HONG KONG LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL — 15 February 1995 1957 OFFICIAL RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Wednesday, 15 February 1995
The Council met at half-past Two o'clock
PRESENT
THE PRESIDENT
THE HONOURABLE SIR JOHN SWAINE, C.B.E., LL.D., Q.C., J.P.
THE CHIEF SECRETARY
THE HONOURABLE MRS ANSON CHAN, C.B.E., J.P.
THE FINANCIAL SECRETARY
THE HONOURABLE SIR NATHANIEL WILLIAM HAMISH MACLEOD, K.B.E., 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 MRS SELINA CHOW LIANG SHUK-YEE, O.B.E., J.P. THE HONOURABLE HUI YIN-FAT, O.B.E., J.P.
THE HONOURABLE MARTIN LEE CHU-MING, Q.C., J.P.
DR THE HONOURABLE DAVID LI KWOK-PO, O.B.E., LL.D., J.P. THE HONOURABLE PANG CHUN-HOI, M.B.E.
THE HONOURABLE SZETO WAH
THE HONOURABLE TAM YIU-CHUNG
THE HONOURABLE ANDREW WONG WANG-FAT, O.B.E., J.P.
THE HONOURABLE EDWARD HO SING-TIN, O.B.E., J.P.
THE HONOURABLE MARTIN GILBERT BARROW, O.B.E., J.P.
THE HONOURABLE MRS PEGGY LAM, O.B.E., J.P.
THE HONOURABLE MRS MIRIAM LAU KIN-YEE, O.B.E., J.P.
1958 HONG KONG LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL — 15 February 1995 THE HONOURABLE LAU WAH-SUM, O.B.E., J.P.
DR THE HONOURABLE LEONG CHE-HUNG, O.B.E., J.P. THE HONOURABLE JAMES DAVID McGREGOR, O.B.E., I.S.O., J.P. THE HONOURABLE MRS ELSIE TU, C.B.E.
THE HONOURABLE PETER WONG HONG-YUEN, O.B.E., J.P. THE HONOURABLE ALBERT CHAN WAI-YIP
THE HONOURABLE VINCENT CHENG HOI-CHUEN, O.B.E., J.P. THE HONOURABLE MOSES CHENG MO-CHI
THE HONOURABLE MARVIN CHEUNG KIN-TUNG, O.B.E., J.P. THE HONOURABLE CHEUNG MAN-KWONG
THE HONOURABLE CHIM PUI-CHUNG
REV THE HONOURABLE FUNG CHI-WOOD
THE HONOURABLE FREDERICK FUNG KIN-KEE
THE HONOURABLE TIMOTHY HA WING-HO, M.B.E., J.P. THE HONOURABLE MICHAEL HO MUN-KA
DR THE HONOURABLE HUANG CHEN-YA
THE HONOURABLE SIMON IP SIK-ON, O.B.E., J.P.
DR THE HONOURABLE LAM KUI-CHUN
DR THE HONOURABLE CONRAD LAM KUI-SHING, J.P. THE HONOURABLE EMILY LAU WAI-HING
THE HONOURABLE LEE WING-TAT
THE HONOURABLE ERIC LI KA-CHEUNG, J.P.
THE HONOURABLE FRED LI WAH-MING
THE HONOURABLE MAN SAI-CHEONG
THE HONOURABLE STEVEN POON KWOK-LIM
HONG KONG LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL — 15 February 1995 1959 THE HONOURABLE TIK CHI-YUEN
THE HONOURABLE JAMES TO KUN-SUN
DR THE HONOURABLE SAMUEL WONG PING-WAI, M.B.E., J.P. DR THE HONOURABLE PHILIP WONG YU-HONG
DR THE HONOURABLE YEUNG SUM
THE HONOURABLE HOWARD YOUNG, J.P.
THE HONOURABLE ZACHARY WONG WAI-YIN
DR THE HONOURABLE TANG SIU-TONG, J.P.
THE HONOURABLE CHRISTINE LOH KUNG-WAI
THE HONOURABLE ROGER LUK KOON-HOO
THE HONOURABLE ANNA WU HUNG-YUK
THE HONOURABLE JAMES TIEN PEI-CHUN, O.B.E., J.P.
THE HONOURABLE ALFRED TSO SHIU-WAI
THE HONOURABLE LEE CHEUK-YAN
ABSENT
THE HONOURABLE NGAI SHIU-KIT, O.B.E., J.P.
THE HONOURABLE LAU WONG-FAT, O.B.E., J.P.
THE HONOURABLE RONALD JOSEPH ARCULLI, O.B.E., J.P.
THE HONOURABLE HENRY TANG YING-YEN, J.P.
IN ATTENDANCE
MR RONALD JAMES BLAKE, J.P.
SECRETARY FOR WORKS
THE HONOURABLE MICHAEL SZE CHO-CHEUNG, I.S.O., J.P.
SECRETARY FOR THE CIVIL SERVICE
MR ANTHONY GORDON EASON, C.B.E., J.P.
SECRETARY FOR PLANNING, ENVIRONMENT AND LANDS
1960 HONG KONG LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL — 15 February 1995
MR HAIDER HATIM TYEBJEE BARMA, I.S.O., J.P.
SECRETARY FOR TRANSPORT
MR GORDON SIU KWING-CHUE, J.P.
SECRETARY FOR ECONOMIC SERVICES
MR MICHAEL DAVID CARTLAND, J.P.
SECRETARY FOR FINANCIAL SERVICES
MR JOSEPH WONG WING-PING, J.P.
SECRETARY FOR HOME AFFAIRS
MR PETER LAI HING-LING, J.P.
SECRETARY FOR SECURITY
THE CLERK TO THE LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL
MR RICKY FUNG CHOI-CHEUNG
THE DEPUTY SECRETARY GENERAL
MR LAW KAM-SANG
HONG KONG LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL — 15 February 1995 1961 PAPERS
The following papers were laid on the table pursuant to Standing Order 14(2): Subject
Subsidiary Legislation L.N. No.
Hospital Authority Ordinance (Amendment of
Schedule 2) Order 1995................................................................ 25/95
Places for Post-Mortem Examination (Amendment)
Order 1995.................................................................................... 26/95 Adoption (Amendment) Rules 1995..................................................... 27/95
Employees' Compensation (Amendment)
Ordinance 1995 (1 of 1995) (Commencement)
Notice 1995 .................................................................................. 28/95
Waste Disposal (Charges for Disposal of Chemical
Waste) Regulation ........................................................................ 30/95
Official Languages (Alteration of Text)
(Education Ordinance) Order 1995............................................... 31/95
Kowloon-Canton Railway (Restricted Area)
Notice 1995 .................................................................................. 32/95
Boundary and Election Commission (Nominations
Advisory Committee) Regulation................................................. 33/95
Commodities Trading (Trading Limits and Position
Limits) Rules ................................................................................ 34/95
Declaration of Change of Titles (University and
Polytechnic Grants Committee and Secretary
General, University and Polytechnic Grants
Committee) Notice 1995 .............................................................. 35/95 Specification of Public Office .............................................................. 36/95
Official Languages (Authentic Chinese Text)
(Land Development Corporation Ordinance)
Order ............................................................................................ (C)7/95
1962 HONG KONG LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL — 15 February 1995
Official Languages (Authentic Chinese Text)
(Gambling Ordinance) Order........................................................ (C)8/95
Official Languages (Authentic Chinese Text)
(Education Ordinance) Order ....................................................... (C)9/95
Sessional Papers 1994-95
No. 63 — Regional Council Estimates of Revenue and
Expenditure for the year ending 31 March 1996
No. 64 — Report of the Public Accounts Committee on the Report of the Director of Audit on the Accounts of the Hong Kong Government for the year ended 31 March 1994 and the Results of Value for Money
Audits (January 1995 — PAC Report No. 23)
OATH
MR LEE CHEUK-YAN took the Legislative Council Oath.
ADDRESSES
Waterworks (Amendment) Regulation 1995
MR FRED LI (in Cantonese): Mr President, thank you for giving me this opportunity to speak on an amended regulation for this year's water charges increases. With effect from 16 February this year, the Government will increase water charges, domestic cash deposits for all new accounts, charges for connection and other miscellaneous services. Regarding measures for water charges increases, I would like to take this opportunity to speak in two different capacities. Firstly, as the Chairman of a subcommittee set up to study the abovementioned regulation, I will state the subcommittee's position. Then I will speak on behalf of the Democratic Party and put forward our views on water charges.
The subcommittee has made two proposals in relation to the proposed increases. Firstly, the existing cross subsidy of non-domestic users by domestic users is found to be unacceptable. At present, water charges for trade purposes have fallen short of the net production cost. The Government proposes to eliminate the cross subsidy in three years' time, that is by 1998-99, with a 3-4% differential rate of increase annually between domestic and non-domestic supply.
HONG KONG LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL — 15 February 1995 1963
Members understood that the proposed 7% increase in domestic water charges together with the changes to the tariff structure would result in an increase of 0.02% in the Consumer Price Index, whereas for the manufacturing sector as a whole, the proposed 10.5% increase in water charges would only increase production cost by 0.02%. We can see that the proposed increases will only exert a very slight pressure on the trade sector. For this reason, the subcommittee considered that the proposed time-frame for eliminating the cross subsidy was too conservative and recommended that it be advanced by two years, that is, to 1996-97.
Subsequent to the meeting, the Administration expressed that it had no objection to this proposal and would recommend it to the Executive Council and the Legislative Council in the next review of the water charges timetable.
Secondly, the present tiered tariff structure for domestic supplies is unfair to those large families housed in small units which tend to have high water consumption but low income. Members urged the Administration to examine how this group can be assisted. The Government has agreed to look for ways to protect such families and will obtain information on such households from the Housing Department for Members' reference.
Since the Government has accepted our first proposal and agreed to consider the second one, the subcommittee has decided not to raise objection to the water charges proposal. However, the subcommittee has reservations about the target return rate of 8% to be achieved in the longer term, and will continue to study this issue.
So far as the Democratic Party is concerned, we consider that the Administration has to differentiate clearly its target consumers when considering water charges increases. To start with, for the general users, water is more a basic necessity than a means of production. Therefore, the Administration should not aim at seeking a commercial return of 8%. At the same time, fees and charges imposed by the Government should be in line with the principle of reallocating resources and narrowing the gap between the rich and the poor. Therefore, the Administration must not seek frequent increases of water charges on the simple ground that the charges represent only a small fraction of household expenditures. It has the responsibility to provide this service even if it is provided on a subsidized basis. Of course, the Democratic Party is not advocating free water supply. What it recommends is only a "reasonable level" of water charges, which will prevent water wastage on the one hand and encourage effective allocation of resources on the other. The "reasonable level" we are referring to is in fact an upper limit to the recoverable operating cost. We believe the newly increased domestic charges should have been able to make up for the operating cost. Therefore, the Government should not impose any additional burden on the public by substantially raising water charges in furture.
1964 HONG KONG LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL — 15 February 1995
The Democratic Party holds that as water is conducive to profit-making purpose by the trade sector, the Government should not subsidize these users for such purpose. Presently, these users are charged $4.14 for every unit of water consumption and even if the charges are increased to $4.58 per unit, this is still far below the net production cost of $5.48. The charges are in fact at the lower end and are not reasonable either. The water charges levied on users of the trade sector should be based on cost recovery and a reasonable return rate.
In conclusion, it is the Democratic Party's view that water charges levied on the commercial sector should be calculated on a commercial basis, and that cross subsidy of non-domestic users by domestic users should be eliminated as quickly as possible. Also, any future increases in domestic water charges should be fixed on the basis of not exceeding the operating cost.
Mr President, these are my remarks.
Report of the Public Accounts Committee on the Report of the Director of Audit on the Accounts of the Hong Kong Government for the year ended 31 March 1994 and the Results of Value for Money Audits (January 1995 — PAC Report No. 23)
MR PETER WONG: Mr President, on behalf of the Public Accounts Committee, I have the honour to table the Committee's Report No. 23 today.
This Report takes stock of the actions and responses by the Administration in respect of the recommendations made by the Committee in our previous reports. It also covers the Committee's consideration of the issues raised in the Director of Audit's Report No. 23 on the accounts of the Hong Kong Government for the year ended 31 March 1994 and on the results of the value for money audits. The comments of the Committee and the conclusions reached on the various subjects considered are fully set out in the Report tabled.
I would like to highlight a few issues which are of particular concern to the Committee. On the subject of "Sale of a commercial site in Garden Road" covered in our Report No. 21A, the Committee have noted the Administration's response in the Government Minute tabled in this Council on 12 October 1994. We are, however, extremely concerned with the Administration's conclusion that there is "no evidence to suggest any bad faith on the part of those involved" and that "although the judgement of some of the officers concerned might, with hindsight, be questioned, imperfect judgement does not constitute misconduct warranting disciplinary action". It is our worry that the Administration's conclusion will send out an undesirable message that if there is no evidence of "bad faith", then an officer's wrong doing of whatever degree of blame will always be tolerated and that Government officials will never have to be accountable for their action.
HONG KONG LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL — 15 February 1995 1965
Another general issue which I wish to bring out concerns the papers submitted to the Executive Council and the Legislative Council. In our consideration of the Director of Audit's Report No. 23 concerning the subjects on "Direct subsidy scheme", "Monthly expenses allowances paid to Legislative Council Members" and "Tai Po Sewage Treatment Works Stage IVA — process modification", we notice a common problem of the failure of the controlling officers concerned to provide sufficient information in their papers submitted to the Executive or Legislative Council. We consider it important that the two Councils should be provided with sufficient as well as relevant and pertinent information in order that they could make a fair and accurate assessment on the matters put before them. We also find that this problem with information papers occurred not only in submissions made to the Executive and Legislative Councils, but also those submitted to the Housing Authority. The fact that there is a significant difference between the actual performance and the target performance measures in the implementation of the Batch Payment System in the processing of minor works orders submitted by the Housing Department to the Housing Authority respectively in 1987 and 1988 does cause concern to the Committee. We note that this is not the first time that unrealistic figures were provided to the Housing Authority and we have expressed concern on the same problem in the last PAC report on the subject of "Provision and utilization of space in the Housing Authority Headquarters Building". We urge that such incidents should not happen again in future.
Notwithstanding the above, I would like to put on record the Committee's appreciation of the positive attitude adopted by the Administration towards the recommendations of the Director of Audit and towards the implementation of many of our Committee's recommendations in previous reports. In considering the subject on "The adequacy and quality of financial and performance information provided by the Government to the Legislative Council", the Committee are pleased to note the Secretary for the Treasury's advice that he accepted the many recommendations made by the Director of Audit and that efforts are being made to improve the presentation of financial and performance information to the Legislative Council. We look forward to changes in the right direction.
Finally, I would also like to take this opportunity to inform Members that the Committee has decided to adopt new arrangements in receiving the Director of Audit's report starting from April this year. In the past, PAC Members received advance copies of the Director of Audit's report about three weeks prior to its tabling in the Council, so that we could move quickly and start early preparation of the public hearings which were usually held within days after the tabling of the report. The previous arrangement gave us extra working time but also put us under immense pressure from the media for the report contents to be made public, particularly after partial leakage occurred in the media. To address the problem, we now decide that henceforth all Members of the Council, including PAC members, and the media, will receive the Director of Audit's report on the day of its tabling in the Council. Although this means that
1966 HONG KONG LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL — 15 February 1995
the Committee will have to work under a very tight schedule in future, on balance, we still feel that it is worth adopting the new arrangement.
Thank you, Mr President.
ORAL ANSWERS TO QUESTIONS
Financial Assistance to Mutual Aid Committees
1. MR SZETO WAH asked (in Cantonese): Mr President, in regard to the financial assistance granted to Mutual Aid Committees (MACs), will the Government inform this Council:
(a) of the amount of financial assistance currently granted to MACs each month;
(b) when this amount was last revised; and
(c) whether there are any plans to increase the amount; if so, when it will be increased?
SECRETARY FOR HOME AFFAIRS (in Cantonese): Mr President, financial assistance is given by Government to MACs to help meet the costs of running the MAC offices. It covers such expenditure items as telephone rental, electricity charges, office furniture and equipment and stationery. The current level of subsidy, up to a maximum of $700 per quarter, was set in 1988. It has been kept under regular review.
We have recently initiated a review on the level of subsidy and aim to complete the exercise as soon as possible.
MR SZETO WAH (in Cantonese): Mr President, the brevity of the answer given just now seems to have broken the record. Therefore, I will be asking more subsequent questions. Firstly, seven years had lapsed since 1988, why did the Government initiate a review after such a long period of time? The Secretary mentioned in his answer the so-called "regular" review, does it refer to a regular period of seven years? Or is the review conducted on an indefinite basis and the idea of conducting a review only cropped up as a result of my question? Secondly, what is the cumulative inflation rate over the past seven years? Will "reimbursement" be granted as compensation for failure to increase the level of subsidy over the past seven years? Thirdly, can a mechanism be established in future ......
HONG KONG LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL — 15 February 1995 1967
PRESIDENT: Mr SZETO Wah, can I suggest you put your questions one by one so that the Secretary can answer them properly.
MR SZETO WAH (in Cantonese): This is the last question. Thirdly, can a mechanism be established in future to revise the level of subsidy according to the inflation rate once every year?
PRESIDENT: Secretary, if you want any of the questions repeated, I am sure they will be.
SECRETARY FOR HOME AFFAIRS (in Cantonese): Mr President, in regard to the first question put forward by the Honourable SZETO Wah, we did review the level of subsidy since 1988. The latest review was conducted in 1993, the result of which showed that the upper level of subsidy of $700 per quarter was sufficient to meet most of the needs of MACs. As a matter of fact, according to our record, the result of the said review had been submitted to Members for reference when the 1993-94 Budget was examined.
