1 HONG KONG LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL -- 1 May 1991 HONG KONG LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL -- 1 May 1991 1
OFFICIAL REPORT OF PROCEEDINGS
Wednesday, 1 May 1991
The Council met at half-past Two o'clock
PRESENT
HIS EXCELLENCY THE GOVERNOR (PRESIDENT)
SIR DAVID CLIVE WILSON, G.C.M.G.
THE CHIEF SECRETARY
THE HONOURABLE SIR DAVID ROBERT FORD, K.B.E., L.V.O., J.P.
THE FINANCIAL SECRETARY
THE HONOURABLE NATHANIEL WILLIAM HAMISH MACLEOD, J.P.
THE ATTORNEY GENERAL
THE HONOURABLE JEREMY FELL MATHEWS, C.M.G., J.P. THE HONOURABLE ALLEN LEE PENG-FEI, C.B.E., J.P. THE HONOURABLE STEPHEN CHEONG KAM-CHUEN, C.B.E., J.P. THE HONOURABLE MRS SELINA CHOW LIANG SHUK-YEE, O.B.E., J.P. THE HONOURABLE MARIA TAM WAI-CHU, C.B.E., J.P. DR THE HONOURABLE HENRIETTA IP MAN-HING, O.B.E., J.P.
THE HONOURABLE CHAN YING-LUN, O.B.E., J.P.
THE HONOURABLE MRS RITA FAN HSU LAI-TAI, O.B.E., J.P. THE HONOURABLE CHENG HON-KWAN, O.B.E., J.P.
THE HONOURABLE CHUNG PUI-LAM, J.P.
THE HONOURABLE HO SAI-CHU, O.B.E., J.P.
THE HONOURABLE HUI YIN-FAT, O.B.E., J.P.
THE HONOURABLE DAVID LI KWOK-PO, O.B.E., J.P. THE HONOURABLE NGAI SHIU-KIT, O.B.E., J.P.
THE HONOURABLE PANG CHUN-HOI, M.B.E.
THE HONOURABLE POON CHI-FAI, J.P.
PROF. THE HONOURABLE POON CHUNG-KWONG, J.P.
THE HONOURABLE SZETO WAH
THE HONOURABLE TAI CHIN-WAH, J.P.
THE HONOURABLE MRS ROSANNA TAM WONG YICK-MING, O.B.E., J.P. THE HONOURABLE TAM YIU-CHUNG
DR THE HONOURABLE DANIEL TSE, C.B.E., J.P.
THE HONOURABLE ANDREW WONG WANG-FAT, J.P.
THE HONOURABLE LAU WONG-FAT, O.B.E., J.P.
THE HONOURABLE MICHAEL LEUNG MAN-KIN, J.P.
SECRETARY FOR TRANSPORT
THE HONOURABLE EDWARD HO SING-TIN, J.P.
THE HONOURABLE RONALD JOSEPH ARCULLI, J.P.
THE HONOURABLE MARTIN GILBERT BARROW, O.B.E. THE HONOURABLE PAUL CHENG MING-FUN
THE HONOURABLE MICHAEL CHENG TAK-KIN, J.P.
THE HONOURABLE DAVID CHEUNG CHI-KONG, J.P.
THE HONOURABLE RONALD CHOW MEI-TAK
THE HONOURABLE MRS NELLIE FONG WONG KUT-MAN, J.P. THE HONOURABLE MRS PEGGY LAM, M.B.E., J.P.
THE HONOURABLE DANIEL LAM WAI-KEUNG, J.P.
THE HONOURABLE MRS MIRIAM LAU KIN-YEE
THE HONOURABLE LAU WAH-SUM, O.B.E., J.P.
DR THE HONOURABLE LEONG CHE-HUNG
THE HONOURABLE LEUNG WAI-TUNG, J.P.
THE HONOURABLE JAMES DAVID McGREGOR, O.B.E., I.S.O., J.P. THE HONOURABLE KINGSLEY SIT HO-YIN
THE HONOURABLE MRS SO CHAU YIM-PING, J.P.
THE HONOURABLE JAMES TIEN PEI-CHUN, J.P.
THE HONOURABLE MRS ELSIE TU, C.B.E.
THE HONOURABLE PETER WONG HONG-YUEN, J.P.
THE HONOURABLE YEUNG KAI-YIN, J.P.
SECRETARY FOR EDUCATION AND MANPOWER
THE HONOURABLE MRS ANSON CHAN, J.P.
SECRETARY FOR ECONOMIC SERVICES
THE HONOURABLE PETER TSAO KWANG-YUNG, C.B.E., C.P.M., J.P. SECRETARY FOR HOME AFFAIRS
THE HONOURABLE MRS ELIZABETH WONG CHIEN CHI-LIEN, I.S.O., J.P. SECRETARY FOR HEALTH AND WELFARE
THE HONOURABLE MARTIN JOHN LEWIS, J.P.
SECRETARY FOR PLANNING, ENVIRONMENT AND LANDS
THE HONOURABLE IAN ROBERT STRACHAN, J.P.
SECRETARY FOR SECURITY
ABSENT
THE HONOURABLE CHEUNG YAN-LUNG, C.B.E., J.P.
THE HONOURABLE PETER POON WING-CHEUNG, O.B.E., J.P. THE HONOURABLE MARTIN LEE CHU-MING, Q.C., J.P.
IN ATTENDANCE
THE CLERK TO THE LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL
MR LAW KAM-SANG
Papers
The following papers were laid on the table pursuant to Standing Order 14(2): Subject
Subsidiary Legislation L.N. No.
Import and Export Ordinance
Import and Export (Carriage of Articles)
Regulations 1991.................................................. 168/91
Societies Ordinance Societies (Amendment) Rules
1991......................... 169/91
Public Health and Municipal Services Ordinance Designation of Libraries (Regional Council Area) Order 1991...................... 173/91
Public Health and Municipal Services Ordinance Designation of Libraries (Regional Council Area) (No. 2) Order 1991.......... 174/91
Antiquities and Monuments Ordinance Antiquities and Monuments (Declaration of Historical Building) Notice
1991............................ 175/91
Interpretation and General Clauses Ordinance Specification of Public Office................................ 176/91
Sessional Papers 1990-91
No. 69 -- Report of changes to the approved Estimates of Expenditure approved
during the second quarter of 1990-91
Public Finance Ordinance: Section 8
No. 70 -- The Government Minute in response to the Report of the Public Accounts Committee dated January 1991
Miscellaneous
White Paper on the Annual Report on Hong Kong 1990 to Parliament
Address by Member
Report of changes to the approved Estimates of Expenditure approved during the second quarter of 1990-91
Public Finance Ordinance: Section 8
FINANCIAL SECRETARY: Sir, in accordance with section 8(8)(b) of the Public Finance Ordinance, I now table for Members' information a summary of all changes made to the approved estimates of expenditure for the second quarter of the financial year 1990-91.
Supplementary provision of $696.7 million was approved. It was fully offset either by savings under the same or other heads of expenditure or by the deletion of funds under the Additional Commitments subheads. This included $327 million in connection with the establishment of a new Student Financial Assistance Agency on 1 August 1990 and $263 million for payment of the revised home purchase allowance and the special allowance to officers eligible for assistance under the Home Purchase Scheme, and the introduction of a new Home Financing Scheme.
Approved non-recurrent commitments were increased by $177.9 million during the period, and new non-recurrent commitments of $26.9 million were also approved.
In the same period, a net increase of 1 131 posts was approved.
Items in the summary have been approved either by Finance Committee or under delegated authority. The latter have been reported to the Finance Committee in
accordance with section 8(8)(a) of the Public Finance Ordinance.
Oral answers to questions
Traffic relief measures in northwest New Territories
1. MR LAU WONG -FAT asked (in Cantonese): In view of the possible protracted delay or indefinite deferment of the construction of the Kwai Chung to Yuen Long section of Route 3 due to financial constraints and the timings of related highways projects at a time when the population of Tuen Mun and Yuen Long is on the increase, public and private housing developments in Tin Shui Wai New Town are coming on stream, and the capacity of the Tuen Mun Highway is reaching saturation point, will Government inform this Council what measures are in hand to relieve the worsening traffic problem in the north-western part of the New Territories?
SECRETARY FOR TRANSPORT (in Cantonese): Sir, I should first point out that there is no "protracted delay or indefinite deferment" to building the Country Park Sector of Route 3, which has all along been planned for completion in the late 1990s.
It is also our intention that the development of the transport infrastructure should keep pace with population growth. To this end, in the northwest New Territories, several major projects are either under construction or under planning. These include the Tuen Mun-Yuen Long Eastern Corridor now under construction which will provide a dual two-lane highway linking the two New Towns by mid 1993. The final phase of the New Territories Circular Road between Au Tau and Fairview Park is due for completion in mid-1992. Design for the Yuen Long Southern Bypass is nearly completed and we hope to call for tenders by the end of this year. The Light Rail Transit extension to Tin Shui Wai is also being built, and is due for completion at the end of 1992. All these major projects should help meet the transport needs of the growing population of the northwest New Territories in the near future.
Meanwhile, various traffic management and improvement measures will shortly be put in hand to improve traffic flows particularly along Castle Peak Road between Tuen Mun and Yuen Long.
MR LAU WONG -FAT (in Cantonese): Sir, could the Government inform this Council of the latest progress of the Route 3 project? When will construction commence at the earliest? Would the new airport project have any bearing on Route 3 development?
SECRETARY FOR TRANSPORT (in Cantonese): As proposed in the Second Comprehensive Transport Study, Route 3 will be constructed in phases. The first phase, expected to be completed by 1996, covers the southern section of Route 3, that is, the Western Harbour Crossing connecting Hong Kong West with Tsing Yi in the north. As for the northern section, which is the Country Park Sector, it is originally scheduled for completion in the late 1990s. But the development of the project will depend on future transport growth and whether or not private sector participation can be brought in. We will have to explore it further before a definite commencement date for the
project can be fixed. Basically, Route 3 is an independent project; it is not directly related to the new airport.
MR EDWARD HO: Sir, will Government inform this Council whether the completion of Route 3 in the late 1990s will affect the potential development of public housing sites in the northwest New Territories thus affecting the long-term housing strategy?
SECRETARY FOR TRANSPORT: No, Sir, as I said in my main reply, the population build-up in the northwest New Territories, that is, Yuen Long, Tuen Mun and Tin Shui Wai, will be matched by a corresponding increase in infrastructure provisions. The transport links I have mentioned in my main reply, plus the planned expansion of Route 3, will meet the transport needs of the population there.
MR LAU WONG-FAT (in Cantonese): Sir, my question is similar to that of Mr Edward HO, which relates to the Country Park Sector of Route 3 having to wait until the late 1990s for completion. Will the Government inform this Council of the contingency improvement measures the relevant departments would come up with in order to cope with the imminent saturation of the Tuen Mun Highway?
SECRETARY FOR TRANSPORT (in Cantonese): Sir, the major projects -- which I have mentioned -- in Yuen Long, Tuen Mun and Tin Shui Wai should be able to alleviate the existing and the anticipated traffic congestion on the Tuen Mun Highway in
the next few years. At present, the Tuen Mun Highway has not reached saturation . We expect that, with the opening of the New Territories Circular Road, the Tolo Highway and the Tate's Cairn Tunnel this year or in the next couple of years, the new access should provide an eastern link for residents in the northwest New
Territories heading for the urban area. Moreover, we are now embarking on a road widening programme to upgrade Kwai Chung Road to a 10-lane dual carriageway. The project is expected to be completed by early 1993. Its completion should greatly relieve the present traffic congestion at Tsuen Wan, Kwai Chung and Tuen Mun. We are also looking into the possible improvement measures to alleviate traffic
congestion along Castle Peak Road, including measures to further improve traffic flows along the sections between Tuen Mun and Yuen Long and Tsuen Wan and Tuen Mun. Finally, the Government is examining the expansion of hoverferry services from Tuen Mun to Central as another traffic relief measure.
Demolition of unauthorized structures
2. MR CHUNG asked (in Cantonese): It is noted that thousands of demolition orders will be issued by the Administration in the coming months to eradicate the unauthorized structures in 30 buildings throughout the territory. Will Government inform this Council, in the course of planning the above action
(1) whether consideration has been given to the introduction of any safety measures to avoid possible risks to the pedestrians during the massive demolition of unauthorized structures; and
(2) whether guidelines will be provided to the owners of unauthorized structures which may help them identify the existence of asbestos materials and also the proper ways of demolishing structures containing such materials?
SECRETARY FOR PLANNING, ENVIRONMENT AND LANDS: Safety is an important element of this ell underway. Staff of the Buildings and Lands Department are, through frequent contacts with the building management organizations and the owners concerned, and through the media, impressing upon the owners and the general public that only
responsible and experienced contractors should be engaged to carry out the removal works, and that precautionary measures such as scaffolding, protective screens, catch fans and platforms should be erected where necessary before any demolition work takes place. To make sure these safety measures are actually implemented, staff from the
department are also paying frequent visits to the buildings concerned. They are finding that the necessary protective measures are being taken.
Advice on identification and removal of asbestos is being given by staff of the Buildings and Lands Department during their frequent contacts with the owners and contractors. Simple guidelines concerning asbestos handling and disposal are being made available to owners and contractors, who can, if necessary, also seek further advice from the Labour Department and the Environmental Protection Department.
MR CHUNG (in Cantonese): Can I ask the Secretary whether the Buildings and Lands Department can supply a list to assist the owners in choosing experienced contractors to carry out the removal works?
SECRETARY FOR PLANNING, ENVIRONMENT AND LANDS: Yes, Sir, a list does exist and it can be obtained from the Buildings and Lands Department on application.
MISS LEUNG (in Cantonese): Sir, will the authority concerned consider formulating a set of demolition guidelines to be followed by the contractors, so as to ensure the structural safety of buildings and the safety of the demolition workers and pedestrians?
SECRETARY FOR PLANNING, ENVIRONMENT AND LANDS: There is really a limit as to how many guidelines one can give in this particular case, Sir. The contractors who undertake this work have to carry it out with safety in mind and what we really expect them to do is to abide by the provisions of the Buildings Ordinance. If they do not abide by those provisions, and if they are carrying out the demolition in an unsafe manner or causing injuries to persons or damage to property, they commit an offence under section 40(2B) of the Buildings Ordinance and they are liable to a fine of $250,000 and three years' imprisonment. Knowing that, any experienced contractor who is
employed to do this work would certainly look to provide a safe operation. I would add that, when I said in my answer that this exercise is well underway, already 930 illegal appendages have either been removed or are in the process of being so.
MRS TU: Sir, what provision is being made for tenants made homeless by these demolitions? And will the elderly be rehoused in the areas with which they are familiar and have connections?
SECRETARY FOR PLANNING, ENVIRONMENT AND LANDS: Sir, we are talking about carrying out removal -- when I say demolition it is removal really -- of metal cages, canopies, metal flower rakes and so on. So far as I am aware at the moment, of the 930 unauthorized projections the removal of which has been already underway, none has caused any
homelessness and I have certainly not seen any on my spot inspections.
