HONG KONG LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 337
OFFICIAL REPORT OF PROCEEDINGS
Meeting of 19th December 1962
PRESENT:
HIS EXCELLENCY THE GOVERNOR (PRESIDENT)
SIR ROBERT BROWN BLACK, GCMG, OBE
HIS EXCELLENCY LIEUTENANT-GENERAL SIR REGINALD HACKETT HEWETSON, KCB, CBE, DSO
COMMANDER BRITISH FORCES
THE HONOURABLE EDMUND BRINSLEY TEESDALE, MC
ACTING COLONIAL SECRETARY
THE HONOURABLE MAURICE HEENAN, QC
ATTORNEY GENERAL
THE HONOURABLE JOHN CRICHTON MCDOUALL
SECRETARY FOR CHINESE AFFAIRS
THE HONOURABLE JOHN JAMES COWPERTHWAITE, OBE
FINANCIAL SECRETARY
THE HONOURABLE ALLAN INGLIS, CMG
DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS
DR THE HONOURABLE DAVID JAMES MASTERTON MACKENZIE, CMG, OBE DIRECTOR OF MEDICAL AND HEALTH SERVICES
THE HONOURABLE KENNETH STRATHMORE KINGHORN
DIRECTOR OF URBAN SERVICES
THE HONOURABLE PETER DONOHU
DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION
THE HONOURABLE DHUN JEHANGIR RUTTONJEE, OBE
THE HONOURABLE RICHARD CHARLES LEE, OBE
THE HONOURABLE KWAN CHO-YIU, OBE
THE HONOURABLE KAN YUET-KEUNG, OBE
THE HONOURABLE WILLIAM CHARLES GODDARD KNOWLES
THE HONOURABLE SIDNEY SAMUEL GORDON
THE HONOURABLE LI FOOK-SHU
MR ALASTAIR TREVOR CLARK (Clerk of Councils)
ABSENT:
THE HONOURABLE FUNG PING-FAN, OBE
HONG KONG LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 338
MINUTES
The minutes of the meeting of the Council held on 28th November 1962 were confirmed.
PAPERS
THE COLONIAL SECRETARY, by Command of His Excellency the Governor, laid upon the table the following papers: —
Subject GN No
Sessional Papers, 1962: —
No 32—Annual Report by the District Commissioner,
New Territories for the year 1960-61.
No 33—Annual Report by the Registrar, Supreme Court
for the year 1961-62.
No 34—Annual Report by the Director of Fire Services
for the year 1961-62.
Public Health and Urban Services Ordinance, 1960.
Mineral Oil in Food Regulations, 1962 .......................................... A 115
Registration of Persons Ordinance, 1960.
Registration of Persons (Re-registration) (No 20) Order, 1962 A 117
Registration of Persons Ordinance, 1960.
Registration of Persons (Cancellation of Registration and
Identity Cards) (No 5) Order, 1962 ........................................ A 118
Public Order Ordinance.
Frontier Closed Area (No 2) Order, 1962 ....................................... A 119
Public Order Ordinance.
Public Order Curfew (Consolidation) (Amendment) Order, 1962 A 120
Registration of Persons Ordinance, 1960.
Registration of Persons (Re-registration) (No 21) Order, 1962 A 121
Registration of Persons Ordinance, 1960.
Registration of Persons (Cancellation of Registration and
Identity Cards) (No 6) Order, 1962 ........................................ A 122
Stamp Ordinance.
Stamp (Bank Authorization) (No 4) Order, 1962 ........................... A 123
HONG KONG LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 339
Subject GN No
Registration of Persons Ordinance, 1960.
Registration of Persons (Re-registration) (No 22) Order, 1962 A 124
Registration of Persons Ordinance, 1960.
