TNAG-1449-FCO40-1953-Minutes-and-Hansards-of-the-Legislative-Council-of-Hong-Kong-1986 — Page 10

- 2 -

only if they could manage to pass the inspection, they would

This is why the Ordinance is not too never be prosecuted.

effective after being in force for about 20 years.

Last year

the Fire Services Department received 4000 odd complaints

Each time routine involving obstruction of means of escape.

Usually

inspection was carried out and a notice was served. the offenders could be able to get by in reexaminations under false pretences, thus wasting considerable human resources while the situation remained unchanged.

It seems that

"removing obstructions only just before the inspection and bringing them back afterwards" have already become usual practices. If this is permitted to go on, how can people's

How can fire fighting lives and property be safeguarded?

It is operations get twice the result with half the effort? therefore in the interest of the public to amend the Ordinance.

The provision in the Bill makes it an offence for any person upon whom a Fire Hazard Abatement Notice has been served to allow the fire hazard to recur within a period of one year

This is the right remedy for after the date of service. preventing the trick of removing obstructions just before the

In addition, inspection and bringing them back afterwards.

there will be heavier penalties which can provide a much stronger deterrent and increase people's awareness so that they I believe that once the amended would not try to defy the law. legislation comes into effect, people will certainly have a greater sense of security and fire-fighting work will be more effective. I suggest

I suggest that Government should immediately carry out comprehensive publcity and education programmes on the amended legislation so that it will be made known to all, including women and children.

It is also necessary that fire

services personnel should strictly enforce the legislation too.

Sir, with these remarks, I support the bill.

0500S