MR MICHAEL CHENG (in Cantonese): Sir, there might be many people who are interested in the removal works of illegal structures, and perhaps, many will change their trades to join the business. What criteria will the Government adopt in identifying the "responsible and experienced contractors" mentioned in the main reply?
SECRETARY FOR PLANNING, ENVIRONMENT AND LANDS: Sir, it is really up to the owner to make sure that he employs an experienced contractor, and if any owner was given the task of removing something illegal from his flat, then he would use a degree of commonsense, I would suggest. He would ask around to find out of a contractor what experience he had and what tools he was going to use and what safety measures he was going to take. I do not think we can give guidelines for everybody participating in taking down these unauthorized building works. After all, it is just the same as,
for example, replacing windows, replacing air-conditioners, putting air conditioners in, which these contractors are already doing, and as I have said, there have already been 930 cases without any reported difficulty.
MR DAVID CHEUNG: Sir, according to a media report, as a result of the massive volume of such demolition work many contractors who are not experienced have been asked to do the job. Will Government inform this Council whether the issuance of such orders could be given in stages so that there are enough experienced contractors to do the job, so as to safeguard the safety of all concerned?
SECRETARY FOR PLANNING, ENVIRONMENT AND LANDS: Yes, Sir, that certainly is what we
are doing in fact. One of the biggest buildings in this particular operation is the Yik Fung Building at To Kwa Wan, and the work is being staggered. Phase one, for example, is underway now and there are four stages. We will give this due consideration but I am very pleased to note that although we have been no more than one month into this operation, owners are really taking this operation seriously and are getting on with it themselves; over 75% are removing the illegal appendages themselves.
MR CHENG HON-KWAN: Sir, will Government inform this Council in what circumstances the Government will require the services of an Authorized Person and Registered Structural Engineer in supervising the demolition of unauthorized building works, to ensure public safety?
SECRETARY FOR PLANNING, ENVIRONMENT AND LANDS: Yes, Sir. If the removal is complicated or is likely to involve structural considerations, then the Buildings and Lands Department will require the appointment of an Authorized Person and/or a Registered Structural Engineer to supervise the removal work. But so far in this exercise this has not proved necessary because the removal of these unauthorized building works is a fairly simple operation and it is not necessary to require such appointment at this stage. But if a complicated removal was required, we would do it.
MR EDWARD HO: Sir, will the Secretary please advise this Council and clarify whether owners are obligated by law to employ registered building contractors and specialist contractors on removal of asbestos if the latter is necessary?
SECRETARY FOR PLANNING, ENVIRONMENT AND LANDS: Not in this case, Sir, because actually the asbestos as has been identified in this operation is corrugated asbestos sheeting which is very low risk asbestos. There is not much volume of that and it is low risk. So therefore the answer to this particular question is no.
MR MICHAEL CHENG (in Cantonese): Sir, it is mentioned in the Secretary's reply that to make sure the safety measures are actually implemented, staff from the department
are paying frequent visits to the buildings concerned. Given that there is a shortage of manpower within the Government, and now thousands of demolition orders are being issued or are to be issued, how will the Government ensure that these visits can be efficiently carried out?
SECRETARY FOR PLANNING, ENVIRONMENT AND LANDS: Yes, Sir, the way we will do it is that although 2 600 orders have been issued they have been issued for 30 buildings. So one does not have to go 2 600 times, but only goes 30 times. And in spite of the shortage, it is still important to visit regularly, and visits to those buildings are taking place twice a week on an average.
MR CHAN (in Cantonese): Sir, as regards the safety of pedestrians, is the legal responsibility on the owner or on the contractor?
SECRETARY FOR PLANNING, ENVIRONMENT AND LANDS: Sir, obviously they both have a responsibility but the contractor would be the one who would be prosecuted in the first instance. But it depends on the circumstances of the actual case.
MISS LEUNG (in Cantonese): Sir, have there been any owners who, on receipt of the demolition order, expressed that they could not afford the costs for demolition of the specified structures?
SECRETARY FOR PLANNING, ENVIRONMENT AND LANDS: If there have been, Sir, it would not rate very highly with us; we are determined to get rid of these illegal appendages because if we do not there is a high chance that they will fall down by themselves, and that is the bottom line. Now we have found that between 75% and 80% of the owners are actually removing them with contractors they have got themselves. For those who do not do it, the Buildings and Lands Department's Term Contractor will do it and they will bill the owners who do not do it themselves. But these illegal structures, as everyone knows in this Chamber, must be taken down because they pose a danger to life.
Locally-established think tanks
3. MR PAUL CHENG asked: What consideration has Government given to support of private sector and tertiary education initiatives for locally-established think tanks as a means of keeping pace with industrial development in the region and as a constructive alternative to virtually exclusive reliance on outside consultants for analysis of local Hong Kong project needs?
FINANCIAL SECRETARY: Sir, we welcome initiatives from the private sector and the tertiary educational institutions to set up think tanks and advise Government on how to keep pace with industrial development in the region. A good example of this is a recent study on "Technology Road Maps" in Hong Kong. This project was initiated and conducted by academics from the six tertiary educational institutions in Hong Kong. Indeed, having considered their study proposals, and on the advice of the
Industry Development Board, Government has agreed to fund part of the costs.
Where the expertise or resources are not available within the Administration, and we resort to the use of consultants, it is fairly common to require or encourage bidders to include people or organizations with local knowledge in their proposals, where this seems appropriate. For example, in studies on industrial matters, the Hong Kong Productivity Council is frequently involved in partnership with a local or overseas consultant.
Finally, the Industry Development Board has recently advised that our tertiary educational institutions should be encouraged to play a larger part in future consultancy studies. We are now examining how this might best be done whilst still ensuring the quality and cost-effectiveness that stem from competition.
MR PAUL CHENG: Sir, it is encouraging to know that the Government welcomes initiatives from the private sector and the tertiary educational institutions to set up think tanks, but does the Government have an overall strategy so that development of quality think tank operations can be implemented in a systematic and co-ordinated manner? If so, will the Government provide us with the highlights of this strategy?
FINANCIAL SECRETARY: Sir, we do not have a strategy because I do not think one is actually required. We are here dealing with a whole range of different consultancies
for different purposes. Our attitude, as I have said, is definitely to encourage the use of local think tanks and the details of how best to do that, as I have said, are currently being examined in the context of industry related consultancies.
MR ARCULLI: Sir, as I understand the question put by the Honourable Paul CHENG, the establishment of a think tank really implies more of a group of individuals who get together to consider various problems. I think, with respect, perhaps the Financial Secretary has not addressed that question and could he please deal with that aspect? Secondly, with regard to the "Technology Road Map" study, was the Government funding agreed to before or after the study proposal had been completed?
FINANCIAL SECRETARY: Sir, with regard to the first part of the question I think that it is rather difficult for us to employ a group of people unless they are grouped together in some formal way. We are talking here, basically, about actual contracts being awarded for advice on specific questions. So if that group of people have banded together and have a legal status, then I think the question of employing them does arise; otherwise it is, frankly, rather difficult.
On the question of "Technology Road Maps" -- a title which is somewhat obscure -- I must confess that the study was partly funded by the Government. With regard to the stage at which we decided to contribute, in fact, to the tune of $200,000, I do not have the information as to whether that was part way through the study or in the beginning.
MR PETER WONG: Sir, can the Acting Financial Secretary please inform us whether encouragement goes as far as making due allowance in the University and Polytechnic Grants Committee budget to permit our tertiary establishments to set up think tanks?
FINANCIAL SECRETARY: Sir, I am not aware of any proposal to specifically provide funds for think tanks in tertiary institutions, but I believe that if that did arise it would be basically a matter for the University and Polytechnic Grants Committee to consider.
MR POON CHI-FAI (in Cantonese): Will the Administration consider, when commissioning
some of the Government's studies, that priority be given to those think tanks formed by the local private sector and tertiary institutions, especially those that meet the criteria set by the authorities concerned?
FINANCIAL SECRETARY: I am a little chary of saying that we will give priority to particular organizations or groups of people. I am not quite sure which criteria are in question. But certainly in some consultancies we do, as I said before, either require or encourage that there be a local organization, that is to say an organization with local knowledge; that is a key question. We would not normally go beyond that and specify that it had to be a think tank or that it had to be from a tertiary
organization.
MR PAUL CHENG: Sir, based on experience with the Central Policy Unit used by the Government's three key decision makers, has there been any evaluation of how the effectiveness of that Unit could be translated into private sector initiatives?
FINANCIAL SECRETARY: Sir, the prime purpose of the Central Policy Unit, as Mr CHENG has said, is to give advice to the three senior members of the Administration and that advice is necessarily private. If the advice produced in due course some project or some policy which has to be implemented, then that would simply slot into the normal government system; there would not be any question of the Unit itself being involved in that follow-up stage.
MR PAUL CHENG: Sir, has any consideration been given to making unclassified information collected by the Government Central Policy Unit available on a public and regularly instituted basis?
HIS EXCELLENCY THE PRESIDENT: That is stretching slightly beyond the original question but I will ask the Financial Secretary to reply.
FINANCIAL SECRETARY: As far as I know, Sir, no.
Written answers to questions
Refund of charges by Government
4. MR PETER WONG asked: Will Government inform this Council:
(a) of the number of cases for refunds of fees and charges paid to the Water Supplies Department, Hospital Services Department, Health Department and Social Welfare Department respectively for the past three years; and
(b) of the longest, shortest and average durations of processing time taken for the above refund cases?
FINANCIAL SECRETARY: Sir, the information requested by Mr WONG is set out in tabular form as follows:
Time taken to
Number of refund cases effect refunds (1)
Department 1987-88 1988-89 1989-90 Longest Shortest
Water Supplies
Department
i) water deposit 64 247 67 498 73 990 4 weeks
Time taken to
Number of refund cases effect refunds (1)
Department 1987-88 1988-89 1989-90 Longest Shortest
Water Supplies
Department
ii) water charges 680 791 770 l - 2 weeks iii) connexion/ 501 552 346 2 - 3 weeks
installation fee
iv) reconnection 28 27 34 4 weeks fee
v) water test fee 486 292 276 4 weeks
Medical & Health 544 577 )
Department (2) )
) 211 days 5 mins.
Hospital 521 )
Services )
Department )
Department of 24 45 days 12 days
Health
Social Welfare 1 53 days
Department (one case only)
Note
(l) With the exception of those in respect of the Water Supplies Department, the figures provided here are the total time taken by the Departments to process the applications and the Treasury to effect payments. In the case of the Water Supplies Department, the figures indicate only the average processing time taken by the
Department itself and do not include the two to three weeks that the Treasury might have taken to effect the payments. Because of the large number of transactions involved, the actual longest and shortest processing time is not available from the Department.
(2) The Medical and Health Department was divided into the Hospital Services Department and Department of Health on l April 1989.
Triad problem
5. MR POON CHI-FAI asked: In view of the recent development that generally more than 100 gangsters were involved in each of the triad related incidents, such as the white-glove gang incident and the drinking-straw gang incident in the speculation of flats, and the incident that even the Wan Chai Police Station had to close its shutters for safety reason when over 200 gang members were reported to have taken to the street in Wan Chai District on the evening of April 15, thus causing great
anxieties among the public, will Government inform this Council of the actual situation of the triad problem in Hong Kong at present; whether triad activities have been brought under control and whether the Administration has any effective measures and the necessary strength to contain such activities?
SECRETARY FOR SECURITY: Sir, almost a third of the 50 different triad societies in Hong Kong are actively involved in criminal activities ranging from low level street crime to sophisticated protection rackets. Such groups vary in size from small loosely knit associations of petty thugs to large highly structured syndicates with thousands of members. There is considerable inter-gang violence. Triad influence permeates various levels of society, and some influential professions.
Whilst it would not be realistic to expect that triads can be fully eliminated, the police believe that they are being contained as a result of regular operations against triads, their associates and premises.
These operations will continue to be carried out at the district, regional and territory-wide levels. As an example, following the incident in Wan Chai on 15 April 1991, operations were conducted on five successive nights against the two triad societies involved, that is Sun Yee On and Wo Hop To. In this operation 13 people were arrested for a variety of offences, in addition to the 14 arrested on the night of the incident.
The police have also had some notable successes recently against the higher echelons of the more organized triad societies. In one case, the police interrupted a triad initiation ceremony using full traditional regalia and insignia whilst it was in progress. This case has resulted in substantial criminal charges against the alleged "Incense Master".
Members are aware of recent measures which we have taken to augment our legal powers in the areas of illegal gambling and prostitution, two areas where triads are
often involved. Members are also aware that the Administration is currently drafting a Bill to tackle organized crime. The Bill, which will be published for public consultation this summer, proposes heavy penalties for organized crime offences and includes provisions for confiscation of proceeds of organized crime. The intent of these provisions is to strike at the economic and physical powers of organized crime syndicates.
The Government remains committed to combatting the triad problem. Effective legislation is at the forefront of these efforts. Sometimes the public feel unsure how best they can help the police to make Hong Kong a safer place. I once again encourage the public to tell the police promptly when they are intimidated or threatened; the police will protect the anonymity of informants. The Government and the community must join together to demonstrate our strength and the resolve to stamp out triad activities.
First Reading of Bills
COMPANIES (AMENDMENT) (NO. 2) BILL 1991
OCCUPATIONAL RETIREMENT SCHEMES BILL 1991
SECURITIES (DISCLOSURE OF INTERESTS) (AMENDMENT) BILL 1991
SECURITIES (INSIDER DEALING) (AMENDMENT) BILL 1991
TRADE DESCRIPTIONS (AMENDMENT) BILL 1991
HONG KONG WAR MEMORIAL PENSIONS BILL 1991
Bills read the First time and ordered to be set down for Second Reading pursuant to Standing Order 41(3).
Second Reading of Bills
COMPANIES (AMENDMENT) (NO. 2) BILL 1991
THE FINANCIAL SECRETARY moved the Second Reading of: "A Bill to amend the Companies Ordinance."
He said: Sir, I move that the Companies (Amendment) (No. 2) Bill 1991 be read the Second time.
The main purpose of the Bill is to lift the present prohibition on share repurchases by local companies, subject to a number of safeguards to protect the interests of shareholders and creditors. The Bill also seeks to update the provision on the giving of financial assistance and to introduce a definition of distributable profits.
Share repurchases
Company share repurchases are permitted in many places, including the United Kingdom, Canada, the United States and Australia. In considering the development of the securities market in Hong Kong, the Securities Review Committee Report recommended that allowing companies in Hong Kong to purchase their own shares should be favourably considered.
In January 1990 the Securities and Futures Commission and the Stock Exchange issued for public consultation joint proposals to permit company share repurchases in Hong Kong. These proposals which received broad support in the market follow closely those in the United Kingdom Companies Act. It is generally accepted that the option of a company share repurchase scheme is a useful financial tool and can work to the benefit of companies and shareholders. Among other things, it enables a company to return surplus cash to its shareholders, support its share price during periods of temporary weakness and prevent or inhibit unwelcome takeover bids. With a few technical amendments, the proposals were subsequently endorsed by the Standing Committee on Company Law Reform in June 1990. Let me highlight some of the salient features.
