12th October 2023 – (Hong Kong) A lively internet interview with a 74-year-old man in Hong Kong has sparked debate around the transparent use of public resources. In the video chat broadcast on Douyin, ‘Mr Kwok’ discussed his finances and lifestyle in candid detail.
The pensioner, who retired as a civil servant in 2001, revealed receiving an annual pension of over HK$160,000 along with the maximum Old Age Living Allowance of $4,060 monthly. However, he also acknowledged working two hours daily in Sham Shui Po to supplement his HK$13,000 monthly income.
Most controversially, Mr Kwok admitted owning an 800-square-foot flat in Guangdong purchased in 1994 for $110,000. When prompted on his current accommodation, he hesitated before confirming living in a 350 square-foot public housing unit in Lok Fu with his wife – implying possible benefit misrepresentation. Kwok then confessed to having a wife and a mistress after 2 marriages. His wife in Hong Kong is 68 years old this year, and his mistress lives in Jiangmen, 52 years old this year. He added that buying a property in mainland China is for the mistress to live in Jiangmen. He reveals an age difference of 18 years with his mistress. He candidly admits that the Jiangmen property belongs to the mistress, saying, “Without a property, how could she be with you?”
Under scheme rules, a three-person household must not exceed an income of $24,410 or an asset value of $490,000 to qualify, declaring all domestic and overseas properties. For over-60s families, the threshold is $980,000 – below Mr Kwok’s declared holdings.
Making false statements in a public housing application carries criminal penalties of a HK$50,000 fine and up to six months imprisonment, rendering the applicant ineligible. Experts note the interviewee’s situation requires clarification to uphold housing integrity.
While praising his positive attitude, some observers questioned whether existing regulations sufficiently deterred potential abuse. Others defended Mr Kwok’s sincerity, attributing ambiguous replies to lack of guile rather than ill intent. As discussions continue, transparency remains key to fair housing access for all.