As regards Mr SZETO Wah's second question, we will of course take into account inflation figures for the recent years in our present review. The change in prices of those items I have mentioned will certainly be taken into account as well. Other factors such as the practical needs of MACs will also be considered. At the same time, of course, we have to bear in mind the problem of resources.
Regarding the third question on whether we will consider establishing a mechanism of review, we will take Mr SZETO Wah's advice and consider the suggestion in detail in the forthcoming review.
MR LEE WING-TAT (in Cantonese): Mr President, MACs were set up by the Home Affairs Department (HAD) for the residents. MACs are, therefore, like babies of the HAD. Regrettably, these babies are not fed with adequate milk powder and they are being treated like abandoned babies. During my visits to many MACs, I received complaints to the effect that the allowance of $700 per quarter was a shameful assistance. Let us take Kwai Tsing District Board as an example. Each District Board is granted $10 million each year, whilst each MAC only $700 per quarter. Will the Government inform us whether any survey, by way of issuing enquiry letters, has been conducted to see if there is adequate "milk powder" to feed all those "babies"?
SECRETARY FOR HOME AFFAIRS (in Cantonese): Mr President, as I have said in my reply to Mr SZETO Wah's questions, we will take into account the practical needs of MACs in the forthcoming review. The conclusion drawn
1968 HONG KONG LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL — 15 February 1995
from the 1993 review was that two-third of the MACs applying for subsidy asked for an amount below the ceiling of $700. It was on this basis that we arrived at the conclusion in 1993 that the subsidy ceiling was not to be revised for the time being. Nevertheless, as I have just said, we are in the process of initiating a review on the level of subsidy, and we will surely consider the suggestions proposed by MACs.
In the meantime, I would like to point out, if I may, that our subsidy to MACs is not only limited to the quarterly subsidy of $700. For example, the Government will, on receiving an application, grant a lump sum subsidy of $700 go to a MAC for setting up its office. At the same time, we also assist the MACs in applying for subsidies from the General Chinese Charities Fund for renovating the offices and from the Sir David Trench Fund for Recreation for organizing sports and recreational activities. And, as Mr LEE just said, we attach great importance to the work of MACs. Therefore, apart from financial assistance, our staff will also offer a lot of assistance and advice to MACs in respect of the setting up, activities and operation of the offices. Of course, individual MAC may apply to the District Boards for funds for organizing activities. What I mainly wish to stress is that the Government attaches importance to MACs and has provided them with financial as well as other forms of assistance in various aspects.
PRESIDENT: Not answered, Mr LEE?
MR LEE WING-TAT (in Cantonese): Mr President, the Secretary for Home Affairs has not answered my question. My question is whether any survey has been conducted, for example, by issuing enquiry letters to all MACs, to see if the financial assistance in the amount of $700 per quarter is sufficient? Mr WONG said two-third of the MACs applied for subsidy and one-third did not. The reason for this is that since MACs can only get $700 each quarter despite all those complicated procedures, they simply do not wish to apply. Will the Government inform us whether any enquiry has been made with MACs to see if the financial assistance in the amount of $700 per quarter is sufficient?
SECRETARY FOR HOME AFFAIRS (in Cantonese): Mr President, we have not made any enquiry in this regard. But as far as we know, a number of MACs in public housing estates do apply to the Government for financial assistance. The figure I just provided referred to the figure of 1993. Now we are proceeding with a review on subsidy for MACs. We will collect relevant data to see how many applications made so far by MACs for subsidy exceeded the existing ceiling of $700.
HONG KONG LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL — 15 February 1995 1969
MR FREDERICK FUNG (in Cantonese): Mr President, the Secretary has just mentioned that, apart from the subsidy of $700, MACs may also apply for funding from the District Boards. As far as public housing estates are concerned, usually one estate consists of several or a dozen blocks of building, which means that there will be several or a dozen MACs altogether. It is not easy for these MACs to apply individually for funds from District Boards every year. The usual practice is to make a joint application. The review mentioned by the Secretary has not touched upon the financial assistance given to MACs for organizing activities for their own block of building. Will the Government consider granting a basic amount of subsidy to MACs in the forthcoming review?
PRESIDENT: Secretary, have you got all that?
SECRETARY FOR HOME AFFAIRS (in Cantonese): Mr President, in the present review, we mainly target at the issue on whether the quarterly subsidy of $700 has to be revised. There were indeed a number of MACs making applications jointly or through an organization to the District Boards for funding activities. It is not our intention, however, to include this aspect in our present review. In fact, MACs are not only of great help to our work — that is also the reason why the Government and the HAD attach great importance to their work — their establishment, organization and operation are also of assistance to the residents to a certain extent. In this regard, apart from applying for funds from the authorities concerned, MACs may also charge a small amount of fees from the residents for organizing activities. We do not think this to be unreasonable.
MR ALBERT CHAN (in Cantonese): Mr President, I do not know to what extent the Policy Secretaries understand the actual operation of MACs. As far as the question of financial assistance is concerned, not only is the amount unreasonably low, but the scope is rather narrow. For example, expenditure on stamps and tea leaves are outside the scope of subsidy. Whilst the Government keeps on saying how much it respects MACs and what importance it attaches to them, the amount of financial assistance it offers is terribly low, leaving the MACs like "Oliver Twist". In this review, will the Government take into account the operational needs of MACs in practice, such as the fact that MACs in the estates under the Housing Society are required to pay rent and residents have to raise funds to pay for it? Will the Government also consider the practical operational needs of MACs which act as regional organizations for residents and subsequently tie in with the needs as far as the scope of financial assistance is concerned?
1970 HONG KONG LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL — 15 February 1995
SECRETARY FOR HOME AFFAIRS (in Cantonese): Mr President, just then I have listed some of the items which can be included within the scope of financial assistance. In fact, the scope is not that limited. It covers rent, rates, telephone rental, electricity and water charges, stationery, office furniture and equipment, and even photocopy facilities. As to whether tea leaves are included, I have to go back to check with the procedure guidelines. But I think it is not possible for us to include each and every item that we can think of. Sorry, does Mr CHAN have another question?
PRESIDENT: Mr CHAN, would you like to repeat your question please?
MR ALBERT CHAN (in Cantonese): Mr President, I think the Secretary is not clear about the operation of MACs. Maybe he will have a better idea after going back to make a study. The Secretary just mentioned that rent falls within the scope of subsidy. May I ask how much space in square inches can be rented with a quarterly subsidy of $700?
PRESIDENT: I do not think that is a proper question, Mr CHAN. Would you like to put a proper question please?
MR ALBERT CHAN (in Cantonese): Mr President, I have pointed out in my previous question that the scope of financial assistance is narrow. Will the Secretary consider in more detail the practical operational needs of MACs and then review the scope of assistance according to those needs? I think it will be more meaningful to conduct the review in this manner. Will the Secretary for Home Affairs consider this?
SECRETARY FOR HOME AFFAIRS (in Cantonese): Mr President, Mr CHAN said I do not understand the operation of MACs. I certainly cannot agree with him. Take the rent as an example, of course we know the amount of rent depends on the locations of MAC offices. In the case of public housing estates, only a token rent of $1 is charged. In the case of Housing Society estates, the rent will range from a few ten to several hundred dollars, depending on the space occupied. The purpose of my spelling out the scope of subsidy was to prove that the scope is not as narrow as Mr CHAN had claimed. Of course, we will conduct a study to see whether the scope has to be widened to include such items as tea leaves. But we have to bear in mind that the subsidy is public resources. In the course of the review, we have to take into account the needs of MACs on the one hand, and on the other hand, we have to avoid being accused of improperly or unjustifiably subsidizing items not directly related to the operation of MACs.
HONG KONG LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL — 15 February 1995 1971 Rooftop Structures
2. DR YEUNG SUM asked (in Cantonese): Mr President, with regard to rooftop structures, will the Government inform this Council of:
(a) the number of such structures in the territory at present; of these, how many are legal;
(b) the number of illegal rooftop structures assigned through solicitors and registered with the Land Registry in the past five years; and what is the legal justification for the Government permitting such transactions and registration of the assignments;
(c) the number of illegal rooftop structures on which rates are levied; what is the legal justification for levying rates on such structures; and
(d) the rehousing policy for residents of illegal rooftop structures; and whether such policy will be reviewed; if not, why not?
SECRETARY FOR PLANNING, ENVIRONMENT AND LANDS: Mr President, the answers to the nine or 10 parts of this question are as follows:
(a) The Administration has neither counted the number of rooftop structures in the territory, nor determined how many are legal or illegal.
(b) Again, the number of rooftop structures, whether legal or illegal, assigned through solicitors and registered with the Land Registry in the past five years have not been counted.
The Land Registration Ordinance obliges the Land Registry to register any document which affects or appears to affect land. Where a transaction affects a piece of land or an undivided share in the land therefore, this is registered, whether or not a structure, legal or illegal, is involved. Registration of a land transaction does not make an illegal structure legal.
(c) Similarly, the Commissioner of Rating and Valuation does not count the number of illegal rooftop structures which have been assessed to rates. Rates are a tax on the occupation of tenements. Under the Rating Ordinance, a property which can be separately occupied is liable for assessment to rates and its occupants are required to contribute their share of the rates. Whether a structure is legal under the Buildings Ordinance is not relevant; and payment of rates does not bestow legality on it.
1972 HONG KONG LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL — 15 February 1995
(d) Rehousing assistance is offered to the occupants prior to the demolition of unauthorized rooftop structures. The policy is that no one will be rendered homeless as a result of such action. To qualify for public rental housing or for the Home Ownership Scheme, the occupants are required to prove that:
(i) they were living in the rooftop structures on or before 1 June 1982;
(ii) the majority of their family members have been living in Hong Kong for seven years or more; and
(iii) they have not owned any domestic property, not including the concerned rooftop structures, in the last 24 months.
Rooftop occupants who do not meet these criteria are offered rehousing in temporary housing areas. Those who do not satisfy the length of residence requirement but are otherwise eligible may be rehoused in refurbished flats in older estates.
Subject to a recommendation being made by the Social Welfare Department, compassionate rehousing in either public housing or local temporary housing may also be offered on the basis of need.
The existing policy is fair and reasonable and the Government does not see any need for a review. Any change in policy in respect of one group, such as those affected by the demolition of rooftop structures, would be unfair and to the disadvantage of others, such as those in the queue for public housing units. Even the suggestion of a possibility of a policy change would encourage more illegal structures to be built and thereby increase the number of people living in risky conditions. We need to avoid giving encouragement to any action which would make the situation worse.
DR YEUNG SUM (in Cantonese): Mr President, the Government has just pointed out in paragraph three of its reply that "under the Rating Ordinance, a property which can be separately occupied is liable for assessment to rates and its occupants are required to contribute their share of the rates." Is the property mentioned in the Ordinance basically referring to a legal property? If the Government thinks that some of the rooftop structures are illegal, will it review its policy of levying rates on illegal structures?
SECRETARY FOR PLANNING, ENVIRONMENT AND LANDS: Mr President, I think the effect of such a review would result in those who live in legal structures paying rates and those who live in illegal structures not paying. I think there would be considerable inequity in such a solution.
HONG KONG LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL — 15 February 1995 1973
MR LEE CHEUK-YAN (in Cantonese): Mr President, one of the conditions mentioned by the Secretary for Planning, Environment and Lands for qualifying for public rental housing or for the Home Ownership Scheme is that the occupants must be living in the rooftop structures on or before 1 June 1982. Will the Secretary inform this Council why cases of squatter occupants were treated with flexibility? For example, residents of the Fu Yung Shan squatter area only moved into the area after 1 June 1982 but were granted local rehousing, whereas rooftop occupants have not been treated with the same flexibility and granted local rehousing as their squatter counterparts?
As regards my second question, the Secretary for Planning, Environment and Lands just said that any action that would aggravate the situation of rooftop structures should not be encouraged. However, it is found that some estate agents are selling rooftop structures. Is there any legislation at present that controls the sale of illegal rooftop structures by these estate agents or groups? If not, will the Government consider enacting legislation to prevent the estate agents or groups from selling illegal rooftop structures?
PRESIDENT: Two questions there, Secretary.
SECRETARY FOR PLANNING, ENVIRONMENT AND LANDS: Mr President, I think the answer to the first question is clearly the one that I have already given: Any change in the guidelines affecting eligibility for public rehousing for those cleared from rooftop structures would serve to increase the tendency for people to build and move into such structures, and therefore I do not believe that we should review or change those rules. Should anybody affected not be eligible for public housing, as I have said, they may well be eligible for alternative rehousing in temporary housing areas, so that nobody is rendered homeless, as we have said numerous times.
As regards the second question, I think anybody buying property, whether it is on the first, third, 15th, 20th floor or the rooftop, is well advised to seek confirmation from a legal adviser as to the legality of the property and should that be done, as I believe most purchasers of flats do, then it should not be necessary for anybody to get themselves in the position where they are buying an illegal or unauthorized structure.
PRESIDENT: Not answered, Mr LEE?
MR LEE CHEUK-YAN (in Cantonese): The Secretary for Planning, Environment and Lands has not answered my question. What I was asking about were not those who bought rooftop structures, but those who sold rooftop structures. In fact, some estate agents are selling rooftop structures. Will the Secretary inform this Council whether there is any Government control on the
1974 HONG KONG LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL — 15 February 1995
sellers, not the buyers? I think the answer given by the Secretary just now only concerns the buyers. My question is: Is there any legislation that controls the sale of unauthorized rooftop structures by estate agents or groups?
SECRETARY FOR PLANNING, ENVIRONMENT AND LANDS: I will certainly consider that point, Mr President, but I think the point remains that the purchaser needs to be sure that he or she is buying property which has a legal basis, and I think if people were sensible about that, then estate agents of this kind would have no business.
MR LEE WING-TAT (in Cantonese): I would like to follow up the question asked by the Honourable LEE Cheuk-yan. I am very surprised that Mr EASON has failed to answer the first part of Mr LEE's question. This is because as a member of the Housing Authority, Mr EASON should be aware of the fact that after the squatter huts on the hillsides of Kwai Tsing District in Tsuen Wan were cleared, even residents who moved into the area in April 1983 instead of before June 1982 were entitled to be granted local rehousing into public rental accommodation, and Mr EASON was one of those who approved this policy. The question asked by Mr LEE Cheuk-yan is: Why did the Administration adopt a local rehousing policy for residents of squatter huts on the hillsides of Kwai Tsing District in Tsuen Wan whereas the same policy is not applied to occupants of rooftop structures?
SECRETARY FOR PLANNING, ENVIRONMENT AND LANDS: I think it must be clear, Mr President, that the majority of rooftop structures are situated in districts where there is no immediately available public housing; that is why the eligibility rules are drawn the way they are. And as I have said, our policy on rooftop structures and the clearance of them is clearly established on the basis that nobody is rendered homeless. I do not think there are necessarily direct comparisons to be drawn between those who live on rooftops and those who live in squatter huts.
MRS SELINA CHOW (in Cantonese): Mr President, a lot of families may face difficulties in finding accommodation as a result of the clearance of rooftop structures. If such clearance is resulted from pressure exerted by owners or tenants of flats below the rooftop rather than for risk reasons, such as the incident of the Kingland Apartment in Mongkok, would the Government, before deciding on the clearance, try its best to reconcile the conflict between those who live on the rooftop and those on the floors below, so that there would be sufficient time to rehouse the rooftop structure occupants whose dwellings have been cleared?
HONG KONG LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL — 15 February 1995 1975
SECRETARY FOR PLANNING, ENVIRONMENT AND LANDS: Mr President, I think we have to have a clear regard here to priorities. Those who are at risk are obviously our priority. As for whether there is a need for mediation between rooftop structure occupants and other residents of buildings where there is no risk involved, I think that this is something which could be considered, if necessary. I will consult my colleagues on that point.
MR FREDERICK FUNG (in Cantonese): Mr President, according to what the Secretary for Planning, Environment and Lands said in the second paragraph of part (b) and part (c) of his reply, the two government departments involved have in fact placed rooftop structures in a grey area, that is to say, without defining whether rooftop structures are legal or illegal. For example, the Land Registry registers land only but not buildings. Also, as pointed out in paragraph (c), the Rating and Valuation Department levies rates on all occupants of tenements, regardless of whether the structures are legal or not. But to members of the public, government departments have direct relationship with them. If they pay the Government for the place they live in, the impression they gain is obviously the place is not unauthorized or illegal. How is the Government going to plug this legal loophole in the minds of the public?
SECRETARY FOR PLANNING, ENVIRONMENT AND LANDS: Mr President, as I have said, the fact that the Land Registry and the Commissioner for Rating and Valuation operate the way they do is entirely in accordance with the legislation and the purposes of that legislation which they operate. It is however clear that there is a lack of understanding in the public sector as to exactly how these ordinances work and why the situation that people find themselves in exists and it is certainly, within the Administration, our intention to try to explain more widely to the public how these ordinances operate and why the contradictions which people believe exist are in fact not contradictions at all.
Transitees from China
3. MR HOWARD YOUNG asked (in Cantonese): Mr President, regarding the policy of permitting residents of mainland China to stay in the territory visa-free for a period not exceeding seven days on their way to and from a third country, since its introduction last year will the Administration inform this Council:
(a) since the introduction of this policy, how many residents of mainland China on transit stay in the territory have been found overstaying;
(b) whether the Administration has reviewed this policy; if so, what is the outcome of the review; and
1976 HONG KONG LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL — 15 February 1995
(c) whether, in the light of operational experience, the Administration will consider ways of relaxing the policy, such as increasing the number of days for visa-free transit visits?
SECRETARY FOR SECURITY: Mr President,
(a) Since the introduction of the visa-free seven-day transit arrangement for the People's Republic of China (PRC) passport holders on 1 August 1993, the average number of PRC travellers overstaying the seven-day transit period has been 69 per month, or about 1 240 in toto.