Registration of Persons (Cancellation of Registration and
Identity Cards) (No 7) Order, 1962 ........................................ A 125
ILLEGAL STRIKES AND LOCK-OUTS ORDINANCE,
CHAPTER 61
THE ATTORNEY GENERAL moved the following resolution: —
Resolved, pursuant to section 8 of the Illegal Strikes and Lock-Outs Ordinance, Chapter 61, that the duration of the said Ordinance be extended for the term of one year with effect from 1st January 1963.
He said: Sir, the Illegal Strikes and Lock-outs Ordinance will lapse on the 31st December of this year unless its duration is extended for a further year by resolution of this Council. The Ordinance in no way affects a strike or lock-out arising out of a genuine trade dispute but it is intended to prevent the occurrence of a strike or lock-out designed or calculated to coerce the Government either directly or by indirect hardship on any substantial portion of the community.
Sir, it is considered that the time has not yet come to dispense with this Ordinance and accordingly I invite this Council to pass the resolution.
THE COLONIAL SECRETARY seconded.
The question was put and agreed to.
SOCIETIES ORDINANCE, CHAPTER 151
THE ATTORNEY GENERAL moved the following resolution: —
Resolved, pursuant to section 26 of the Societies Ordinance, Chapter 151, that the duration of the said Ordinance be extended for the term of one year with effect from 1st January 1963.
He said: Sir, the purpose of this resolution is to extend the duration of the Societies Ordinance for a further year. This Ordinance affords the Commissioner of Police powers which aid him in curbing
HONG KONG LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 340
the activities of triad and other unlawful organizations. It is Government's view that the continuance in force of this Ordinance is essential to the maintenance of law and order in the Colony.
THE COLONIAL SECRETARY seconded.
The question was put and agreed to.
DEFENCE REGULATIONS (CONTINUATION)
ORDINANCE, 1958
THE ATTORNEY GENERAL moved the following resolution: —
Resolved, pursuant to section 6 of the Defence Regulations (Continuation) Ordinance, 1958, that the duration of the said Ordinance be extended for the term of one year with effect from 1st January 1963.
He said: Sir, the purpose of this resolution is to extend the life of the Defence Regulations (Continuation) Ordinance, 1958 for a further year. This Ordinance which has been extended annually by resolution since 1958 keeps in operation certain Defence Regulations and Orders; although it is necessary that some of these Regulations and Orders should continue in operation for the time being I am pleased to be able to say that a considerable number of them have just been revoked and their revocation will take effect on publication of the Gazette this coming Friday.
THE COLONIAL SECRETARY seconded.
The question was put and agreed to.
COMPANIES (PREVENTION OF EVASION OF THE
SOCIETIES ORDINANCE) ORDINANCE, 1959
THE ATTORNEY GENERAL moved the following resolution: —
Resolved, pursuant to section 16 of the Companies (Prevention of Evasion of the Societies Ordinance) Ordinance, 1959, that the duration of the said Ordinance be extended for the term of one year with effect from 1st January 1963.
He said: Sir, the purpose of this resolution is to continue in force for another year the Companies (Prevention of Evasion of the Societies Ordinance) Ordinance, 1959. This Ordinance became law in July 1959 and is designed to prevent persons who associate together for undesirable purposes from evading the incidence of the Societies Ordinance by registering under the Companies Ordinance. Government
HONG KONG LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 341
considers that the maintenance of law and order requires that this Ordinance continue in force.
THE COLONIAL SECRETARY seconded.
The question was put and agreed to.
PUBLIC CLEANSING AND PREVENTION OF NUISANCES (AMENDMENT) (NO 2) BY-LAWS, 1962
MR K. S. KINGHORN moved the following resolution: —
Resolved that the Public Cleansing and Prevention of Nuisances (Amendment) (No 2) By-laws, 1962, made by the Urban Council on the 4th day of December 1962, under section 15 of the Public Health and Urban Services Ordinance, 1960, be approved.
He said: Sir, the proposed amendment to the Public Cleansing and Prevention of Nuisances By-laws, 1960, will permit the use of disposable sacks, made of strong paper, as refuse receptacles in premises such as hotels, where their use would be suitable. Written approval from the Urban Council will be required in each case.
