Page 66 of 132
137
136
HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL
(4) MS. ANNA TANG KING-YUNG asked the following question (in Cantonese): In recent years, the U.C. has formulated control policies and the USD adopted enforcement strategies to deal with the problem of unlicensed hawkers. While these measures have proven to be effective to a certain extent on ordinary hawkers, they seem to be outwitted by notorious ones who are organized and backed up by certain people. It is said that the GDT's operations are constantly under the watchful eyes of certain people. The hawkers are tipped off before the GDT members arrive at the spot and hence the raids are always of no avail.
I would like to know: Has the USD considered sending GDT members to conduct special operations in plain clothes?
MR. IP KWOK-CHUNG, CHAIRMAN OF THE MARKETS AND STREET TRADERS SELECT COMMITTEE, replied as follows (in Cantonese): This question asks whether GDT members ever conduct special operations in plain clothes.
In fact, GDT members are sometimes deployed in plain clothes for scouting or similar operations, and this had been found to be useful in some circumstances as a preliminary to mounting exercises such as hawker clearances in connection with re-siting exercises. However, the Department seldom uses plain clothes tactics for raiding operations. We very rarely do that. The premise behind the concept of deploying GDT members in plain clothes to carry out raiding operations assumes that such officers, because they could approach the hawkers incognito, would be able to arrest them before the latter had the opportunity to flee. In reality, however, it is likely that the GDT staff would encounter very serious problems if they attempted to make arrests in such a manner. Hawkers would almost certainly confront GDT staff if they are not wearing uniform, and their authority would inevitably be subject to challenge. Such operations would render plain-clothed teams more likely to be exposed to the risk of physical assault by hawkers, who could allege that they were resisting because they did not believe that the officers out of uniform were GDT members. The Department has considered this issue on many occasions. Whilst the Department does not rule out its feasibility entirely, in the majority of cases, the disadvantages would likely outweigh the advantages. Therefore, in principle, in raiding operations, we do not use such tactics.
MS. ANNA TANG KING-YUNG (in Cantonese): I have a follow-up question. In fact, when the GD teams have such operations, message or the information does leak, and therefore they will not be able to get any results. Recently, I have talked to them about the difficulties, and they have raised this point. So, how is the Department to face such a situation, i.e., leaking of information essentially? And are there ways to counter such things?
MR. IP KWOK-CHUNG (in Cantonese): Thank you, Ms. TANG, for your point. Well, leaking of information does happen. But we must make clear one point.
Page 66 of 132
HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL
In making arrests and in having such raiding operations, our objective is not really to arrest them but rather to disperse them. So, that actually is our major objective. And so, if that is our objective, we feel that probably we have accomplished something. We do not really need to arrest all of them.
MOTION
(1) MR. B. A. BERNACCHI, CHAIRMAN OF THE FINANCE SELECT COMMITTEE, moved the following motion:
'RESOLVED that the Urban Council (Fees for Official Signatures and Miscellaneous Services) (Amendment) Bylaw 1993 be made under section 41A of the Urban Council Ordinance, Cap. 101.'
He said (in English): Mr. Chairman, as Chairman of the Finance Select Committee, I rise to move the motion standing in my name:
'RESOLVED that the Urban Council (Fees for Official Signatures and Miscellaneous Services) (Amendment) Bylaw 1993 be made under section 41A of the Urban Council Ordinance, Cap. 101.'
This amending bylaw arises from Council's decision to revise the fees payable from $110 to $125 for official signatures and miscellaneous services provided by public officers on behalf of the Urban Council.
The increase is reasonable, bearing in mind the type of services and the increase in the cost of living. Also, this increase brings these fees into line with the Government's own increase for similar services, which was first introduced on 1 October 1993. Whilst not compulsory for the Urban Council to follow suit, it is obviously administratively convenient to have uniformity in this matter.
Sir, I beg to move.
MR. LO KING-MAN, VICE-CHAIRMAN OF URBAN COUNCIL (in English): I second the motion.
The question was put.
The motion was carried unanimously.
ADJOURNMENT - 3.39 p.m.
CHAIRMAN (in English): That concludes the business for today's meeting. Council stands adjourned until Tuesday, 14 December 1993, at 2.30 p.m. Thank you for your attendance.
PRINTED AND PUBLISHED BY THE GOVERNMENT PRINTER, HONG KONG
Page 66 of 132