(b) We have regularly reviewed the policy since its introduction. The most recent reviews were conducted in June and December 1994. We concluded that the arrangement was generally working well, but there had also been problems. In addition to the issue of overstaying to which the Honourable Member referred, a fair number of PRC transitees have abused the system by, for example, failing to proceed to onward destinations, or engaging in unauthorized work, or using forged travel documents. Consequently, the Immigration Department has stepped up screening efforts at the control points, and will continue to liaise closely with the Chinese side, through the Border Liaison Group, to clamp down on such abuses.
(c) The introduction of this visa-free arrangement has improved convenience for PRC passport holders travelling through Hong Kong. It has also reduced the workload on the Immigration Department. But in view of the existence of such abuses, I do not believe that the time is right to relax our policy any further at this stage. Nevertheless, we will keep the matter under review from time to time.
MR HOWARD YOUNG (in Cantonese): Mr President, the number of overstayers is 1 240 per year but as far as I know, the number of PRC citizens visiting Hong Kong is close to 2 million a year. Therefore, the number of overstayers may only account for about 0.06% of the total number of arrivals from China. If people are found to have abused this arrangement, for example by using forged travel documents or taking up employment in Hong Kong, will the Administration consider blacklisting them so that they will not be able to make use of this arrangement to enter Hong Kong again. In doing so, those who come to Hong Kong for bona fide visits will not be affected by this small number of people and the Administration can counsequently relax its policy?
HONG KONG LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL — 15 February 1995 1977
SECRETARY FOR SECURITY: Mr President, the number of overstayers from amongst PRC transitees is not, as the Honourable Member said, a very large number. But as I have referred in my main reply, there are other abuses which we need to be concerned about. Other than overstaying, for example, there is the question of those who did not proceed onward to their destinations. In the past 11 months, an average of 1 200 PRC transitees per month, for example, or about 5% of transit arrivals from China, did not, I repeat did not, proceed to their onward destinations. Please remember of course that the visa-free arrangement that we are discussing is for the purpose of onward transit to another place, but these people do not actually go to another place. Most of them return to China within seven days of their arrival. A small number of them of course become overstayers as well. Although it is possible that some of them may have genuine reasons for not proceeding with their onward journeys, it is also possible that others may never have intended to do so in the first place. Instead, some of them, maybe a fair number of them, may have deliberately abused this system, this facility as a means of entering Hong Kong for a short period of money-making work. For example, on the question of unauthorized work, about 300 PRC transitees were found to be involved in prostitution in 1994 and they were prosecuted for breach of condition of stay.
DR PHILIP WONG: Thank you, Mr President. I assume the fact that one overstays in Hong Kong would become a permanent record in his personal file. I just wonder whether such information will count against such individuals in their subsequent applications?
SECRETARY FOR SECURITY: Mr President, for those persons who overstay for a very short time, say two or three days, or for those with compassionate reasons as to why they could not leave Hong Kong within the stated time, for example, they may have fallen sick, these matters are not counted against them. Generally, in fact, those who surface this way simply pass on to their next destination or go back to China. We would only seriously consider removing those who overstay for a very long time and who are unwilling to go. Obviously, those persons who have abused the system and the facility that we make available for them, and especially if they do so repeatedly, are obvious targets for a question mark being put on whether or not the next time they come we should continue to avail them the hospitality of Hong Kong.
MR MARTIN BARROW: Mr President, I am disappointed that the system is not to be relaxed further as the number who abuse the system is a tiny share of the 1.94 million visitors from the PRC in 1994. The Secretary has revealed that 5% of these visitors in transit return to China, the reason being the long and bureaucratic delays in obtaining a visa. Would the Secretary undertake a complete review of our visitor entry arrangements covering the promised consideration of elimination of visas for those visiting Hong Kong only and the very long delays, due in part to the use of the British Embassy postbox, suffered
1978 HONG KONG LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL — 15 February 1995
by those visiting to promote economic contacts and relationships between Hong Kong and China?
PRESIDENT: So you are not just confining your question to the so-called transitees, Mr BARROW?
MR MARTIN BARROW: Mr President, the Secretary has revealed to us that some of the transitees return to China without going elsewhere. I am therefore suggesting if he would consider looking at the whole system to reduce and eliminate this element of the problem.
SECRETARY FOR SECURITY: Mr President, as I have said, we will keep the issue under review from time to time, but I do not at the present time see a very strong case for "an overall review in terms of a root and branch review". At any time that we look at the question of the control of immigration from China, which is what this issue is part and parcel of, we have to bear in mind two factors.
First of all, there is an enormous pool of people who wish to come to Hong Kong for a variety of reasons, most of which I am sure are legitimate aspirations but some may not be. If we are not careful about the way in which we deal with this question of control of immigration and entrance from China, we may find ourselves in very hot water indeed. Hence, in my view, the correct approach is to improve the current system step by step as we are fairly certain that the next step would not produce unacceptable consequences. This is how we started the scheme of waiving transit visas for PRC passport holders.
Secondly, we have also got to realize that because of the unique position of Hong Kong, any system of controlling entry from China into Hong Kong must also have regard to the policies and practices of the PRC. Indeed we would find it very difficult to control the whole question of entry from China without the co-operation of the Chinese Government. They too have a very different system from any other system that we may have to deal with. They have a two-way entry permit system into Hong Kong, for example, which is not available elsewhere. So I think in any attempt to look at the issue, we must bear those two factors in mind.
MR CHIM PUI-CHUNG (in Cantonese): Mr President, I would like to follow up the question raised by the Honourable Martin BARROW. Since the Hong Kong Government thoroughly understands that many Chinese residents need to come to Hong Kong for sightseeing, visiting relatives or even spending money, does the Government harbour similar doubts as to whether foreign travellers entering Hong Kong in transit will return to their place of domicile? If not, should the Government solve this transit problem as soon as possible by directly
HONG KONG LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL — 15 February 1995 1979
allowing residents of China to stay in Hong Kong for seven days instead of requiring them to have this arrangement only for transit purpose, in order to clear up the misunderstandings?
SECRETARY FOR SECURITY: Mr President, I am not sure if I have understood the Honourable CHIM Pui-chung's question very thoroughly. Let me just put it this way. Other than those who enter from China for permanent settlement or for specific official or business reasons, there are two kinds of entrants from China. Those who come to Hong Kong for a stay in Hong Kong and then go back. They come to Hong Kong on the strength of a two-way entry permit which is issued by the Chinese authorities. That is the normal and proper method which the Chinese Government uses in deciding who within the population of China may enter Hong Kong for a short visit.
Those who only come to Hong Kong in transit to another place and then go back to China come to Hong Kong under the arrangement of visa-free transit of seven days from China before they go to a third country and also another seven days from a third country before they go back to China. So in other words, the question of transit visa is not something which covers normal entrants to Hong Kong from China for short visits.
Traffic Management on Tuen Mun Road
4. MR ALFRED TSO asked (in Cantonese): Mr President, the findings of a survey indicate that during rush hours along the Tuen Mun Road, buses account for 11% of the total traffic volume while private cars make up 47%. Also, according to my own on-site observation, over 70% of the private cars carry only one to two passengers, which is not in accordance with the principle of efficient use of roads. Under the bus-only lane pilot scheme which the Transport Department plans to implement during rush hours along the Tuen Mun Road from 11 March this year, one-third of the road space will be reserved for the exclusive use of buses and the remaining two-thirds for other vehicles. This is also likely to result in serious traffic congestion. In the light of this, will the Government inform this Council whether:
(a) it has any specific plan to encourage private car owners living in New Territories West to use their cars more efficiently when they drive to urban districts, such as mounting a publicity campaign to encourage private car owners to "give a lift" to their friends and neighbours;
(b) it will take positive steps to develop "point-to-point" express air-conditioned bus and green minibus services running from various housing/HOS estates in Tuen Mun and Yuen Long to MTR stations in the urban area, as well as to revise existing policies so as to allow public light buses (PLBs) to use the Tuen Mun Road and bus-only
1980 HONG KONG LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL — 15 February 1995 lanes in order to encourage private car owners to travel by PLBs; and
(c) it will provide more funds for the establishment of a permanent traffic management team responsible for the day-to-day management of traffic along the Tuen Mun Road?
SECRETARY FOR TRANSPORT: Mr President,
(a) The introduction of more bus priority schemes has been widely supported by the community and by Members of this Council in the context of the Administration's proposals for addressing the traffic congestion problem. In this respect, a trial scheme to provide a bus only lane in Tuen Mun Road is scheduled for implementation on 11 March this year. Details of the scheme are now being finalized and will be publicized. As part of this exercise, the Administration will mount a campaign to persuade commuters to use public transport services rather than to drive cars. I am grateful to the Honourable Alfred TSO for his suggestion that those who continue to drive should be encouraged to give lifts to their friends and neighbours so as to make better use of road space. We will follow this up. But, of course, we must ensure that no private car driver solicits paying passengers as this would be illegal.
(b) Sixteen air conditioned KMB bus routes have already been introduced with services from housing estates and major transport interchanges in Yuen Long/Tuen Mun to Tsim Sha Tsui as well as various Mass Transit Railway (MTR) stations. On the introduction of the bus only lane, the Kowloon Motor Bus Company (KMB) will provide two additional bus services from Sham Tseng and Siu Lam to the Tsuen Wan MTR Station. Also 11 existing services from Tuen Mun and Yuen Long will be strengthened by the provision of 11 extra buses. In addition, there are 39 residents' coach services connecting particular housing developments with the urban area. The Transport Department will continue to encourage the provision of such services.
Our objective must remain to maximize the use of the available road space by encouraging more people to use mass carriers, that is, franchised buses and residential coaches which will have access to the dedicated bus only lane. At present, green minibuses can only use the Tuen Mun Road between midnight and 6 am. There are no plans to relax this restriction or allow red public light buses to use Tuen Mun Road.
HONG KONG LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL — 15 February 1995 1981
(c) Over the last year, the police have doubled the deployment of officers to patrol strategic roads in the New Territories, including the Tuen Mun Road. Additionally, extra Transport Department staff have also been provided to implement a Traffic Surveillance and Information System for Tuen Mun Road, the first phase of which will be completed in May this year. This will comprise closed circuit television cameras and variable display signboards so as to advise motorists of road conditions ahead, all of which will help improve the management of traffic along Tuen Mun Road.
MR ALFRED TSO (in Cantonese): Mr President, I think the Secretary for Transport has not answered part (c) of the main question. Although the police will deploy additional manpower to monitor traffic on the Tuen Mun Road whenever there were serious traffic congestion which would lead to strong criticism, but the additional manpower will be redeployed to other areas afterwards. I am of the view that traffic flow along the Tuen Mun Road can only be improved if the bus-only lanes are more effectively managed by providing funds for the establishment of a specialized traffic management team. Will the Secretary for Transport actively lobby the Finance Branch and the Police Force for support of the establishment of the traffic management team so that residents in western New Territories will not suffer great losses due to frequent traffic congestion?
SECRETARY FOR TRANSPORT: Mr President, the deployment of police manpower is a matter, of course, for the Commissioner of Police. He does have a regular team of police traffic officers to patrol roads in the New Territories. I have often raised with him the need for additional staff but it must be recognized that the police have many other priorities. During the trial scheme period, which will last for three weeks, the police will certainly deploy additional staff and the Transport Department will also monitor the trial scheme very closely. The need for additional staff will be borne in mind and, if there is a case, I shall certainly attempt to seek additional resources.
MRS MIRIAM LAU (in Cantonese): Mr President, will the Secretary for Transport inform this Council whether the Administration will discuss with the Hong Kong Ferry (Holdings) Company Limited on strengthening the ferry services between the Gold Coast and Central, particularly by using catamaran vessels which travel at a higher speed and carry more passengers so as to encourage the local residents to use ferries to cross the harbour instead of driving their cars?
SECRETARY FOR TRANSPORT: Mr President, the Administration will certainly encourage the use of waterborne transport. In fact, over the past two years, there has been some improvements made to ferry services to and from
1982 HONG KONG LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL — 15 February 1995
Tuen Mun. This includes the introduction of three highspeed catamaran vessels which have 428 seats each and, in addition, the deployment of six additional hoverferries on the Tuen Mun ferry routes. We also expect to introduce two more hoverferry services, between Tuen Mun and Wan Chai and one of which has now been implemented between the Gold Coast and Central. As a result of these services, the passenger carrying capacity for ferry services from Tuen Mun has increased from just under 1 000 in the morning peak to over 3 000 now and the present services can cope with the morning rush. The Hong Kong and Yaumati Ferry Company Limited (HYF) have plans to deploy a fourth catamaran vessel on the Tuen Mun/Central run in the near future.
DR TANG SIU-TONG (in Cantonese): In paragraph (b) of the main reply, it was mentioned that the Transport Department would encourage the provision of "point-to-point" residential coach service in housing estates. Is the Administration aware that there are problems regarding the allocation of interests between the coach companies and mutual aid committees? Besides, the companies providing such "point-to-point" coach service usually have one to two coaches only. If a coach breaks down on the Tuen Mun Road, what measures will be taken to transfer the passengers to the urban area?
SECRETARY FOR TRANSPORT: Mr President, residential coach services are operated by private management estates; it is a matter for them. The Transport Department continues to encourage this and if it is necessary, the Transport Department will try to resolve any problems which may arise between the management company on the one hand and mutual aid committees on the other. When it comes to breakdowns, because these are private residential coaches, it must be left to the company which operates these services to tackle this. But we shall certainly follow this up.
MR WONG Wai-yin (in Cantonese): Mr President, apart from the normally heavy traffic flow, traffic accidents also contribute to traffic congestion along the Tuen Mun Road. According to the reply given by the Secretary for Transport, a trial scheme to provide a bus only lane in Tuen Mun Road will be implemented on 11 March. I wish to ask the Secretary for Transport: should a bus break down and block the bus only lane, do the authorities concerned have adequate contingency measures to enable the bus to be towed away from the bus only lane within a very short period of time so that traffic can resume smoothness in the lane as soon as possible? Besides, will the Secretary for Transport consider introducing ferry services between Tuen Mun and Tsuen Wan to relieve traffic congestion along the Tuen Mun Road resulting from the huge number of road-users?
PRESIDENT: Two questions, Secretary.
HONG KONG LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL — 15 February 1995 1983
SECRETARY FOR TRANSPORT: Thank you, Mr President. Along Tuen Mun Road, there are six additional lay-by's which have been provided since April 1994, making a total of 10; seven on the Kowloon-bound carriageway and three on the New Territories-bound carriageway. This facilitates the towing away of broken down vehicles including buses and the access of emergency vehicles to undertake recovery services. The police have various tow trucks. They have recently secured an additional medium tow truck to improve their vehicle recover capacity and as regards the heavy towing service, a contract has been let by the police so that there are standby arrangements at strategic locations along Tuen Mun Road, for example, at Sham Tseng. If necessary, the KMB can also be contacted to provide their tow truck facilities.
Insofar as ferry services between Tuen Mun and Tsuen Wan is concerned, I shall certainly follow up the Honourable Member's suggestion and see whether the HYF can supplement the existing services.
Overseas Visits by the Governor
5. MR TAM YIU-CHUNG asked (in Cantonese): Mr President, will the Government inform this Council of:
(a) the number of overseas visits (including duty trips to the United Kingdom) made by the Governor since he assumed office in 1992 and the total amount of public funds involved;
(b) the number of such visits scheduled for 1995 and the anticipated amount of public funds involved; and
(c) the criteria adopted by the Governor in determining whether to accept invitations for overseas visits; and how the Governor evaluates the effectiveness of his previous visits abroad so as to assess whether these visits are cost-effective?
CHIEF SECRETARY: Mr President,
(a) The Governor has made 19 overseas visits, including 12 to the United Kingdom, since he assumed office in 1992. This was one fewer visit than Lord WILSON in his last two and a half years as Governor. The total cost to public funds of these visits was $4,660,328.67.
(b) As currently planned, in the remainder of 1995, the Governor has accepted an invitation to visit Singapore in March, the costs of which will be borne by his hosts. He will also visit London in October. The cost of that visit is estimated at about $180,000. The Governor has also received invitations to visit other countries,
1984 HONG KONG LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL — 15 February 1995
including Vietnam, in this and future years, and he is considering these invitations.
(c) The Governor has one criterion for deciding whether to accept invitations for overseas visits; and that is, will the visit help Hong Kong? Different visits have different purposes. Some aim to promote our trade relations with important trading partners. Other visits have a narrower focus, such as the Governor's visit to Washington in May 1993 to lobby President CLINTON and senior United States officials for Most Favoured Nation (MFN) renewal. All his visits serve to focus attention on Hong Kong abroad and to increase understanding of our affairs amongst our international friends in the crucial run-up to 1997.
Visits to London have a particular purpose. The Prime Minister, the Foreign Secretary and other senior Ministers expect to be kept closely in touch with events in Hong Kong, increasingly so as 1997 approaches. When the Cabinet Committee on Hong Kong meets, the Governor is invited to attend. The Governor also uses his visits to London to keep the opposition parties at Westminster briefed on Hong Kong affairs, and to promote Hong Kong amongst the business community in Britain.
Visits made by the Governor are assessed against the specific purpose they were aimed to achieve, whether it be MFN renewal, promotion of our trade relations or promotion of greater understanding of our affairs. But the obvious yardsticks include the calls made by the Governor, the effectiveness with which the target audience was reached and specific Hong Kong concerns conveyed.
MR TAM YIU-CHUNG (in Cantonese): Mr President, from paragraph (b) of the main reply, we know that the number of duty trips made by the Governor to the United Kingdom this year will be far fewer than those made in the past two years. Is it because the British Government has recently lost interest in Hong Kong affairs or the Governor has made changes as he realized that the people of Hong Kong are concerned about the frequency of his overseas trips?