THE COLONIAL SECRETARY seconded.
The question was put and agreed to.
HAWKER (AMENDMENT) BY-LAWS, 1962
MR K. S. KINGHORN moved the following resolution: —
Resolved that the Hawker (Amendment) By-laws, 1962, made by the Urban Council on the 4th day of December 1962, under section 83 of the Public Health and Urban Services Ordinance, 1960, be approved.
He said: Sir, the first amendment proposed in the Hawker (Amendment) By-laws, 1962, will alter, and simplify the method of assessing, the annual fees for licensed wall stalls.
The second amendment will permit fixed pitch stallholders to retain their goods at their stalls overnight. General purpose and cooked food stallholders are allowed to retain goods at their stalls overnight and it is considered reasonable that fixed pitch stallholders should also enjoy this concession.
THE COLONIAL SECRETARY seconded.
The question was put and agreed to.
HONG KONG LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 342
DEMOLISHED BUILDINGS (RE-DEVELOPMENT OF SITES) BILL, 1961
MR A. INGLIS moved the withdrawal of a Bill intituled "An Ordinance to make provisions concerning the re-development of sites of certain demolished buildings, compensation of tenants evicted therefrom and for purposes connected therewith."
He said: Sir, I shall, in a few moments, be moving the, First reading of the Demolished Buildings (Re-development of Sites) Bill, 1962. The 1961 Bill has been the subject of much discussion with representatives of my Unofficial colleagues and in view of the number of important amendments to be made, it is thought more convenient to proceed by way of substituting a fresh Bill and by withdrawing the present one.
THE COLONIAL SECRETARY seconded.
The question was put and agreed to.
DEMOLISHED BUILDINGS (RE-DEVELOPMENT OF SITES) BILL, 1962
MR A. INGLIS moved the First reading of a Bill intituled "An Ordinance to make provision concerning the re-development of sites of certain demolished buildings, and the compensation of certain tenants for loss of possession, and for purposes connected with the matters aforesaid."
He said: Sir, legislation to provide for the re-development of sites and compensation of protected tenants where buildings are condemned as dangerous, or have already been destroyed by fire or other disaster, has had a long and difficult progress in this Council. If I may sum up, in one sentence, the reasons for this slow progress I would be inclined to say that it was due to the natural and commendable desire on the part of the honourable Members of this Council to ensure that the interests of all parties in this complex question—the interests of the owner of the property as well as the interests of his tenants—are fully and carefully provided for.
Perhaps, Sir, if honourable Members will bear with me, I can illustrate what I mean by going back a little and referring briefly to the history of this matter. This is the third Bill to be introduced into Council on this difficult subject. Honourable Members will recall the Working Party which was appointed in 1959 to examine the situation caused by the number of potentially dangerous buildings in the Colony and the problems arising from the fact that, although the Buildings Ordinance contains adequate powers to require, in really serious cases, the demolition of such buildings, the tenants occupying them not only would, in such circumstances, be rendered homeless but would, unlike
HONG KONG LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 343
tenants dispossessed by reason of Exclusion Orders under the Landlord and Tenant Ordinance, fail to receive compensation to alleviate the hardship of having to find new accommodation. The first Demolished Buildings (Redevelopment of Sites) Bill which received its first reading in August 1960 sought, among other things, to meet this problem by providing that owners of protected property who thus obtained vacant possession without payment of compensation to their protected tenants would be required to pay a levy equal to half the incremental value of their vacant property. Although not stated in the Bill the responsibility for rehousing the dispossessed tenants was to fall on Government and the cost of this was to have been met, in part, by the proceeds of the levy. This proposal, in particular, as honourable Members will recall did not commend itself to them and discussions ensued resulting in due course in a fresh Bill which the Acting Director of Public Works moved in February last year. The principal change introduced by this second Bill in relation to the dispossessed tenant and the landlord's responsibility towards him was a provision which would enable such a tenant to obtain compensation either by applying to a Tenancy Tribunal of by agreement with the owner. There was no specific provision for rehousing since, by virtue of the change in the Bill to which I have just referred, tenants dispossessed as a result of a demolition order or because of some calamity would be in exactly the same position as tenants of any building demolished in pursuance of an exclusion order made under the Landlord and Tenant Ordinance.