First, the Bill provides that an unlisted company may purchase its own shares under a contract authorized in advance by a special resolution of the company. A copy of the contract or a written memorandum of its terms must be available for inspection by members of the company prior to and at the meeting at which they authorize the repurchase.
Secondly, the Bill provides that a listed company may purchase its own shares in accordance with the Share Repurchase Code issued and administered by the Securities and Futures Commission. Essentially, the approach is to require company share repurchases to be achieved by way of a general offer to all shareholders in accordance with rules similar to those applicable to takeover bids.
The requirement for listed companies to obtain prior shareholder approval appears in the Repurchase Code and the Listing Rules, and not in the Bill. This departure from the United Kingdom approach is intended to provide the necessary flexibility in times of market crisis, since the Securities and Futures Commission and the Stock Exchange have the right to waive such requirements under the Code and the Listing Rules as may be warranted by exceptional circumstances.
Thirdly, the non-statutory Share Repurchase Code and the Listing Rules are given statutory backing for the purpose of company share repurchases. Failure to comply with the Code and the Listing Rules in respect of share repurchases will thus attract the same penalties as failure to observe the provisions of the Bill.
Lastly, repurchased shares are to be treated as cancelled, thus reducing the company's issued share capital but not its authorized share capital. This follows the approach in the United Kingdom. We have considered the United States approach of retaining repurchased shares as treasury stock which may be resold in future. However, we prefer on balance the United Kingdom approach which, we believe, provides better safeguard against the possibility of companies trafficking in their own
shares.
Financial assistance
The Bill also introduces more comprehensive provisions on the giving of financial assistance by a company to a third party for the purchase of its shares. The new provisions maintain the general prohibition on the giving of financial assistance, subject to a number of exceptions especially in the case of unlisted companies.
Distributable profits
Finally, the Bill introduces a definition of distributable profits. There is at present no statutory provision governing the distribution of profits by a company to its shareholders, although there are accepted principles and practices governed by common law. The new provisions serve in effect to codify existing good accounting
practice. A statutory definition is desirable in itself and will strengthen the position of creditors since share repurchases may only be made out of distributable profits.
Sir, I move that the debate on this motion be now adjourned.
Question on the adjournment proposed, put and agreed to.
OCCUPATIONAL RETIREMENT SCHEMES BILL 1991
THE FINANCIAL SECRETARY moved the Second Reading of: "A Bill to ensure that certain occupational retirement schemes are properly funded and for that and other purposes to establish an office to be known in the English language as the Registrar of Occupational Retirement Schemes and in the Chinese language as " "; subject to a residence qualification, to make certain matters relating to schemes to which the Ordinance applies and whose proper law is not the law of Hong Kong justiciable in the High Court; to enable applications to be made to the High Court for certain relief where registration of such a scheme has been cancelled under the Ordinance; and to provide for related matters."
He said: Sir, I move that the Occupational Retirement Schemes Bill 1991 be read the Second time.
In July 1990, the Government published the Occupational Pension Schemes (Commerce, Trade and Industry etc.) Bill 1990 as a White Bill for public comment. During the two-month consultation period, submissions were received from about 40 business, professional and labour organizations, indicating strong support for the regulation of private retirement schemes. There were also comments on the detailed provisions of the White Bill. We have carefully examined all the comments and as a result made some changes to the original proposals. The Occupational Retirement Schemes Bill 1991 now placed before this Council is the result of this process.
The aim of the Bill is to provide a framework for the regulation of private retirement schemes in Hong Kong so as to ensure that retirement benefits promised to employees will be paid when they fall due. It is not intended to compel employers to set up retirement schemes, nor to specify a minimum level of benefits.
The key features of the Bill are as follows.
First, the Bill has a wide coverage. All schemes which are operating in Hong Kong and all schemes towards which contributions are made in Hong Kong are covered. This is necessary to avoid possible abuse by employers setting up schemes with an overseas domicile to evade the regulatory requirements.
Secondly, while casting a wide net, we are mindful not to impose unnecessary restrictions upon global retirement schemes operated by multinational corporations. The Registrar of Occupational Retirement Schemes is, therefore, given a limited power to exempt certain schemes from registration. A scheme which has been approved or registered by an overseas regulatory body performing a similar function to the
Registrar may apply for exemption. A scheme which has not more than 10% and not more than 50 members who are Hong Kong permanent residents may also apply for exemption. We believe that the exemption qualifications are about right. We will, nevertheless, review these criteria in the light of operational experience.
Thirdly, the Bill is designed to ensure that in most cases compliance with the relevant criteria will enable registration to be automatic. In other words, the Registrar shall normally register all schemes which comply. All schemes which are domiciled in Hong Kong will normally be registered if they are set up as trusts or subject to an insurance arrangement. Schemes domiciled overseas will normally be registered if they are set up as trusts, and if the trustees make a submission to the jurisdiction of the Hong Kong courts in relation to the entitlement and quantum of benefits of the scheme members. Where a scheme does not meet the relevant criteria for registration, the Registrar is given a very limited discretion to approve
registration. He may register the scheme only if he is satisfied that it would be unreasonable to require full compliance.
Fourthly, the Registrar will not actively intervene in the affairs of a registered retirement scheme. But he is empowered to intervene when concern is expressed about a scheme, for example, through the annual returns of the scheme. He may require the submission of special reports and certificates, and appoint a person to inquire into the operation of a scheme.
Sir, the regulatory system in the Bill embodies four guiding principles. They are separation of assets of the retirement scheme from those of the employer, provision of sufficient funding to meet the scheme's liabilities, independent annual
audit of the accounts of the scheme and adequate disclosure of information to scheme members.
To achieve the principle of separation of assets, the Bill requires that retirement schemes should be grounded on trust or subject to an insurance arrangement. In respect of those grounded on trust, the Bill requires that there should normally be an independent trustee at all times. Furthermore, the Bill stipulates that not more than 10% of the assets of a scheme may be invested in securities issued by the employer or his associates. Investment by way of loans to the employer or associates are strictly prohibited.
On the question of funding, all schemes are required to maintain sufficient assets to meet their immediate liabilities, that is, all schemes must be solvent. For defined contribution schemes, contributions are to be made in accordance with the rules of the scheme. For defined benefit schemes, contributions are to be made in accordance with actuarial advice. The Bill stipulates the minimum requirements for on-going actuarial certification. Triennial actuarial reviews are required and, where a scheme is insolvent, annual reviews are required to ensure that the scheme achieves solvency within three years. For schemes which exist before the legislation comes into force, there are transitional provisions to allow shortfalls in funding to be met within five years.
In respect of audits and accounts, the Bill requires the trustees or scheme managers to keep proper accounts and records of all financial transactions of a retirement scheme. An annual statement of accounts and a report prepared by an auditor independent of the employer are required to be submitted to the Registrar.
As regards information disclosure, the Bill provides that consultative committe es may be appointed for contributory retirement schemes with more than 50 members. This provision is different from that proposed in the White Bill, which stipulated that for all schemes where a majority of the members so wished, a consultative
committee should be established. Views were expressed during the public consultation exercise that an across-the-board requirement to set up consultative committees could discourage employers from setting up retirement schemes. Whilst we recognize that consultative committees can provide a useful forum for the exchange of views, we agree that the regulatory requirement should not be so onerous as to inhibit the setting up of retirement schemes, and we have, therefore, modified the provision. In
addition to serving as a forum for the exchange of views, consultative committees
are entitled to receive certain information about the relevant retirement schemes. Where no committees are set up, individual scheme members may request for the information.
The Bill is silent on the tax status of contributions. The Inland Revenue Ordinance provides that contributions by an employer towards a retirement scheme approved by the Commissioner of Inland Revenue are tax deductible. In future, a scheme must be registered with the Registrar of Occupational Retirement Schemes to qualify for tax relief, but only one application will need to be lodged with the Registrar. No separate application to the Commissioner for Inland Revenue will be required.
The Bill, when enacted, will have wide implications for employers who are operating retirement schemes for their employees. They will have to ensure that their schemes comply with the new requirements on trusteeship, asset investment, funding, accounting, auditing, information disclosure and so on. A transitional period of two years will be provided for the schemes to become registered. Upon expiry of the two-year period, it will be an offence to operate an unregistered retirement scheme.
Sir, when the White Bill was issued for public consultation last summer, one major criticism of the Bill was its complexity. It is true that the Bill is a technical and complicated piece of legislation, because the subject of retirement schemes is far from simple. We have made a policy decision that the Bill should cover all schemes operating in Hong Kong or towards which contributions are made in Hong Kong,
regardless of their domicile. Had the scope been limited to schemes which are domiciled in Hong Kong, the Bill and the speech would be much shorter. However, as I explained earlier, the purpose of the legislation could be frustrated if its scope were reduced. We appreciate that the Bill may not be as "user-friendly" as one would like, but the registration procedure itself is straightforward. Also, to assist employers in understanding their statutory duties, we will publish explanatory pamphlets before bringing the legislation into operation.
It has also been pointed out that selected provisions in the Bill, in particular, the requirement to submit statements and certificates to the Registrar, will lead to increased costs in the operation of retirement schemes. While this is a fair comment, I think it is generally accepted that there is a price attached to every regulatory regime. While the requirements in the Bill may result in higher
administrative costs for retirement schemes, this is a reasonable price to pay in order to achieve better protection for scheme members.
There has been extensive consultation on the subject over the past three years. Many constructive comments have been offered by various professional bodies, advisory committees and trade organizations during this period. We have found their comments most useful, and I would like to take this opportunity to thank all those concerned for their assistance and interest in this Bill.
Sir, I move that the debate on this motion be now adjourned.
Question on the adjournment proposed, put and agreed to.
SECURITIES (DISCLOSURE OF INTERESTS) (AMENDMENT) BILL 1991
THE FINANCIAL SECRETARY moved the Second Reading of: "A Bill to amend the Securities (Disclosure of Interests) Ordinance."
He said: Sir, I move that the Securities (Disclosure of Interests) (Amendment) Bill 1991 be read the Second time. The main purpose of the Bill is to extend the scope of the Ordinance to cover overseas companies listed in Hong Kong.
At present, the Ordinance applies only to local companies listed in Hong Kong. It has always been the intention that the disclosure obligations under the Ordinance should also apply to officers and substantial shareholders of overseas companies listed in Hong Kong, in order to protect local investors.
We propose, therefore, to extend the Ordinance to overseas companies listed in Hong Kong, subject to certain other amendments to the Ordinance to recognize the need for possible exemptions, the problems of enforcement in relation to overseas companies and the need for equal treatment of local and foreign companies listed in Hong Kong. I shall now highlight the main features of the Bill.
Exemptions
We believe that, as a general rule, the Ordinance should apply to all companies listed in Hong Kong. We accept, however, that relief may be justified in certain
cases. Our intention is to ease the administrative burden on listed companies of duplicate filing requirements without compromising the need for adequate investor protection.
Much will depend upon the circumstances of each case. We propose, therefore, that the Securities and Futures Commission be given a general power to exempt companies from some or all of the provisions of the Ordinance. However, for the sake of transparency, this discretion will need to be exercised in the light of guidelines to be published by the Commission after consulting the Financial Secretary.
The Commission has issued draft guidelines for public consultation in advance of their submission to the Financial Secretary. These guidelines envisage two broad classes of exemption, upon application, for eligible companies listed or intending to list in Hong Kong. First, a complete exemption may be given to a large
multinational company where the main markets in its securities are on major international stock exchanges other than Hong Kong, and where the proportion of the company's world-wide share turnover taking place in Hong Kong is or is likely to be only nominal.
Secondly, an exemption from the reporting requirements under the Ordinance may be given to a company where the proportion of the company's world-wide share turnover taking place in Hong Kong is not or is not likely to be significant, and where the company is subject to comparable statutory disclosure provisions elsewhere. Such exemption would be conditional upon the regulatory authorities in Hong Kong receiving copies of notifications required to be filed in that other jurisdiction.
The draft guidelines will be reviewed in the light of public comment. We aim to ensure that they reflect the proper balance between the need to protect local investors and the need to encourage foreign issuers to list and raise capital in Hong Kong.
Freezing orders
If an investigation into the ownership of a company's shares meets with obstruction, the existing provisions of the Ordinance provide that the Financial Secretary and the High Court may order that the shares in question be subject to
certain restrictions, commonly known as a "freezing order". These restrictions operate together to freeze the transfer, exercise of voting rights, payment of
dividends and bonus issues in respect of the shares of a defaulting shareholder.
With the exception of a restriction on transfers in Hong Kong, these provisions could not be enforced in practice against foreign companies. To retain them for local companies only is neither desirable nor necessary. Our aim must be to provide a level playing field. Unless practical and prudential considerations dictate otherwise, we should avoid a disparity in treatment between local and foreign companies.
We propose, therefore, to replace the present provisions by a restriction on the transfer of shares registered in Hong Kong. We believe that this sanction, which will be applicable to all listed companies, should be adequate and effective in the generality of cases. Because of the requirement in the Stock Exchange Listing Rules that shares traded on the Exchange be maintained on a register kept in Hong Kong, it will effectively prevent the shares being traded in Hong Kong. We are also assured that trading elsewhere will be made more difficult because the great majority of overseas companies listed in Hong Kong have their primary, if not their sole, listing in Hong Kong.
Publicity and other measures are being worked out by the Securities and Futures Commission to ensure that the restriction on transfers is workable and effective. Nevertheless, to strengthen the sanction and to limit the opportunities for evasion, we propose two further measures.
First, a freezing order will include new restrictions on the cancellation of share certificates and removal of shares from Hong Kong. These are intended to help the frozen shares to be traced in Hong Kong and to inhibit the registration of transfers overseas. Under proper accounting principles and subject to the company law of the place of incorporation, shares of an overseas company must first be removed from the branch register in Hong Kong before a transaction involving the same shares can be registered on the principal register overseas.
Secondly, a listed company and its officers who act in contravention of the proposed restrictions on registration, issue, cancellation and removal of shares commit an offence and are liable upon conviction to the same penalties as the defaulting shareholder who attempts to evade the restrictions.
Commencement date of the principal Ordinance
Sir, the Securities (Disclosure of Interests) Ordinance was enacted in July 1988,
but has yet to be brought into force. In the interests of equity and investor protection, we have undertaken not to bring the Ordinance into force until its requirements are also made applicable to overseas companies listed in Hong Kong. Subject to the enactment of this Bill now before this Council, it is our intention to bring the principal Ordinance into operation on l August 1991.
Sir, I move that the debate on this motion be now adjourned.
Question on the adjournment proposed, put and agreed to.
SECURITIES (INSIDER DEALING) (AMENDMENT) BILL 1991
THE FINANCIAL SECRETARY moved the Second Reading of: "A Bill to amend the Securities (Insider Dealing) Ordinance."
