Page 50 of 146
59
58
HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL
MRS. ELLIOTT (in English):-Mr. Chairman, I understand all that, but the point is that the people of the districts have made objections, unless we are going to listen to the people in the districts when they are making objections, then the Urban Council is not going to seem to be co-operating with the District Committees and Boards. Eventually, these people may become members. I, therefore, still suggest that the Chairman should go with them and reason with them and say, alright you show me where is the better place and then they can decide whether or not, that is the only viable place. I think reasoning with them on the spot is much better than saying we have considered, let our decision stand.
DR. HUANG (in Cantonese):-I must clarify one point, Mr. Chairman. Mrs. ELLIOTT said that I refused to receive them in my ward office, it is not correct. I have received them in my ward office but they had not given me any written representations and all their information have already been known to the Urban Council. I have told them that if they have any further suggestions to write to me, to refer to the Environmental Hygiene Select Committee or to the Urban Council for reconsideration. I think if we have to proceed with our own projects, we should not change our decisions just because someone objects, because that would affect the carrying out of our projects in the future.
MISS YEUNG (in Cantonese):-Mr. Chairman, the question concerning the refuse collection point in Nullah Road had been discussed by the Director of Urban Services, and some members from Mong Kok have suggested that the site could be moved forward a bit on the one we proposed. I hope we could accept their proposal because then the site would be slightly further away from the residential buildings, as is the present proposal, and that would be beneficial to the traffic situation and we could meet their expectation as well. So, I hope Dr. HUANG could contact our Director of Urban Services to find a solution.
DR. HUANG (in Cantonese):-I would like to thank Miss YEUNG, I would refer Miss YEUNG's idea to the Director of Urban Services.
3. MR. C. S. SHUM asked the following question (in Cantonese):- (a) How many applications have been received for factory canteens to date? (b) How many have been licensed? (c) How many have been turned down? (d) How many are still being processed and what is the main cause of the delay?
THE HONOURABLE MARIA W. C. TAM, CHAIRMAN OF THE FOOD HYGIENE SELECT COMMITTEE, replied as follows (in English):-This question concerns the licensing of factory canteens and is in four parts.
The answer to the first part of the question is that between 1 August 1980 when the new licensing procedure was introduced and 26 August 1981, a total of 229 applications for factory canteen licences for buildings in the urban areas were received. This includes 18 applications which were subsequently withdrawn by the applicants themselves.
HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL
In answer to the second part of the question as to how many have been licensed, 5 factory canteens in the urban areas have been licensed so far and a number of applications are still being processed.
In answer to the question as to how many have been turned down, 55 applications have been refused because of objections from the Urban Services Department, the Buildings Ordinance Office or the Fire Services Department. These objections all relate to premises which are basically unsuitable for licensing.
In answer to the question as to how many are still being processed, 151 applications are still being processed. This figure can be divided into two categories. The first category includes those applications which have been approved in principle by the departments concerned subject to compliance with a set of licensing requirements which have been issued to the applicants. There are 50 such cases. The second category includes applications where letters setting out licensing requirements have not yet been issued because there have been objections from one or more Government departments which must be overcome by the applicants. Examples of cases in this category are premises where the existing means of escape are inadequate or major alterations to the layout of the premises are necessary. In this category there are 101 cases.
As to the reasons of the delay, delays can occur for various reasons. In respect of the first category which I have just mentioned, the main cause of delay is the time it takes applicants to carry out modifications to their premises. Delay also occurs because applicants revise their plans after they receive letters setting out health requirements thereby creating a need for the application to be re-examined. In some cases the applications simply do not take any effective action to comply with health and other requirements.
In respect of the second category, that is, those cases where applications have been informed of health requirements, delays arise mainly because of the need for applications to revise plans in order to overcome objections from Government departments and because the departments concerned need time to clear the revised plans.
MR. SHUM (in Cantonese):-Mr. Chairman, I want to ask, right now, according to what Miss TAM had said, 156 applications have been or are under consideration and 151 are being processed. After one year, we have only given licences to 5 factories. Is it because our conditions are difficult to comply with? There are 101 applications which cannot be accepted. Is it because of other reasons?
MISS TAM (in Cantonese):-Mr. Chairman, I thank Mr. SHUM for his supplementary question. On 14 April this year Mr. Stephen M. L. LAU asked how many factories were licensed up to this year, and the answer for that was
Page 50 of 146
Page 50
Page 51
Page 51 of 146