This Bill, too, on closer examination, was found to contain a number of defects and unsatisfactory features, and considerable discussion and redrafting has taken place in which Government has received very great assistance from the Unofficial Members, represented in particular by my honourable Friends Mr R. C. LEE and Mr C. Y. KWAN. As a result of these discussions it was thought more convenient to proceed by way of yet a third Bill rather than by amendment of the second Bill which has just been withdrawn. The principal provisions in this fresh Bill are set out clearly and at some length in the Objects and Reasons and I feel I need confine myself here only to those Clauses in which there are important changes from the 1961 Bill.
The principal object of the legislation still remains, that is to say, it will enable dispossessed tenants of protected premises subject to a demolition order or destroyed by fire or other calamity to obtain compensation either by applying to a Tenancy Tribunal or by agreement with the owner. But, whereas under the 1961 Bill, there was no limit to the amount which an owner might be required to pay out in compensation to tenants, under Clause 8 of the present Bill, no owner, unless he has agreed to pay more than a Tenancy Tribunal would have awarded, will have to pay more by way of compensation than the amount of the incremental value of the property. This incremental
HONG KONG LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 344
value, which is the amount by which the market value of the property with vacant possession exceeds the market value of the property in occupation prior to the demolition order or disaster, will be assessed by the Director of Public Works. A Tenancy Tribunal at the time of making its award will be prohibited from taking into account the amount of this incremental value. Where the amount of compensation awarded by the Tenancy Tribunal together with any amounts the owner has agreed to pay to other protected tenants, exceeds the incremental value, the owner may require the Tribunal to make an appropriate reduction in its awards. If, therefore, there is no incremental value no compensation will be payable except in those cases where the owner has agreed to pay. These provisions, then, seek to meet a specific point of criticism against the earlier Bill that an owner of property which had become dangerous or had indeed been demolished as a result of some disaster over which he had no control, might, in certain circumstances, as, for instance, when the property had little or no redevelopment value, be required to pay more in compensation than the value of the vacant site. This criticism is now met, as I have said, by Clause 8 of the present Bill. The second Bill which has just been withdrawn provided that an owner could surrender his property to the Crown, and if the compensation to tenants exceeded its market value Government would make up the difference.
Another Clause of particular importance to which I would draw special attention is Clause 12. The final awards of a Tenancy Tribunal as to compensation will be registered as a charge on any property made subject to this Ordinance and will have priority over all instruments affecting the property executed subsequent to the commencement of this Ordinance. This means, in effect, that a mortgage on the property executed prior to the enactment of the Ordinance ranks ahead of the compensation as a charge against the property, and the position of existing mortgagees is therefore safeguarded.
Sir, this is an unusual Bill, not only by reason of the provisions which it contains, but also because of the care and time which has been devoted to them. The object throughout has been to endeavour to meet as satisfactorily as possible the reasonable interests of both landlord and tenant in circumstances where, for the protection of public safety, it is necessary to secure the demolition of dangerous buildings. I have therefore gone into the background in some detail. I would like again to record appreciation of the assistance given by my honourable Friends in the discussion and drafting stage, and to express hope that the present Bill will commend itself of this Council.
THE COLONIAL SECRETARY seconded.
The question was put and agreed to.
The Bill was read a First time.
HONG KONG LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 345
Objects and Reasons
The "Objects and Reasons" for the Bill were stated as follows: —
This Bill is in substitution for the one presently before the Legislative Council, which was read a first time on 8th February, 1961. The introductory speech and the statement of Objects and Reasons for that Bill may be found at pages 15 to 18 of Hong Kong Hansard for 1961. After the first reading numerous criticisms were considered and in consequence the redrafting of many of the provisions was undertaken; it is thought more convenient to proceed by way of a new Bill rather than by amendment.
