1967-10-18 — Page 1

HONG KONG LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL—18th October 1967 415

OFFICIAL REPORT OF PROCEEDINGS

Meeting of 18th October 1967

PRESENT

HIS EXCELLENCY THE GOVERNOR (PRESIDENT)

SIR DAVID CLIVE CROSBIE TRENCH, KCMG, MC

THE HONOURABLE THE COLONIAL SECRETARY (Acting) MR DAVID RONALD HOLMES, CBE, MC, ED

THE HONOURABLE THE ATTORNEY GENERAL

MR DENYS TUDOR EMIL ROBERTS, OBE, QC

THE HONOURABLE THE SECRETARY FOR CHINESE AFFAIRS (Acting) MR PAUL TSUI KA-CHEUNG, MBE

THE HONOURABLE THE FINANCIAL SECRETARY

MR JOHN JAMES COWPERTHWAITE, CMG, OBE

THE HONOURABLE ALEC MICHAEL JOHN WRIGHT, CMG DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS

DR THE HONOURABLE TENG PIN-HUI, CMG, OBE

DIRECTOR OF MEDICAL AND HEALTH SERVICES

THE HONOURABLE WILLIAM DAVID GREGG

DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION

THE HONOURABLE ROBERT MARSHALL HETHERINGTON, DFC COMMISSIONER OF LABOUR

THE HONOURABLE ALASTAIR TODD

DIRECTOR OF SOCIAL WELFARE

THE HONOURABLE TERENCE DARE SORBY

DIRECTOR OF COMMERCE AND INDUSTRY

THE HONOURABLE GEOFFREY MARSH TINGLE

DIRECTOR OF URBAN SERVICES

THE HONOURABLE DHUN JEHANGIR RUTTONJEE, CBE

THE HONOURABLE KAN YUET-KEUNG, CBE

THE HONOURABLE LI FOOK-SHU, OBE

THE HONOURABLE FUNG HON-CHU, OBE

THE HONOURABLE TANG PING-YUAN, OBE

THE HONOURABLE TSE YU-CHUEN, OBE

THE HONOURABLE KENNETH ALBERT WATSON, OBE

THE HONOURABLE WOO PAK-CHUEN, OBE

THE HONOURABLE GEORGE RONALD ROSS

THE HONOURABLE SZETO WAI, OBE

THE HONOURABLE WILFRED WONG SIEN-BING, OBE

THE HONOURABLE ELLEN LI SHU-PUI, OBE

THE HONOURABLE JAMES DICKSON LEACH, OBE

ABSENT

THE HONOURABLE KENNETH STRATHMORE KINGHORN DISTRICT COMMISSIONER, NEW TERRITORIES

IN ATTENDANCE

THE DEPUTY CLERK OF COUNCILS

MR DONALD BARTON

HONG KONG LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL—18th October 1967 416

MINUTES

The minutes of the meeting of the Council held on 20th September 1967 were confirmed.

PAPERS

THE COLONIAL SECRETARY, by Command of His Excellency the Governor, laid upon the table the following papers:—

Subject LN

No

Subsidiary Legislation: —

Proclamation No 5 of 1967.

Asiatic Emigration (Amendment) Ordinance 1967

(No 22 of 1967) to come into operation on the

22nd day of September 1967 .……..................... 144 Road Traffic (Public Omnibus and Public Car) Regulations. Delegation by Officer administering the Government 147 Boilers and Pressure Receivers Ordinance.

Boilers and Pressure Receivers (Amendment) Regula

tions 1967 ……................................................. 152 Interpretation and General Clauses Ordinance.

Specification of Public Offices ……...................... 153 Public Health and Urban Services Ordinance.

Public Health and Urban Services Ordinance (Amend

ment of Fourth Schedule) (No 2) Order 1967 ..... 155 Importation (Coffee) Regulations.

Importation (Coffee) Regulations (Amendment of

First Schedule) (No 2) Order 1967 ................… 156 Estate Duty Ordinance.

Prescription of Forms under s. 3(1) ....................... 157 Estate Duty Ordinance.

Prescription of Forms under s. 28...................….. 158 Industrial and Reformatory Schools Ordinance.

Reformatory School (Amendment) Rules 1967 ....... 159 Supreme Court Ordinance.

The Rules of the Supreme Court (Amendment) Rules

1967 ..……….................................................... 160 Interpretation and General Clauses Ordinance.