CHIEF SECRETARY: Mr President, I did stress in my reply that the further visit to London, that is, one further planned visit, is current plans. Of course depending on the need, the Governor may need to visit London more than once for the remainder of this year. I might also say that the number of visits certainly does not reflect a lack of interest on the part of the Prime Minister and Cabinet Ministers in Hong Kong affairs. But as I stressed in my main reply, the frequency of visits depends on the need for the Governor to visit London and depends on issues arising during the year.
HONG KONG LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL — 15 February 1995 1985
MR CHIM PUI-CHUNG (in Cantonese): Mr President, the Chief Secretary mentioned in paragraph (a) of her reply that the total costs of the Governor's overseas visits amounted to 4.6 million-odd dollars. Were the costs incurred by the Governor alone or by the Governor together with his accompanying officials? If the costs included the expenses incurred by the accompanying officials as well, then it would not be too extravagant, but if it is only the expenses of one person, it would be quite different. Besides, in paragraph (b) of the reply in the Chinese version, it was mentioned that the Governor would visit Vietnam this year (that is 1995) and in future years (數年). As far as Chinese is concerned, "數年" literally means "a few years". However, there are only one and a half years to go from next year to 30 June 1997. Is it a bit misleading, giving people a wrong impression, that the Governor's term of office will last for a few more years besides this year? In fact, this is impossible. I think there is no problem with the English version of the reply, but there is something wrong with the choice of words in the Chinese version. Can I seek clarification from the Chief Secretary?
CHIEF SECRETARY: Mr President, the costs that I quoted in my main reply refer to the total costs, that is, the costs not only incurred by the Governor himself but by all accompanying officials. In my main reply, I referred to visits planned for this year. I also referred to the fact that the Governor has received several invitations to visit but without predetermined dates. The Governor is considering these invitations. As to the future visits I refer, of course, they are up to 30 June 1997.
MR TAM YIU-CHUNG (in Cantonese): Mr President, has the Governor sought to visit the coastal cities of China this year in order to promote Sino-Hong Kong trade?
CHIEF SECRETARY: Mr President, the Governor has made it clear on numerous occasions that he would be happy to visit China at any time in the same way as we would all be delighted to welcome Chinese officials to visit Hong Kong at any time to discuss important transitional issues.
MR FREDERICK FUNG (in Cantonese): Mr President, the Chief Secretary just said that the Governor would be happy to visit China. Has the Governor conveyed his wish to the Chinese authorities?
CHIEF SECRETARY: Mr President, I do not think that the Governor and other senior officials could have made it any clearer their desire to visit China at any time.
1986 HONG KONG LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL — 15 February 1995 Cost of Regulation Compliance to Private Sector
6. MR MARTIN BARROW asked: It has recently been estimated that in the United Kingdom the direct cost of compliance with various forms of regulation to the private sector amounts to £43 billion (HK$520 billion), or twice the size of its defence budget. Will the Government inform this Council whether:
(a) it has attempted to calculate the equivalent figure for the territory; if not, why not;
(b) it is concerned that the cost of such compliance to the private sector in the territory may now be at an excessive level; if not, why not;
(c) it will undertake a review of the cost and benefits of the amount and extent of regulation; if not, why not; and
(d) it will take steps to reduce the cost of such compliance and, through deregulation, return the territory to the traditions of positive non interventionism, which brought so much benefits to the economy of the territory and its people?
SECRETARY FOR FINANCIAL SERVICES: Mr President, the Administration has no reason to believe that Hong Kong is over-regulated or that the cost to the private sector of compliance with regulation is excessive. It has not, therefore, attempted to calculate the cost of compliance to the private sector. Nor does it plan to conduct an overall review of the cost and benefits of the amount and extent of regulation. Indeed, such an exercise would itself be likely to prove costly, complex and hard to justify.
It is noted that the estimate relating to the United Kingdom was produced, not by the Government, but by the Institute of Directors. It is also relevant to note that the level and extent of regulation in Hong Kong is much lower and more limited than that in the United Kingdom. Indeed, Hong Kong has recently been ranked by Fortune Magazine as the world's best city in which to do business and by the Heritage Foundation as the freest economy in the world.
It is also relevant to point out that before any new piece of legislation is introduced, the Administration will have to assess its economic impact and that inevitably will involve a general assessment of the cost and benefits involved.
The Administration firmly believes in only intervening where a good case to do so has been made, and its policies and regulatory schemes are a reflection of that philosophy. However, it must be accepted that regulation is sometimes necessary and indeed it can sometimes bring net economic and social benefits.
HONG KONG LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL — 15 February 1995 1987
Hong Kong, as a prosperous community and a world class financial and trade centre, cannot ignore the need for protecting the public and safeguarding its reputation and standing as an international financial and trade centre. The important point is that the Administration is fully aware of the need to ensure that overall, the impact of any regulation is beneficial to Hong Kong.
MR MARTIN BARROW: Mr President, while noting the Secretary's statement, I would like his reassurance that the Government is not being complacent as there is always room for improvement, given that there are many examples of regulatory steeple-chases ranging from the long delays in licensing restaurants and hotels to additional complexities being proposed in the current Occupational Retirement Schemes (Amendment) Bill and to the need for frequent work visa renewals? Would the Secretary consider setting up a deregulation unit, perhaps under the Efficiency Unit, which could take the lead in promoting effective deregulatory initiatives which cut across departmental boundaries and which fits in well with the excellent work that the Efficiency Unit is doing in other areas?
SECRETARY FOR FINANCIAL SERVICES: Mr President, I can certainly assure Mr BARROW that the Government is not being complacent. My answer to the main question dealt with the issue of a general review and whether the Government would conduct that on a generic basis right across the board. It was silent on the question of whether we would look at any particular areas on a specific or selective basis. Indeed, it would be apparent that the Administration is already doing that, and just to take an example from my own policy area, there is currently a review going on of the Companies Ordinance. That review was initiated at the Government's own initiative. But it is now under way and will take two years in the initial stage at a cost of $14.5 million. It will be apparent from that that, looking at only one chapter of the laws among a thousand of them, and doing a little simple arithmetic, to do a comprehensive review and to take a generic approach would cost millions of dollars and take hundreds of years. Clearly that is impractical.
Mr President, what that does illustrate is that the Government is willing and does, in fact, take an active approach at reviewing existing legislation and regulation. It does in fact look at it from the point of view of simplification, the need to remove redundant regulation and to improve procedures. So without wishing to comment on any of the examples that Mr BARROW has mentioned, I do believe that there is indeed a capacity and a willingness to undertake reviews. But equally, there must be a limit on the number of those that can be undertaken at the same time. Too many such reviews would be indigestible and I think it is clear from that that we would have to be very selective in looking at any individual areas. There can be no blanket undertaking that any particular subject that is raised would automatically be looked at.
As to the question of a deregulation unit, that indeed is an approach I note that has been adopted in the United Kingdom, and indeed there is such a unit in
1988 HONG KONG LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL — 15 February 1995
the Department of Trade and Industry. As I indicated in my main answer, it does not automatically follow that what is done in the United Kingdom in reaction to a perceived problem there, should automatically be adopted in Hong Kong. It may well be an appropriate approach for their circumstances, but circumstances here are very different. That said, I note the proposal with regard to the Efficiency Unit and indeed will convey that to the appropriate authorities.
MR PETER WONG: Mr President, I would like to ask the Secretary what is being done in his particular policy area to make government forms more user friendly and really relevant to the job in hand?
SECRETARY FOR FINANCIAL SERVICES: Mr President, government forms are indeed looked at from time to time. They are not kept under constant review because obviously it would be impractical to have a running review on all of them, all the time; they run to hundreds and thousands. But there are exercises going on to look at them and recently in this Council, I have introduced resolutions to simplify forms in respect of the office of the Official Receiver; that is an example of what we have been doing.
If Mr WONG would like a more comprehensive answer on the detail of what is going on in that area, I would be happy to provide that to him in writing. (Annex)
MR PETER WONG: That would be appreciated.
DR DAVID LI: Mr President, would the Government inform this Council how our costs of compliance in the financial sector is compared with our regional competitors?
SECRETARY FOR FINANCIAL SERVICES: Mr President, we have not conducted any detailed comparison of this recently, but I would draw attention to the comparisons that have been done by others and in particular the two that I mentioned in my main answer, that is to say Fortune Magazine and the Heritage Foundation. In those cases, fairly detailed examinations were undertaken of a whole range of factors which included the costs of compliance with regulation and the complexity of regulation, and Hong Kong came out extremely well in those comparisons.
MR CHIM PUI-CHUNG (in Cantonese): Mr President, on 10 February, that is last Friday, the Chief Secretary gave us a detailed introduction on the operation of the Hong Kong Government. Most of the Members in this Council were quite satisfied. But recently, we read from the newspaper that the Securities and
HONG KONG LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL — 15 February 1995 1989
Futures Commission (SFC) frequently stated that it would investigate into insider dealings, liquidate certain companies and even appeal to the Privy Council in London. The SFC, under such circumstances, is able to meet the expenses from its levy revenues. But its opponent, that is the entire securities sector, has to pay the same price too. Will the Secretary inform this Council whether regular comprehensive reviews on the operation of the SFC are conducted or whether a committee has been set up to do so? Does the Secretary think the SFC has too much money and with adequate power that makes it difficult for its opponent to fight back, so much as that the SFC's authority is thereby established?
SECRETARY FOR FINANCIAL SERVICES: Mr President, there is no plan to establish such a committee.
MR JAMES TO (in Cantonese): A few Members just pointed out that the regulation might be a bit too excessive. However, can the Government, particularly with reference to the SFC, promise that it will do its upmost to investigate cases in which illegal activities, abuse of power and even crimes and defrauding of small shareholders are involved?
SECRETARY FOR FINANCIAL SERVICES: Mr President, the question of the powers of the Securities and Futures Commission (SFC) is one that has been raised in this Council before, and on each occasion I have pointed out that it is not the view of the Administration that the SFC has excessive powers. We believe that it needs to have the enforcement capacity to back up the regulation that exists and, for example, the events of 1987 certainly prove the need to have a body that is effective and has teeth. The important point though is that there should be checks and balances on it and those checks and balances are indeed built into the system. There is in the first place an Appeal Committee appointed by the Governor that hears appeals against the decisions of the SFC. The SFC is subject to the purview of the Commissioner for Administrative Complaints. The SFC is subject to the purview of the Independent Commission Against Corruption. The appointments to the SFC are made by the Governor, its budget is subject to the approval of the Governor, and under delegated powers, those functions are discharged by the Financial Secretary. There is, therefore, a considerable degree of examination and checks and balance already in place. Not only that, their budget is tabled in the Legislative Council and the Chairman of the SFC appears before the relevant panel to answer questions in relation to it. There is, therefore, ample opportunity to answer for the activities that are going on in the SFC and it is not our view that the degree of power that it exercises is excessive.
1990 HONG KONG LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL — 15 February 1995
DR HUANG CHEN-YA (in Cantonese): Mr President, we know that insider dealings and major shareholders' deception behaviour are unfair to small investors and they also deal serious blows to Hong Kong as an international financial market. Can the Government tell us definitely it will not give up its determination to combat insider dealings and curb company directors' defrauding of small shareholders?
PRESIDENT: We are straying far from the original question. I think we had better put a stop there.
WRITTEN ANSWERS TO QUESTIONS
Hawkers in Urban Districts
7. MR ROGER LUK asked: Will the Government inform this Council whether it is aware that the substantial increase in the number of hawkers in urban districts (including Central and Tsim Sha Tsui) has caused serious obstruction and nuisance to pedestrians; if so, whether any positive measures have been taken to address the problem?
SECRETARY FOR HOME AFFAIRS: Mr President, records of the Urban Services Department indicate that there has been a decline in both the licensed and unlicensed hawker population in the urban area over the past few years. The number of licensed hawkers has reduced from 12 300 in 1992 to less than 11 000 at the end of 1994, primarily as a result of Urban Council policies designed to reduce the licensed hawker population in the urban area. Informal head counts of unlicensed hawkers in the urban area also indicate a reduction of approximately 1 000 over the same period.
In order to control hawker activity more effectively, the Urban Council and the Urban Services Department have recently put in hand a number of measures. These include the phasing out of the whole category of itinerant hawker licence by 1 April 1996 which will further reduce the licensed hawking population. In addition, a new grade of Hawker Control Officer in the Urban Services Department has been introduced in the middle of 1994 to better manage the urban hawking population. Regional Task Forces of Hawker Control Officers have also been established recently to enhance the capacity of the Department to conduct surprise raids on hawker blackspots and to reinforce district-based hawker control teams. Plans are in hand to expand the two Task Forces later this year.
HONG KONG LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL — 15 February 1995 1991 Location of Methadone Treatment Centres
8. MRS PEGGY LAM asked (in Chinese): As methadone treatment centres are located in residential areas, they not only pose threats to the environment but also have become crime black spots. In view of this, will the Government inform this Council whether:
(a) crime rates are on an upward trend over the past two years in areas where methadone treatment centres are located; and
(b) the Government has considered relocating such centres into neighbouring medical institutions so that they are away from residential areas; if so, what the progress is; if not, what the reasons are?
SECRETARY FOR SECURITY: Mr President,
(a) There is no evidence to suggest that there has been an upward trend in the crime rates in the areas surrounding methadone clinics. Overall the crime rates in such areas have remained stable; occasionally slight increases have been detected at individual clinics at different times. Generally there are slight increases in the crime rates when there is a shortage of supply of heroin on the street.
(b) The prime objective of the Methadone Treatment Programme is to provide a readily accessible, legal, medically safe and effective alternative to illicit administration of opiate drugs by drug abusers. The success of the programme depends to a large extent on its accessibility to drug abusers. Methadone clinics are thus located in areas which are convenient of access to facilitate attendance by patients. Requests for relocation of methadone clinics are considered having regard to the availability of a suitable site which should be accessible and acceptable to the district board concerned. The main difficulty in relocating methadone clinics lies in the identification of a suitable relocation site.
Used Syringes Strewn in Public Housing Estates
9. MR MICHAEL HO asked (in Chinese): As used syringes discarded by drug addicts have posed a serious health problem to residents in public housing estates, will the Government inform this council of the immediate strategy and long-term practical measures it will take to improve the situation?
1992 HONG KONG LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL — 15 February 1995
SECRETARY FOR SECURITY: Mr President, the Government is concerned about the potential health hazard posed by improperly disposed used syringes to residents in public housing estates. Measures are being taken by various departments to tackle the problem.
The Housing Department requires its cleansing contractors to remove immediately any discarded syringes found in the estates and to report to the estate office. Patrol guards and estate staff are instructed to keep a vigilant watch on the situation during their patrols. Estate staff also maintain close liaison with the police to combat the problem and intensify patrol of black spots. On the other hand, notices are put up in estates to draw tenants' attention to the problem. They are encouraged, through regular estate newsletters, to report to the police or estate office any discarded syringes found in the estate.
For the long term, education and training on the proper disposal and collection of used syringes will continue to be the main strategy in tackling the problem. The proper disposal of used syringes is incorporated as part of the health education messages targeted towards drug abusers. The message is disseminated to drug abusers through various channels — leaflets and handouts are distributed, reminders are posted in methadone clinics, and workshops for recovering drug abusers and counselling services provided for methadone patients also emphasize drug abusers' social responsibility in proper disposal of used syringes.
The Working Group on Drug Abuse and AIDS under the Committee on Education and Publicity on AIDS, in collaboration with the Pui Hong Self-Help Association, conducted a "Cleaning-up of Abandoned Syringes Pilot Project" in 1994. One of the objectives is to promote the proper disposal of used syringes. To this end, efforts are made to remove abandoned syringes from "black spots", and to distribute education leaflets to drug abusers in the vicinity.
Student Enrolment in Tertiary Institutions
10. DR SAMUEL WONG asked (in Chinese): Regarding the intake of students by tertiary institutions funded by the University Grants Committee in 1994-95, will the Government inform this Council:
(a) how does the actual intake of students by various tertiary institutions compare with the planned enrolment capacity; and
(b) what are the minimum matriculation grades required for enrolment by each department of these institutions; and whether the entry requirements have been lowered in order to enrol a sufficient number of students?
HONG KONG LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL — 15 February 1995 1993 SECRETARY FOR EDUCATION AND MANPOWER: Mr President,
(a) The Administration's student number target for the enrolment of first-year first-degree (FYFD) students in the seven institutions funded by the University Grants Committee (UGC) in the academic year 1994-95 is 14 500 students in full-time equivalent terms (fte). As at 31 December 1994, the provisional enrolment figures for FYFD students at the seven UGC-funded institutions were 14 146 students, meaning an overall under-enrolment of 2.4%. The under-enrolments in some of the institutions such as the City University of Hong Kong and the Hong Kong Baptist University were deliberate following advice from the UGC to redress the balance after over enrolments at FYFD level in previous years so that the total undergraduate student numbers of these institutions would adhere to the Government's approved overall student number targets at this level. A breakdown of the approved student targets and the provisional enrolment figures in the seven institutions is at Annex A. The final enrolment figures will not be available until mid-March 1995.
(b) Each institution has its own institution-wide minimum admission requirements, as summarized at Annex B. Some institutions have also maintained slightly different minimum admission requirements for their different departments or faculties, mainly in the results attained in the Use of English of the Hong Kong Advanced Supplementary (AS) Level Examination. The institutions have not lowered their entry requirements in order to enrol adequate number of students although some institutions have allowed their departments flexibility in considering whether applicants have met the specified language requirements for admission to some courses. For example, the Chinese University of Hong Kong has accepted a few students who have obtained Grade F in AS-Level Use of English but managed to pass the Supplementary English Examination as having fulfilled the English requirement for admission to some of the University's courses. The Hong Kong University of Science and Technology has lowered the admission requirement of Grade D in the AS-Level Use of English to Grade E for some students. These students are nevertheless required to take and pass a non credit-bearing language enhancement course, failing which they will not be allowed to continue their studies. Furthermore, the City University of Hong Kong has waived the Chinese Language requirement for applicants to its four full-time bachelor's degree courses offered by the Faculty of Science and Technology.