He said: Sir, I move that the Securities (Insider Dealing) (Amendment) Bill 1991 be read the Second time. The main purpose of the Bill is to clarify the duty of officers of a corporation in relation to insider dealing by the corporation.
Duty to prevent insider dealing
The Ordinance imposes a duty on every officer of a corporation to take all reasonable precautions to prevent insider dealing by the corporation. Where an Insider Dealing Tribunal identifies a corporation as an insider dealer, the Tribunal may also identify any officer of that corporation whose breach of duty has led, directly or indirectly, to the insider dealing in question, and may make an order against him as if he were an insider dealer.
These provisions, as presently worded, produce an unintended effect because they overlook the distinction drawn in the Ordinance between "insider dealer" and "insider dealing". The Tribunal may make an order against any person which it finds to be an insider dealer. But a person who engages in conduct which is, by definition, insider dealing, may be held, in certain circumstances, not to be an insider dealer by virtue of the defences available under the Ordinance. Thus, the officers of a corporation are required to prevent conduct which may in the event be excused.
We consider it most unlikely that an officer in technical breach of his duty would
ever have an order made against him. We accept, however, that the terms of any statutory duty should be stated unambiguously. We propose therefore to make it clear that the officer's duty is to prevent the company from engaging in conduct which might cause it to be identified by the Tribunal as an insider dealer.
Other amendments
We have also taken the opportunity to replace an obsolete reference in the Ordinance to the Commissioner for Securities with a reference to the Securities and Futures Commission.
Commencement date of the principal Ordinance
Sir, the Securities (Insider Dealing) Ordinance was enacted in July 1990 but has yet to be brought into force. At the time of enactment, fears were expressed that the new legislation would have an adverse effect on market liquidity. We have undertaken therefore not to bring the Ordinance into operation until proposals to allow buyback of shares by listed companies, and stock borrowing and lending free of stamp duty, have been implemented.
These proposals are well advanced. I have today introduced amendments to the Companies Ordinance to permit local companies to purchase their own shares. The Securities and Futures Commission and the Stock Exchange are now finalizing the necessary arrangements to regulate stock borrowing. Subject to the implementation of these proposals and to the enactment of this Bill now before the Council, it is our intention to bring the principal Ordinance into force on 1 August 1991.
Sir, I move that the debate on this motion be now adjourned.
Question on the adjournment proposed, put and agreed to.
TRADE DESCRIPTIONS (AMENDMENT) BILL 1991
THE FINANCIAL SECRETARY moved the Second Reading of: "A Bill to amend the Trade Descriptions Ordinance."
He said: Sir, I move that the Trade Descriptions (Amendment) Bill 1991 be read the Second time.
This Bill seeks to amend the Trade Descriptions Ordinance to permit the Director-General of Trade to specify the place of manufacture or production of certain goods, subject to a special licensing scheme. Under the Bill, the Director-General would have the power to specify, by notice in the Gazette, the kind of goods to be covered under such a scheme.
These amendments are designed to enable us to deal with a particular problem relating to piece-knitted garments. The making of such garments involves two major steps: the knitting of knit-to-shape panels, and the linking-and-looping of such panels into finished products. In Hong Kong, as in most other places, linking
and-looping is regarded as the origin-conferring process. Thus piece-knitted garments may carry the label of "Made in Hong Kong" only if the knit-to-shape panels are linked-and-looped in Hong Kong.
Previously, US rules were the same as those of Hong Kong. However, the US rules were unilaterally changed in 1985. Since then, under US rules, the knitting process for piece-knitted garments must be carried out in Hong Kong to enable them to carry the label of "Made in Hong Kong" on importation into the United States. The Trade Department has pressed the US authorities to revert to their old rules, but to no avail.
Thus at present Hong Kong exports of piece-knitted garments to the United States must meet both the Hong Kong as well as the US origin requirements for labelling. As a result, exports must be both knitted and linked-and-looped in Hong Kong. No relocation of either process elsewhere, for the purpose of reducing costs, is
possible.
At a time when the Hong Kong knitwear industry has to face increasing competition in the US market, this double requirement is a severe restriction on the industry's ability to compete. The knitwear industry has asked the Administration to allow relevant piece-knitted garments for export to the United States to carry the label of "Made in Hong Kong" in accordance only with the US requirements.
We agree with the industry that it is not reasonable to subject them to double requirements which adversely affect their competitive edge. In the circumstances, where the industry has no option but to comply with the US rules, we have concluded that special practical arrangements are required. We have, therefore, proposed the provisions set out in the Bill before Members today. The intention is to implement,
with effect from 1 July this year, a special licensing scheme for piece-knitted garments for export to the United States, thus applying the US rules only.
Sir, it is difficult to predict what proportion of the linking-and-looping work for such piece-knitted garments could be relocated elsewhere, but the Administration recognizes that the proposed changes may have implications for local employment. We have discussed the situation with representatives of the major knitwear associations. They have given their assurance that they will do what they can to impress upon their members the need to treat fairly any workers who may be affected as a result. The associations have also undertaken to mediate in any cases of alleged unfair treatment and to help with hardship cases. They will set up a service centre to help individuals find new jobs.
Given the shortage of experienced workers in Hong Kong in general, and in the garment industry in particular, any worker who might be displaced should be able to find alternative employment without a great deal of difficulty. The Government will do all it can to ensure that the interest of the workforce is protected. The Labour Department stands ready to clarify workers' statutory entitlements under the
Employment Ordinance and to advise on alternative employment. If there is a need for re-training, the Department will help to put those affected in touch with the Clothing Industry Training Authority or the Vocational Training Council.
Sir, I move that the debate on this motion be now adjourned.
Question on the adjournment proposed, put and agreed to.
HONG KONG WAR MEMORIAL PENSIONS BILL 1991
THE SECRETARY FOR HEALTH AND WELFARE moved the Second Reading of: "A Bill to make provision for the payment of pensions to be known as the Hong Kong War Memorial Pensions and other benefits to persons who have contributed to the defence of Hong Kong in the Pacific War, persons who have suffered in the War and spouses of such persons, for the establishment of a committee to advise on matters related to such pension and benefits and for incidental or connected matters."
She said: Sir, I move that the Hong Kong War Memorial Pensions Bill 1991 be read a Second time.
The Bill provides for the payment of pensions to beneficiaries of the existing Hong Kong War Memorial Fund and Far Eastern Relief Fund, and to applicants who meet the qualifying criteria stipulated in the Bill. These pensions will be paid in recognition of the recipients' war-time suffering and the long-term effects of being held in captivity.
At present, beneficiaries of the two Funds are required to declare that their personal income is below a specified income threshold in order to qualify for a grant. This income threshold requirement was introduced on the recommendation of a Select Committee of this Council which concluded, in 1986, that the terms of the existing Hong Kong War Memorial Fund Ordinance required that assistance from the Fund must be based on need.
In February last year, I was asked in this Council whether Government would consider converting the existing grants into pensions. Subsequently, I met with members of the Hong Kong War Memorial Fund Committee and re-examined the current policy in the light of new evidence presented by the Committee.
The Committee pointed to the suffering endured by Hong Kong's own ex-prisoners of war and the growing body of evidence in a number of medical studies regarding the particular long-term physical and psychological effects of being held in captivity in Asia during the Second World War. These studies offered new insight into the detrimental effect of long-term captivity on our ex-prisoners of war; the majority of whom are elderly and in deteriorating health.
The removal of the income threshold requirement and the award of pensions, payable as recognition of injuries sustained in the defence of Hong Kong and suffering endured by ex-prisoners of war in captivity is warranted. It has long been the Government's policy that a debt of gratitude is owed. The special case of ex-prisoners of war, acknowledged in the past by payment of discretionary grants, will now be recognized through conversion of these grants into pensions.
The Hong Kong War Memorial Pensions Bill follows directly from this change in policy. It provides for the repeal of the Hong Kong War Memorial Fund Ordinance and the dissolution of the Fund and its Committee in order to pave the way for the introduction of the new legislation and arrangements catering specifically for the award of statutory pensions. These steps are necessary because, as the Select Committee of this Council concluded, the existing Ordinance requires an applicant's
need for assistance to be assessed. It is also probable that the legal status of the War Memorial Fund is that of a discretionary charitable trust, thus making it an inappropriate vehicle for the payment of statutory pensions. Pensions of this kind are more properly paid directly by Government.
With the winding up of the War Memorial Fund, it follows that its Committee will no longer be able to function in its present form. However, the Committee will be reconstituted through this Bill as an advisory committee to advise on the eligibility of applicants and the administration of the pensions legislation.
In addition to slightly over 700 existing beneficiaries of the War Memorial Fund and the Far Eastern Relief Fund, the proposed pensions will also benefit new applicants who meet basic eligibility criteria derived from the existing War Memorial Fund Ordinance: in other words, pensions will be paid to persons who, while serving in specified volunteer units, were held in captivity by the enemy and to the widows or widowers of those who were killed during the fighting or who died in subsequent captivity. Civilians who were tortured and the widows or widowers of those executed for acts of resistance will also continue to be eligible.
It is estimated that there are 48 potential applicants who meet the eligibility criteria and will benefit from the removal of the income threshold requirement.
The existing level of benefits under the Hong Kong War Memorial Fund will provide the benchmark for payments under the new pension arrangements. These payments will be reviewed annually in line with inflation.
Sir, this year marks the 50th anniversary of the defence of Hong Kong. The award of pensions is fitting recognition for the suffering which an unbowed group of men and women endured and have had to live with since those painful days.
I move, Sir, that the debate on this motion be now adjourned. Question on the adjournment proposed, put and agreed to.
Loud clapping in the public galleries
HIS EXCELLENCY THE PRESIDENT: Order! Order! Could I ask those in the galleries, whatever their distinguished service to Hong Kong in the past years, to maintain the
order of this Chamber?
SECURITIES (AMENDMENT) (NO. 2) BILL 1991
Resumption of debate on Second Reading which was moved on 17 April 1991 Question on the Second Reading of the Bill proposed, put and agreed to. Bill read the Second time.
Bill committed to a Committee of the whole Council pursuant to Standing Order 43(1).
ELECTORAL PROVISIONS (AMENDMENT) (NO. 2) BILL 1991
Resumption of debate on Second Reading which was moved on 13 March 1991 Question on the Second Reading of the Bill proposed, put and agreed to. Bill read the Second time.
Bill committed to a Committee of the whole Council pursuant to Standing Order 43(1).
HOTEL ACCOMMODATION BILL 1990
Resumption of debate on Second Reading which was moved on 9 January 1991 Question on Second Reading proposed.
MR CHUNG: Sir, the Hotel Accommodation Bill 1990 seeks to establish a licensing system and a licensing authority for hotels, guesthouses and similar accommodation. The main purpose of the proposed licensing system is to enable Government to deal with fire safety, structural safety, health and hygiene in respect of these establishments more effectively by keeping a comprehensive register of these establishments and by imposing certain necessary requirements and standards for their operation. The Bill was introduced into the Legislative Council on 9 January 1991.
A Legislative Council ad hoc group consisting of seven members was formed to study this Bill. The group held eight meetings including two meetings with the Administration and one meeting with the Hong Kong Hotels Association, the Hong Kong Federation of Hotel Owners Limited and the Hong Kong Tourist Association. Having regard to the views expressed by these interested parties and the Administration, the group considered that the Bill could be improved in a number of areas.
Members spent quite some time considering whether the Bill's present title was an appropriate one. The hotel trade and the Hong Kong Tourist Association were strongly opposed to the Bill being entitled "Hotel Accommodation Bill" for fear that it would encourage sub-standard establishments to claim themselves hotels after obtaining a licence under the new legislation. To prevent this from happening, they suggested that the title of the Bill be changed to "Guest Accommodation Bill". After some discussion, it was agreed unanimously by members of the ad hoc group that a more appropriate title for the Bill should be explored. In reaching this view, the group was conscious of the following considerations:
(i) first, the strong sentiments expressed by the hotel industry were not without grounds and should not be overlooked;
(ii) second, the Hotel Proprietors Ordinance and the Hotel Accommodation Tax Ordinance did not have the same problem because they did not carry the same degree of public concern; and
(iii) finally, a suitably revised title should not be objectionable provided that it would not change or reduce the intended effect of the Bill.
Another area which required amendment was the powers of the licensing authority proposed. Members considered that the powers to be granted to the licensing authority should not be too wide. Instead, they should be confined to areas directly related to the administration of the licensing system such as the inspection of hotels and guesthouses to ensure that the safety requirements were complied with.
In order to enable an applicant whose application for a licence was refused to fully assess his position, the ad hoc group also considered that the reasons for refusal of issue of a licence should be given by the licensing authority and that this should be made clear in the Bill.
The last point made by the ad hoc group which I would like to mention here is about penalty. The maximum penalties for operating without a licence and for contravening certain conditions of the licence proposed in the Bill were the same. The group considered the former offence to be of a more serious nature and, therefore, should attract a heavier punishment.
These views were conveyed to the Administration. After discussion, and having sought the advice of the Law Draftsman, it was agreed that the title of the Bill should be amended to "Hotel and Guesthouse Accommodation Bill 1991". It was also agreed:
(a) that the clause in which the licensing authority could give directions to any hotel in relation to its operation, upkeep and management should be deleted so as to allay the fear of the industry that the Authority would interfere in the general management of hotels;
(b) that in the event of an application for a licence being refused, the applicant should be given notice stating the grounds of refusal to enable him to fully assess his position; and
(c) that the maximum financial penalty for operating without a licence be doubled.
The ad hoc group has been assured by the Administration that the Bill is not intended to include premises let out on periodical tenancy with services or facilities provided on payment, such as serviced apartments. The Secretary for Home Affairs will no doubt clarify this point in his speech.
Before closing, I must thank my colleagues for their time and efforts in studying this Bill. I also wish to thank the Administration for their understanding and co-operative attitude in compromising on the amendments to be introduced.
Sir, with these remarks, I support the Bill.
MR EDWARD HO: Sir, I rise to support the Hotel Accommodation Bill 1990. The purpose of the Bill is to enable Government to deal with fire safety, structural safety, and health and hygiene matters in hotels, guesthouses and similar accommodation which are presently not licensed.
Although Occupation Permits for these premises may have been obtained, such permits may have been issued either a long time ago when safety and health requirements were of a lower standard than what they are today, or that such permits have been issued for purposes other than what these premises are presently used for. This is especially true for many guesthouses in highrise buildings. The Occupation Permits for such premises would probably have been issued for the purpose of residential accommodation but not for accommodation for transient visitors or for the number of people that would occupy such premises in relation to appropriate fire exits and health requirements.
There has been a lot of concern in respect of safety and health on some of these premises and therefore I support that a form of control, which does not at present exist, should be introduced. In supporting the Bill, I would like to bring up a couple of points for the consideration of the Administration.
There are probably two general categories of such accommodation that we are talking about: the first category being purpose-built hotel buildings, and the second category being guesthouses and holiday flats which were not originally designed as a type of hotel accommodation.
