings erected in those areas depress this value . . . because they no longer correspond to the changed circumstances. . . . The result is that the workers are forced out of the center of the town, toward the outskirts.


– Friedrich Engels  URL

 

▪️ 在2024年1月22日,終於蒸發了本港帶頭摧毀國策動態清零以來炒上去的恆生指數份額。即從2022年10月28日恆生指數紀錄14,863.06以來至今,由港府,本港資本,外部勢力都反抗和取消國策動態清零來炒作的恆生指數份額全都蒸發了,過去五年內降了-12,608.01 (-45.73%) URL,當日紀錄了恆生指數14,961.18。 實踐是真理的基準,因此足認所謂全面復甦,復常,一昧反動態清零國策的港府和本港資本,外部勢力的政治舉措都錯誤。 不但根本無助於改善虛擬經濟和泡沫經濟,甚至根本無法改善實體經濟,於是炒樓炒股是不健康經濟,炒樓炒股根本無法救香港經濟,也就是本港實體經濟依然處於停滯不前的原因。最可笑的是,外部勢力撐腰的地產朋黨資本貪婪勢力只准樓價永升,而不準降價才是對市場經濟的干涉。

 

On January 22, 2024, Hong Kong finally vaporized the Hang Seng Index (HSI) shares that had been speculated on since the derivative sabotage of the national policy of dynamic zeroing. That is, since October 28, 2022, when the Hang Seng Index was recorded at 14,863.06, the shares of the Hang Seng Index speculated by the Hong Kong Government, Hong Kong's capital, and external forces all resisted and canceled the national policy of dynamic zeroing have all evaporated, dropping by -12,608.01 (-45.73%) in the past five years, and the record for that day was. The Hang Seng Index was recorded at 14,961.18 on that day. 

 

Practice is the benchmark of truth. Therefore, it is sufficient to recognize that the so-called full recovery, the recovery, the Hong Kong Government and Hong Kong's capital, as well as the political initiatives of external forces, which have been blindly countering the national policy of dynamic zeroing, are all wrong. Not only does it not help to improve the virtual economy and the bubble economy at all, it cannot even improve the real economy at all. Therefore, speculation in property and stocks is an unhealthy economy, and speculation in property and stocks cannot save the economy of Hong Kong at all, and that is why the real economy of Hong Kong is still at a standstill. 

 

The most ridiculous thing is that the greedy forces of the capitalists of the real estate cronies backed up by external forces only allow property prices to go up forever, and it is only interference in the market economy if they do not allow prices to go down.

 

▪️自從本港由VISION2047(如透過港美中心建立培養示威者的通識課程系統的馮國經,地產霸權利益代表龍漢標),香港團結基金(如新世界地產,馮國經)和香港總商會代表(如林健鋒,夏雅朗)積極把商業犯罪(逃稅項目)剔除逃犯條例,違抗和率先拆除動態清零,一直到日日大喊減辣和全面撤辣的一系列政治行為都是本港資本勢力,地產霸權炒家投機份子勢力,依然強大或日益囂張的本港政治背後的統治階級力量的體現。這也揭示黎智英,示威者和反對派都只不過是那些真正幕後黑手們換取政治權力的祭祀品了。為何?那些絕不可忽視的本港重大政治爭吵發生而嚴重損害民生和勞動者階級利益時,黎智英和反對派都已不存在了。甚至,有趣的是所謂建制在重新高喊以前叫反對派高喊的口號,如‘中產交稅多,福利少’的口號原來是由反對派主張的(如,在2013年5月3日,社民連在臉書發佈了名為你覺得自己交稅太多嗎? (文:黃俊邦)的post: 上月政府公佈財政預算案,除了繼續沒有長遠的財政及公共政策提議外,連派糖的份量也比去年減少。典型的新聞報導有兩類,分別是中產認為自己交稅太多受惠太少,另一類便是基層未能受惠。這兩個角度其實存在一種典型的偏見:中產交稅負擔重、基層則只顧伸手拿福利 URL)。這也足認兩派的金主們,操盤者都是一致的。

 

From the time when Hong Kong's VISION2047 (e.g. Victor Fung, who established the Liberal Studies Program for demonstrators through the Hong Kong America Center, and Louis Loong Hon-biu, who represents the interests of real estate hegemony), the Hong Kong Solidarity Fund (e.g. NWD, Victor Fung), and representatives of the Hong Kong General Chamber of Commerce (e.g. Jeffrey Lam and Aron Hari Harilela) have been actively taking out commercial crimes (tax evasion) from the Fugitive Offenders Ordinance, defying the law and being the first to take the lead in demolition to zero-COVID, to the day after day of shouting, 'Reduce the anti-speculation tax and remove all of it!' The series of political behaviors are the manifestation of the ruling class power behind the still strong or increasingly arrogant politics of Hong Kong's capitalist forces, real estate hegemonic speculators. It also reveals that Jimmy Lai, the protesters and the opposition are just sacrificial offerings to the real masterminds behind the scenes in exchange for political power. Why? By the time the major political quarrels in Hong Kong, which must not be ignored, had occurred and seriously jeopardized the livelihood of the people and the interests of the working class, Jimmy Lai and the opposition had ceased to exist years ago.

