12
WEDNESDAY, JULY 24, 1985
THE AMENDMENTS ALSO PROVIDE FOR A FINE OF $50 000 FOR AN EMPLOYER OR HIS AGENT WHO FAILS TO COMPLY WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE ORDINANCE.
MR CHEN MOVED THE COMMITTEE STAGE AND THIRD READINGS OF THE BILL.
RIGHT TO ORDER REHEARING SUPPORTED
****
THE AMENDMENT PROPOSED UNDER THE MERCHANT SHIPPING (AMENDMENT) BILL 1985 TO MAKE IT CLEAR THAT THE GOVERNOR MAY ÖRDER REHEARING OF AN INVESTIGATION BY A MARINE COURT INTO THE CASUALTY AFFECTING A SHIP WAS BOTH +LOGICAL AND INDEED DESIRABLE+ AND SHOULD THEREFORE BE SUPPORTED.
THIS WAS STATED BY THE HON PETER WONG IN THE LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL TODAY (WEDNESDAY) DURING RESUMED DEBATE ON THE BILL.
+HOWEVER, CLAUSE 2(B) OF THE BILL STIPULATES THAT THE AMENDMENT SHALL APPLY IN RESPECT OF ANY INVESTIGATION WHETHER HELD BEFORE OR AFTER THE AMENDMENT TAKES EFFECT, HE SAID.
CLEARLY, HE ADDED, IT INTRODUCED A RETROSPECTIVE ELEMENT AND WAS OF DIRECT RELEVANCE TO THE OSPREY INQUIRY.
MR WONG RECALLED THAT DURING THE PASSAGE OF TYPHOON ELLEN ON SEPTEMBER 9 1983, THE BARQUENTINE OSPREY FOUNDERED AT SEA WITH THE LOSS OF EIGHT LIVES.
ON DECEMBER 29 1983, THE GOVERNOR APPOINTED A MARINE COURT, UNDER SECTION 52(1) OF THE MERCHANT SHIPPING ORDINANCE, TO INVESTIGATE THE CASUALTY.
SINCE THE REPORT WAS MADE ON JULY 30 1984, ACCORDING TO THE ADMINISTRATION, FRESH EVIDENCE HAD EMERGED WHICH TENDED TO CONTRADICT SEVERAL OF THE FINDINGS OF FACTS OF THE REPORT.
THE ADMINISTRATION WAS OF THE VIEW THAT THE NEW EVIDENCE SUGGESTED THAT A REHEARING SHOULD BE ORDERED, HE SAID.
MR WONG POINTED OUT THAT UNDER THE MERCHANT SHIPPING ORDINANCE A REHEARING MIGHT ONLY BE HELD UNDER SECTION 56(1) IN CASES IN WHICH AN INVESTIGATION INTO THE CONDUCT OF A HOLDER OF A CERTIFICATE OF COMPETENCY HAS BEEN HELD+,
THE WARRANT APPOINTING THE MARINE COURT IN THE CASE OF THE OSPREY RELATED ONLY TO THE COURT MAKING INVESTIGATION AS TO THE CASUALTY AFFECTING THE SHIP.
/+IT IS