For the first category, where the design of the building was for a purpose-buil t hotel, then matters of safety and health under the provisions of the then current Buildings Ordinance and various building and fire safety regulations would have been complied with. Some of these buildings may have been built as far back as the early 1960s and even earlier, and it may be necessary for additional fire safety and health requirements to be added to conform with present day standards. I understand that this type of additional requirements for the purpose of licensing may become necessary for even some of our most reputable hotels. In such cases, since the premises
concerned were built in compliance of the law, discretion should be given so that any additional requirement would be practical or indeed physically possible. In addition, there are purpose-built hotels constructed in the last five to 10 years, also with proper Occupation Permits, in which case it would be reasonable to expect that little modifications should be required of them.
Naturally, for premises in the second category which were not purpose-built hotels or guesthouses, they would have to be required to comply fully with modern-day safety and health standards.
With the creation of the Hotel Accommodation Authority, there would be an addit ional authority dealing with matters of fire safety, structural safety and health and hygiene matters, matters that are also being dealt with by the Building Authority. The latter Authority, through the Buildings Ordinance Office, currently adopts a central processing procedure, co-ordinating with different relevant government
departments, in dealing with plans submission. This procedure should in future extend to obtaining comments and approvals on the building plans from the Hotel Accommodation Authority. In other words, when the Building Authority approves a set
of general building plans, it should be deemed that the same plans would eventually be approved by the Hotel Accommodation Authority. The development of a hotel requires very heavy financial investments and it would be very unfortunate and unfair if, after a building has been built in accordance with plans approved by the Building Authority and other government departments, it would not be approved by the Hotel Accommodation Authority.
Conversely, when the Hotel Accommodation Authority processes an application for licence under the Hotel Accommodation Ordinance, it should give due account to the fact that the building design has been approved by the Building Authority and other government departments: the Hotel Accommodation Authority should conform very
closely to the requirements of the Building Authority and the Fire Services Department in matters of fire safety, structural safety and health and hygiene matters.
Sir, I have used the titles "Hotel Accommodation Bill" and "Hotel Accommodation Authority" as in the Bill, but I understand that, in response to comments from the hotel and tourist industry, these will be amended in the Committee stage. I support those amendments and, with these observations, I support the Bill.
MR BARROW: Sir, I have little to add to the points made by the Honourable CHUNG Pui-lam and the Honourable Edward HO.
The tourism industry has for many years been concerned about the conditions prevailing in guesthouse accommodation and the very real worry that a major incident in those premises would be damaging to the Hong Kong tourism industry.
The decision to implement this legislation was therefore very welcome to the tourism industry. There was however some surprise that the title of the Bill was
as per the original proposal. However, the compromise which has now been reached is a sensible one and there is now support for the Bill from the industry.
With these words, I support the Bill.
SECRETARY FOR HOME AFFAIRS: Sir, I am most grateful to the ad hoc group and to Mr CHUNG for the support that they have given to this Bill.
The Administration has also received representations from the Hong Kong Tourist Association, the Hong Kong Hotels Association and the Federation of Hong Kong Hotel Owners Limited. While there is general support for this Bill, the hotel industry has reservations as expressed to us direct on the short title of the Bill and much has been said about how the title should be fixed.
Sir, this Bill essentially deals with the safety of life and limb and is not an attempt to categorize hotels into classes of luxury or whether or not they are purpose built. Indeed if one were to attempt to classify hotels on safety grounds, some of the best known, but older purpose built hotels would probably receive a classification inferior to some establishments in Chung King Mansion. This may sound rather
surprising, but is a fact established through vigorous inspections and enforcement of current safety regulations.
The expression "Hotel" follows that in the Hotel Proprietors Ordinance, Cap. 158 and the Hotel Accommodation Tax Ordinance, Cap. 348. It includes hotels, guesthouses and similar sorts of accommodation. However, the ad hoc group, as stated by Mr CHUNG, is of the view that the short title should be amended to "Hotel and Guesthouse
Accommodation Ordinance" to dispel possible misunderstanding on the type of establishments subject to the Bill. While I myself do not see any strong reason for amending the title, and making some 80 incidental amendments as well, if strong concern has been expressed, and if the ad hoc group's amendment would fix them, numerous though they may be, then I shall not stand in the way of the amendment.
Sir, anxiety has also been expressed that the scope of control may include monthly and leased tenancies. I would therefore wish to take this opportunity to clarify that the licensing scheme aims at regulating establishments which offer temporary sleeping accommodation to their customers. It is not the intention of the
Administration to put under control premises which are let out on monthly or leased
tenancies with the exception of the so-called "cage men accommodation" to which I shall refer later in this year.
Arising from discussions with the ad hoc group, I want to give assurances here that although verbal representations will not be entertained under clause 11(1), as to do so would introduce an element of uncertainty as to what representations have actually been made, my staff in the licensing office will be more than happy to meet with any licensees to discuss their problems verbally.
Sir, I will also be moving a number of amendments to the Bill at the Committee stage.
Clause 5(1) of the Bill provides for penalties on conviction for operating a hotel or a guesthouse without a certificate of exemption or a licence as mentioned earlier by Mr CHUNG. The penalties proposed are the same as those set out for contravening the conditions of a certificate of exemption. According to the recommendation of the ad hoc group to which we agreed, I shall be moving an amendment to double the financial penalty without changing the penalty of imprisonment.
It has been suggested that an applicant for a licence should be given notice in the event that the Authority intends to refuse his application under clause 8(3). This suggestion is eminently reasonable and provision to that effect will be proposed to clause 8.
The Administration has received representation from the hotel industry that the power of the Secretary for Home Affairs to give directive regarding the operation and management of a hotel or a guesthouse is too wide and that the Administration should not get involved in such matters. This point was mentioned also by Mr CHUNG in his speech. I am mindful of the primary purpose of the Bill, which is to regulate fire and structural safety in hotels and guesthouses. Accordingly, I shall move an amendment that the original clause 19(1) (a) should be deleted.
Sir, I beg to move.
Question on the Second Reading of the Bill put and agreed to. Bill read the Second time.
Bill committed to a Committee of the whole Council pursuant to Standing Order 43(1).
LEGAL AID (AMENDMENT) BILL 1991
Resumption of debate on Second Reading which was moved on 13 March 1991 Question on Second Reading proposed.
MRS TAM: Sir, the Legal Aid (Amendment) Bill 1991, which seeks to give effect to a new system of means testing in assessing eligibility for legal aid and to improve and give statutory effect to certain existing legal aid practices, was introduced into the Legislative Council on 13 March 1991.
A Legislative Council ad hoc group of eight members was formed to study this Bill. The group held three meetings including one meeting with the Administration. The group has also consulted the Hong Kong Bar Association and the Law Society of Hong Kong and their comments on the Bill are, on the whole, favourable.
In the first place, I welcome the new financial capacity approach in assessing eligibility. At present, an applicant is means tested separately on his capital and income and he has to satisfy the criteria of both tests before he is eligible. This system works to the disadvantage of persons who have capital above the limit but little or no income, or vice versa. Under the proposed new system, the applicant will be assessed according to his financial resources, which are defined as being the sum of his disposable annual income and capital. This new comprehensive approach will result in fairer eligibility assessment. It will avoid the anomalies of separate capital and income means tests and will result in more people becoming eligible when assessed on their total resources.
Sir, in scrutinizing the Bill, Members have expressed concern on a number of matters. The first concern is about the adoption of a financial capacity of $120,000. According to the Administration, anyone with a financial capacity in excess of $120,000 should be able to pay their own legal expenses in all but exceptional cases. The ad hoc group has asked what the additional staff and legal costs would be if the financial capacity limit were revised to $130,000. The Administration estimates that this may involve additional expenditure of several million dollars. The ad hoc group accepts the financial limit of $120,000 at this stage but feels that it should
be reviewed from time to time.
The ad hoc group is aware that several years ago, some applications for legal aid were made for the purpose of delaying legal proceedings. This is because an application for legal aid has the effect of staying legal proceedings for 42 days to enable the application to be considered. Such incidents were particularly frequent in cases involving possession of domestic properties by landlords. Members were worried that the legal aid system could be unduly abused and legal proceedings unnecessarily delayed. However, the Administration has advised that the number of such cases has been greatly reduced in recent years and that problems in this area have not been serious enough to warrant genuine concern. Moreover, under regulation 11, the Director of Legal Aid may make an order that no consideration shall be given to any future application by a person whose conduct amounts to an abuse of the legal aid facilities.
The Administration points out that legal aid applicants sometimes make no attempt to obtain gainful employment whilst awaiting the outcome of their application, purposely limiting their financial resources so as to qualify for legal aid. To close this loophole, the Bill proposed to enable the Director to refuse an application when the applicant has failed to maximize his earning potential or has been absent from Hong Kong for a continuous period of six months after submitting an application for legal aid, thus making it impossible to assess his eligibility. The ad hoc group is concerned about how a fair assessment could be made on whether a person has failed to maximize his earning potential. In this respect, we are informed by the Director of Legal Aid that guidelines drawn up by the department would ensure that discretion would be exercised fairly and equitably and that no genuine cases would be discriminated against.
Sir, finally, I would like to add that the Hong Kong Bar Association, in commenting on the Bill, has suggested it is time to consider whether the legal aid entry level should still be measured in absolute terms or whether it should be measured with reference to other factors such as the anticipated legal costs of the particular litigation involved in each individual case. Obviously, the proposal of adopting the anticipated legal costs of each case as a factor in assessing eligibility for legal aid would alter the existing criterion for eligibility. Nevertheless, I
consider it desirable for the Administration to bear this suggestion in mind and further explore its viability.
Sir, with these remarks, I support the motion.
Question on the Second Reading of the Bill put and agreed to.
Bill read the Second time.
Bill committed to a Committee of the whole Council pursuant to Standing Order 43(1).
Committee stage of Bills
Council went into Committee.
SECURITIES (AMENDMENT) (NO. 2) BILL 1991
Clauses 1 to 3 were agreed to.
ELECTORAL PROVISIONS (AMENDMENT) (NO. 2) BILL 1991
Clause 1
ATTORNEY GENERAL: Sir, I move that clause 1 be amended as set out under my name in the paper circulated to Members.
The proposed amendment is a simple technical one to enable the Electoral Provisions (Amendment) (No. 2) Bill 1991, when passed by this Council, to be cited as the Electoral Provisions (Amendment) Ordinance 1991.
Sir, I beg to move.
Proposed amendment
Clause 1
That clause 1(1) be amended by deleting "(No. 2)".
Question on the amendment proposed, put and agreed to.
Question on clause 1, as amended, proposed, put and agreed to. Clauses 2 to 9 were agreed to.
HOTEL ACCOMMODATION BILL 1990
Clauses 11 to 14 and 16 were agreed to.
Clauses 1 to 4 and Headings of Part II and Part VI
MR CHUNG: Sir, I move that the clauses specified be amended as set out in the paper circulated to Members.
Proposed amendments
Clause 1(1)
That clause 1(1) be amended by adding "and Guesthouse" after "Hotel". Clause 2
That clause 2 be amended --
(a) in the definition "Authority", by adding "and Guesthouse" after "Hotel".
(b) in the definition "hotel" --
(i) by adding "and "guesthouse"" after ""hotel"";
(ii) by deleting "means" and substituting "mean".
Clause 3(1)
That clause 3(1) be amended
(a) by adding "or any guesthouse" after "any hotel" where it twice occurs. (b) by adding "or guesthouse" after "of hotel" where it twice occurs. Clause 4
That clause 4 be amended --
(a) in the section heading, by adding "and Guesthouse" after "Hotel". (b) in subclause (1), by adding "and Guesthouse" after "Hotel". Part II
That Part II be amended by adding "AND GUESTHOUSES" after "HOTELS" in the heading.
Part VI
That Part VI be amended by adding "AND GUESTHOUSES" after "HOTELS" in the heading. Question on the amendments proposed, put and agreed to.
Question on clauses 1 to 4 and Headings of Part II and Part VI, as amended, proposed, put and agreed to.
Clause 5 and 19
MR CHUNG: Sir, I move that clauses 5 and 19 be amended as set out under my name in the paper circulated to Members.
Proposed amendments
Clause 5
That clause 5 be amended --
(a) in the section heading, by adding "or guesthouse" after "hotel". (b) in subclause (1), by adding "or a guesthouse" after "hotel".
(c) in subclause (2), by adding "or the guesthouse" after "hotel" where it twice occurs.
Clause 19
That clause 19 be amended --
(a) in subclause (1), by adding "or any guesthouse" after "any hotel". (b) In subclause (2)(a), by adding "or the guesthouse" after "the hotel". Question on the amendments proposed, put and agreed to.
SECRETARY FOR HOME AFFAIRS: Sir, I move that clauses 5 and 19 be further amended as set out under my name in the paper circulated to Members.
Proposed amendments
Clause 5(1)
That clause 5(1) be further amended--
(a) by deleting "$100,000" and substituting "$200,000".
(b) by deleting "$10,000" and substituting "$20,000".
Clause 19(1)
That clause 19(1) be further amended by deleting paragraphs (a) to (d) and substituting --
"(a) the safety of guests in the hotel or the guesthouse is promoted in a proper manner;
(b) adequate apparatus and equipment required as safeguards against fire or other hazard are provided in the hotel or the guesthouse; and
(c) the provisions of this Ordinance are complied with.". Question on the amendments proposed, put and agreed to.
Question on clauses 5 and 19, as amended, proposed, put and agreed to.
Clauses 6, 7, 9, 18 and 20 to 22
MR CHUNG: Sir, I move that the clauses specified be amended as set out under my name in the paper circulated to Members.
Proposed amendments
Clause 6
That clause 6 be amended, in subclauses (1), (3)(d) and (7), by adding "or a guesthouse" after "hotel".
Clause 7
That clause 7(2) be amended by adding "or a guesthouse" after "hotel". Clause 9
That clause 9(1) be amended by adding "or a guesthouse" after "hotel". Clause 18
That clause 18 be amended --
(a) in the section heading, by adding "and guesthouses" after "hotels". (b) in paragraph (a) --
(i) by adding ", any guesthouse" after "any hotel";
(ii) by adding "or a guesthouse" after "a hotel".
(c) in paragraph (b) --
(i) by adding "or a guesthouse" after "a hotel";
(ii) by adding "or that guesthouse" after "that hotel";
(iii) by adding "or the guesthouse" after "the hotel".
(d) in paragraph (c), by adding "or a guesthouse" after "a hotel".
(e) in paragraph (d) --
(i) by adding "or a guesthouse" after "a hotel";
(ii) by adding "or the guesthouse" after "the hotel".
Clause 20
That clause 20 be amended --
(a) in the section heading, by adding "or a guesthouse" after "hotel". (b) in subclause (1) --
(i) by adding "or the guesthouse" and "or a guesthouse" after "the hotel" and "a hotel" respectively;
(ii) in paragraphs (a) and (b), by adding "or the guesthouse" after "the hotel" wherever it occurs.