2. Where buildings subject to the Landlord and Tenant Ordinance, Chapter 255 (1953 Reprint), become dangerous and require to be demolished, the Building Authority serves an order under the Buildings Ordinance, 1955, and the buildings are demolished without recourse to a tenancy tribunal. As a result the owner obtains vacant possession without payment of a compensation to the dispossessed tenants. The principal object of this Bill is to enable protected tenants dispossessed in this way to obtain compensation, either by making application to a tenancy tribunal or by agreement with the owner, and similar provision is made in the case of protected tenants of premises actually demolished by fire or other calamity.
3. Property which has become dangerous, or has in fact been demolished by reason of fire or other calamity, may be made subject to the provisions of this Bill by a re-development notice served by the Director of Public Works under clause 3. Thereafter the Director may make an order requiring the re development of the site within a specified time with buildings conforming to the lease covenants. Against this order the owner has right of appeal to the Tribunal established by clause 14. These notices and orders are required to be registered in the Land Office and copies of them served on all persons appearing from the records in the Land Office to have an interest in the property.
4. Clause 5 provides for the extinguishment of the rights of occupation or possession of displaced tenants who were protected by the Landlord and Tenant Ordinance at the date of service of the re-development notice or of the fire or calamity. These tenants are given a right to compensation which, under clause 7, in default of agreement between them and the owner of the property, will be settled by a tenancy tribunal appointed by the Chief Justice. Protected tenants and property owners have a right of appeal against an award of compensation. The appeal lies by way of petition to the Governor in Council.
HONG KONG LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 346
5. Clause 6 requires the Director of Public Works to assess the incremental value of a property affected by the Ordinance; this incremental value is the amount by which the market value of the property with vacant possession exceeds the market value of the property in occupation prior to it becoming subject to the Ordinance. This incremental value will normally be considerably in excess of the amount payable as compensation to the tenants; but in any event the owner cannot be required to pay more by way of compensation than the amount of the incremental value. To ensure this the tenancy tribunal, in making awards, is prohibited from taking into account the amount of the incremental value or even receiving evidence concerning it (clause 7(4)). If necessary the owner may require the tenancy tribunal to reduce the awards it has made so that they together with any sums payable to the tenants under agreement, as reassessed by the tenancy tribunal on the basis of what it would have awarded, shall not exceed the incremental value (clause 8).
6. Clause 9 deals with the time of payment of compensation awarded, the procedure relating thereto and the payment of interest on sums not paid in due time.
7. Clause 10(1) makes provision for the enforcement of awards of compensation in the same manner as a judgment of the Supreme Court, and clause 10(2) provides a further sanction in that the Building Authority may refuse to grant permission for building works (except demolition) until he is satisfied that all sums by way of compensation of which the Government has notice have been paid, or have been deposited with the Treasury.
8. Provision is made for the case where the Crown decides to resume property which is the subject of a re-development notice (see clause 11); in this case, there is deducted from the compensation payable to the owner for the resumption, all sums known to be due to protected tenants by way of compensation under the Ordinance, and for those sums to be paid to the persons to whom they are due or to be placed on deposit on their behalf with the Treasury.
9. The registration in the Land Office of an award of a tenancy tribunal constitutes the amount of compensation and any interest thereon a charge on the property (see clause 12). This charge is in favour of The Colonial Treasurer Incorporated in trust for the persons to whom the money is due, has priority over all other instruments affecting the property executed after commencement of the Ordinance, and is enforceable as if it were a mortgage.
10. Clause 14 provides for the establishment and functions of the Tribunal which is to hear appeals against re-development orders made under clause 4 and against the assessments of incremental value by the Director of Public Works made under clause 6(1).
