Page 47 of 606
PROVISIONAL URBAN COUNCIL
69
scope covered by Mr. Wong's motion today is extended wider to a quarantine system on high-risk imported seafood, which of course covers shellfish because it belongs to the high-risk category. Mr. WONG is merely quoting deep-sea coral-reef fish as an example. Nevertheless, I consider that the weight should not be five kilograms because we are talking about five catties or above. Five kilograms is quite a weight because it is equivalent to ten catties or more. Nevertheless, this is not important. All I want to point out is that I and the other members of the Democratic Party will fully support the motion to ensure that the people of Hong Kong could 'eat safely'.
Mr. Chairman, while I support the motion, I feel sorry for the DAB for being volatile and lacking in principle. When I moved a motion at the March monthly meeting, the DAB kept suppressing my motion with various means and various pretexts. I have with me the minutes of the meeting that day and I have studied a number of times the inter-relationship between Mr. CHUNG Shu-kun's two speeches and Mr. Ip Kwok-chung's speech on the one hand and today's debate on the other.
My motion touched on shellfish and urged the Department of Health to examine the setting up of an import quarantine and source registration system. I don't know how it differed from the motion moved by Mr. WONG today, but Mr. Chung, at the March monthly meeting, said, "If there had been a quarantine system, the people of Hong Kong might have had no fish supply at all." He added, "How are we going to implement the quarantine system if one is introduced? I wonder whether this motion is enforceable." Lastly, he said, "A motion carried does not necessarily solve the hygiene problem of Hong Kong, does it? The motion is not feasible at all. Can you (Mr. Li Wah-ming) tell me where a certain lobster comes from? The fisherman himself does not know either. To move such a motion is simply an indication of complete ignorance (on the part of Mr. Li Wah-ming) of the fishing industry. The motion is a nuisance and cannot solve the problem at all."
If Mr. CHUNG's view given that day was established, that is, if what his accusation was correct, may I ask, Mr. CHUNG, are you going to support today's motion by changing your stance? I wish to ask Mr. Chung, since today's motion recommends the setting up of a quarantine system, does it mean that the people would no longer have any seafood supply at all? In moving the motion, is Mr. Wong Kwok-hing also ignorant of the fishing industry? Is this motion yet another nuisance to the people? I hope Mr. CHUNG will answer all these questions later.
Mr. Ip Kwok-chung too made things difficult for me that day, considering that there would be difficulty in implementing my motion and citing a Standing Order, he moved that the matter be referred to the Public Health Select Committee for action, just in the same way the first motion today was referred to the Administration Select Committee under a procedural motion. The motion before you now is the same in concept and in content as the
Page 47 of 606
Page 47 of 606
Page 47 of 606