|
This Months Issue
Advertisement
|
The rise of urbanisation
Economic growth in Fiji during the 1950s saw the emergence of a new grouping known as the working class. The impact of this social class, not only in the economic sector but in the social sector, was immense. It was because of the working class that the Housing Authority and suburban Fiji were born. New words like “housing estate”, “subdivision” and “low-cost housing” appeared. MAI LIFE, through the Great Debate Series, looks back at the formation of the Housing Authority and tracks changes through the years. By Solomoni Biumaiono When Fiji’s Legislative Council debated the establishment of the Housing Authority in 1955, the scale of the debate did not do justice to the magnitude of urban development that Fiji would undergo in the next half-century. Yet some of the remarks recorded in Hansard reports, foretold some of the urbanisation problems that Fiji had yet to encounter – overcrowding, dangerous housing and a rise in crime. Only six speakers chose to contribute to the debate when the Housing Ordinance Bill was moved in the House, but the Bill set the platform from which the Authority was to derive its legal powers and mandate to build housing estates. A. F. R. Stoddart, in moving the Bill, said the autonomous body would be known as the Housing Authority and the Governor of then colony would appoint its board, consisting of five members. The Authority would have the power to build housing for people with low incomes. For ease of reference in the Bill, such people low income earners were called “workers”, defined as a “person whose average income does not exceed twelve pounds per week or such other sum as the Governor in Council may prescribe”; “that is to say, a person whose average income is approximately 600 pounds a year. The power and functions of the Authority were described as that to:
It was this last clause that drew a lot of attention from the speakers, apart from those who feared the disintegration of social standards – or European standards, as would likely have been the case. Stoddart was the chief defender of the Bill. “As honourable members will see by reference to the interim report of the committee, objection has been raised to that proposal on the ground that those who are going to benefit from the operations of this Authority will comprise just one particular section of the population, and it is contended that one section should not benefit pecuniarily under a special definition of ‘public purpose’. “Honourable members will recall, however that a specific item included in the resolution passed by Council was ‘to acquire land compulsorily for the purposes of the scheme’. So the inclusion of this particular provision in the Bill is at the deliberate request of this Council. Moreover, I think Council will agree that the provision of housing for the vast body of low-income workers and others is a very great public matter, a matter of great public concern. The purpose for which the right to acquire land compulsorily is sought in this Bill can, therefore, rightly be regarded as a public purpose.” The Bill also clearly stated that it was the Authority’s board’s duty to give priority to those whose family circumstances are such because of poverty or because they have unduly large families; (this does not include all their friends and relations) – that they cannot easily obtain accommodation elsewhere. Another important aspect of the Bill exempted the Authority from regulations like the Building Regulations, the Subdivision of Land Ordinance and the Town Planning Regulations. The limit to such exemptions was the requirement that the Authority needed written agreements from the authorities which administer such regulations prior to any construction. One interesting observation raised during the 1955 debate was made by the European member for the Eastern Division, H. B. Gibson who said the building regulations was ridiculously demanding in view of the type of people the Housing Authority would be building houses for. “Sir I could take you to houses in the Samabula area which had to be built to European living standards,” Gibson told the Legislative Council. “They are not occupied by people who never in the course of history could possibly pay the rent which the amount of capital invested in the house demands, or use the houses properly. Those houses have a large lounge and sitting room, three bedrooms by and large, a lavatory, a shower room or bathroom and a laundry, and they are eminently suitable for small European families, but they are not in an area in which Europeans would wish to live. “Who occupies them? In one house I visited the other day the big lounge was occupied by an Indian and his family and each of the three bedrooms was occupied by – goodness gracious – probably a dozen Fijians; and they all used the European style kitchen and lavatory. I could tell the same story of Labasa. A man there does not let rooms, he lets lying-down places. When the tenants have done their cooking in the communal European style kitchen, and used the European style lavatory and bathroom, he puts down his mats and sleeps with his family in the European style kitchen. “That is ridiculous, and if we did not have silly building regulations private enterprises would find the money to build suitable houses for those people. I think the second European nominated member has put his finger right on the spot, and that we will presently find ourselves forced to reduce our building standards,” Gibson said. It would be in another three years that Gibson would add a really fascinating and perhaps honest observation to the Housing Authority debate. Over the next two years, ambiguities within its legal framework saw the Authority struggle to carry out the work it was set out to do. In 1958 steps were taken to address this when Administrative Officer, Class H-B K. R. Bain was sent on a fact-finding trip to the West Indies to find out about low-income housing projects that had been developed there. Later, in August of the same year, an amendment Bill was tabled in the Legislative Council to make the necessary amendments to the Authority’s legal framework. Bain’s West Indies report and recommendations were accepted as the guiding principles for the Authority. Generally, the 1958 debate produced no spectacular disagreements on the proposed amendments which included:
“I want to make it clear sir that I am referring in this merely to the initial stage of the activities of the Authority. This is a matter of policy, and policy should at all times be flexible. Let the Authority start with this, try it out and propose what changes it thinks are necessary in the light of practical experience,” Bain said. The first speaker, the first ever chairman of the Authority and the brains behind its establishment, the European member for the Southern Division, J. N. Falvey, proceeded to lay out the first ever unofficial report from the Authority. “It is now over two years, Sir – nearly three years – since the Housing Ordinance was passed, and it has been a matter of acute disappointment to many people, including myself that there is still no sign of any tangible results from the Housing Ordinance, 1955. “The Authority has come to conclusion that the quickest way to get results is to launch a scheme of cash loans to workers in the low income group who will have, we hope, something put themselves and at any rate the capacity to meet the amortization requirements for such loans. It is perhaps not too incautious to predict, Sir, that before the end of this year, possibly even sooner, we shall have some visible signs of the Authority’s work,” Falvey said. Falvey reported that Government had given them 43 acres with which to start constructing houses and that had been the only substantive work done since its formation in 1955 and since it started to give out loans. “The worst sin the Authority can commit is that of timidity. It is firmly determined to do something and to do it quickly. It would be wholly unnatural not to make mistakes; and it would be wholly unnatural if it did not expect to be criticized for such mistakes, so if members feel disposed even now to “cut loose” as the saying goes, let them start,” he said. Responding to the invitation, the Indian member for the North-Western Division, Ayodhya Prasad asked if farmers in rural areas qualify as workers too as they also work. “If farmers such as these are also included in this word “workers”, then I have no more to say but if not then I propose moving an amendment to ad the word “farmer”, so that “farmers” and “workers” will be included. The fourth Native member Semesa Sikivou asked that the Authority be exempted from any criticisms if they incur heavy public expenditure and then asked if they could cut the costs of building houses to a bare minimum and that no effort be spared in this endeavor. First Indian nominated member A. N. Deoki warned the Authority against the unnecessary use of funds and went on to question why the Authority’s office was located in a high rent area of Suva and why it employed an architect on a full time basis when it required only one design for all its proposed schemes. Gibson raised the only new question and one which eventually became the legacy of the Authority’s notorious housing schemes. “I want to make the observation as a person who has given thought over a long period to the question of housing, that when we come to housing people closely together which of course we are going to do, there are two problems to examine. Will we sprawl over the countryside or will we build into the air,” Gibson asked the Legislative Council. He said the then British colony Hong Kong was forced to build into the air because the scheme fitted the natural geography of the land. Gibson said if the Authority decided to build into the countryside, it would increase its costs as it would have to build roads, take away their wastes and sewerage, bring them water and give them light and power. “Now if you sprawl, you will increase all these costs. If you build upwards you have greater costs in the foundation in order to take the higher buildings, but this does decrease the costs of roading, the cost of water reticulation and the cost of sewerage and it reduces the cost of light and power reticulation,” he said. He also said that in Italy he observed that big cities were built upwards rather than sprawled out. From a member of the Italian Medical Authority he was told that it was easier to contain an epidemic and criminals with these high rises. “It was that in his wisdom Mussolini – who had quite a lot of wisdom as well as a lot of stupidity – found that even in approaching the question of playing areas and exercising areas he could provide for them just as conveniently inside a big block of skyscrapers – these skyscrapers are all built around a rectangle. He found he could provide by building a play-ground in the centre of an urban area, many of which as we know, are not beautiful anyhow. “This medical man found that it was also much easier for them to control medical problems. One has heard a little of the dreadful scourge that threatens us now. It is truly an urban one. It is much easier to control people from the medical point of view when they live in one block of buildings. There is another telling point, and I am sorry our Commissioner of Police is not here, for this is a typically Mousolini story. They found in Italy that many of the people who give governments trouble are amongst the low wage earners. The police under Mussolini, found that it was much easier to deal with “trouble makers” in a great big building where they had everybody under control where they could use fire hoses or as Mussolini did, guns on them if they wanted to. It was much easier this way than having to chase them over a lot of dirty backyards. “That is another thing I commend to this Housing Authority: please do not build a collection of back lanes and backyards which, when our police want to chase a fugitive will allow the fugitive to climb over much quicker than the police can. Please think that out carefully. There are many places to go to for a lesson and many books that can be read on this subject,” Gibson said. 
|