 

It is even interesting to note that the so-called establishment has resumed chanting the slogans that the opposition used to chant, such as 'the middle class pays too much tax and receives too little welfare', which was originally advocated by the opposition (e.g. on May 3, 2013, the League of Social Democrats (LSD) published a Facebook post titled "Do you think you pay too much tax? (Written by Wong Chun Bon) post: Last month, the government announced its budget, and apart from continuing to have no long-term financial and public policy proposals, even the amount of candies handed out was less than that of last year. In fact, there is a typical bias between these two perspectives: the middle class pays too much tax, while the grassroots only care about getting their hands on welfare) This also recognizes that the funders and manipulators of both camps are the same.


▪️本港媒體和港府的公關和報導傾向是隱瞞一個事實,即劏房是僭建物,是違法的。因此,租管條例的紛爭是個偽命題,它的問題出在港府(屋宇署,差餉物業估價署)如何掌握僭建物一般的執法問題。只要在一般僭建物的執法上無法掌握所有僭建物的情形,僭建物之一的所謂劏房和其他類型不適切居所的租金和非法業主濫收諸費用的問題只會不絕於耳。本港不適切居所的概念內涵為分間單位(粵語:劏房),其外延為板間房、床位、太空倉、閣樓空間、籠屋,以至「天台屋」和「平台屋」等不同類型的「分間單位」(URL)。 在此官方定義上,本港不適切居所人口與申請公屋上樓的宗數大致一致。即全港在2021年及2016年分別有約10.8萬個及9.3萬個劏房,有約21.6萬人及21萬人居住,即5年間劏房數目增16%,居住人數增6000人(URL),而目前的公屋申請人口(在2023年9月底,約有132,000宗一般公屋申請,以及約96,600宗配額及計分制下的非長者一人申請 URL)228,600宗。也就是,本港不適切居所人口和租住公屋申請宗數都是約22萬到23萬左右。因為所謂劏房是違法的,僭建物,所以所謂優質劏房純然是個非法歪念。

 

The public relations and reports of the local media and the Hong Kong Government tend to hide the fact that subdivided units are unauthorized building works (UBWs) and illegal. URL

 

Therefore, the dispute over the Rent Control Ordinance is a false proposition. The problem lies in how the Hong Kong Government (the Buildings Department and the Rating and Valuation Department) can grasp the general law enforcement of UBWs. As long as the general law enforcement of UBWs fails to grasp the situation of all UBWs, the problem of rents and overcharging of fees by illegal owners for the so-called subdivided units and other types of unsuitable dwellings, which are one of the UBWs, will only continue to be a problem.

 

The concept of UH in Hong Kong connotes subdivision of flat units (Cantonese: subdivided units), which extends to different types of "subdivided units" such as cubicles, bedspaces, space compartments, cocklofts, caged homes, as well as "rooftop" and "podium" units. For the purpose of this official definition, the population of unfit inhabitants in Hong Kong is broadly in line with the number of applications for public rental housing (PRH) allocation.

 

In other words, there will be about 108,000 and 93,000 subdivided units in Hong Kong in 2021 and 2016 respectively, occupied by about 216,000 and 210,000 people, i.e. the number of subdivided units will increase by 16% and the number of occupants will increase by 6,000 in five years. The current PRH applicant population (about 132,000 general PRH applications and about 96,600 non-elderly one-person applications under the Quota and Points System (QPS) as at end-September 2023) is 228,600. In other words, there are around 220,000 to 230,000 cases for both the population living in unfit accommodation and applying for public rental housing in Hong Kong. Since the so-called subdivided units are illegal and unauthorized building work, the so-called quality subdivided units are purely an illegal idea.