Delegations by Governor …................................... 161

HONG KONG LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL—18th October 1967 417

Sessional Papers 1967:—

No 17—Annual Report by the Community Relief Trust Fund Trustee for the year ending 31st

March 1967.

No 18—Annual Report by the Commissioner of Mines for the year 1966/67.

No 19—Annual Report by the Director of Civil Aviation for the year 1966/67.

No 20—Annual Report by the Commissioner of Inland Revenue for the year 1966/67.

Report: —

Report by the Director of Education and Social Welfare on Activities for School Children and Other Youths in the Summer Vacation (1967).

QUESTIONS

MRS ELLEN LI SHU-PUI, pursuant to notice, asked the following questions: —

(1) Can Government inform this Council as regards the number of participants, the adequacy of facilities, the availability of leadership and the amount of subsidy involved in the programme mounted during the summer, whereby most of the youth organizations, welfare agencies and schools had greatly accelerated their activities for young people, many through the instigation and subsidy from the Social Welfare Department, the Education Department and the Secretariat for Chinese Affairs?

(2) Can Government say whether the same accelerated programme is being contemplated for the next summer with the view to making it a permanent feature of activities for our young people during the long summer months?

(3) In view of the fact that many students find the summer vacation rather boring, especially those living in cramped conditions, will Government consider the possibility of keeping the Government schools open, say for 2 hours each morning, during the summer holidays, for the use of their students for sports, recreations and tutorial classes to be run and managed by their students for their younger schoolmates as a programme for practical training in leadership, sportsmanship and good citizenship?

HONG KONG LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL—18th October 1967 418

MR A. TODD replied as follows:—

He said: —Sir, in round numbers it is estimated that well over a quarter of a million children and young persons took part in a wide variety of activities organized during the summer holidays by many voluntary agencies, including the Kaifongs, by Government Departments and by the Armed Forces. I should like to be able to give a comparable figure for previous years, but hesitate to do so because the records for previous years may not be sufficiently complete to be directly comparable. A rather rough figure of 100,000 was mentioned in 1966, but this may have been an underestimate. There is however no doubt that considerably more was provided this year than ever before. Details are given in a joint report by the Education Department and the Social Welfare Department, copies of which are in the hands of honourable Members, and which will be published for general information after this meeting.

The activities provided have been varied in content, but all have had the object of encouraging the constructive and enjoyable use of leisure time. Camping, sports, picnics and outings as well as opportunities for learning and practising useful skills have all played a part. Although we estimate that over a quarter of a million boys and girls have taken part in one or more of the activities, it must be noted that a considerable number were only engaged in activities of very short duration and that many were involved in a passive form of recreation.

As to the adequacy of the facilities it is in fact almost impossible to say, numerically at any rate, what an adequate provision would be. I can only say that many of the programmes we put on were oversubscribed and that there is clearly scope for a further considerable expansion of the summer programmes as well as for the extension of this kind of activity to other vacation periods, if the means can be provided. To do this, of course, new resources will have to be tapped, including more accommodation for indoor activities, more launches, buses and other means of transport for outings, new camp sites, and more staff. Even with substantially increased resort to the use of volunteers, which I hope to see, there will still be a need for additional qualified and experienced staff to plan, organize and lead the various programmes. The number of volunteer leaders involved in the programmes conducted by the Social Welfare Department increased from 252 last year to 337 this year; but of course many volunteers have been used in other programmes too.

As regards finance I am afraid that I cannot give any useful figures on the extent of Government subsidy. Many of the agencies subvented through the Social Welfare Department provide summer activities as a regular feature of their programme, but it is not easy to determine what part of the subvention relates specifically to such activities. Additional funds became available from unofficial sources this year. Apart from a

HONG KONG LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL—18th October 1967 419

sum of $10,000 which I was able to secure from private donors for the employment of part-time workers to strengthen our own summer programmes, donations to a total well in excess of $200,000 were made by the Royal Hong Kong Jockey Club for the promotion of recreational and camping programmes run by voluntary organizations, schools and the Army, in collaboration with the Education and Social Welfare Departments. The Chinese Temples Fund also made a contribution of $7,000 to the Kaifongs towards the expenses of the activities sponsored by their Women's Section.

As for the future I hope that not only shall we be able to continue these programmes but also to secure continued expansion. A full review is shortly to be carried out of all that was done this year, much of it in a rather hurried and ad hoc manner as additional funds became available at a late stage. There is room for improvement in the overall co-ordination of the programmes provided by different bodies, and those concerned will be conferring soon, I hope, on the best way to secure this. One thing however is clear already, and that is that we cannot continue to plan these programmes through the diversion for part of the year of staff whose normal function is to help run our community centres and youth centres, and I have already formulated proposals for a small number of additional posts to be created specially for the continuous planning, organization and co-ordination of the holiday programmes.