1994 HONG KONG LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL — 15 February 1995 Annex A
Enrolment of First-year First-degree (FYFD) Students
(as at 31 December 1994)
Excess (+)/
Target (fte)
Enrolment# (fte)
Shortfall (-) (fte)
CityU 2 359 2 163 -196 HKBU 1 345 1 294 -51 LC 690 705 +15 CUHK 2 913 2 797* -116 PolyU 2 496 2 511 +15 HKUST 1 920 1 896 -24
HKU 2 777 2 790* +13 ------- -------- -----
Total 14 500 14 156 -344 ===== ===== ====
Note: # These are provisional enrolment figures as the institutions' databases of FYFD numbers have not all yet closed for 31 December 1994. Final enrolment figures will only be available by mid-March 1995.
* The figures exclude the 140 fte students enrolled on BEd(Primary) programmes offered by the two Universities which are funded separately, and not counted within the Government's approved student number targets.
Annex B
Minimum Entry Requirements for
Admission to UGC-funded Institutions
CityU - 1. Grade E in 2 A-level subjects or Grade E in 1 A-Level subject and 2 AS-level subjects; and
2. Grade E in Use of English at AS-level (except for the Faculty of Law which requires Grade D in Use of English at AS-level); and
HONG KONG LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL — 15 February 1995 1995
3. Grade E in Chinese Language and Culture at AS level or Grade E in Chinese Literature or Chinese Language and Literature at A-level.
HKBU - 1. Grade E in 1 A-level subject; and
2. Grade E in two of the following three AS-level subjects:
(i) Use of English;
(ii) Chinese Language and Culture; and
(iii) Liberal Studies;
and
3. Grade E in one additional AS-level or A-level subject.
LC - 1. Grade E in 2 A-level subjects or Grade E in 1 A-level subject plus 1 AS-level subject (other than Use of English and Chinese Language and Culture); and
2. Grade E in AS-level Use of English; and
3. Grade E in AS-level Chinese Language and Culture.
CHUK - 1. Grade E in 3 A-level or AS-level subjects (other than Use of English and Chinese Language and Culture), at least one of which is at A-level for the Faculty of Arts, Business Administration, Education, Medicine, and Anthropology and Journalism and Communication programmes of the Faculty of Social Science, and 2 of which are at A-level for the Faculty of Engineering, other programme of the Social Science Faculty; and
2. Grade E in AS-level Use of English; and
3. Grade E in AS-level Chinese Language and Culture.
PolyU - 1. Grade E in 2 A-level subjects or 1 A-level and 2 AS-level subjects other than Use of English and Chinese Language and Culture (except for the Faculty of Communication which requires Grade D in 1 A-level subject); and
2. Grade E in AS-level Use of English; and
3. AS-level in Chinese Language and Culture or A-level in Chinese Literature.
1996 HONG KONG LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL — 15 February 1995
HKUST - 1. Grade E in either 1 A-level subject and either AS-level Chinese Language and Culture or AS-level Liberal Studies, and two AS-level subjects; or
2. Grade E in 2 A-level subjects plus either AS-Level Chinese Language and Culture, or AS-level Liberal Studies; and
3. Grade D in AS-level Use of English.
HKU - 1 Grade E in 2 A-level subjects or Grade E in 1 A-level subject plus 2 AS-level subjects (other than Use of English and Chinese Language and Culture); and
2. Grade D in AS-level Use of English; and
3. Grade E in AS-level Chinese Language and Culture.
(Note: 1. A-level means Hong Kong Advanced Level Examination
2. AS-level means Advanced Supplementary Level Examination)
Speed Detection on Roads
11. DR LAM KUI-CHUN asked: Regarding the effectiveness of using speed detectors in improving traffic safety, will the Administration inform this Council of:
(a) the number of traffic accident "black spots" in the territory; and
(b) the number of locations regularly used for speed detection; and how many of these locations are traffic accident black spots?
SECRETARY FOR TRANSPORT: Mr President, sites are designated as traffic accident black spots if, within a 12-month period, these have been the locations of several accidents involving injury to passengers or pedestrains.
There are 174 traffic accident black spots designated in the territory: 26 on Hong Kong Island, 122 in Kowloon and 26 in the New Territories.
Speed checks on vehicles are carried out for road safety purposes. Speed detectors are mounted at different spots and different times. In all, there are 248 locations used for this purpose including 165 of the traffic black spots. Speed checks are not mounted at the remaining nine black spot sites because of difficulty in setting up the detection equipment at those locations.
HONG KONG LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL — 15 February 1995 1997 International Conferences on AIDS
12. DR CONRAD LAM asked (in Chinese): With regard to Hong Kong's participation in international conferences on AIDS, will the Government inform this Council:
(a) of the number of participants from the territory at the International Conference on AIDS organized by the World Health Organization (WHO) in Japan in August 1994, together with the total amount of expenditure incurred by the Government on this occasion and the benefits gained from the conference;
(b) whether delegates from the territory were sent to attend the first AIDS Summit held on 1 December 1994 in Paris; if not, why not; and
(c) of the Government's policy on participation in international conferences/work on AIDS?
SECRETARY FOR HEALTH AND WELFARE: Mr President,
(a) As far as we know, a total of 37 persons from Hong Kong participated in the International Conference on AIDS organized by the World Health Organization in Japan in August 1994. Of these, eight were representatives of the Government (from the Health and Welfare Branch, the Department of Health and the Social Welfare Department). The total expenditure incurred by the Government on this occasion was HK$341,800.00, which includes the cost of setting up an exhibition booth at the conference.
The strong contingent attending the Yokohama Conference was a clear demonstration of Hong Kong's commitment to the fight against AIDS. In addition to the exhibition booth, which was very favourably received, Hong Kong participants made a total of 15 abstract presentations. The Secretary for Health and Welfare addressed a well-attended session of the conference.
The conference also provided an excellent opportunity for participants to make official contacts with international organizations (including the World Health Organization, the World Bank and the United Nations Development Program) and delegates from other countries, thus facilitating networking and co-ordination of efforts in confronting the AIDS problem. It enabled Hong Kong to keep abreast with current developments in AIDS programmes on the international scene.
1998 HONG KONG LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL — 15 February 1995
The Conference also enabled us to share experience with other countries. Reference has been made to the information collected during the conference in the design of AIDS education and care programmes in Hong Kong.
(b) The AIDS Summit was conceived by the French Government and held on 1 December 1994 in Paris. Its goal was to heighten political commitment in HIV affected countries with the expectation that this would lead to greater efforts to curb the spread of HIV and assist those affected. Heads of government from about 42 countries were invited; Hong Kong was not invited to participate in the event.
(c) The Government in general supports participation in international AIDS conferences as it is important to keep Hong Kong in the forefront of advances in this fast-moving field. The choice of conference and the selection of participants, however, are made after careful consideration of the benefits that could be derived from such an attendance.
Effective AIDS control calls for co-ordinated international efforts and Hong Kong actively participates in such work. Over the past few years, Hong Kong has taken part in meetings that have brought together officials and representatives from different countries to discuss and exchange views on matters of common concern. The type of collaborative work generated has included scientific research, public health programmes and policy development. In fact, Hong Kong has just participated in the International Consultation for Policy-makers on Women and AIDS in Geneva in preparation for the Beijing Conference later this year.
Registration Fees Exemption for Small Businesses
13. MR ALBERT CHAN asked (in Chinese): In his Budget Speech for the current financial year presented in March 1994, the Financial Secretary proposed to increase substantially the exemption levels for the business registration fee paid by businesses with a small turnover, so that a business with average monthly sales not exceeding $15,000 or a business rendering services with average monthly receipts not exceeding $4,000, would be exempt from the fee. The Business Registration Ordinance was amended on 1 April in the same year to implement this policy. However, it is learnt that some eligible businesses are unaware of this exemption policy and have paid the business registration fee. In this connection, will the Government inform this Council:
(a) what steps the Government has taken to publicize the new policy among small businesses;
HONG KONG LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL — 15 February 1995 1999
(b) whether there are any channels for those small businesses eligible for exemption, who are unaware of the new policy and have paid the business registration fee, to apply for refund of the fee paid; and
(c) whether the staff of the Business Registration Office have a responsibility for advising small businesses of the new policy?
SECRETARY FOR THE TREASURY: Mr President, in reply to the three questions raised by the Honourable Member:
(a) Details of the increase in exemption levels (proposed in the 1994 Budget) have been included in publications issued by the Inland Revenue Department, namely:
- How to Apply for Business Registration; and
- Synopsis of Taxes Administered by the Inland Revenue Department.
These publications are available in both English and Chinese at all offices of the Inland Revenue Department and at District Offices. In addition, copies of the publication, "How to Apply for Business Registration" and a specimen application form (Form 3), "Claim for exemption from payment of fee and levy under section 9 of the Business Registration Ordinance" are displayed on notice boards in the public hall of the Business Registration Office, which is situated at the Department's main offices in Revenue Tower.
The Department operates an Enquiry Service Centre for general enquiries and the Business Registration enquiry counter for specific enquiries. Members of the public can obtain information on the current exemption levels from staff stationed at either of these enquiry counters located in the Department's main offices in Revenue Tower. The Department also operates a 24-hour public telephone enquiry system and this service includes details of the current exemption levels.
(b) An unincorporated business may apply for exemption and where granted after payment of the prescribed business registration fee, the fee paid will be refunded. Applications for exemption (using Form 3) must be submitted no later than one month before the date of expiry of a current business registration certificate, or in the case of a new business, one month after application for the registration of the business. However, the Commissioner of Inland Revenue will normally accept late applications if reasonable grounds are shown.
2000 HONG KONG LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL — 15 February 1995
(c) Staff of the Business Registration Office and the General Enquiry Service Centre bring to the attention of members of the public, where necessary, details of the current exemption levels for business registration.
Imprisoned Vietnamese Boat People
14. DR TANG SIU-TONG asked (in Chinese): With regard to the Vietnamese Boat People (VBP) who have been convicted of criminal offences and given prison sentences, will the Government inform this Council:
(a) of the total number of VBP convicted and given prison sentences in the past two years, together with the longest and average prison terms;
(b) whether any VBP are serving prison terms that straddle 30 June 1997; if so, the total number of such VBP and whether they will be repatriated as soon as they have served out their prison terms; and
(c) whether, in regard to those VBP whose prison terms stretch beyond 30 June 1997, the Government has conducted any negotiations with the Vietnamese Government for such VBP to be repatriated after that date so that they can continue to serve the remainder of their prison terms in their own country?
SECRETARY FOR SECURITY: Mr President,
(a) In 1993 and 1994, 1 052 Vietnamese migrants were convicted and sentenced to imprisonment. The longest prison term was life imprisonment, and the average was eight months.
(b) 31 Vietnamese migrants are now serving sentences which will straddle 30 June 1997. The intention is that they should be deported to Vietnam after they have served their sentences.
(c) The Administration has not conducted any negotiations with the Vietnamese Government on the possibility of Vietnamese migrants who are serving prison sentences in Hong Kong being repatriated to serve the remainder of their sentences in Vietnam.
HONG KONG LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL — 15 February 1995 2001 Green Managers in Private Sector
15. MR MAN SAI-CHEONG asked: In his 1993 policy address, the Governor stated that the Government would invite the private sector to appoint a "Green Manager" in each of their companies to arouse environmental awareness and conduct environmental audits. In a recent study on this issue prepared by a green group, it is reported that only a fraction of companies have appointed Green Managers for environmental matters. This indicates that the response from the private sector to the Government's appeal has not been keen. In view of this, will the Government inform this Council:
(a) of the present situation regarding the carrying out of environmental audits in the private sector; and
(b) whether the target set by the Government has been achieved; if not, what further action will be taken to improve the present situation, so as to help local industry carry out environmental audits and adopt measures to reduce the consumption of energy, paper and other resources?
SECRETARY FOR PLANNING, ENVIRONMENT AND LANDS: Mr President,
(a) Although precise figures are not available, we understand that some 40 commercial and industrial companies have carried out environmental audits or are in the process of doing so. Some companies have also produced or sponsored the production of environmental audit manuals which are available to other organizations.
(b) We have not set a specific target for environmental audits to be carried out by companies in the private sector. The approach we have adopted is to set a good green example for the private sector to follow and to work in partnership with the private sector to promote a reduction in resource consumption.
To set a good green example, all government departments and branches have appointed Green Managers since January 1994. Two government departments also completed pilot environmental audits in December 1994 and we are now working towards extending the concept of environmental audits and management to other departments and branches.
To provide guidance and advice, the Environmental Protection Department provides technical advice to local companies on the approach to environmental audits and will establish by April 1995 a directory of consultants with appropriate expertise in the field of
2002 HONG KONG LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL — 15 February 1995
environmental audits and management. Specifically on reduction of energy consumption, the Energy Efficiency Advisory Committee has produced advisory notes for the commercial sector and building management companies of residential buildings. It will also make available a guide on energy audit for distribution to companies in the commercial and industrial sector in mid-1995. Furthermore, the Industry Department is co-ordinating a number of initiatives on increasing manufacturers' awareness of the benefits of good environmental practice. Members may wish to refer to the reply provided by the Secretary for Trade and Industry on 25 January 1995.
To work in partnership with the private sector, we liaise with non government organizations, such as the Hong Kong Productivity Council and the Centre of Environmental Technology, as well as major industrial and commercial associations. We will continue to work closely with these organizations to promote environmental audits and to encourage companies to identify opportunities for reducing resource consumption.
Bigamy Cases
16. MR ERIC LI asked (in Chinese): Will the Government inform this Council:
(a) whether, in handling alleged bigamy cases, there are insurmountable difficulties in law enforcement and evidence adduction if the ceremony of the second marriage was conducted outside the territory; if so, what the difficulties are; and
(b) what was the number of alleged bigamy cases in each of the past three years and how many of such cases resulted in conviction; of the convicted cases, how many involved the penalty of imprisonment and how many involved the penalty of fines; and how many of the alleged bigamy cases involved marriages which took place outside the territory?
SECRETARY FOR SECURITY: Mr President,
(a) Under section 45 of the Offences Against the Persons Ordinance (Cap. 212), any individual who, being married, marries another person during the life of the former husband or wife, is liable to imprisonment for a maximum period of seven years. Evidence of the second marriage is essential to prove the offence of bigamy. In order to prosecute for this offence, there must be proof that the individual has been married before he/she registered for marriage
HONG KONG LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL — 15 February 1995 2003
in Hong Kong. There is, however, no jurisdiction for the Hong Kong courts to prosecute an inidvidual, who being married here, registers himself or herself again for marriage outside the territory.
Collection of evidence could be complex where the first marriage is registered outside the territory; the Hong Kong courts have to rely on the foreign jurisdiction to provide the original records or duly certified copies of such records as evidence. An authorized official from that jurisdiction must testify in the Hong Kong courts in the event that the records of marriage are contested. Despite these difficulties, it is possible to adduce evidence for the prosecution of bigamy in Hong Kong courts provided that documentary evidence of registration is available.
(b) The number of alleged bigamy cases in each of the past three years is as follows:
1992 1993 1994
Total number of cases 51(48) 36(34) 41(36) Total number of convictions 23 15 10 Footnote:
Number in brackets represent the number of cases involving marriages which took place outside Hong Kong
Details of the types of sentences are provided as follows:
Type of sentence 1992 1993 1994 imprisonment - 1 - suspended sentence - 2 2 fine 21 9 6
fine and suspended sentence 2 3 2 ---- ---- ----
23 15 10
== == ==
2004 HONG KONG LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL — 15 February 1995 Asia-Pacific Economic Co-operation Agreement
17. DR DAVID LI asked: At the last meeting of the Asia-Pacific Economic Co operation (APEC) on 15 November 1994, all members agreed to implement an official timetable to remove all trade and non-trade barriers and to promote "free trade" within the Asian region. However, the definition of "free trade" differs among the APEC members, with some considering that trade liberalization should be on non-discriminatory grounds. Will the Government inform this Council of its own definition of "free trade"?
SECRETARY FOR TRADE AND INDUSTRY: Mr President, the APEC Economic Leaders' Meeting held on 15 November 1994 in Bogor, Indonesia, issued a Declaration of Common Resolve which, among other things, set a goal of free trade in the Asia-Pacific region, to be achieved by 2010 for industrialized economies and by 2020 for developing economies. Detailed proposals to implement this goal, including the definition of free trade, will be considered by officials of APEC member economies this year and then submitted to the APEC Economic Leaders for their decision at their next meeting, to be held in Osaka, Japan, in November 1995.
The Hong Kong Government believes that "free trade", as reflected in the free trade policy practised by Hong Kong, means the complete absence of barriers, whether in the form of customs tariff, quotas or other restrictions, to the free flow of goods and services across borders.
Students' Hostels in Tertiary Institutions
18. MR TIMOTHY HA asked (in Chinese): Due to a sharp increase in university places in recent years, the supply of student hostels has fallen short of the demand. In view of this, will the Government inform this Council:
(a) of the respective expected numbers of hostel places to be provided by each of the University Grants Committee funded tertiary institutions for its students on bachelor's, master's and doctoral degrees and other courses in the current academic year, together with a breakdown of the actual provision of hostel places in each of these institutions;
(b) whether there is any difference in the proportion of actual provision to expected provision of hostel places among these institutions; if so, what the reasons are; and
(c) whether the Government has formulated any plan to ease the shortage of student hostels; if so, what the details are; if not, why not?
HONG KONG LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL — 15 February 1995 2005 SECRETARY FOR EDUCATION AND MANPOWER: Mr President,
(a) The levels of provision of student hostels at the institutions funded by the University Grants Committee (UGC) are different largely because of historical and locational reasons. The Government does not specify the percentage of hostel places to be provided for students studying at different levels. It is up to the institutions to allocate the hostel places.