HONG KONG LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 347
11. Section 3(1)(c) of the Landlord and Tenant Ordinance provides that that Ordinance shall not apply to any business premises which may, after the 1st day of February, 1947, be let for a term of not less than five years. By clause 16 of this Bill this provision will have effect even though the lease contains provision for its earlier determination in the event of service of a re-development notice.
12. The remaining clauses are—2 which contains definitions of words and expressions, 13 which enables Crown rent to be apportioned, 15 which provides for the methods of service of notices and orders, and 17 which saves rights and remedies of the Crown and powers of the Building Authority.
PAWNBROKERS (AMENDMENT) BILL, 1962
THE ATTORNEY GENERAL moved the First reading of a Bill intituled "An Ordinance to amend the Pawnbrokers Ordinance, Chapter 166."
He said: Sir, under section 6 of the principal Ordinance as it now stands, the provisions of the Ordinance do not apply to articles which have been pawned for a sum in excess of $500. Thus where a person convicted of feloniously taking or fraudulently obtaining goods has pawned such goods for an amount exceeding $500 a magistrate is unable to exercise the powers afforded him under section 28 of the Ordinance to order delivery of the goods to the owner.
The criterion of $500 specified in section 6 has remained unchanged since 1860 and is unrealistic today. Accordingly, Sir, the purpose of this Bill is to amend section 6 so as to extend the application of the Ordinance to articles which have been pledged with a pawnbroker for a sum of $2,000 or less.
THE COLONIAL SECRETARY seconded.
The question was put and agreed to.
The Bill was read a First time.
Objects and Reasons
The "Objects and Reasons" for the Bill were stated as follows: —
The purpose of this Bill is to seek the amendment of the Pawnbrokers Ordinance, Chapter 166, in order to increase from five hundred dollars to two thousand dollars the maximum loan to which the provisions of the Ordinance may apply.
2. The reason for the introduction of this measure is the fall in the value of money.
HONG KONG LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 348
MAGISTRATES (AMENDMENT) BILL, 1962
THE ATTORNEY GENERAL moved the Second reading of a Bill intituled "An Ordinance to further amend the Magistrates Ordinance, Chapter 227."
THE COLONIAL SECRETARY seconded.
The question was put and agreed to.
The Bill was read a Second time.
Council then went into Committee to consider the Bill clause by clause. Clauses 1 and 2 were agreed to.
Council then resumed.
THE ATTORNEY GENERAL reported that the Magistrates (Amendment) Bill, 1962, had passed through Committee without amendment and moved the Third reading.
THE COLONIAL SECRETARY seconded.
The question was put and agreed to.
The Bill was read a Third time and passed into law.
LEGAL PRACTITIONERS (AMENDMENT) (NO 2) BILL, 1962
THE ATTORNEY GENERAL moved the Second reading of a Bill intituled "An Ordinance further to amend the Legal Practitioners Ordinance, Chapter 159."
THE COLONIAL SECRETARY seconded.
The question was put and agreed to.
The Bill was read a Second time.
Council then went into Committee to consider the Bill clause by clause. Clauses 1 to 18 were agreed to.
Clause 19.
THE ATTORNEY GENERAL: —Sir, I rise to move that clause 19 be amended as set forth in the paper before honourable Members.
HONG KONG LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 349
Proposed Amendment
Clause
19 In alternative (b) of paragraph 4 of the First Schedule—
(a) after the words "employed W' insert the following—
"the Judiciary or";
(b) leave out the words
“judicial or”;
(c) after the words "normal scope of" insert the following— "the Judiciary or of".
Clause 19, as amended, was agreed to.
Clauses 20 to 28 were agreed to.
Council then resumed.
THE ATTORNEY GENERAL reported that the Legal Practitioners (Amendment) (No 2) Bill, 1962 had passed through Committee with one amendment and moved the Third reading.
THE COLONIAL SECRETARY seconded.
The question was put and agreed to.
The Bill was read a Third time and passed into law.