(c) in subclauses (2) and (3), by adding "or the guesthouse" after "the hotel" wherever it occurs.
(d) in subclause (4) --
(i) by adding "or the guesthouse" and "or a guesthouse" after "the hotel" and "a hotel" respectively;
(ii) in paragraphs (a) and (b), by adding "or the guesthouse" after "the hotel".
Clause 21
That clause 21 be amended --
(a) in subclause (1) --
(i) by adding "or a guesthouse" after "a hotel";
(ii) in paragraph (c), by adding "or the guesthouse" after "the hotel".
(b) in subclause (3) --
(i) by adding "or a guesthouse" after "a hotel";
(ii) in paragraph (c), by adding "or the guesthouse" after "the hotel".
(c) in subclause (4), by adding "or a guesthouse" and "or the guesthouse" after "a hotel" and "the hotel" respectively.
(d) in subclause (5), by adding "or a guesthouse" after "a hotel" where it twice occurs.
(e) in subclause (6), by adding "or a guesthouse" after "hotel". Clause 22
That clause 22 be amended --
(a) in subclause (1), by adding "or guesthouses" after "hotels" wherever it occurs.
(b) in subclause (3), by adding "or a guesthouse" and "or that guesthouse" after "a hotel" and "that hotel" respectively.
(c) in subclause (5)(a), by adding "or a guesthouse" after "hotel" wherever it occurs.
Question on the amendments proposed, put and agreed to.
MRS LAM (in Cantonese): I move that the clauses specified be further amended.
In scrutinizing the Chinese version of the present Bill, the ad hoc group took pains to see if the various clauses adequately imported the legal connotations of the original. The ad hoc group found that "A renewal of a licence ..... shall take effect on the day following the day of its expiration" in clause 9(4) of the English version is given in the Chinese text as 續期在原來有效期屆滿之日翌日生效 . The group proposed that this be amended to read 續期在原來有效期屆滿日的翌日生效 . 屆滿日的翌日 would seem to better convey the meaning of the original subclause.
Sir, the other amendments I am moving are as set out in the paper circulated to Members.
Proposed amendments
Clause 6(3)(d)
That clause 6(3)(d) be further amended by deleting "辦" and substituting "營".
Clause 7(3)
That clause 7(3) be further amended by deleting "及" and substituting "或". Clause 9(4)
That clause 9(4) be further amended by deleting "之日" and substituting "日的".
Clause 9(6)
That clause 9(6) be further amended by deleting "該日" and substituting "期滿日的 ".
Clause 18(a)
That clause 18(a) be further amended by deleting "任何" when it secondly occurs. Clause 20(1)(b)
That clause 20(1)(b) be further amended, by deleting subparagraph (i) and substituting --
"(i) 旅館內任何住客遇到危險或可能遇到危險 或".
Clause 21(2)(b)
That clause 21(2)(b) be further amended by deleting "監督" and substituting "督導 ".
Clause 21(5)
That clause 21(5) be further amended by deleting "作出㆒" and substituting "控制㆒".
Clause 22(1)(e)
That clause 22(1)(e) be further amended by adding ", 以" before "及㆖". Question on the amendments proposed, put and agreed to.
Question on clauses 6, 7, 9, 18 and 20 to 22, as amended, proposed, put and agreed to.
Clauses 8 and 10
MR CHUNG: Sir, I move that clauses 8 and 10 be amended as set out under my name in
the paper circulated to Members.
Proposed amendments
Clause 8
That clause 8 be amended --
(a) in subclause (1), by adding "or a guesthouse" after "hotel". (b) in subclause (2)(a), by adding "or the guesthouse" after "hotel". (c) in subclause (3) --
(i) by adding "or a guesthouse" after "hotel";
(ii) in paragraph (a), by adding "or the guesthouse" and "or a guesthouse" after "the hotel" and "a hotel" respectively;
(iii) in paragraph (c), by adding "or the guesthouse" after "hotel". (d) in subclauses (4)(d) and (6), by adding "or a guesthouse" after "hotel". Clause 10
That clause 10 be amended --
(a) by adding "or a guesthouse" after "a hotel".
(b) in paragraphs (a) and (b)(ii), by adding "or that guesthouse" after "that hotel".
(c) in paragraph (c) --
(i) by adding "or that guesthouse" after "that hotel";
(ii) in subparagraph (ii), by adding "or the guesthouse" after "the hotel".
(d) in paragraph (d), by adding "or the guesthouse" after "the hotel". Question on the amendments proposed, put and agreed to.
SECRETARY FOR HOME AFFAIRS: Sir, I move that clauses 8 and 10 be further amended as set out under my name in the paper circulated to Members.
Proposed amendments
Clause 8
That clause 8 be further amended --
(a) in subclause (3), by deleting "if it" and substituting "on the ground that it".
(b) by adding after subclause (3) --
"(3A) Where the Authority refuses to issue a licence in
respect of a hotel or a guesthouse under subsection (3), he shall make a written order, properly dated and signed, to that effect stating the ground in subsection (3) on which he has refused to issue a licence and shall send a copy thereof by registered post to the applicant, at the address last known to the Authority.".
Clause 10
That clause 10 be further amended by deleting paragraph (e) and substituting -- "(e) on the ground that it appears to him that --
(i) the hotel or the guesthouse has ceased to be operated as such or to exist; or
(ii) such person has ceased to operate, keep, manage or otherwise control the hotel or the guesthouse.".
Question on the amendments proposed, put and agreed to.
MRS LAM (in Cantonese): Sir, I move that clauses 8 and 10 be further amended.
In scrutinizing clause 8 the ad hoc group found certain irregularities in the use of terms which could lead to confusion and which therefore need to be amended.
In clause 8(3)(c) of the Bill, "Supervision" is given in the Chinese text as 監督 . However, in view of the fact that "Hotel Accommodation Authority" in the Bill is already termed 旅館業監督 , the ad hoc group proposed that "Supervision" be translated as 督導 and, to this end, 合理監督 in clause 21(2)(b) be amended so as to read 合理督導 .
The group found in clause 10(c) an instance of disjointed sentence construction. 就該旅館或其住客 有㆟曾經或正在違反本條例規定 should be amended to read 就該旅館或其住客方面 有㆟曾經或正在違反本條例規定 , that
is to say, to add the words 方面 to make it a clearer and better phrased clause. Proposed amendments
Clause 8(3)(c)
That clause 8(3)(c) be further amended by deleting "監督" and substituting "督導 ".
Clause 8(4)(d)
That clause 8(4)(d) be further amended by deleting "證明書的㆟經辦" and substituting "牌照的㆟經營".
Clause 10(c)
That clause 10(c) be further amended by deleting "就該旅館或其住客" and substituting "在該旅館或其住客方面".
Question on the amendments proposed, put and agreed to.
Question on clauses 8 and 10, as amended, proposed, put and agreed to. Clause 15
SECRETARY FOR HOME AFFAIRS: Sir, I move that clause 15 be amended as set out under my name in the paper circulated to Members.
Proposed amendment
Clause 15(1)
That clause 15(1) be amended by adding ", being not less that 2," after "persons". Question on the amendment proposed, put and agreed to.
MRS LAM (in Cantonese): Sir, I move that clause 15 be further amended.
The ad hoc group found in clause 15(9) a discrepancy in meaning between the English and Chinese texts of the Bill. "a debt ..... recoverable in the District Court" is given as 債項 可作為民事債項追討 . Here the term "District Court" has been incorrectly translated. It is proposed that the Chinese be amended so as to read 債項 在㆞方法院追討 .
Proposed amendment
Clause 15(7)(c)
That clause 15(7)(c) be further amended by adding "委員" after "令該". Clause 15(9)
That clause 15(9) be further amended by deleting "作為民事債項" and substituting " 在㆞方法院".
Question on the amendment, proposed, put and agreed to.
Question on clause 15, as amended, proposed, put and agreed to.
Clause 17
MRS LAM (in Cantonese): Sir, I move that clause 17 be amended as set out in the paper circulated to Members.
Proposed amendment
Clause 17(2)
That clause 17(2) be amended by adding "案件" after "可將".
Question on the amendment, proposed, put and agreed to.
Question on clause 17, as amended, proposed, put and agreed to. Long title
MR CHUNG: Sir, I move that the long title be amended as set out in the paper circulated to Members.
Proposed amendment
Long title
That long title be amended by adding "and guesthouse" after "hotel". Question on the amendment, proposed, put and agreed to.
Question on long title, as amended, proposed, put and agreed to.
LEGAL AID (AMENDMENT) BILL 1991
Clauses 1 to 20 were agreed to.
Council then resumed.
Third Reading of Bills
THE ATTORNEY GENERAL reported that the
SECURITIES (AMENDMENT) (NO. 2) BILL 1991 and
LEGAL AID (AMENDMENT) BILL 1991
had passed through Committee without amendment and the
ELECTORAL PROVISIONS (AMENDMENT) BILL 1991, the original short title of which is the ELECTORAL PROVISIONS (AMENDMENT) (NO. 2) BILL 1991 and
HOTEL AND GUESTHOUSE ACCOMMODATION BILL 1991, the original short title of which is the HOTEL ACCOMMODATION BILL 1990
had passed through Committee with amendments. He moved the Third Reading of the Bills.
Question on the Third Reading of the Securities (Amendment) (No. 2) Bill 1991, Electoral Provisions (Amendment) Bill 1991, Hotel and Guesthouse Accommodation Bill 1990 and the Legal Aid (Amendment) Bill 1991 proposed, put and agreed to.
ATTORNEY GENERAL: Sir, a point of order, please, before the Clerk reads out the titles of the Bills. I think it should be the Hotel and Guesthouse Accommodation Bill 1991.
HIS EXCELLENCY THE PRESIDENT: Thank you, Attorney General. I assume you amended it or you read out a different title from what is on a piece of paper.
ATTORNEY GENERAL: No, Sir, it should be 1991.
HIS EXCELLENCY THE PRESIDENT: I am grateful for that amendment. I will now put that question again. I think that is the simplest way of doing it. We will now know what we are voting on in precise terms -- not only that we have added "Guesthouse" but
we have got the date 1991. So I will read out that question again.
Question on the Third Reading of the Securities (Amendment) (No. 2) Bill 1991, Electoral Provisions (Amendment) Bill 1991, Hotel and Guesthouse Accommodation Bill 1991 and the Legal Aid (Amendment) Bill 1991 proposed, put and agreed to.
Bills read the Third time and passed.
Member's motion
REVIEW OF OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH AND SAFETY
Dr C.H. LEONG moved the following motion :
"That this Council urges the Administration on this International Labour Day that a comprehensive review on Occupational Health and Safety be conducted with urgency. In particular three aspects must be explored :
1. Hazard prevention;
2. Disability assessment and compensation; and
3. Rehabilitation."
DR LEONG: Sir, I rise to move the motion under my name as set out in the Order Paper. It is perhaps befitting that this debate on the numerous facets of occupational health, safety and hazards should be conducted in this Chamber today -- the International Labour Day -- as a tribute to our working force. For it is their hard work that culminated to what Hong Kong is today.
Let me hasten to add that doctors and dentists, whom I represent, are an important integral part of the Hong Kong's working force and I am sure my honourable colleague, Mr Ronald CHOW, would agree that the same are to the nurses and the other allied medical and health personnel that he represents.
The fact remains, Sir, that there is a 2.79 million-strong working force in Hong
Kong. In other words, a total of 67.1% of Hong Kong people are working day in and day out, responsible for keeping up Hong Kong's economy; keeping Hong Kong vibrant; and making Hong Kong a haven for "workaholics".
But are we doing justice to these "bumble bees"? Are we providing them with a suitable environment to work in? Are we providing them with adequate safety prevention and protection? Are we giving them the proper compensation assessment so that their lives and those of their families can still go on without beg, borrow, or steal even if they are injured? Are we providing them with adequate and suitable retraining should harm befall so that they can be integrated back into society?
Sir, let me put it to you and this Council that these questions need to be addressed and that an urgent and comprehensive review must be the order of the day.
Sir, if it pleases this Council, I would venture to elaborate in general some fallacies of health hazard prevention; some deficiencies in health disability assessment and compensation and some inadequacy in rehabilitation. I would then elaborate on some specific issues which are of concern to the medical profession at large; and finally attempt suggestions to render improvement for the future.
During the debate I am sure some of my honourable colleagues will address the issues from another perspective; in particular the Honourable TAM Yiu-chung and the Honourable PANG Chun-hoi will cover the parameters of compensation whilst the Honourable Mrs Rosanna TAM and the Honourable HUI Yin-fat will address the issues of rehabilitation. I am sure Dr IP will probably address also the issue of noise-induced deafness.
I do hope that at the end of the day, some concrete suggestions could be forthcoming, not only to make this debate worthwhile, but also to provide for the needs of our workforce that they thoroughly deserved.
Let me move to say some words on the fallacies of hazard prevention and occupational health safety problems.
Limited coverage
Sir, we have in hand a 2.79 million-strong working force. Yet unlike the United Kingdom where all workforces are being protected by the Health and Safety at Work
Act 1974, in Hong Kong only factory workers, industrial undertakings and recently, food and catering workers are covered by the Factories and Industrial Undertakings (Amendment) Ordinance 1989. Who can the rest of the working force turn to?
What preventive measures are devised for the poor postman, who day in and day out has to carry an oversized and overweighed bag delivering our mail but only to be led to the development of premature osteoarthritis of their spine ( )? What preventive measures are there for our hard-working personal secretaries who developed persistent low back pain during hours of uncomfortable posture typing letters and documents? What protective measures do we have for our Florence Nightingales should they develop tuberculosis, hepatitis or other infectious diseases from continuous contacts with infectious patients?
The list, Sir, is far from exhaustive!
Inadequacy in legislation
Little have we in legislation that touches on occupational health preventive measures -- the Factories and Industrial Undertakings Ordinance is perhaps the only one -- which, alas, only deals with the relationship between employers and employees. It is not encompassing enough to cover all aspects of employees' health and safety at work, nor is it wide enough to include the need for employers to improve working environment and preventive measures for their employees.
No incentives to form safety committees
There is not enough incentives put forward to encourage workers to be concerned with hazard prevention. Whilst in many countries safety committees are compulsory by law, in Hong Kong, the formation of safety committees are only being encouraged on a voluntary basis. Currently in Hong Kong safety committees are in existence only in large factories. The hard fact shows that out of some 80 000 factories and
establishments in Hong Kong, only 171 have safety committees. Safety committees involve workers' active participation and thus heighten the awareness of workers towards safety procedures.
No specific body to monitor policies
The existing structure within the Administration leaves a lot to be desired in
relation to monitoring on industrial safety and health. There is no basic comparable body like the Health and Safety Committee of the United Kingdom which has the power to touch on policies regarding health and safety laws and to move amendments where laws are deemed insufficient. Let me hasten to add, Sir, that I am in no way
discrediting the function nor the good work that the Occupational Health and Safety Council has done since its inauguration in 1988. But unfortunately, that Council is not empowered with any executive power and furthermore, its terms of reference, as I understand it, deal mainly with educational matters.