 

▪️註解1:香港社區組織協會(Society for Community Organization):是個慈善機構。雖它指摘埋葬動態清零後的後果,但它曾反對了動態清零。它的組織身分不是社團,也沒有登記成為社團(URL),而在稅務條例上享受稅務優待的慈善機構身分(URL),但與其他登記為社團的政治性公關團體沒有兩樣。本港政治性團體有幾個類別,即社團(社團條例下登記的非政府組織一般,如工聯會),法定機構,有限公司(如VISION2047),非牟利組織(NPO;大部分以擔保有限公司名義登記在公司條例下 URL),慈善機構(稅務條例認可),慈善信託(稅務條例認可),職工會(職工會條例下的組織,如商會,工會,工會聯合會)等要看該組織在哪一個條例之下登記其正式身分。一再強調,本港不存在任何正式政黨(政黨法),而僅存在各種公司,因此貪婪資本無孔不入。

 

Note 1: Society for Community Organization is a charitable organization. Although it played the role in burying the dynamic zero-COVID, its organization status is not a society, and it is not registered as a society, and it enjoys the status of a tax-favored charity under the tax ordinance, but it is not the same as other charities. However, there is no difference from other political PR organizations registered as societies. There are several types of political organizations in Hong Kong, namely, societies (non-governmental organizations registered under the Societies Ordinance in general, e.g., HKFTU), statutory bodies, limited companies (e.g., VISION2047), non-profit-making organizations (NPOs; most of them are registered as companies limited by guarantee under the Companies Ordinance). Charities (recognized under the Inland Revenue Ordinance), charitable trusts (recognized under the Inland Revenue Ordinance), trade unions (organizations under the Trade Unions Ordinance, e.g. chambers of commerce, labor unions, federation of trade unions), etc. Depends on which Ordinance the organization is registered as official. It has been emphasized time and time again that there are no formal political parties in Hong Kong (the Political Parties Act), only corporations of all sorts, and therefore greedy capital is everywhere.

 

▪️註解2:盧文端是從反動態清零以來積極偽裝中央之聲的本港資本的公關小丑之一,所謂全國僑聯並非中央政府機構。甚至,現在是‘前’副主席。

 

Note 2: Lo Man Tuen is one of the public relations clowns of Hong Kong's capital who has been actively pretending to be the voice of the Central Authorities since the Anti-zero-COVID, and the so-called All-China Federation of Overseas Compatriot Societies (ACCS) is not a Central Government organization. It is even now a 'former' vice-chairman.

 

▪️註解3: 只要沽空指定股票證券,沽空行為本身則不違法。

 

Note 3: Short selling itself is not illegal as long as it is done on a specified stock security.

 URL


🔻 NEWS / FACTs 【事實關係】

 

▪️龍漢標:針對樓市辣招,他重申樓市「辣招」的有效期已經過去,2010年首項「辣招」推出時,物業供應少,而且需求高,加上息口很低,但目前周期已經完全逆轉,現時息口為15年來最高,供應亦很多,置業需求亦減弱,所以「辣招」沒有需要存在的理由,因此政府該在財政預算案中「撤辣」。URL

 

▪️ 新一份財政預算案下月發布,立法會「C15+」今(22日)提交預算案建議,有議員指預算案要就急速人口改變做好計劃和部署,要未雨綢繆,不能「臨渴先來掘井」,至於早前有風聲指政府要開立資本增值稅,議員直言不支持,因社會和經濟不符合條件,稱所有窒礙經濟增長的稅不應該徵收;而樓市印花稅則建議「全面撤辣」,而且「愈快愈好」。議員江玉歡表示,根據人口推算報告,香港未來人口轉變巨大,出生率下降已經到危險水平,而未來將倍增外來人口,因此預算案要就急速人口改變做好計劃和部署,不能「臨渴先來掘井」。針對大型投資項目,她指政府應該更加審慎看效益,用商業角度衡量基建是否吸引投資,又指如開展北都和大嶼,目前缺少市民、投資者和企業對香港的信心,政府需要做好解說工作。另一議員尚海龍也認為應「先做北都,再謀大嶼」,兩者之間要做選擇,而公帑更要放在市民的醫療、教育等。URL

 

▪️全國僑聯前副主席盧文端建議當局全面撤銷樓市辣招,指有關官員似乎仍不願正面回應社會的訴求,香港仍有很多年輕人及家庭希望置業,反問是不是要等到樓價斷崖式下跌,或跌至很多年輕人都買得起樓的時候,才會全面撤辣。盧文端在報章撰文,指本港的經濟正面臨嚴峻挑戰,政府賣地多次流標、恒生指數跌破16,000點心理關口,房地產和金融兩大經濟支柱都陷於困境,令社會上浮現悲觀的氣氛。而樓市未有全面「撤辣」,與社會的期待存在明顯反差,增加了市民的焦慮情緒。他又指,撤辣不過是「拆牆鬆綁」,讓樓市正常運作,促進經濟復蘇,不是提供優惠政策,亦不是公帑資助買樓,並非「托市」。URL

 

▪️社協指,通關後業主「唔憂租」。事實上,隨着社會復常,有業主或將劏房「再轉型」成「客房」,接待旅客「搵真銀」,「凍租」變成不可能,促引入起始租金,可惜政府一直拖延,一味指劏房租金水平有異,訂立劃一標準有難度,也就難怪劏房租金愈升愈有。

 