With regard to the last part of the question, I am advised by my honourable Friend the Director of Education that it has been the custom for a number of years for summer programmes to be arranged both in government and other schools, and that in response to a circular issued by his Department, and with the stimulus given by funds provided by the Royal Hong Kong Jockey Club, these summer activities have been more extensive in scope and number than in previous years. Daily programmes were arranged in all government secondary schools and all but a few of the government primary schools were also used for this purpose. Primary school programmes are less easy to organize than secondary, because the facilities available in the average primary school are rather less adaptable to informal activities than those in a secondary school. However, a good deal of ingenuity was shown by a number of centres this summer and from the experience gained it is proposed to devise a number of model programmes for the guidance of primary schools in future years, which will include inter-school programmes and competitions to be organized by the Education Department.

The suggestion that older students should assist in organizing such informal activities is fully shared, but it is felt particularly at the primary level that general supervision must be exercised by either teachers or adult leaders, if the activities are to achieve maximum success.

HONG KONG LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL—18th October 1967 420

MRS ELLEN LI said: —Your Excellency, thank you very much for the very, very extensive answer with which I am very satisfied. Can I ask a supplementary question of our Director of Social Welfare? Sir, can you tell me whether, in your considered opinion, such a programme is worth pursuing? In view of the vast number of young people being benefited, does he consider that it was money well spent?

MR A. TODD replied as follows:—

He said: —Sir, I think the programme is indeed beneficial to many young people and I believe the money which was contributed from many sources was well spent.

SUPPLEMENTARY PROVISIONS FOR THE QUARTER ENDED 30TH JUNE 1967

THE FINANCIAL SECRETARY moved the following resolution:—

Resolved that the Supplementary Provisions for the Quarter ended 30th June 1967, as set out in Schedule No 1 of 1967/68, e approved.

He said:—Sir, the schedule for the first quarter of the 1967-68 financial year covers supplementary provision totalling $11.3 million. Of this sum $5.5 million was required for Public Works Non-Recurrent, half of which represented revotes of funds unexpended in the previous financial year. One major item of Personal Emoluments which is of interest is the provision of $2.2 million under the Urban Services Depart ment head to meet the cost of new staff for the abattoirs due to come into commission at Kennedy Town and Cheung Sha Wan.

All the items in the schedule have been approved by Finance Committee and the covering approval of this Council is now sought.

THE COLONIAL SECRETARY seconded.

The question was put and agreed to.

DIPLOMATIC PRIVILEGES (AMENDMENT) BILL 1967

THE COLONIAL SECRETARY moved the First reading of:—“A Bill to amend the Diplomatic Privileges Ordinance.”

He said: —Sir, the purpose of this Bill is to delete from the prin cipal Ordinance the statutory obligation to publish a list of persons entitled to privileges and immunities under the Ordinance. The staff of international agencies and other persons entitled to such privileges have increased very greatly in numbers, and are also constantly changing,

HONG KONG LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL—18th October 1967 421

and it has therefore proved quite impracticable to publish such a list. In fact it has never been done since the principal Ordinance was enacted in 1948. We have accordingly looked for a simpler way of achieving the same ends.

The means chosen to achieve this is to substitute a simplified method of establishing, should the question arise, who is entitled to these privileges and immunities. Clause 2 of the Bill sets out the new procedure.

THE ATTORNEY GENERAL seconded.

The question was put and agreed to.

The Bill was read a First time.

Objects and Reasons

The “Objects and Reasons” for the Bill were stated as follows: —

The purpose of this Bill is to delete from the principal Ordinance the requirement of publication of the list of persons entitled to privileges and immunities under the Ordinance and to substitute therefor a simplified evidentiary procedure in cases where the question of entitlement arises.

CORONERS BILL 1967

THE ATTORNEY GENERAL moved the First reading of:—“A Bill to make provision for the appointment and duties of a coroner, for the duties of medical officers in connexion with dead bodies and for matters relating to coroners inquiries, and to make consequential amendments to other enactments.”

He said:—Sir, this Bill is based mainly upon the recommendations of a Committee appointed by the Chief Justice to consider generally the office and duties of coroners and to make recommendations as to any changes thought desirable in the law.