Publicly-funded student hostels are not provided for three of the UGC funded institutions, that is, the Hong Kong Polytechnic University (PolyU), the City University of Hong Kong (CityU) and the Baptist University (HKBU). The existing planning standards for the provision of publicly funded hostel places at the other four institutions, the University of Hong Kong (HKU), the Chinese University of Hong Kong (CUHK), the Hong Kong University of Science and Technology (HKUST) and the Lingnan College (LC) are:
HKU - up to 25% of the full-time student population
CUHK - up to 50% of the full-time student population
HKUST - up to 30% of the full-time student population
LC - up to 50% of the full-time student population.
The current practice is that these institutions are required to meet at least 25% of the total construction costs of the "approved hostel places" from private donations. At Annex A is a breakdown of the actual number of hostel places provided at the relevant institutions in the current academic year, that is, 1994-95.
(b) As shown in Annex A, the proportion of actual provision to expected provision of hostel places among the institutions varies. In the case of HKU and CUHK, the numbers of publicly-funded hostel places are lower than the planned maximum levels. However, the two institutions have secured private funds to provide hostel places so that the total numbers of hostel places are about 24% and 37% of their students respectively. As regards HKUST, it has currently hostel places for about 42% of its existing students, which is beyond the level stipulated by the Government. However, when the University's student population reaches the designed capacity, the publicly funded hostel places will accommodate about 30% of the student population. And for Lingnan College, since it has been successful in securing private donations for additional hostel accommodation, 72% of its student population will be provided with
2006 HONG KONG LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL — 15 February 1995
hostel places upon its moving to the new campus in Tuen Mun in September 1995.
(c) The Government will continue to encourage the UGC-funded institutions to seek private funds to provide more hostel places. Subject to the availability of suitable sites, the Government is prepared to consider granting land at nominal premium to facilitate the construction of student hostels by these institutions. Also, the UGC is now conducting a review of the space and accommodation provided to UGC-funded institutions. The requirement for student hostels is an important element of the review which is expected to be completed by late 1995 or early 1996. The Government will consider whether the existing policy on the provision of student hostels needs to be adjusted in the light of the results of the review.
Annex A
Number of Student Hostel Places provided
in the UGC-Funded Institutions in 1994-95
Government funded hostel places
Privately
Funded
hostel places Total
Planning Standards#
HKU 2 066(19%) 516(5%) 2 582(24%) 25% CUHK 2 183(20%) 1 799(17%) 3 982(37%) 50% HKUST 2 078(42%) - 2 078(42%) 30% Note
( ) denotes the number of hostel places as a percentage of the student number (fte) population *
* The actual enrolment figures of full-time students for 1994-95 will not be available until mid-March 1995 and therefore the approved student number targets are used in calculating the number of hostel places as a percentage of the student number population
# Number of publicly-funded hostel places as a percentage of the student number (fte) population
HONG KONG LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL — 15 February 1995 2007 Standing Committee on Pressure Groups
19. MS ANNA WU asked: Regarding the establishment and subsequent activities of the Standing Committee on Pressure Groups (SCOPG) during the 1970s and early 1980s, will the Government inform this Council:
(a) of the date when the SCOPG was established, what its terms of reference were, how many times it was convened, and what its membership was;
(b) which parties SCOPG had singled out for monitoring, and how these parties were selected for surveillance; and
(c) whether there were any reports on the activities of the parties under surveillance by the SCOPG; if so, where such reports were kept; and whether the parties concerned will be granted access to such reports?
SECRETARY FOR SECURITY: Mr President,
(a) The Standing Committee on Pressure Groups (SCOPG) was established in 1977 under the chairmanship of the then Home Affairs and Information Services Branch to report to and advise the Government on social and political trends and developments in Hong Kong. It was disbanded in 1982. During its establishment the Committee met twice yearly. Its membership comprised representatives from the Home Affairs and Information Services Branch, Home Affairs Department, Government Information Services and the police.
(b) The Committee had no executive or operational functions; its role was advisory. It would have made assessments on groups which had a bearing on social and political trends and developments in Hong Kong. I am not aware that it "singled out" any particular group for surveillance.
(c) All SCOPG files containing assessments and reports have been destroyed.
Non-compliance with Descriptions in Construction of Home Ownership Scheme Flats
20. MR FRED LI asked (in Chinese): There have been complaints recently from residents of home ownership scheme flats that the standards of quality of their flats were not in conformity with descriptions in the sales brochures. For
2008 HONG KONG LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL — 15 February 1995
example, in the sales brochure of Phase 15A flats at Tsz On Court and Ko Chun Court, it was stated that mosaic tiles and acrylic paint would be used for the external walls of the buildings. However, acrylic paint was used for most of the external walls of Ko Chun Court while mosaic tiles were used for Tsz On Court. It was unfair to the residents that the authority concerned neither informed them nor made any public announcement about the change. In this connection, will the Government inform this Council why the Housing Department has switched to the use of acrylic paint on the external walls of Ko Chun Court; and what appropriate remedial measures will be taken?
SECRETARY FOR HOUSING: Mr President, owing to the shortage of skilled labour for laying mosaic tiles and technological improvements in the quality of acrylic paint, the Housing Department's current practice is to use fewer mosaic tiles and more acrylic paint on the external walls of domestic blocks.
Both Ko Chun Court and Tsz On Court have a combination of acrylic paint and mosaic tiles on the external walls of their domestic blocks. There is no contradiction with the descriptions in the sales brochures of these blocks.
The Housing Department places emphasis on the quality of its construction work. Members of this Council may rest assured that the domestic blocks in Ko Chun Court, which will be completed later this year, will be built to a satisfactory standard before the flats are handed over to the purchasers.
MOTION
ORGANIZED AND SERIOUS CRIMES ORDINANCE
THE SECRETARY FOR SECURITY moved the following motion:
"That the Code of Practice for the questioning of persons and the production of material under section 3 of the Organized and Serious Crimes Ordinance, be approved."
He said: Mr President, I move the motion standing in my name in the Order Paper.
Under section 3(19) of the Organized and Serious Crimes Ordinance, I am required to prepare for approval by this Council a Code of Practice in connection with the exercise of powers and discharge of duties under section 3 of the Ordinance.
The main provisions of the Code of Practice are to set out:
HONG KONG LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL — 15 February 1995 2009
first of all, the questioning procedures for the interviews of persons subject to an order under section 3 of the Ordinance;
secondly, the guidelines for the production of material under section 3 of the Ordinance; and
thirdly, the complaint procedures for persons subject to an order under section 3 of the Ordinance.
Mr President, the draft Code of Practice has been examined carefully by the Legislative Council ad hoc group studying the Organized and Serious Crimes Bill and has its support for which I am grateful.
The motion seeks this Council's approval of the Code of Practice. This is an essential step in enabling the Administration to implement the special investigative powers under section 3 of the Ordinance.
Mr President, I beg to move.
Question on the motion proposed.
MR JAMES TO (in Cantonese): Mr President, firstly, I am very pleased that the Government has tabled this Code of Practice today. As the Organized and Serious Crimes Bill was passed last October, the public very much hope that the police can acquire these powers as soon as possible. However, even if this Code of Practice is approved by this Council today, the Ordinance cannot be invoked yet because we still have to discuss with the Judiciary about issues such as certain court rules. After the Bill was passed, the public has been expecting that the Government can exercise the newly vested investigative powers responsibly, effectively and properly to combat organized and serious crimes. Therefore, I hope the Government can discuss the court rules with the Judiciary without delay so that the police can exercise these powers as soon as possible.
Secondly, the Code of Practice concerns with the safeguarding of the rights of interviewees. In fact, codes of practice should also be drawn up in respect of the procedures for taking statements by the police and other law enforcement authorities. At present, the procedures of taking cautioned statement are also contained in the Judges Rules, but unlike the provisions of the Organized and Serious Crimes Ordinance, the Judges Rules do not provide for the presentation of the statement to the interviewees when exercising the powers of the Ordinance, nor do they provide for an explanation on the rights of an arrested person in simple and clear sentences. At present, an arrested person would only be told, "You are not obliged to say anything." In fact, this sentence is not easy to understand. To put it in clearer terms, he should be told, "You have the right to remain silent, you have the right not to say anything, and this will not constitute any evidence or allegation unfavourable to you."
2010 HONG KONG LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL — 15 February 1995
Thirdly, at present, if any officer breaches the Code of Practice, the Complaints Against Police Office would step in and deal with the complaint so arises. However, as what I have been saying, I hope the Government will continue to consider setting up a Complaints Against Police Branch which is independent of the Royal Hong Kong Police Force so that the increased powers of the police and other departments can be subjected to proper checks and balances.
SECRETARY FOR SECURITY: Mr President, all I would say is that as far as the rules of court to which the Honourable James TO referred, it is of course true that we will also need these rules of court to be made under the Supreme Court Ordinance. My information is that we will be able to make those rules within a matter of weeks and I will hope that we will then be able to enforce the relevant sections of the Ordinance speedily thereafter.
Thank you, Mr President.
Question on the motion put and agreed to.
BILLS
First Reading of Bills
SUPREME COURT (AMENDMENT) BILL 1995
BUILDERS' LIFTS AND TOWER WORKING PLATFORMS
(SAFETY) BILL
MERCHANT SHIPPING (LINER CONFERENCES) BILL
NUCLEAR MATERIAL (LIABILITY FOR CARRIAGE) BILL
INSURANCE COMPANIES (AMENDMENT) BILL 1995
Bills read the First time and ordered to be set down for Second Reading pursuant to Standing Order 41(3).
Second Reading of Bills
SUPREME COURT (AMENDMENT) BILL 1995
THE ATTORNEY GENERAL moved the Second Reading of: "A Bill to amend the Supreme Court Ordinance."
HONG KONG LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL — 15 February 1995 2011
He said: Mr President, I move that the Supreme Court (Amendment) Bill 1995 be read the Second time. The Bill puts forward an amendment to the Supreme Court Ordinance to expand the current eligibility criteria for direct appointment to the Supreme Court to include solicitors who have practised as such in Hong Kong for at least 10 years.
Members will recall that this Council passed, on 6 July last year, the Supreme Court (Amendment) Ordinance 1994 which established a formal system of appointing experienced barristers as recorders of the High Court, who would sit as temporary judges for specific periods. The qualifications for appointment as a recorder are the same as those in respect of permanent appointment to the Supreme Court, as set out in section 9(1) of the Supreme Court Ordinance. A legal practitioner in private practice is eligible for either appointment if he or she is a qualified barrister and has practised for at least 10 years as a barrister or solicitor.
Mr President, before that Ordinance was passed, the question of making solicitors also eligible for appointment as recorders of the High Court was raised by the Bills Committee. Following discussions with the Administration, the Bar Association and the Law Society, the Bills Committee agreed that the qualifications for appointment as recorders should be dealt with separately. It asked the Administration to discuss this issue with the Bar Association and the Law Society in the succeeding few months and then report its conclusion to the panel on Administration of Justice and Legal Services.
After holding a series of discussions with the Bar Association and the Law Society, the Administration reaffirmed its view that the qualifications for appointment as recorders of the High Court should be the same as those for permanent appointments to the Supreme Court. The Administration also reached a preliminary conclusion that solicitors, who have practised as such in Hong Kong for 10 years or more, should be eligible for appointment as both recorders of the High Court and as permanent judges of the Supreme Court. The views of the Bar Association and the Law Society on this preliminary conclusion were sought last November. At the same time, the Administration briefed the Panel on the Administration of Justice and Legal Services. We also took part in the Panel's subsequent discussions with the Bar Association and the Law Society in December.
Mr President, after carefully considering the different views expressed by the Bar Association and the Law Society, the Executive Council agreed on 17 January that solicitors who have practised in Hong Kong for 10 years or more should be made eligible for direct appointment to the Supreme Court and that this Bill should be introduced into this Council to make an appropriate amendment to the current eligibility criteria in section 9(1) of the Supreme Court Ordinance.
2012 HONG KONG LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL — 15 February 1995
The amendment proposed in this Bill will provide a simple and objective test of eligibility, and will ensure that no experienced legal practitioner in Hong Kong will be automatically excluded from applying for appointment to the Supreme Court. This will substantially enlarge the pool of eligible candidates.
Some people, including some Members of this Council, have expressed concern that it may be difficult to assess the suitability of the solicitor who has not appeared as an advocate or does not have the right of audience before the Supreme Court. I do not think that this should pose any insurmountable problem. Apart from Mauritius, Hong Kong appears to be the only common law jurisdiction which no longer provides any avenue by which a solicitor may be directly appointed to the High Court. Other jurisdictions which have introduced these avenues have been able to devise means of assessing the suitability of solicitors for appointment to the Bench. I am sure that Hong Kong can do so too.
Bill referred to the House Committee pursuant to Standing Order 42(3A).
BUILDERS' LIFTS AND TOWER WORKING PLATFORMS
(SAFETY) BILL
THE SECRETARY FOR WORKS moved the Second Reading of: "A Bill to provide for the design, construction, installation and maintenance in safe working order of builders' lifts and tower working platforms, for the examination and testing of such lifts and platforms, and to provide for related matters."
He said: Mr President, I move the Second Reading of the Builders' Lifts and Tower Working Platforms (Safety) Bill. The Bill provides for the introduction of the statutory regulation of the design, construction, installation, examination, operation and the maintenance of builders' lifts and tower working platforms.
The tragic deaths of 12 workers in June 1993 made it clear that existing legislation does not adequately control the use of these installations. Subsequent inspections of builders' lifts revealed a disturbingly low level of maintenance and that there was an urgent need for vigorous action to control all aspects of their use.
The operation, maintenance and examination of builders' lifts (passenger hoists) are now subject to the control of the Construction Sites (Safety) Regulations made under the Factories and Industrial Undertakings Ordinance (Cap. 59) and are under the jurisdiction of the Commissioner for Labour. The current legislation requires the building contractor to employ a competent examiner to examine the builders' lift after erection and at regular intervals of six months. The contractor is also required to employ a competent person to regularly inspect the builders' lift.
HONG KONG LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL — 15 February 1995 2013
To adequately control the use of these installations, it was decided to introduce a completely new Ordinance. This Bill makes provision not only for approval of the design of builders' lifts and to tower working platforms, but includes for the registration of contractors who supply, install, maintain and remove them and for the registration of those who examine and certify fitness for use.
The Bill also sets out the safety requirements to be followed by the owner of the equipment and that of the registered contractor and registered examiner.
The requirements of the Bill will be controlled by the Director of Electrical and Mechanical Services who will examine certificates, test reports and the maintenance log books and be in a position to stop the use of any unsafe installation.
The Bill requires the setting up of a disciplinary tribunal to regulate registered contractors and registered examiners, with an appeal procedure against any decision given by the Director of Electrical and Mechanical Services or the tribunal.
The Builders' Lifts and Tower Working Platforms (Safety) (Fees) Regulation will be produced in due course and made by the Financial Secretary upon enactment of the Bill.
Mr President, this Bill aims to provide a regulatory framework for the control of builders' lifts and tower platforms and is supported in principle by the construction industry. I commend it to members for favourable consideration.
Thank you, Mr President.
Bill referred to the House Committee pursuant to Standing Order 42(3A).
MERCHANT SHIPPING (LINER CONFERENCES) BILL
THE SECRETARY FOR ECONOMIC SERVICES moved the Second Reading of: "A Bill to provide for the implementation of the Convention on a Code of Conduct for Liner Conferences signed at Geneva on 6 April 1974; and for connected purposes."
He said: Mr President, with your permission, I shall move the Second Reading of both the Merchant Shipping (Liner Conferences) Bill and the Nuclear Material (Liability for Carriage) Bill.
Firstly, the Merchant Shipping (Liner Conferences) Bill. The purpose of the Bill is to implement in Hong Kong legislation the Convention on a Code of Conduct for Liner Conferences, which was drawn up in Geneva in 1974 under
2014 HONG KONG LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL — 15 February 1995
the auspices of the United Nations. A liner conference is a group of carriers providing international services for the carriage of cargo on particular routes with an agreement whereby its members operate under uniform or common freight rates and any other agreed conditions. The Code of Conduct establishes rules designed to ensure a balance of interest between suppliers and users of liner shipping services to avoid discrimination against shipowners and shippers of the foreign trade of any country and to ensure transparency of information to interested parties.
This code already applies to Hong Kong and is implemented here by the United Kingdom legislation extended to Hong Kong. It is necessary to enact local legislation, namely the Merchant Shipping (Liner Conferences) Bill, to replace the United Kingdom enactments so that their legal effect will continue after 30 June 1997. This systematic localization of the United Kingdom merchant shipping legislation has been under way for some years and has involved the enactment of primary and subsidiary legislation addressing such issues as marine pollution, shipping safety and the establishment of the Hong Kong Shipping Register.
The continued application in Hong Kong of the Convention will ensure that liner conferences which are based in Hong Kong are governed by uniform rules in accordance with international practices. As merchant shipping activities make a significant contribution to Hong Kong's economy, it is important that we continue to apply internationally recognized rules to our shipping industry and international trade. The Merchant Shipping (Liner Conferences) Bill will help to achieve this aim.
Bill referred to the House Committee pursuant to Standing Order 42(3A).
NUCLEAR MATERIAL (LIABILITY FOR CARRIAGE) BILL
THE SECRETARY FOR ECONOMIC SERVICES moved the Second Reading of: "A Bill to regulate liability in respect of injury or damage caused by the carriage of unclear material in Hong Kong."
He said: I now move the Second Reading of the Nuclear Material (Liability for Carriage) Bill. The purpose of the Bill is to replace through the enactment of local legislation the relevant provisions of the United Kingdom Nuclear Installation Act 1965 as applied to Hong Kong by three Orders-in-Council made between 1972 and 1986. The three Orders-in Council will cease to have effect in Hong Kong after 30 June 1997.
