Page 55 of 194
80
MOTIONS
HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL
1. MRS. E. ELLIOTT moved the following motion:—
RESOLVED that the Public Health and Urban Services (Designation of Libraries) (No. 3) Order 1983 be made under section 105K of the Public Health and Urban Services Ordinance, Cap. 132.'
She said (in English):--Mr. Chairman, I rise to move the motion standing in my name:---
'THAT the Public Health and Urban Services (Designation of Libraries) (No. 3) Order 1983 be made under section 105K of the Public Health and Urban Services Ordinance, Cap. 132.'
The purpose of the Order is to designate Shop A on the ground floor of 17 Playing Field Road, Kowloon as a library and to include it in the Third Schedule to the Public Health and Urban Services Ordinance, Cap 132.
I beg to move.
MRS. GRACE HO, VICE-CHAIRMAN OF THE LIBRARIES SELECT COMMITTEE, seconded (in English):-—Mr. Chairman, as the Vice-Chairman of the Libraries Select Committee, I would like to second the motion.
The question was put.
The motion was carried unanimously.
2. MR. B. A. BERNACCHI moved the following motion:—
"That the Council accepts in principle that wall-stall operators will be licensed if:-
(1) They have been in possession of a Business Registration Certificate for the stall for three years or more;
(2) They have been trading at the same place for last three years or more; which must be proved to the satisfaction of the Council in the case of any particular stall not on the 1976 survey of Wall Stalls;
(3) Their family income is entirely or largely dependent on the stall. But that the matter be referred to the Markets and Streets traders Select Committee for consideration of all necessary steps in order to implement the same.'
He said (in English):—Mr. Chairman, I rise to move the Motion which stands in my name on today's order paper, except that owing to a typographical error, paragraph (2) of the Motion reads 'which must be proceed to the satisfaction of the Council' whereas it should be 'which must be proved to the satisfaction of the Council'.
It was in the 1960s that the Council started to take on the very considerable task of thinking about licensing wall-stalls. The purpose was mainly to restrict these wall-stalls, both as to their length and as to the amount that they could jet out onto the pavement but not to put any genuine wall-stall operators out of business. Several detailed surveys of the position were carried out, but every time the survey was done, another delay was encountered. The last survey was done in 1976 but still there were reasons why the licensing procedures could not be adopted until recently.
The present position, therefore, is still a higgledy-piggledy mess. There are many wall stalls that have been occupied since the 60's or before, but were not operating, for one reason or another, at the time of the 1976 survey. These, by and large, have been refused licences, although they can prove that they were operating before, and for a number of years after 1976. On the other hand, in view of the delay, there have been a number of wall-stalls set up, most of them under tenancy agreements with the landlords of the walls for a number of years, but after 1976. After-all, we are now in 1983.
What this Motion proposes is that we should adopt in principle that wall-stall operators will be licensed, if they comply with (1), (2) and (3), the 1976 survey being thereafter reduced to a check survey. In other words, if a particular applicant is on the 1976 survey, he does not have to prove that he has been trading at the same place for the last 3 years or more. On the other hand, if the stall holder is not on the 1976 survey, he must prove, to the satisfaction of the Council, that he has been trading there for at least the last three years. However, that is not the only criterion, he must also be in possession of a Business Registration Certificate for 3 or more years, and the family income must largely be dependent upon the stall.
Having said all this, I would like to disclose to Members that in a conversation I have had recently with Mrs. ELLIOTT, she told me that whilst she was willing, to a large extent, to support my Motion she did query the stress that is laid in my Motion on three years. If, therefore, Mrs. ELLIOTT or Mr. SHUM as Chairman would like to propose an amendment to my Motion to refer the whole matter to the Markets and Street Traders Select Committee, I would not object. This is perhaps an example of the advantage of holding meetings of the Standing Committee of the Whole in public. This Motion could then have been merely suggestions by me that could have been more informally brought up in such a standing committee meeting.
If Mrs. ELLIOTT or Mr. SHUM does not move such an amendment, then I would ask Members to approve in principle the Motion. As the Motion contemplates already, being referred back to the Markets and Street Traders Select Committee, I am sure that anyhow the actual time, whether it is two years, three years, four years or even five years, will be further discussed.
The principal reason why I make this Motion is that the matter of wall-stalls now takes up a considerable amount of time both in the Markets and Street Traders Select Committee and of the Delegated Member. I do not consider that relying on the 1976 survey of wall-stalls as much as we do, is right in 1983. As I
HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL
81
Page 55 of 194
Page 56 of 194