16 September, 2009
We, the undersigned civil groups, are writing to express our serious concern at the lack of a transparent and reasonable mechanism for the minimum food in Hong Kong.
As we are all aware, on 2nd September 2009, the Hong Kong SAR government announced that the food allowance, in lieu of free food for foreign domestic helpers, would be increased from not less than HKD 300 per month to not less than HKD 740 per month.
The statement that announced the freezing of domestic helpers wage level and the increase in minimum food allowance was released unexpectedly. Domestic workers unions were not consulted either. Just as the initial minimum food allowance of HKD 300 was arbitrarily notified to the public by the Hong Kong Immigration Office about 25 years ago, the HKD 740 was also renewed without transparent and reasonable procedure.
It is reported that the government has reviewed the food allowance, in lieu of free food, this year and decided to raise it to the new level after taking account of the movement in the relevant consumer price indices. Accordingly, the primary indicator for renewal of minimum food allowance is the relevant consumer price indices. Which raises the question: what is the initial level before other indicators are reflected in it?
The minimum food allowance is the standard that should not be less than that required in order to ensure the right to adequate food with dignity. In other words, it reflects an adequate quantity and quality of food, on average, respecting people’s food culture and tradition. It is one of the fundamental human rights to guarantee right to life.
According to the report on Household Expenditure Survey conducted by Census and Statistics Department of Hong Kong, the monthly average expenditure per capita is HKD 6,108 as of 2004-05. As the food expenditure amounted to 25.94%, the average food expenditure per capita is HKD 1,645. In addition, as the government stated, the consumer price indices reads as 109.2 as of July 2009 compared to 100 of October 2004-05. Accordingly, it is estimated that the food expenditure per capita would be more than HKD 1,645, which is significantly higher than what the government has recently announced. Approximately 50% of the survey sample was composed of low income groups, which means the indicator is a reasonable average to apply to all residents including foreign domestic workers and migrant workers in Hong Kong.
We recognise that most of the employers at present provide food for free at home. Unlike Chinese domestic workers or other migrant workers in Hong Kong, foreign domestic workers are required to live in their place of work according to the decision of the Hong Kong government in 2003. For workers who work and live in the home, three meals are thus also required to be provided for the workers with reasonable time given to eat the meal. In the case that the domestic workers are given food for free at home, the food should have the same value as the minimum food allowance we have proposed above. The relevant government departments also need an indicator to monitor this, since housework tends to be seen as private sector, which causes difficulty in assessment. Many foreign domestic workers reveal that they receive no food allowance, and due to inadequate or inappropriate food provided, they must use much of their own money to supplement their diet. As a consequence, many foreign domestic workers eat sufficiently only on their single rest day, due to being both too busy and lacking opportunity to buy their own food during the week. As the government stated, the minimum food allowance needs to be reviewed every year.
So far, most employers have decided whether to provide food for free at home or to provide food allowance, depending on their own convenience. However, foreign domestic workers may not always be able to consume certain foods, due to their food habits or religion. This leads one to question: Do employers ensure provision of adequate food suitable for their employees, and what are the governments guidelines or mechanisms for monitoring this? The right to adequate food, stipulated in International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR), requires that food should correspond with food culture and personal habit. The way to ensure this should be decided by mutual agreement and furthermore, the domestic workers’ choice should be given priority.
The government cannot underestimate the contribution of foreign domestic workers in economic development. It is the same principle as that of the housewife contributing to the domestic economy. However, the government has never shared economic growth with them, but rather forced them to share the difficulty for decades. To employ foreign domestic workers is not to give charity or kindness but to create mutual development. As much as Hong Kong society gets benefits and support from foreign domestic workers, it is true that the workers should also get support from the society. To improve mutual relationships as well as to create an honest society with justice to all, the government needs to build a clear indicator and standard which should be discussed and decided by public discourse. Without transparency and rationality based on human rights and dignity, the government cannot keep pace with international society.
The government says that its planned arrangement should allow sufficient time for employers to send the signed contracts to the Immigration Department for completion of the necessary application procedures. We are of the opinion that before they decide to increase the minimum food allowance, there should be sufficient open discussion for a mechanism to be established regarding standard-setting and procedures to be involved. It is not too late. We can start the discussion now. This is the way the government creates a transparent society that is respectful of human rights and is a responsible member of international society.
We look forward to your prompt reply and your effective actions in protecting the rights of the foreign domestic workers in Hong Kong.
Yours sincerely,
Asian Human Rights Commission (AHRC)
Asian Migrants’ Coordinating Body (AMCB)
Asia Monitor Resource Centre (AMRC)
Asia Pacific Mission for Migrants (APMM)
Association of Indonesian Migrant Workers (ATKI)
Bethune House Migrant Women’s Refuge
Filipino Migrant Workers’ Union (FMWU)
Hong Kong Catholic Commission for Labour Affairs (HKCCLA)
Hong Kong Confederation of Trade Unions
Hong Kong Christian Institute
Helpers for Domestic Helpers (HDH)
Hong Kong Domestic Workers General Union
Justice and Peace Commission of the Hong Kong Catholic Diocese
Mission for Migrant Workers (MFMW)
Thai Regional Alliance – Hong Kong (TRA-HK)
United Filipinos in Hong Kong (UNIFIL-MIGRANTE-HK)
Cc:
1. Mr. LEE Siu Kwong, Ambrose, GBS, IDSM, JP, Secretary for Security
2. Mr. PEH Yun Lu, Simon, IDSM, Director of Immigration, Immigration Department
3. Li Cheuk Yan, Legislative Council Member
4. Wong Kwok Hing, Legislative Council Member
5. Leung Yiu Chung, Legislative Council Member
6. Alan Leung Ka Kit, Legislative Council Member
7. Leung Kwok Hung, Legislative Council Member
8. Albert Ho, Legislative Council Member
