XN000022-1995-05-24 — Page 32

- 9

There can be no doubt that Hong Kong's port and airport development have had a major impact on the viability of Hong Kong's inshore fishing industry. The Government fully recognises this. We estimate that some 27,000 hectares of inshore fishing grounds, or about 17% of the total area of Hong Kong waters, are, or will be affected by dredging, reclamation and mud dumping works associated with the airport core programme and other major development projects. As a result, the livelihood of some 1,500 owners/operators of small fishing vessels in inshore waters are affected.

Having said this, we must keep the extent of the problem in perspective. Some 90% of the Hong Kong fishing fleet's catch is captured outside Hong Kong waters and total fisheries production has remained steady at over 210,000 tonnes per annum since the works began in earnest in 1991.

Does that mean we ignore the interests of inshore fishermen, or turning a blind eye to the problems they are facing? Definitely not.

We have taken a number of measures. We have made a careful assessment of the size of the problem and of the extent of inshore waters affected by development works.

We have taken, as a matter of policy, to provide ex-gratia assistance to all those who have been deriving some or all of their income from fishing in local waters. Recognising the scale and nature of the disturbance to the livelihood of the fishermen and the possible need for them to relocate their operations or move into other types of work, we proposed to Finance Committee in 1993 a change in the bases for calculating ex-gratia assistance from the notional value of one year's fish catch in the affected areas to that of three years' notional value. This was approved. At the same time. Finance Committee also approved the broadening of the scope of compensation by accepting that ex-gratia allowances should be paid also to the owners of fishing vessels exceeding 15 metres in length.

Turning now to the data used in the survey which back up the submission the Finance Committee. I take note what Members have said as regards the details. Personally I see no reason why we cannot discuss, for example, if the Chairman of the Panel of the Economic Services agreed.

see

We can actually discuss the details of how that survey was carried out. One of my concerns was the actual names and fishing vessel number. That's all. absolutely no reason why together we should not go back to to the bases on which we prepared that first survey which produced the data for calculating the submission to the Finance Committee in 1993. Let's go through that.