TELECOMMUNICATION BILL, 1962
THE ATTORNEY GENERAL moved the Second reading of a Bill intituled "An Ordinance to repeal and replace the Telecommunication Ordinance, Chapter 106, and to make better provision for the licensing and control of telecommunications, telecommunication services and telecommunication apparatus and equipment."
THE COLONIAL SECRETARY seconded.
The question was put and agreed to.
The Bill was read a Second time.
Council then went into Committee to consider the Bill clause by clause. Clauses 1 to 10 were agreed to.
Clause 11.
HONG KONG LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 350
THE ATTORNEY GENERAL: —Sir, I rise to move that clause 11 be amended as set forth in the paper before honourable Members.
Proposed Amendment
Clause
11 (1) Leave out the commas and words ", other than Very High Frequency apparatus used for air traffic control and
navigation purposes,".
(2) After the word "Colony", insert the following—
“, except for the purposes of air traffic control and air
navigation or for testing prior to flight of the apparatus
used for air traffic control and air navigation purposes,”.
Clause 11, as amended, was agreed to.
Clauses 12 to 41 were agreed to.
Council then resumed.
THE ATTORNEY GENERAL reported that the Telecommunication Bill, 1962 had passed through Committee with one amendment and moved the Third reading.
THE COLONIAL SECRETARY seconded.
The question was put and agreed to.
The Bill was read a Third time and passed into law.
ESTATE DUTY (AMENDMENT) BILL, 1962
THE FINANCIAL SECRETARY moved the Second reading of a Bill intituled "An Ordinance to amend the Estate Duty Ordinance, Chapter 111."
THE COLONIAL SECRETARY seconded.
The question was put and agreed to.
The Bill was read a Second time.
Council then went into Committee to consider the Bill clause by clause. Clauses 1 to 7 were agreed to.
Clause 8.
THE FINANCIAL SECRETARY: —Sir, I rise to move the amendment set out in the paper already before honourable Members.
HONG KONG LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 351
Proposed Amendment
Clause
8 Leave out paragraph (a) and substitute the following—
"(a) the deletion in subsection (1) of all the words and commas preceding the first colon, and the substitution
therefor of the following—
"In every case where any account is delivered
after the lapse of twelve months from the death, the
estate duty shall, without prejudice to the exercise
of the Commissioner's discretion under section 24,
be charged at twice the rates set out in the
applicable Schedule, unless the person accountable
for the estate duty satisfies the Commissioner that
there is a reasonable excuse for the delay in the
delivery of the account”.”.
Clause 8, as amended, was agreed to.
Clauses 9 to 14 were agreed to.
Council then resumed.
THE FINANCIAL SECRETARY reported that the Estate Duty (Amendment) Bill, 1962 had passed through Committee with one amendment and moved the Third reading.
THE COLONIAL SECRETARY seconded.
The question was put and agreed to.
The Bill was read a Third time and passed into law.
TRAMWAY (AMENDMENT) BILL, 1962
THE FINANCIAL SECRETARY moved the Second reading of a Bill intituled “An Ordinance to amend the Tramway Ordinance, Chapter 107.”
THE COLONIAL SECRETARY seconded.
The question was put and agreed to.
The Bill was read a Second time.
HONG KONG LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 352
Council then went into Committee to consider the Bill clause by clause. Clauses 1 to 22 were agreed to.
Council then resumed.
THE FINANCIAL SECRETARY reported that the Tramway (Amendment) Bill, 1962 had passed through Committee without amendment and moved the Third reading.
THE COLONIAL SECRETARY seconded.
The question was put and agreed to.
The Bill was read a Third time and passed into law.
ADJOURNMENT
HIS EXCELLENCY THE GOVERNOR: —Well, gentlemen, that concludes the business for today. When is it your pleasure that we should meet again?
THE ATTORNEY GENERAL: —I suggest this day three weeks, Sir.
HIS EXCELLENCY THE GOVERNOR: —Council stands adjourned until this day three weeks.