Regular check-ups are inadequate
Sir, the medical profession is disillusioned by the fact that pre-employment health check-ups are very scarcely employed in Hong Kong. We are even more dismayed by the inadequacy of regular check-ups after workers have taken up their position. All too many occupational diseases are only discovered when full blown and disability becomes unpreventable.
Clearly, there is a case for compulsory pre-employment check-up for a wide range of hazardous occupation if not for all work categories. There is an even greater call for compulsory regular check-ups for selected hazardous occupations so that any occupational diseases can be detected early and disability minimized to the maximum.
Pneumoconiosis ( ) is perhaps a vivid example of how pre-employment check-ups and regular physical assessment can help. It is well known that pre-existing lung diseases such as old tuberculosis or other chronic chest condition catalyze the development of pneumoconiosis. It is a well-known fact too that if pneumoconiosis is detected early, and the person is not allowed to be exposed further to dust, the lung damage could be arrested and disability kept to a lowest minimum.
Industrial medical officers not properly utilized
Sir, many industrial countries, notably even our closest neighbour Singapore, have stipulated that for every 2 000 workers, there must be an industrial medical officer who must have experience and training on industrial health but this is not the case in Hong Kong. There are only eight industrial health officers who are
employees of the Department of Health working under the Labour Department. They have an immense task of having to inspect factories, assessing disabilities and providing education for health hazard prevention.
Sir, there are many doctors in Hong Kong who are interested in and concerned with industrial health and would like to make a career out of this aspect of medicine. Unfortunately, they are bewildered. Some factories do employ company doctors but when they do, they are only asked to look after the minor ailments of the staff. Their comments on changes to improve health hazard preventions often fall on deaf ears either because it is not within their job description or for fear of upsetting, as it were, the apple cart.
The need for realistic statistics
Sir, a total of only 244 industrial diseases were recorded in the year 1990. Out of these, 103 cases were silicosis simply because it has recently attracted a lot of attention. Is this a realistic figure or is Hong Kong really so supreme in the prevailing measures against industrial diseases? A total of some 37 types of
industrial diseases are notifiable but how many are actually notified? A recent information paper provided by the Department of Health has admitted that it may be difficult to calculate a realistic number of notifiable individual diseases. There is a dire need to improve the system to ensure that meaningful statistics are available for proper planning in the future.
Unreasonable assessment of injury and unsatisfactory compensation
Sir, I would like to turn your attention to some shortcomings of the current disability assessment and unsatisfactory level of compensation for an unfortunate worker who sustained injury. In one word, Sir, the current method of disability assessment is crude. The process of assessment is usually done in haste, attended by junior and inexperienced medical officers without the presence of representation of that trade. The assessed percentage loss of function is supposed to be based on the "age, degree of incapacity and earnings of the employee". However, the
assessment of the degree of incapacity is very arbitrary. According to the First Schedule of the Employee's Compensation Ordinance, the loss of both hands or the loss of all fingers and both thumbs amounts to 100% disability while the loss of four fingers of the hand amounts only to 40%. How these percentages came about is
anybody's guess.
The kind of assessment is entirely outdated. The irony is that the percentage loss of function does not take into consideration the injured's individual job nor
his physical characteristics. The left-handed person having a complete loss of function of his left hand is assessed to have the same percentage disability as another person who is right-handed.
The unsatisfactory state of compensation is clearly reflected in the current pneumoconiosis compensation scheme. I will not be dwelling on details of this as I am sure my honourable colleagues, Mr TAM Yiu-chung and Mr PANG Chun-hoi, would have more to say in this aspect. But I am happy to hear that the Pneumoconiosis
Compensation Board is having a second look at the scheme and hopefully can come out with a more humane and satisfactory proposal.
May I now, Sir, turn to say a few words on the lack of co-ordinated rehabilitation.
Sir, it is not enough to give a lump sum of money to a disabled who sustained injury in building work and then forget about him forever. It is the Government and society's responsibility to train these people back into society so that they can contribute to their best of ability. In this aspect, Sir, a properly co-ordinated rehabilitation programme aiming to retrain these people should be instituted. I have no doubt my honourable colleagues, Mrs Rosanna TAM and Mr HUI Yin-fat, will be
highlighing this later.
I would now turn to two industrial diseases which the medical profession are most concerned with and through which the fallacies of the current preventive, assessment and compensation mechanism could even be made more obvious -- these are, Sir, pneumoconiosis and noise-induced deafness.
Let me say a few words on pneumoconiosis ( ).
This is a disease which leads to progressive destruction of functioning lung tissue as a result of long-term inhalation of excessive dust. The booming building industry in Hong Kong has led to a rapid rise in pneumoconiosis amongst its workers. The disease is most prevalent amongst caisson workers.
Let me put it to you, Sir, that everything is wrong from the word "go". No pre-employment check-ups are instituted so as to bar those with lung problems. These people work in the depth of a caisson where the dust level may be anywhere up to 600 times the danger level. Yes, they are advised to use a mask, but there is no specification on the type of mask. Neither are they educated to learn how the mask
should be used properly. There is no statutory need for regular medical check-up and there is nothing to prevent them from going back to their same job, inhaling more dust and facing a much faster development of a crippling lung damage.
Sir, it is the considered view of the Hong Kong Medical Association that as pneumoconiosis once diagnosed has no effective cure and would only progressively deteriorate, the following consideration should be adopted;
(1) Compensation or "pension" scheme can be calculated at 100% incapacity depending on age, earnings and number of dependent family members. This "pension" should be provided for life, to be paid monthly.
(2) Should the pneumoconiosis person be engaged in working in other trade the compensation should be deducted accordingly.
(3) It should be a criminal offence to employ a pneumoconiosis person on pension to work on caisson again.
(4) The pneumoconiosis person must be annually assessed by the Pneumoconiosis Medical Board with a certification from the Board which will be used to continue drawing of the "pension". This would provide a detailed clinical progress and the natural history of pneumoconiosis which is at present quite deficient.
(5) Pneumoconiosis should be made a notifiable disease.
Noise-induced hearing loss ( )
Let me now, Sir, give some considerations to noise-induced deafness which I am sure my honourable colleague, Dr Henrietta IP, will also address. There is an estimate workforce of some 40 000 exposed to noise at a harmful level to the ear. There are undoubtedly some regulations in respect of control of factories under a noisy environment. But are these regulations ever implemented? The Labour Department would say that there are "insufficient staff", but are we satisfied with the answer? Is this all we can do to give the best prevention to this group of workforce? Why is there no evidence of any hearing protection on construction sites? We can see workers standing next to noisy machines some over 120 dB, yet do they wear any protective devices? I feel this is a gross negligence on the employers, the employees and the Labour Department.
It is with this in mind and after carefully considering the size of the problem that the medical profession proposes that:
(1) hearing loss caused by jobs related to industries be counted as a compensable occupational disease;
(2) the enforcement of regulations be strengthened and employers be required to provide hearing protectors or employees to use them;
(3) pre-employment check-ups and subsequent regular check-ups be introduced for workers in noisy industries.
The way ahead
What then should be done?
The myriad of problems facing industrial diseases and injuries and the multi-faceted nature of these problems call for an urgent review of the overall strategy. Such review should be done not by just one branch of the Administration but by all branches concerned.
It is timely that whilst the Report of the Working Party on Primary Health Care has made significant recommendations on industrial health, and a Green Paper on rehabilitation is in the making, an inter-departmental working group from at least the Education and Manpower Branch, the Health and Welfare Branch and the Finance Branch be established and the progress of this group be regularly reported to this Council and its working panels. In particular, the following principles should be considered without delay:
(1) Statutory medical examinations concerning a wide range of hazardous occupations must be introduced in the form of pre-employment check-ups and regular check-ups that follow.
(2) It should be made compulsory that an industrial health medical officer be employed to an establishment with more than a set number of workforce. In smaller establishments, a few of them can share one medical officer.
(3) Safety committees must be set up with mandatory workers participation in all establishments.
(4) Regulations concerning industrial diseases and injury prevention must be implemented.
(5) A complete revamp is needed of the procedures and the mechanism of disability assessment and compensation.
(6) A programme of co-ordinated rehabilitation must be introduced for the disabled to bring them back into useful participation of society.
Sir, I beg to move.
Question on the motion proposed.
4.35 pm
HIS EXCELLENCY THE PRESIDENT: There are a number of Members who have their names down to speak. For the sake of those Members who might otherwise be suffering from lower back pain (laughter) we might have a short break at this point.
5.12 pm
HIS EXCELLENCY THE PRESIDENT: Council will resume.
DR IP: Sir, my good friend, Dr George CHOI, one of the pioneers in ear, nose and throat surgery who has devoted all his life to serve the ears of Hong Kong people informs me that the number of people with noise- induced hearing loss is increasing. He telephones me, writes to me, faxes to me ever so often, to keep up pressure on me, to keep up the pressure on Government, to do something about noise-induced hearing loss. And every time sick children scream in my ear when I examine them, the more I feel a victim, and I fight harder for the cause. My request for compensation for such hearing loss began six years ago. It took three years to convince Government who then agreed in principle to introduce legislation for such compensation. Another three years had passed and Government is still assessing ways to compensate.
Sir, there is still no sign of draft legislation after six years. Do we have to wait another legislative term before such a law can be enacted? Of course, prevention is better than cure and more efforts should be made to inform the public of the danger of noise. However, it must be the responsibility of Government and the employers to protect staff from such danger. In this respect, we have failed in the past and every effort must therefore be made to compensate those whose ears have sustained irreversible damage. On this International Labour Day, I urge all of us to reflect how much we should appreciate those labourers whose energy and sweat and sometimes physical injury created this very infrastructure we are standing on today and every roof which shelters us at night and to make haste to introduce legislation to offer compensation for this last, major occupational disease so far neglected.
Sir, it is rare to see workers in noisy environment wear ear protectors in spite of Government's effort to publicize that noise can cause hearing loss. I would like to stress that it is just as much the responsibility of the employees to protect themselves from hearing loss as it is the employers. It is with this in mind that I suggested in November 1988 that employees working in noisy environment must agree and actually do undergo annual hearing tests or else forfeit their rights to claim compensation when this comes into existence. This, Sir, has three advantages of acting as:
(1) a continuous reminder to the employee to wear ear protectors; (2) documentation of his having worked in noisy environment, and (3) an early warning.
Sir, if legislation is enacted without such provisions, we will not see an end to such compensation. We must not allow staffing problem to be an excuse to exclude this important proviso. Sir, I look forward to seeing legislation introduced to offer employees' compensation for noise-induced hearing loss. With these words, I support the motion before Council.
MR CHAN (in Cantonese): Sir, Dr LEONG focused his attention, when he delivered his speech a while ago, on occupation and health. I fully support his views and, as a
complement, I would like to say something on industrial safety. According to the latest statistics of the Census and Statistics Department, the figure of casualties in industrial accidents has not shown any decrease from the year 1984 to 1989. On average 80 000 to 100 000 persons were injured and 200 to 220 died in industrial accidents every year. The steady and undropping figure evidences that there is still inadequacy in the work of accident prevention.
Meanwhile, in certain trades which often cause chronic diseases or gradual disability, workers are likely to disregard effective preventive measures. It is too late when they are found to have asbestosis, silicosis, permanent damage of vision and hearing, and so on.
In fact, these accidents and chronic diseases can be avoided if workers have taken adequate preventive measures.
The problem is that workers have often neglected the importance of safety for the sake of convenience or time-saving. Industrial safety education may be useful to the new entrants of a trade, but for the serving workers, it is like water over the duck's back. I believe that the most effective means is punishment. The
punishment is not to be imposed by the Government but it should be up to the employers to suspend the employee who fails to observe safety measures from work or even dismiss him.
I feel that punishment is feasible. The most important principle in imposing punishment is fairness. Fairness is achieved if the employer has already provided sufficient facilities; has educated and required the workers to use them; and regularly monitors the situation. I think it is more than fair for the worker to be punished if he deliberately disregards the safety facilities.
The problem lies in whether the employer has provided sufficient facilities and has instructed the workers to use them. If he has not, then it is the employer to be punished. However, the Government does not have sufficient manpower to enforce the provisions of the law. For example, there should be a Safety Officer for a
construction site with more than 200 workers, but some employers just appoint a Safety Officer to meet the requirement and they do not bother to do anything about safety measures at all.
Such situation is more commonly found in the construction industry, which
operates under the contractor system and it is most difficult to monitor the situation of the industry. In these circumstances, the ultimate employer is the owner who pays for the construction cost and it is he who should be responsible for the safety of the workers. There are some safety conscious employers who have included the
provision of safety measures in the cost even though at present it is not required by the law to do so. The construction will be penalized by a reduction of payment if he does not follow the safety standard and workers will be suspended from work for not following safety regulations. As a result, safety is greatly enhanced.
Thorough study should be carried out on the question of making law to hold the owner of a construction site responsible for industrial safety. However, penalty regarding safety measures is not included in Government's construction contracts, and government departments related to engineering even attach less importance to safety than certain site owners. This is really a backward situation.
The figure of industrial casualties has not come down, showing that the effect of partial implementation of the law and of the existing safety education is very limited. To raise the awareness of the employers and the workers, sanctions are necessary. Employers who do not abide by the law should be brought to the court. Similarly, employers should punish workers who do not follow the safety regulations. These are the only effective methods.
Sir, I support the motion moved by Dr LEONG.
MR HO SAI-CHU (in Cantonese): Sir, as a result of the Labour Department's hard work over the years and the establishment of the Occupational Safety and Health Council two and a half years ago, the term "occupational safety" is now widely known and often mentioned in our community. More and more activities have been organized in recent years to promote occupational safety. And while the "health" aspects have never been neglected, it is nonetheless the case that due to constraints in resources and
objective circumstances, more emphasis has all along been placed on occupational "safety", leaving occupational "health" as a matter of secondary importance.
However, the situation is now improving. Through the zealous efforts of the OSHC in putting the proper message across, our local industries are becoming more concerned about the health of their employees. In the past, people focused more attention on the question of safety, probably because the occurrence of any industrial accident
might instantly take the life of a worker or cause him serious injuries. On the other hand, health problems are unlikely to be detected immediately, especially in the case of chronic diseases. When a worker finds out his problem, it may already be too late. It is therefore incorrect for some employers and employees to attach greater
importance to occupational safety at the expense of the health aspects. The health and safety of workers are closely related. A healthy body enables us to work in a sound state of mind. As a result, various accidents can be avoided.
