XN000022-1995-07-19 — Page 97

- 72 ·

-

Mr President,

I would first like to point out that we are not comparing like with like when we talk about hospital-acquired infections (HAIs) and construction site accidents. I am advised that HAIs in Hong Kong are generally not due to lapses in safety or hygiene in hospitals. They are attributable principally to the following reasons:

(a)

(b)

The immunity defences of many patients are already weakened by their pre-existing illnesses which may make them particularly susceptible to infections.

Many aspects of medical care require the use of invasive techniques for diagnoses, monitoring and therapy. These techniques may result in a higher probability of infection among hospitalised patients when compared with normal persons, despite the greatest care exercised by medical personnel.

As there are many factors leading to HAIs, it is difficult, if ever possible, to pinpoint the cause of the infection to be the negligence of the attending doctor. However, I am advised that in the course of treating patients, medical professionals are not immune from criminal liabilities. If a doctor causes death by recklessness, he may be liable for manslaughter, in addition to civil and professional liabilities.

In the case of construction sites, the consequences of an accident, for example a building collapse, may be disastrous and massive. We have seen this in Hong Kong and more recently, very dramatically elsewhere.

Though much has been done in recent years to promote industrial safety, the construction industry has remained a major area of concern for the Government and community. The industry employs less than 8% of the total industrial workforce, but it consistently accounts for more than 1/3 of all industrial accidents. This is a clear and urgent need for strengthening supervision at construction sites and the public expects it.

It is not the intention of Government to make Authorised Persons (APs) or Registered Structural Engineers (RSES) criminally responsible for deaths arising from construction site accidents. In asking his question, I believe Dr the Hon Samuel Wong is referring to the Buildings (Amendment) (No. 2) Bill 1995. Government's main objective in the Bill is to strengthen safety assurance at construction and demolition sites. APS, RSES and Registered Contractors are now already required under the law to provide supervision but it has not been satisfactory as there is inadequate sanction. One of the proposals of the Bill is aimed to clarify how all concerned, including APS and RSES, will maintain a proper level of supervision during the construction or demolition process and to provide sanctions for failure. The level of supervision to be required will normally be prescribed in a supervision plan to be approved by the Building Authority.