至於濫收水、電費更是普遍,協會在去年底至本月,向該會服務的不適切居所租戶進行網上問卷調查。受訪者來自12個地區,包括深水埗、元朗及觀塘等,年齡介乎41至50歲,八成受訪者是劏房戶,最多2人及3人家庭。當中,逾六成受訪者指電費是由業主另定每度電價計算,有濫收情況,條例生效後,業主違規情況未有顯著改善。

 

從以上情況可見,有關條例生效後,並未能真正幫到劏房戶。條例生效當年的年底,差估署一共識別逾1,000宗業主涉嫌違規的個案,但政府最新公布的數字顯示,由條例生效至本月5日,只有共87名劏房業主因違反條例而被定罪。有關團體認為如今租管條例實施已兩年,以上情況仍未有顯著改善。

 

為政貴在行。有法而無人執行即是廢。有關條例實施後,有關注團體已指出,當局主動巡查次數不足,執法力度弱,依賴劏房租戶舉報的做法極不理想,形同「將責任外判」。再說,有租戶亦憂慮舉報後會遭業主報復被迫遷,那只好啞忍。條例生效至今兩年,能進入司法程序的個案偏少,很大程度就是因為投訴人拒絕作證而無法檢控,試問在如此情況下,租管條例怎不淪為無牙老虎? URL

 

▪️針對分間單位的租管條例列明業主需於租期開始的60日內,向差餉物業估價署以AR2表格提交租賃通知書,但截至去年11月中,差估署只處理了2.35萬份AR2表格,佔全港10萬劏房戶約20%。條例又列明首兩年租約期內業主不能加租,其後續約時加租不得多於10%。URL

 

▪️港股今年開局不久已累跌一成,反彈力度短暫,周五(19日)收市又再以跌市報收,弱勢未改!除了主動型基金掟貨離場,原來被動型基金都加入沽貨大軍,當中以科技股沽壓最嚴重。投行摩根士丹利估計,主動型長倉基金月內已累計淨掟中資科技股約23億美元(約179.4億港元),對沖基金更加碼沽空科技股,是故恒生科技指數本月累插近17%,遠遠跑輸大市。即使人民銀行本周向市場淨投放1.56萬億元人民幣,金額創一年新高,仍難以穩定人心,助資本市場對抗地心吸力,可見眼前這場中國資產保衞戰,絕不好應付!URL

 

 

🔻 COMMENT 【評語】

 

實踐是真理的基準。在2024年1月22日恆生指數跌破一萬五千點大關,而與外部勢力勾結的本港資本和港府從2022年10月28日以來開始積極拆除動態清零國策而換來的炒股數值都蒸發了。這證實了炒樓炒股已無路可走,甚至這個不健康不勞所得虛擬/泡沫剝削模式根本無助於改善本港實體經濟和民生。不但投入公帑給上市公司(在2024年現在僅有2286 /1,428,589包括公眾,私人,擔保公司在內的,全港公司)是不當的干涉市場之行為,每月強徵5%工資來投資上市公司也就是不公道。關於劏房問題,最大的問題盲點在於所謂劏房是僭建物,也就是違法建築物,因此港府帶頭推銷所謂‘優質劏房’是個非法歪念。足認本港腐爛墮落程度已到連政府自己都無法識別是非的地步了。

 

Practice is the benchmark of truth. On January 22, 2024, the Hang Seng Index fell below the 15,000 point mark, and the stock speculation values that local capital colluding with external forces and the Hong Kong government have been actively speculated on dismantling the national policy of dynamic zero-COVID since October 28, 2022, have all evaporated.

 

This confirms that there is no way out for property and stock speculation, and even this unhealthy and unproductive virtual/bubble exploitation model is not at all conducive to improving the real economy and people's livelihood in Hong Kong. Not only is public money invested in listed companies (there are now only 2,286 in 2024 out of 1,428,589 companies in Hong Kong, including public, private and guarantee companies), it is an inappropriate intervention in the market, and the imposition of a mandatory 5% monthly wage levy to invest in listed companies is also unfair.  

 

Regarding the issue of subdivided units, the biggest blind spot is that the so-called subdivided units are unauthorized building works (UBWs), that is, illegal structures, and so the Hong Kong Government's taking the lead in promoting the so-called 'quality subdivided units' is an illegal and distorted idea. It is evident that Hong Kong has become so rotten and corrupt that even the government itself is unable to distinguish right from wrong.

 


 

Hong Kong Intelligence Report #116 港媒隱瞞劏房(不適切居所)是僭建物(違章建築)

Copyright Disclaimer Under Section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, allowance is made for "fair use" for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, and research. Fair use is a use permitted by copyright statute that might otherwise be infringing. Non-profit, educational or personal use tips the balance in favour of fair use.

Comments


bottom of page