The Bill provides that operators of certain nuclear installations and other persons responsible for the carriage of nuclear material in Hong Kong have a duty to ensure that no occurrence involving the nuclear material causes injury to any person or damage to any property arising out of the hazardous properties of the material. The Bill also makes provision in regard to compensation payable
HONG KONG LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL — 15 February 1995 2015 for such injury or damage and provides for a 10-year limit on the time for bringing claims.
Mr President, I do not expect any consignment of nuclear material to pass through Hong Kong on its way to or from a nuclear installation in the foreseeable future. I consider, however, that it would be prudent to retain provision in the laws of Hong Kong concerning liability for the safe carriage of any such consignment. I therefore commend the Bill to this Council.
Thank you, Mr President.
Bill referred to the House Committee pursuant to Standing Order 42(3A).
INSURANCE COMPANIES (AMENDMENT) BILL 1995
THE SECRETARY FOR FINANCIAL SERVICES moved the Second Reading of: "A Bill to amend the Insurance Companies Ordinance."
He said: Mr President, I move the Second Reading of the Insurance Companies (Amendment) Bill 1995. This Bill seeks to amend the principal Ordinance in a number of areas with a view to promoting efficiency in the Insurance Authority's administration of the insurance industry, and the proposed changes also aim to enhance protection of policy holders' interests.
One of the main purposes of the Bill is to define clearly the functions of the Insurance Authority. The main function of the Insurance Authority is to regulate and supervise the insurance industry for the promotion of its general stability and for the protection of existing and potential policy holders. He is responsible for, amongst other things, supervising an insurer's compliance with the provisions of the Ordinance; promoting prudent business practices amongst the insurers; encouraging proper standards of conduct among insurance intermediaries; reviewing the regulatory system and issuing guidelines to assist in better compliance with the Ordinance. However, the Ordinance does not contain a general description of the Authority's functions. This is unsatisfactory as insurers have occasionally challenged the nature and extent of the Authority's express statutory duties. The proposed amendments describing the Authority's functions and duties, which are no different from those presently exercised by the Authority, will lead insurers to a better understanding of his regulatory role.
The second major proposal in the Bill seeks to allow the beneficial exchange of information between the Insurance Authority and other financial regulators. In view of the international nature of the insurance business and the development of financial conglomerates which offer a variety of financial services, financial regulators should be permitted to exchange information, within prescribed limits, so as to foster co-operation and enhance the effectiveness of their supervision of the relevant markets. The Bill therefore
2016 HONG KONG LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL — 15 February 1995
proposes that the Insurance Authority be allowed to disclose information to other financial regulators, local or overseas, provided that such disclosure will assist the recipient to exercise his statutory functions and is not contrary to the interests of policy holders or the public interest. Similar disclosure is already permissible under the Banking Ordinance and the Securities and Futures Commission Ordinance.
Thirdly, the Bill seeks to allow the Insurance Authority to approve a transfer of general business. Transfer of general business from one insurer to another becomes necessary when an insurer is about to cease business, for example, by reason of its insolvency or intended withdrawal from Hong Kong. Under common law, such a transfer requires the consent of each and every policy holder and is therefore extremely time consuming and costly, particularly when a large number of policies are involved. It is therefore proposed that the Ordinance be amended to introduce a statutory mechanism for transfer of general business with the approval of the Insurance Authority. This amendment will not only save time and costs for insurers, but will also ensure that policy holders are properly protected under policies issued by another authorized insurer who continues to carry on business in Hong Kong.
In addition, the Bill proposes to make a number of other amendments to the Ordinance to enable the Insurance Authority to perform certain functions for the effective supervision of insurers and to reflect clearly the intention of certain provisions in the Ordinance. The amendments comprise:
Firstly, clarifying section 5(1)(b) of the Ordinance, which requires the Authority to enter in the register of authorized insurers authorization conditions relating to restrictions only on the classes of business. Although it was never the intention that precautionary authorization conditions such as conditions on premium limit be included in the register, the wording of the section is such that any authorization conditions would have to be included. As inclusion of such conditions may be misinterpreted as signifying that the insurer is in trouble, it is necessary to amend the section to reflect clearly the original intention.
Secondly, enabling the Authority to relax requirements of the Valuation Regulation that is being drafted pursuant to section 59(a) of the Ordinance. This section empowers the Governor in Council to make regulations to determine the value of an insurer's general business assets and liabilities. Under certain circumstances, it will prove necessary to modify some requirements of the Regulation, for example, in relation to authorized insurers incorporated outside Hong Kong who are already subject to satisfactory valuation regulations in their home countries. Such modification will however only be approved on a case by case basis and provided that it is not contrary to the interests of policy holders.
Thirdly, limiting to businesses carried on in or from Hong Kong the requirement under section 22(1)(a) for separation of the assets and
HONG KONG LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL — 15 February 1995 2017
liabilities attributable to class G or H of long-term business, that is, retirement schemes business with or without a guarantee. The intention of such separation is to safeguard retirement schemes business carried on in Hong Kong and not elsewhere. However, the section applies inadvertently to overseas insurers, some of whom are not required to separate assets and liabilities attributable to such classes of business in their home countries. The proposed amendment would relieve them of these difficulties.
Fourthly, empowering the Authority to authorize an insurer to combine his Hong Kong long-term business other than classes G and H with his other overseas long term business including any additional business not defined in the Ordinance. This amendment is necessary as long-term business in overseas jurisdictions may be classified differently from the classifications set forth in the Ordinance. An overseas insurer may have difficulty in fully complying with the separation requirement under section 22(1) of the Ordinance and be required to establish a separate fund purely for his Hong Kong business. As such business may be much smaller, he would not be able to take advantage of broader, risk limiting, investment opportunities, which in turn would not be in the best interest of Hong Kong policy holders.
Fifthly, a proposal to give retrospective effect to the Regulation made by the Governor in Council in July 1994 to exclude trustee operated retirement schemes, which were unintentionally brought within the ambit of the Insurance Companies (Amendment) Ordinance 1993, which introduced classes G and H retirement schemes business. To avoid rendering retirement schemes operated by trustees illegal during the period between commencement of the Amendment Ordinance and the making of the Regulation, the Regulation shall, I propose, be deemed to take effect from commencement of the Amendment Ordinance.
Lastly, a proposal to exempt immediate annuity contracts which provide benefits to retirement scheme beneficiaries from the prohibition to combine a class G or H retirement scheme business with any other long-term business and to give retrospective effect to the exemption from the date of commencement of the prohibition. This would prevent such contracts from being rendered illegal between that date and the enactment of this Bill.
Mr President, as I said at the outset that these proposals are put forward to promote efficiency and the Insurance Authority's administration of the insurance industry and to enhance protection of policy holders' interest, as such, I commend them to Members.
Bill referred to the House Committee pursuant to Standing Order 42(3A).
2018 HONG KONG LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL — 15 February 1995 EXCHANGE FUND (AMENDMENT) BILL 1994
Resumption of debate on Second Reading which was moved
on 11 January 1995
Question on Second Reading proposed.
MR JAMES TIEN: Mr President, as Mr Ronald ARCULLI, Chairman of the Bills Committee to study this Bill, is out of town today, I rise to speak on the Bill.
The background and the salient features of the Exchange Fund (Amendment) Bill 1994 have been clearly explained by the Financial Secretary at the Second Reading of the Bill on 11 January 1995. It seeks to provide an up-to-date and more robust legal framework for monetary management and for prudent management of the Exchange Fund.
The Bills Committee has held a meeting with the Administration and representatives from the Hong Kong Monetary Authority to discuss the Bill in detail.
In scrutinizing the Bill, concern has been expressed on the provision to broaden the scope of permissible investments of the Exchange Fund to cover new financial arrangements such as derivatives which are of high market risk. The Monetary Authority has explained to us that this provision, clause 3(a) of the Bill, if enacted, will enable it to use derivatives prudently to minimize risk in Exchange Fund investments, that is, for hedging purposes rather than for the purpose of speculation. It has assured the Bills Committee that it is the existing policy of the Monetary Authority to require the holding of underlying assets in the use of derivatives. Moreover, investment decisions will be subject to the advice of the Exchange Fund Advisory Committee.
A Member of the Bills Committee has raised concern that there should be a mechanism to ensure prior knowledge of this Council of any significant change in investment policy. In response, the Monetary Authority has advised that it will be impracticable to disclose the investment strategy or any change in investment policy because of market sensitiveness. It considers that sufficient checks and balances are in place to ensure the prudent management of the Fund.
The Bills Committee has also noted that to reflect Hong Kong's autonomy in monetary and financial policies and be consistent with Article 113 of the Basic Law, the Bill, if passed, will allow for transfer to the Hong Kong Government certain powers over the control of the Exchange Fund which are presently vested in the Secretary of State in London. We have also noted that the proposals of the Bill have the support of the Chinese Government.
HONG KONG LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL — 15 February 1995 2019
Mr President, as the legal and drafting aspects of the Bill are in order, the Bills Committee supports it intact.
With these remarks, Mr President, I commend the Exchange Fund (Amendment) Bill 1994 to Honourable Members.
DR DAVID LI: Mr President, as a leading international financial centre, Hong Kong must respond to the needs of a constantly changing global economy. Therefore the financial constituency which I represent welcomes the Exchange Fund (Amendment) Bill.
The Bill seeks to update the provision for the management of the Exchange Fund. It aims to refine the mechanism of monetary management and incorporate provision for a new inter-bank payment and settlement system. Members of the financial constituency will continue to work closely with the Hong Kong Monetary Authority to ensure that the highest international standard is maintained in our financial industry. The Exchange Fund (Amendment) Bill is part of the process of necessary change to meet the needs of our industry and our international standing.
With these remarks, Mr President, I support the motion.
DR HUANG CHEN-YA (in Cantonese): Mr President, the Democratic Party supports the Exchange Fund (Amendment) Bill.
However, I must point out that one of the consequences of this amendment is that the Exchange Fund may be involved in the trading of derivatives. In a recent debate on the issue of futures, many of my colleagues pointed out that derivatives were high risk products, and substantial loss might be resulted if they were not handled with due care. I believe the painful experience of Orange County of the United States is still fresh in our memory. We agree that the Exchange Fund may be involved in the trading of derivatives for hedging purposes and to minimize risk in Exchange Fund investments. However, we do not think that the Exchange Fund should be invested directly in derivatives.
According to the explanations of the Administration, the present policy of the Exchange Fund is that it will only use derivatives for hedging purposes rather than investing directly in them. Both the Exchange Fund and since its establishment the Monetary Authority have so far maintained good track records. The present policies are sound, but personnel and policies may change. We cannot rule out the possibility that one day when Hong Kong experiences changes in its revenue income, the Administration or the Exchange Fund may change these policies and think that derivatives may be used to generate interest. We should bear in mind that the person in charge of finance in Orange Country was once applauded as the most outstanding and successful official for finance in
2020 HONG KONG LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL — 15 February 1995
the history of local governments in the United States. We must learn a lesson from that incident.
Therefore, while we support the Bill, we request the Administration to continue adopting a highly prudent policy towards derivatives. It should take the initiative to report any changes in policy to the Legislative Council at the earliest possible time so that the painful experience of Orange Country will not be repeated in Hong Kong.
The Monetary Authority holds that it is not feasible to disclose changes, if any, in investment policy because this will influence the market. We do not agree with their view because it means that the Monetary Authority will also hold back relevant information from the Legislative Council. This also means that the Exchange Fund will operate in secrecy. How can we ensure that the hard-earned money of our taxpayers will not be totally lost in the game?
Therefore, while the Administration is broadening the scope of authority in the management of the Exchange Fund, it should also set up an accountability system under which the managers of the Exchange Fund will have to take better initiative to report to the Legislative Council so that the sound operation of the Exchange Fund may be monitored by this Council more effectively. If the Administration does not do so, we may enact laws in the form of a private bill to make it mandatory for the Administration to disclose to the Legislative Council details of the operation of the Exchange Fund.
FINANCIAL SECRETARY: Mr President, perhaps I could just respond to the remarks about derivatives and investment policy.
First, I thank Mr TIEN and the Bills Committee for their support for this Bill. I can assure you that we are normally criticized for being too conservative rather than too risky, and in terms of investment policy, and in particular derivatives, it is worth noting that the Monetary Authority of course works under the guidance of the Exchange Fund Advisory Committee. That has on it representatives of the private sector, in particular the banking sector, so that there is an oversight of that very important area.
But I will look further at the question of transparency. I believe the Monetary Authority in fact has made a number of steps already to make its operations more transparent. It has recently produced a number of publications which did not exist before. We have, of course, published the annual accounts, and I will certainly look further at what further steps can be taken in that direction.
Thank you, Mr President.
HONG KONG LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL — 15 February 1995 2021 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).
ADMINISTRATION OF JUSTICE (MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS) BILL 1994 Resumption of debate on Second Reading which was moved on 11 May 1994 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).
WASTE DISPOSAL (AMENDMENT) BILL 1994
Resumption of debate on Second Reading which was moved on 11 January 1995 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).
SHIPPING AND PORT CONTROL (AMENDMENT) BILL 1994 Resumption of debate on Second Reading which was moved on 11 January 1995 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).
2022 HONG KONG LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL — 15 February 1995 Committee Stage of Bills
Council went into Committee.
EXCHANGE FUND (AMENDMENT) BILL 1994
Clauses 1 to 8 were agreed to.
ADMINISTRATION OF JUSTICE (MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS) BILL 1994 Clauses 1, 2, 3, 18, 19, 20, 22 to 50, 52, 53, 55 to 64 and 66 were agreed to. Clauses 4 to 17, 21, 51, 54 and 65
ATTORNEY GENERAL: Mr Chairman,
Amendments to English and Chinese texts
I move that clauses 51, 54 and 65 of the Bill be amended as set out in the paper circulated to Members.
The amendments to clauses 51 and 54 are drafting changes not affecting the substance of the Bill.
The purpose of clause 65 was to introduce a simple provision dealing with the protection of magistrates, in place of several very complicated provisions. However, the Administration has received representations from the Bar Association and the Law Society in respect of this proposal and accepts that further consideration of it is required. It is therefore proposed that clause 65 be deleted.
Amendments to Chinese text
I further move that clauses 4 to 17 and 21 of the Bill be amended in respect of the Chinese text as set out in the paper circulated to Members.
These amendments are required to reflect the authentic Chinese title and text of the Ordinances referred to in the Bill.
Mr Chairman, I beg to move.
HONG KONG LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL — 15 February 1995 2023 Proposed amendments
Clause 4
That clause 4 be amended, in the Chinese text, by deleting the clause and substituting — "4. 欠缺資格可作反對陪審員㆟選的理由但並非使審訊無效的理由
《陪審團條例》（第 3 章）第 6 條現予修訂，廢除“或雖被傳召出任特別 陪審員，卻無出任特別陪審員的資格，”。".
Clause 5
That clause 5 be amended, in the Chinese text, by deleting the clause and substituting — "5. 陪審員的臨時名單
第 7(3)條現予修訂，廢除兩度出現的“普通”。".
Clause 6
That clause 6 be amended, in the Chinese text, by deleting the heading of the clause and substituting —
"特別陪審員的臨時名單".
Clause 7
That clause 7 be amended, in the Chinese text, by deleting the clause and substituting — "7. 陪審員名單的確定
第 9 條現予修訂 ―
(a) 在第(1)款㆗，廢除“普通陪審員和特別”；
(b) 在第(2)款㆗，廢除“普通陪審員名單或特別陪審員名單（視屬何 情況而定）內，或從該等”而代以“陪審員名單內，或從該”；
2024 HONG KONG LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL — 15 February 1995 (c) 在第(3)款㆗，廢除兩度出現的“普通”；
(d) 在第(3A)款㆗，廢除第㆒次出現的“任何”；
(e) 廢除第(4)款；
(f) 廢除第(5)款而代以 ―
“(5) 即使本條的㆖述條文已有規定，司法常務官
可採用㆖㆒年的名單，作為本年的陪審員名單。”。".
Clause 8
That clause 8 be amended, in the Chinese text, by deleting the clause and substituting — "8. 陪審員名單的刊登及生效
第 10 條現予修訂 ―
(a) 在第(1)款㆗，廢除“普通陪審員名單，以及由總督最後確 定的特別”；
(b) 在第(2)款㆗，廢除“特別陪審員名單或普通陪審員名 單，”而代以“陪審員名單”。".
Clause 9
That clause 9 be amended, in the Chinese text, by deleting the clause and substituting — "9. 對已確定的陪審員名單作出增補的權力
第 11 條現予修訂，廢除所有“普通”。".
Clause 10
That clause 10 be amended, in the Chinese text, by deleting the clause and substituting — "10. 從陪審團名單內剔除的權力
HONG KONG LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL — 15 February 1995 2025 第 12(1)條現予修訂 ―
(a) 在(a)段㆗，廢除“特別陪審員名單或普通”；
(b) 廢除(b)段。".
Clause 11
That clause 11 be amended, in the Chinese text, by deleting the clause and substituting — "11. 陪審員小組的組成
第 13(1)條現予修訂，廢除兩度出現的“普通”。".
Clause 12
That clause 12 be amended, in the Chinese text, by deleting the heading of the clause and substituting —
"特別陪審員小組".
Clause 13
That clause 13 be amended, in the Chinese text, by deleting the clause and substituting — "13. 民事訴訟的陪審團
第 15 條現予修訂 ―
(a) 在第(1)款㆗ ―
(i) 廢除兩度出現的“特別陪審團或普通”；
(ii) 廢除“（視屬何情況而定）”；
(b) 在第(3)款㆗，廢除“特別陪審團或普通”。".
2026 HONG KONG LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL — 15 February 1995 Clause 14
That clause 14 be amended, in the Chinese text, by deleting the heading of the clause and substituting —
"組成小組時略去某些㆟的姓名".