As will be seen from an examination of the Comparative Table which is annexed to the printed Bill, the new provisions largely follow those to be found in the existing Magistrates (Coroners Powers) Ordinance. I shall therefore confine myself mainly to drawing honourable Members' attention to the principal differences which are to be found in this Bill.

Clause 3 of the Bill provides for the appointment of one or more coroners, who may be assisted by magistrates appointed by the Chief Justice, in the event of a vacancy in the office of coroner, or the illness or absence of a coroner, or in the special circumstances visualized in paragraph (c) of subclause (2).

HONG KONG LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL—18th October 1967 422

In recent years inquests have been carried out by magistrates appointed for that purpose, who have devoted to them the same care and attention which they have to their other tasks. It is, however, thought preferable that, as far as possible, inquests should be carried out by persons whose whole time may be devoted to this work and who can be selected for it with an eye to those qualities which are particularly desirable in a coroner.

The ideal coroner is thought by many to be a person qualified both in law and in medicine. This, however, is a rare double qualification and it is unlikely that we shall be able to appoint any coroners who possess both, though it is an ideal to be aimed at. Of the two, a legal training seems the more important, since the evaluation of evidence is a vital part of the coroner's duties, and he will invariably be provided with expert medical evidence to assist him in his task.

In accordance with clause 5, of the Bill a report is made to the coroner by a doctor on every dead body which is brought to a hospital and the coroner may order a post mortem examination if he considers this necessary.

Whenever he receives a report of a sudden death, or of a death due to accident or violence, or one taking place in suspicious circumstances, the coroner will carry out a private preliminary investigation. This investigation is in itself a valuable safeguard for the public but in the majority of cases he will, as a result of it, be fully satisfied that there are no suspicious circumstances and will not consider it necessary to carry out a public inquiry. To oblige coroners to carry out a full public inquiry into every unnatural death would impose a heavy and wasteful burden on them; it is of interest to notice that in England in little more than a quarter of the cases reported to coroners is there a public interest held.

A further safeguard against a possible omission to hold a public inquiry in a case where this is desirable is provided by subclause (5) of clause 6, which obliges a coroner to forward the papers to the Attorney General in any case where he decides that a public inquiry is unnecessary, and clause 8, which empowers the Attorney General to require a coroner to' hold an inquiry. The procedure of sending papers to the Attorney General has been followed in practice for some time though he has only very rarely exercised the power to require an inquiry.

Clause 7 of the Bill obliges a coroner to enquire into the death of persons who die after lawful execution or in official custody, which latter phrase is widened to include the various classes of person listed in the definition to be found in clause 2. This clause will not, as the corresponding provision does now, impose any obligation on the coroner to view the body of a person whose death is under inquiry. Experience has shown that a view is seldom of any help to a coroner, though he

HONG KONG LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL—18th October 1967 423

will retain a discretion to view, under subclause (3) of clause 6, if he considers this desirable.

Clauses 10 to 13 of the Bill deal with the selection, summoning and functions of a coroner's jury and contain nothing new of substance, save that by subclause (6) of clause 11 a jury may be able to bring in a majority verdict.

Clause 14 gives a coroner power to adjourn an inquiry to a fixed date or sine die, which he cannot strictly do at present. Clause 18 confers a new power on the coroner, the power to order exhumation of a body so that an inquiry into the cause of death may be held.

These Sir, are the main features of a Bill which, though largely a reproduction of existing law, makes a number of amendments which will, it is hoped, help the coroners to carry out their difficult task more effectively and economically and will further increase the protection which already exists against the danger of deaths due to criminal conduct passing undetected.

I would like to take the opportunity of correcting what seems to be some misunderstanding of the present position in the minds of a few members of the public. The number of public inquests held is very much smaller than the number of investigations carried out by the coroner into unnatural deaths. In most cases of unnatural death, the coroner has no difficulty in deciding that public inquiry is unnecessary, since the cause of death is clear. Where there is any hint of negligence, or criminal conduct, a public enquiry is invariably held.

May I, Sir, in conclusion, express appreciation of the care, patience and skill with which the magistrates have for many years discharged the exacting and often unpleasant task of investigating deaths.

THE COLONIAL SECRETARY seconded.

The question was put and agreed to.

The Bill was read a First time.

Objects and Reasons

The “Objects and Reasons” for the Bill were stated as follows: —

The main purpose of this Bill is to reinstate the office of coroner whose powers are at present exercised by magistrates under the Magistrates (Coroners Powers) Ordinance. At the same time the opportunity has been taken to make several amendments to the existing law mainly in connexion with coroners inquiries with a jury.