The OSHC has always attached great importance to the promotion of occupational safety. Since the OSHC training programmes were first introduced in early 1990, courses on occupational health, such as industrial ventilation, ergonomics, hearing protection, manual handling of goods, and laser safety have been included as some of the major subjects. Occupational health has also been a predominant theme of the monthly seminars organized by the OSHC for members of the public. For instance, the topic for the seminar held on 20 March was "Legionnaires Disease in Hong Kong", the speaker being an expert on this subject from the Faculty of Medicine of the Hong Kong University. The seminar was very well received and extra seats had to be made
available for the packed audience. This demonstrates that through stepped up publicity and promotion, workers have come to realize that occupational health and safety are equally important to them. There has been a general improvement in the living standards of local workers in recent years. They have learnt to cherish their health as well as their safety.
Apart from conducting the above-mentioned courses and seminars, the OSHC has been purchasing books and information materials on the subject of occupational health to ensure that equal attention is paid to occupational health and safety. For example, the OSHC library, which is open to the public, contains a very comprehensive
collection of reference material on "Occupational Health" and "Toxicology". The opening hours of this library has recently been extended to make its facilities more accessible to members of the public.
The Education and Research Committee and the Trade Safety and Health Committee of the OSHC also have plans to launch a series of research programmes on various aspects of occupational health. These include the eye problem of electronics workers, indoor air quality of commercial buildings, and problems of the catering industry, such as carcinogenic substances in and smoke from aged cooking oil. Employees will be encouraged to participate actively in these programmes.
Apart from these, the OSHC will continue to attach importance to its publicity programmes so as to enhance the knowledge and awareness of employees in occupational safety and health. These efforts will include producing promotional advertisements to be screened on television and in cinemas, organizing exhibitions, distributing posters, publishing articles on occupational health in major newspapers and magazines as well as preparing and issuing health guidelines to employees and so on.
The OSHC has recently set up two safety and health committees for the catering industry and the transport and physical distribution industry. There are now a total of eight committees for eight different trades under the OSHC. The two new committees are beginning to bear fruit in their endeavours to upgrade the safety and health standards of employees in their respective industries. The OSHC will gradually
extend its scope of service to further improve the safety and health conditions of employees when a surplus and additional funds are available in future.
To enhance the standards of occupational safety and health is the responsibility of both the employees and employers. Shortly after its establishment, the OSHC has introduced an "Occupational Safety and Health Employees' Participation Scheme" to provide funds and assistance to labour organizations interested in organizing
publicity and educational activities on occupational safety and health. It is hoped that these organizations can help arouse the awareness of workers in different districts and different trades to the importance of occupational safety and health, and educate them on how to protect themselves in the course of work.
If the safety and health of employees are to be more effectively safeguarded, o
rganized efforts must be made within enterprises in addition to general publicit y and educational campaigns. Employers can consider providing financial support for employees to set up organizations such as safety groups to play an educatio nal and promotional role, or encourage their staff to apply to the OSHC for funds for this purpose. May I take this opportunity to remind employers not to overlook the importance of ensuring the safety and health of their employees. As you,
honourable colleagues, may be aware, it was reported in the newspapers of 11 April this year that a warehouse worker fell to the ground from the cockloft while he was handling goods and broke his vertebra rendering him a quadriplegic. This employee subsequently took civil action against the employer for negligence on his part to provide safety measures. The case ended with an out of court settlement, and the plaintiff was paid $6.5 million as compensation. I refer to this particular case
because I hope to alert the employers and urge them to pay more attention to the safety and health of their employees. They should allocate more resources to improve the working environment of workers, or they may run the risk of suffering greater losses.
Sir, may I appeal to various sectors of our community and relevant government departments to devote their concerted efforts and take positive steps towards promoting occupational safety and health and creating a safe and healthy working environment for the employees, with a view to fostering the economic development of our society.
I can assure Members that the Occupational Safety and Health Council will try its best to carry out its responsibilities. I would like to thank every Member who have spoken and is going to speak in today's debate. We have listened carefully to many views -- many more will be coming later in the debate -- and will try our best to give them support. Nevertheless, I would like to make it very clear that the Council has established for only two years or so. Due to limited resources and in order to avoid duplication of efforts, we need to have a clear division of labour with the Government. The Council has its well-defined scope of duties which of course can be expanded. But time is a factor. We need more time to establish our authority which, I believe, will be instrumental to an effective discharge of our duties. Given the short history of the Council, we regret to say that we cannot direct resources to every aspect of work but have to rely on priority.
Sir, with these remarks, I support the motion.
MR HUI (in Cantonese): Sir, from the investment point of view, human resources has all along been the most valuable resources in Hong Kong. This is why no one would ever object to the principle that the Government should spend more public money on training various talents. However, I think the manpower policy of the Government is still short of being comprehensive. At least there is not yet a proper approach to facilitate the speedy recovery of those who have temporarily lost their working ability so that they can soon return to the productive work force of Hong Kong. On the other hand, as the saying goes, "prevention is better than cure". But I do not think the Government has done a thorough job in this respect. At least it does not always have the foresight to take the lead. More often than not, they would look for solutions hastily only when problems arise.
In today's debate, I would like to focus on two particular aspects, namely the prevention of occupational diseases and rehabilitation, for prevention and rehabilitation constitute the fundamental philosophy of the social work profession.
From what I understand, when a worker temporarily loses his working ability because he has contracted occupational disease or because he suffers physical disability as a result of industrial accident, it seems that all the Government can do for him is to arrange for a doctor to assess the degree to which he has lost his earning potential, and then require the employer or the insurance company to pay compensation in accordance of the law. Even though medical staff can help the worker to recuperate or perform orthopedic surgery for him so that he can still perform certain basic movements and medical staff or social workers based at the hospital can also offer him various kinds of counselling, all these care services are available only during his stay in the hospital. As soon as he is discharged from the hospital, he himself would have to face the hardship of adaptation and the problem of how to recover his working ability to earn his living.
Because of the lack of adequate occupational rehabilitation services and in particular occupational and skill training, even if he still possesses working ability to a certain extent and wishes to make his own living, the worker cannot return to his original job or find a new job and hence has to resign to accepting the meagre financial assistance from the Government. From the angle of human resources, he is not fully rehabilitated and the work force of our society has lost the contribution of one of its workers. On the contrary, he would become a burden of the Government. This is indeed regrettable.
To address the problem, I am of the opinion that the Government should take up the full responsibility of developing rehabilitation services so that those who have temporarily or permanently lost part of their ability to work can have simple chances to join the work force again. This is not only part of the basic human right, but is also a basic step in building up their self confidence and self esteem. One
possible way is to follow the approach of manpower training in other advanced countries, to provide special occupational counselling and skill training for injured or ill workers discharged from hospitals. Also, experienced social workers can offer more than psychological counselling service. They can assist the clients to return to their job or seek new employment after refreshing their skills.
Nevertheless, prevention is always better than cure. This is a universally
applicable truth. The Labour Department has indeed poured much resources in the past through various channels and means such as publication of pamphlets, organization of seminars and talks, and demonstration in factories to publicize the importance of prevention work and the ways to go about it. Yet one cannot help feeling that either these efforts are inadequate or they come too late. This can be reflected from the fact that many of the industrial accidents each year are repeat of past disasters and the fact that work codes were only drafted after asbestos was found to be harmful.
Indeed, at a time when the production process is becoming more and more sophisticated, the Government must have the foresight to assume its role in this regard. It must break out of the constraints posed by traditions in order that education work on prevention can be more forward-looking. One possible approach is for the officer in charge to contact employers and employees of different trades to get a better understanding of the potential risk or possible occupational diseases associated with the production process. They can then solicit views of doctors and experts before deciding what prevention work and steps should be carried out.
On the other hand, according to existing policy, the prevention of occupational diseases or industrial accident is the common responsibility of the Government, the employers, and the employees. Though there is nothing wrong with this viewpoint, but the undeniable facts are that there are still some employers who for various reasons do not provide necessary prevention and safety facilities for the employees, and that quite a number of employees disregard the established safety procedures or facilities for the sake of convenience. Therefore the Government should step up surprise inspection and strengthen enforcement and penalties in relevant legislation in due course. Only by so doing can better result of preventive work be achieved.
Furthermore, for the sake of effective performance of industrial safety work, I would have to say a few words about the Occupational Health and Safety Council before concluding my speech. It is my view that owing to restriction of its terms of reference, the OHSC has never been able to realize its full role and live up to its name. Some would even have the impression that the OHSC is some sort of window dressing of the Government. I think the Government should adopt the same system as the Health and Safety Commission in the United Kingdom. The OHSC should be given the power to discuss policies and propose amendments to legislation on occupational health and safety.
Sir, with these remarks, I support the motion.
MR PANG (in Cantonese): Sir, economic development in Hong Kong has won international status for a long time and it is expected that our industrial and commercial sectors will continue to develop. However, this has brought about problems of industrial safety and inadequate prevention of occupational diseases. All along, the
Government has only introduced remedies after industrial accidents have occurred. Yet these remedies often fall short of our expectations and as they usually deal with industrial accidents, the prevention of occupational diseases has been overlooked.
Information given by the Director of Health to this Council last December has revealed that the Government is only passively relying on:
(A) reports from doctors, employers and employees;
(B) surveys conducted by the Occupational Health Division alone or jointly with the two universities.
The Government has frankly admitted that to rely on the above two channels for reliable information is largely ineffective. It can be seen that the Government has not been positive enough in devising a policy for the prevention of industrial accidents and occupational diseases. In fact, it lacks a comprehensive set of strategies and proposals.
It is common knowledge that prevention is better than cure. One can understand that industrial accidents and occupational diseases do not only mean sufferings to the victims and their families, but also burden to society.
I therefore urge the Government to set up an inter-departmental working group t
o conduct comprehensive surveys on occupational diseases which have already been identified or yet to be identified among employees of various industries and tr ades in Hong Kong. In addition, reference data from other advanced countries sh ould be analysed. As far as I know, countries like Japan, Singapore and Korea h ave placed great emphasis on occupational health and safety and thorough studies have been conducted. Japan in particular keeps amending its industrial safety and health laws promulgated in 1972 to tie in with social changes. Amendments made in
1975, 1977, 1980 and 1987 were aimed at the working environment, occupational diseases, the safety aspect of the construction industry and measures to promote occupational health and curb industrial accidents. This series of improvement measures has been
extremely successful and the project carried out in 1988 contributed to the realization of systematic safety and health management. The working group as proposed by myself should have its members appointed by you, Sir, including officials from the Education and Manpower Branch and the Health and Welfare Branch, representatives from the employers and the employees, and professionals well versed in occupational diseases. Moreover, the working group should prepare a comprehensive report at regular intervals with a view to:
(1) providing information for the Government when drafting new legislation or reviewing the Employees' Compensation Ordinance;
(2) reminding employers of the need to improve the working environment and to pay attention to the effect of improper processes on the health of workers; (3) educating employees on safety at work and prevention of occupational diseases that may be contracted in the workplace.
The Government, employers, employees and trade unions all have the responsibility of promoting occupational health and safety. Only through our concerted efforts can the present situation be greatly improved. The Government should amend outdated laws and introduce new provisions to safeguard employees' health. Apart from this, the Government is duty-bound to urgently conduct studies on the prevention of
occupational diseases and launch positive and effective publicity as well as educational campaigns on the subject.
Employers should also undertake to establish a management system in relation to safety and health, providing employees with channels to reflect their views.
To recognize the importance of their safety at work and the protection of health, employees need to acquire adequate knowledge in these respects. Trade unions should also have a duty to reflect views and assist the Government, employers and employees in promoting occupational safety and health.
Sir, with these remarks, I support the motion.
PROF. POON: Sir, it is indeed most timely and opportune for us to debate on the motion of occupational health on this Labour Day when the Administration has just released one of its most comprehensive Green Papers aiming at the overhauling of our primary health care system.
For the past decade, Hong Kong has come through an era of political and economic uncertainty. For better or for worse, our society's attention during this period has been heavily concentrated on the investors, the entrepreneurs and the professionals. Incentives and plans, both public and private, are everywhere to attract these unique groups to stay on and be contributive to Hong Kong. While not undermining the social significance of these moves, it is extremely sad to realize that over 90% of the 2.8 million work force, which forms the backbone of our economy, have been the least attended to and the least encouraged group in our society.
In the past three decades, industrial accidents and diseases have been largely perceived as individual misfortunes, personal negligence or worst still, the costs of survival in Hong Kong! We do not yet have an exact estimate of the social opportunity costs of these personal misfortunes, but we do know that in the years to come, Hong Kong's labour force can no longer afford these costs. To do so, we must be able to provide a healthy and safe working environment, one which workers find security and protection; as well as satisfaction and achievement.
Undoubtedly progress has been made in the last few years in terms of legislation. The Factories and Industrial Undertaking Ordinance (Amendment) 1989 enacted in December 1990 is stringent and it does impose on employers definite responsibilities concerning the safety and health of their employees whilst at work.
A start has already been made in requiring specialists and skilled persons to be registered and this is to be encouraged and the process accelerated. The setting up of the Occupational Safety and Health Council is an initiative opening the way for further advances.
According to Labour Department statistics, in 1989 there were some 53 000 r
eported industrial accidents. Amongst these, almost half, to be exact, 47% were related to the construction industry. Textile industry and machine manufacturi ng crowned the second and the third largest group respectively. The fatal accident statistics show that the construction industry is even more dangerous. In 1990, 78
workers died as a result of industrial accidents, among which 58 workers (74%) were in the construction industry. Apart from the industrial accidents, it is worth noting that over the past decade, the number of non-industrial injuries has increased 1.7 times, indicating that injury numbers in non-industrial settings, that is, the service sector, the white collars, are increasing rapidly. In addition, in any one year, the average total number of days lost due to injuries amounts to roughly 660
000. In 1990, death arising out of accidental injury and poisoning was 1 737, although the figure comprises death other than industrial accidents. Now with this broad statistical scenario in mind, I think I have no doubt that much remains to be done to improve the state of health and safety of our working population.
In Hong Kong, the major responsibility of ensuring safety and health for workers rest with two divisions within the Labour Department, that is, the Factory Inspectorate Division and the Occupational Health Division. Whilst I would pay tribute to the long and untiring efforts of the Commissioner for Labour and his team of Factory Inspectors, it is a fact that inadequate manpower resources have not enabled the two divisions to carry out their duties sufficiently. This I believe is a problem which Government alone cannot be expected to cure. It is one which requires much greater effort from us all whatever our occupations, and whatever our level!
My honourable colleague, Mr HO Sai-chu, Chairman of the Occupational Health and Safety Council, in his annual report of the Council stated that:
"the positive interest of industry and the public community is more likely to achieve higher standards and more durable results than an inspection and enforcement system acting in isolation".
I fully agree with Mr HO's statement and firmly believe that education is more important in the long run than legislation, although both are necessary. The key factor in improving matter, in both the long and short term, is undoubtedly education of a kind leading naturally and voluntarily to the acceptance of the need by employers to employ qualified persons and to provide safe working places and by employees to work in a safe manner.
Amongst the 26 pieces of legislation which Hong Kong now has to protect and pre vent occupational hazards, only three pieces of legislation are directly related to disease prevention (namely: asbestos; carcinogenic substances; and Notificat ion of Occupational Diseases), while 90% of them are related directly to injury