Clause 15
That clause 15 be amended, in the Chinese text, by deleting the heading of the clause and substituting —
"刑事案件㆗的特別陪審團".
Clause 16
That clause 16 be amended, in the Chinese text, by deleting the clause and substituting — "16. 法院豁免陪審員的權力
第 28(1)(b)條現予修訂，廢除“普通陪審員名單或特別陪審員名單（或 兩者）”而代以“陪審員名單”。".
Clause 17
That clause 17 be amended, in the Chinese text, by deleting "(or special juror)" and substituting "（或特別陪審員）".
Clause 21
That clause 21 be amended —
(a) in the Chinese text, by deleting -
"《Education Regulations》
21. Forms"
HONG KONG LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL — 15 February 1995 2027 and substituting -
"《教育規例》
21. 表格".
(b) in the Chinese text, by deleting "《Education Regulations》" and substituting "《教育規例》".
(c) in paragraph (a), by deleting "名冊內的" and substituting "名單㆖所列". (d) in the Chinese text, by deleting paragraphs (b) and (c) and substituting —
"(b) 在表格 8 的註 3 ㆗，廢除“特別陪審員名單㆖所列㆟ 士、”；
(c) 在表格 10 的註 4 ㆗，廢除“特別陪審員名單㆖所列㆟ 士、”。".
Clause 51
That clause 51 be amended, in the proposed section 3(4) by deleting "bequests" and substituting "bequeaths".
Clause 54
That clause 54 be amended, by deleting "of the Criminal Procedure Ordinance (Cap. 221)".
Clause 65
That clause 65 be amended, by deleting the clause.
Question on the amendments proposed, put and agreed to.
Question on clauses 4 to 17, 21, 51, 54 and 65, as amended, proposed, put and agreed to.
New clause 53A Computation of sentences
of imprisonment
Clause read the First time and ordered to be set down for Second Reading pursuant to Standing Order 46(6).
2028 HONG KONG LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL — 15 February 1995
ATTORNEY GENERAL: Mr Chairman, I move that new clause 53A as set out in the paper circulated to Members be read the Second time.
New clause 53A amends section 67A of the Criminal Procedure Ordinance, which deals with the computation of sentences of imprisonment. At present, the length of any prison sentence imposed on a person is reduced by any period during which the person was in custody, before his conviction, by reason of a court order made in connection with the proceedings leading to his conviction. No deduction is, however, made in respect of any period of custody before the person was first taken to court. This has given rise to unfairness, particularly in relation to illegal immigrants who may be lawfully detained under Part VII of the Immigration Ordinance without a court order.
Attempts have been made to deal with this problem at the sentencing stage by drawing to the attention of the judge any period of executive detention. However, the Judiciary has called for a legislative amendment and the Administration accepts that this is the better approach.
The amendment being proposed will cover periods of detention not only under Part VII of the Immigration Ordinance but also by the police, Customs and Excise Department and the Independent Commission Against Corruption.
Mr Chairman, I beg to move.
Question on the Second Reading of the clause proposed, put and agreed to. Clause read the Second time.
ATTORNEY GENERAL: Mr Chairman, I move that new clause 53A be added to the Bill. Proposed addition
New clause 53A
That the Bill be amended, by adding before clause 54 —
"53A. Computation of sentences
of imprisonment
Section 67A of the Criminal Procedure Ordinance (Cap. 221) is amended — (a) by adding -
"(1A) The length of any sentence of
imprisonment imposed on a
HONG KONG LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL — 15 February 1995 2029
person by a court shall also be treated as reduced by
any period during which he was, immediately prior to
his first appearance in court in connection with any
proceeding relating to the offence for which the
sentence of imprisonment was imposed, in custody -
(a) of the police, Customs
and Excise Department
or Independent
Commission Against
Corruption in
connection with that
offence; or
(b) under Part VII of the
Immigration Ordinance
(Cap. 115) in connection
with that offence.";
(b) by adding -
"(3A) No period of custody, other than a
period which would have been taken into account
immediately before thecommencement of the
amendment to this section effected by the
Administration of Justice (Miscellaneous Provisions)
Ordinance 1995 ( of 1995) for the purpose of
reducing a term of imprisonment, shall be taken into
account for the like purpose under this section unless
it falls after that commencement.".".
Question on the addition of the new clause proposed, put and agreed to.
Schedule 1
ATTORNEY GENERAL: Mr Chairman, I move that schedule 1 be amended as set out in the paper circulated to Members.
2030 HONG KONG LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL — 15 February 1995
The amendments to item 8 of Schedule 1 are required to reflect the authentic Chinese text of the Ordinances referred to in the Bill.
Item 13 of Schedule 1 amends the minimum fee payable to the Urban or Regional Council for a licence of a place of public entertainment kept or used by a religious, charitable or educational body. However, the two Councils have recently been given a complete discretion to waive licence fees and item 13 has therefore become redundant and should be deleted.
Mr Chairman, I beg to move.
Proposed amendment
Schedule 1
That schedule 1 be amended, in the Chinese text, in item 8 by deleting paragraphs (a) and (b) and substituting —
"(a) 在第 7(a)(i)條㆗，廢除“可動用收入及可動用資產”而代以“財務資 源”。
(b) 在第 7(a)(ii)條㆗，廢除“可動用資產”而代以“財務資源”。". That schedule 1 be amended, by deleting item 13.
Question on the amendment proposed, put and agreed to.
Question on schedule 1, as amended, proposed, put and agreed to.
Schedule 2 was agreed to.
WASTE DISPOSAL (AMENDMENT) BILL 1994
Clauses 1 to 10 were agreed to.
SHIPPING AND PORT CONTROL (AMENDMENT) BILL
1994
Clauses 1 and 2 were agreed to.
Council then resumed.
HONG KONG LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL — 15 February 1995 2031 Third Reading of Bills
THE ATTORNEY GENERAL reported that the
EXCHANGE FUND (AMENDMENT) BILL 1994
WASTE DISPOSAL (AMENDMENT) BILL 1994 and
SHIPPING AND PORT CONTROL (AMENDMENT) BILL
1994
had passed through Committee without amendment and the
ADMINISTRATION OF JUSTICE (MISCELLANEOUS
PROVISIONS) BILL 1994
had passed through Committee with amendments. He moved the Third Reading of the Bills. Question on the Third Reading of the Bills proposed, put and agreed to. Bills read the Third time and passed.
PRIVATE MEMBER'S MOTIONS
PRESIDENT: I have accepted the recommendations of the House Committee as to the time limits on speeches for the motion debates and Members were informed by circular on 9 February. The movers of the motions will have 15 minutes for their speeches including their replies and another five minutes to reply to proposed amendments. Other Members, including movers of amendments, will have seven minutes for their speeches. Under Standing Order 27A, I am required to direct any Member speaking in excess of the specified time to discontinue his speech.
MEASURES TO ADDRESS TRAFFIC CONGESTION
MRS MIRIAM LAU moved the following motion:
"That this Council urges the Administration to fully consider the public views expressed on the "Report of the Working Party on Measures to Address Traffic Congestion" and to adopt such measures that are both fair and effective to solve the traffic congestion problem in Hong Kong."
2032 HONG KONG LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL — 15 February 1995
MRS MIRIAM LAU (in Cantonese): Mr President, after a study of almost two years, the Government published at last the Report of the Working Party on Measures to Address Traffic Congestion in November 1994 and carried out a public consultation. The Liberal Party welcomes the Government's willingness to conduct the study on traffic congestion. But on the whole, we are disappointed with the recommendations made by the Government experts. Before the Report was published, even the Transport Advisory Committee, the Government's advisor on transport matters, has not had a chance to take a glance at it. What an irony this is.
Of course, I am not saying that this report does not have any merits. Most of the measures, such as expanding public transport services, implementing traffic management schemes, introducing district road improvements, tightening control on road openings, and so on are worth supporting. But the Liberal Party begs to differ on such controversial issues as increasing the First Registration Tax (FRT) and Annual Licence Fee (ALF), quota system for private vehicles, increasing in the passage tax for the Cross Harbour Tunnels, restricting use of the Cross Harbour Tunnels to vehicles with odd or even licence numbers on alternate days, and implementing an Electronic Road Pricing (ERP) system when a feasibility study is yet to be carried out and sufficient supporting transport facilities are yet to be ascertained.
Today, I would like to discuss two aspects of these measures that spark off a lot of public controversies: which are fairness and effectiveness. First of all, it is most unfair that all these punitive measures are levelled at private cars. It is even more unfair that the Government has classified motorcycles as private vehicles. Basically, the growth of motorcycles over the past 10 years is a mere 14%. Although the number of private vehicles is greater and the growth rate is faster, the percentage of road occupancy is far less than that of goods vehicles, and very often the culprits of congestion are not private vehicles. For these reasons, it is absolutely unfair to adopt punitive measures against private vehicles only.
This is not the first time the Government has adopted fiscal measures to curb growth in the number of vehicles. In 1974 and 1982, such measures had been adopted. However, only temporary relief resulted in each case. The Government doubled FRT and increased ALF by three times in 1982, it also raised substantially the fuel tax. In spite of the economic depression and political uncertainty then, these drastic measures were effective for only a few years. By 1987, the number of private vehicles started to rise again.
Time has changed. Now that the economy of Hong Kong is robust, and its political situation is on the whole stable, how effective will it be by adopting the same measures? It is really doubtful. The main reason for most people to "keep a car" is that they have the genuine need, especially those who live in remote areas. Their cars are like their own legs. Even if cars are getting costly and it is becoming more and more expensive to "keep a car", people would rather give up food than giving up their cars simply because they need to use
HONG KONG LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL — 15 February 1995 2033
them to travel about. Under these circumstances, the measures of increasing ALF and FRT will only lower the people's quality of living, thereby casting a far-reaching impact on the community. The Liberal Party is against measures that bring about damage before benefit, and which are unfair and without any practical effect.
In the report, the Government recommends an increase in the passage tax for the tunnels. A strange phenomenon emerged. According to the results of a number of surveys, the number of people supporting and opposing ERP are more or less the same. However, in the same surveys, they oppose strongly any increase in the passage tax. Passage tax or tunnel toll is one form of road pricing, why is ERP more acceptable to the public than an increase in passage tax? The reason is simple. Although the public accept the "user pays" principle, they are unwilling to pay if they are forced to do so without options. The congestion in the two cross harbour tunnels is mainly caused by an insufficient number of passage lanes. Moreover, the Central-Jordan vehicular ferry service, the only form of transport which helps to ease road congestion, has now been closed down, hence aggravating congestion at the tunnels. Therefore, a rise of $10 in the passage tax may be completely ineffective, given the substantial need of the public to travel across the harbour. Of course, if the toll is to be increased to $100 per trip, the general public may stop using the tunnels as it is totally beyond their affordability, and using the tunnels will then become a privilege of the rich. As a matter of fact, the Western Harbour Crossing will not be completed until 1997, and it is unlikely that link roads to the Island Eastern Corridor will be completed in the foreseeable future. The delay in these programmes will directly or indirectly cause congestion in the cross harbour tunnels and areas in their vicinity. For this, the Government should shoulder the responsibility.
With robust economic development in the Territory today, frequent travelling between places is essential. Transport policy should always be planned one step ahead of economic or regional development. It is undesirable to adopt an attitude of "confronting whatever is the reality" or "taking stopgap measures" as we do now. If one takes a look at other places in the world which have an earlier economic development than Hong Kong, one can see that their plannings for transport always go ahead of those for the economy. In Hong Kong development in transport infrastructure always lags behind that in economy, and numerous road projects have been delayed time and again. Instead of reflecting upon its fault, the Government simply passed the buck to road users. This is really unfair. Had the Government been sincere, confident, brisk and credible, there would not have been such a strong aversion to the recommendations proposed by it.
Another perplexing recommendation proposed in the report is restricting the use of the cross harbour tunnels to cars with odd or even licence numbers on alternate days. The Liberal Party is of the opinion that such a measure would clearly aggravate the disparity between the rich and the poor. It would also encourage rich people to buy a few more private cars so that they can have use
2034 HONG KONG LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL — 15 February 1995
cars to everyday. Those who are less affluent would then be deprived of such right. Not only is this against the basis and principle of social equity, but this may also lead to a growth in the number of cars. The Liberal Party strongly opposes such a disturbing and unfair proposal.
Another high-handed recommendation proposed in the report is the vehicle quota system, or the Certificate of Entitlement system. While I agree that such a measure may be effective in curbing the growth of private cars, the social problems it brings about may be very serious. In a paper recently submitted to the Legislative Council Transport Panel, the Government admitted that the vehicle quota system would probably make vehicles very expensive, and that it would bring about problems such as "speculation", aging of vehicles and hoarding of old vehicles by speculators. These shortcomings would cause various social problems, leading to a disparity between the rich and the poor and creating social conflicts and unrests. Moreover, once the entitlement system is implemented, car owners will instantly be deprived of their present right to own unlimited number of cars, while car ownership with a time limit will take its place. This is no different from looting and is absolutely unfair to car owners, the number of which have now reached nearly 300 000.
Since the Government knows that the system is so infested with problems, why should it still have recommended the system as an interim measure to ease traffic congestion? According to Government, it is an alternative to raising vehicle tax. The fact that the Government asks the public to choose between the entitlement system and a fiscal measure is tantamount to asking them to choose between cyanide and arsenic. I wonder if the Government really wants the public to drink poison to quench thirst?
Though the system, one which had never been introduced in other countries before, has not aroused strong objection among the public, it is quite obvious that the public is in two minds. On the one hand, people are longing for a solution to the traffic problem that has existed for years, but on the other hand, they are unwilling to pay a "mandatory road toll". If the government sets up fee charging zones, and members of the public are faced with no alternatives, they will be forced to drive into such zones; however, an "extortionary system" such as that of the cross harbour tunnels would never gain acceptance from the public, neither would the relevant measures be definitely effective. If given no choice, many of the car owners could only scrimp on clothing and food expenses in order to continue using the roads. By that time, not only will traffic congestion stay unimproved, but the public will also start grumbling and cursing the government for that. Moreover, once the ERP system is implemented, there will be no way for the Government to "draw in its horns". By then, this policy of the Government will be overly implemented and will be beyond reversion.
HONG KONG LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL — 15 February 1995 2035
The Liberal Party is not saying that it does not support the "user pays" principle, but we feel that before ERP is to be introduced in Hong Kong, the Government must first carry out a comprehensive feasibility study and provide adequate transport facilities such as bypasses or public transport link to cope with the situation, so that motorists who have to enter the ERP zones are given choices, and vehicles just passing by such zones will not be subject to charges.
The Liberal Party is of the view that if a pilot scheme on ERP is to be carried out, Singapore could be an example to follow. A non-electronic mode should first be adopted and successfully tried out before the ERP system is implemented. By doing so, the risk of buying costly equipments could be avoided before the feasibility of the system is ascertained.
Such have been the extensive queries and objections raised by the Liberal Party on the Report, but the Liberal Party is not behaving as if it is going to object with or without reason; instead, we are analyzing the proposals, as regards their merits and demerits, feasibility as well as impact on the community, with our consistent pragmatism, adoption of the truth and negation of falsities. People may ask: we have excluded nearly all of the most effective measures the Government has proposed, so what other means are there that can address the traffic congestion problem? In our view, any measure to be adopted by the Government must be fair and effective. If the measures to be implemented are intrinsically laden with problems, they will only aggravate the situation and bring upon more negative impact to our community. The Government must be very careful about this.
"It takes more than one cold day for the river to freeze three feet deep". The traffic problems confronting us now are in fact the results of the Government's past mistakes in town planning and land use. The Government has migrated a large portion of the population to the New Territories, but most people are still working in urban areas, thus creating a tremendous demand for transport facilities; meanwhile, public transport has been unable to match with regional developments completely, consequently, all these contribute to growth in the number of vehicles and road traffic congestion. It would simply be a fairy tale to have these age-old problems solved instantly by short-term measures.
The Liberal Party is of the view that if the traffic congestion problem in Hong Kong were to be completely solved, the Government must tackle it at its roots and administer remedy to the case. In its response (on the report submitted by the Transport Branch), the Liberal Party has analysed in detail the causes of traffic congestion in Hong Kong and has proposed 20 recommendations to be considered by the Government. Such interim and long term measures include:
2036 HONG KONG LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL — 15 February 1995
1. Transport issues must be given prime consideration in future area development planning and land use, to ensure, in particular, that adequate public transport services are provided to newly developed areas.
2. The Government should provide as many job opportunities as possible in newly developed areas, so that residents need not travel to and fro the urban areas for work.
3. The Government should develop the New Territories North West (NWNT) Railway and undertake the Route 3 project without delay, in order to solve the congestion problem along Tuen Mun Road and relieve the pressing demand for freight transport.
4. The Government should allocate buffer areas in the neighbourhood of Kwai Chung so as to solve the congestion problem caused by container vehicles in that area.
5. The Government should speed up road projects which it has presently committed to carry out and build more flyovers and bypasses in busy areas.
6. The Government should develop without delay mass transit network on a region-wide basis and consider the provision of aerial railway in appropriate areas, and as far as possible, with carparks encouraging drivers to park their cars and ride on mass transit carriers or other forms of public transport.
7. The Government should build more public carparks and encourage private investment in this aspect. Adequate parking spaces should be provided in new buildings to cater for various kinds of vehicles. It must also be noted that enough parking spaces for goods vehicles should be provided so as to avoid their random parking on the streets.
8. As regards the ERP, the Government should carry out, first of all, a thorough study on its feasibility. Even if the implementation of the policy were decided, it should be effected under the premise that adequate transport facilities are to be provided for the public to choose. There is no need for the Government to introduce an electronic mode road pricing system hastily. If a pilot scheme is to be carried out, the Government should try a non-electronic mode first.