2. Clause 3 of the Bill gives the Governor power to appoint one or more coroners, although the Chief Justice may appoint a

HONG KONG LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL—18th October 1967 424

magistrate to act as a coroner temporarily where, in certain circumstances, a coroner is not available or when it is inexpedient for a coroner to inquire into a particular case.

3. If a coroner decides not to hold an inquiry, he must, under subclause (5) of clause 6, forward all papers to the Attorney General. This has, in fact, been the practice for some time.

4. Subclause (2) of clause 7 makes it mandatory for a coroner to hold an inquiry with a jury when a person dies in official custody. The term “official custody” is defined in clause 2 and is wider in scope than the present law, which is restricted to police custody and persons dying in prisons. It is thought desirable to extend this provisions to other cases where persons are committed to an institution. However a view of the body is not mandatory as at present.

5. Clause 11 will allow a juror to be summoned by registered post, in the same way as a juror summoned under the Jury Ordinance. Subclause (6) allows a jury to bring in a majority finding.

6. Clause 14 deals with a coroner's powers to adjourn an inquiry. In the 1962 Memorandum on the Coroner's System by the Council of the Coroner's Society of England and Wales, the recommendation was made that a coroner should have power to adjourn an inquiry sine die. This recommendation has been in corporated in subclause (1).

7. Clause 21 enables the Governor to prescribe fees to be paid to non-government medical practitioners who have performed a post mortem examination or who are medical witnesses at an inquiry.

8. Clause 22 makes the Chief Justice the rule-making authority.

MAGISTRATES (AMENDMENT) BILL 1967

THE ATTORNEY GENERAL moved the First reading of:—“A Bill to amend further the Magistrates Ordinance.”

He said: —Sir, the purpose of this Bill is to effect four minor amendments of the principal Ordinance.

Clause 2 makes verbal amendments designed to bring the wording of section 78, which deals with prosecution witnesses, into line with that used in section 21 of the Ordinance, which provides generally for the attendance of witnesses before a magistrate.

Clause 3 replaces the First Schedule to the principal Ordinance, which contains a list of Ordinances in relation to offences against which

HONG KONG LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL—18th October 1967 425

a summons may be served by post. The new Schedule contains four additional Ordinances, the Factories and Industrial Undertakings Ordin ance, the Fire Services Ordinance, the Post Office Ordinance and the Dangerous Goods Ordinance. Their inclusion in the Schedule will save a lot of time which is now spent by police officers in serving summonses under these Ordinances by hand.

Clause 4 amends the Second Schedule to the principal Ordinance so that a magistrate may hear summarily a charge of robbery. At present, although a charge of burglary may be tried summarily, all cases of robbery must be transferred for trial to the District Court or the Supreme Court. However, many offences which are technically robberies under section 40 of the Larceny Ordinance are of a less serious nature than many burglaries. It is therefore considered desirable that a magistrate should be empowered to try a charge of robbery summarily, in order to reduce the delay and extra work involved in the trial of a relatively minor offence before the District Court or the Supreme Court. This power to deal summarily with robbery is permissive, and the more serious cases of robbery will still in practice be tried by the District Court or the Supreme Court.

The amendment effected by clause 5 is a formal alteration and has become necessary as a result of an amendment of section 4 of the Sum mary Offences Ordinance. It alters references to the latter Ordinance in the third Schedule to the principal Ordinance, which sets out those offences for which a plea of guilty in writing may be received at the hearing of the case.

THE COLONIAL SECRETARY seconded.

The question was put and agreed to.

The Bill was read a First time.

Objects and Reasons

The “Objects and Reasons” for the Bill were stated as follows: —

The main purpose of this Bill is to make procedural amendments of the principal Ordinance.

2. Clause 2 of the Bill seeks to make formal amendments of section 78 of the principal Ordinance to bring that section into line with the similar provision in section 21 dealing with witnesses in summary proceedings.

3. Clause 3 of the Bill seeks to delete and replace the First Schedule to the principal Ordinance in modern form. The short titles of four Ordinances are added to those listed therein.

HONG KONG LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL—18th October 1967 426

4. Clause 4 of the Bill seeks to amend the Second Schedule to the principal Ordinance to authorize a magistrate to hear summarily a charge of robbery.

5. Clause 5 of the Bill seeks to make a formal amendment of the Third Schedule to the principal Ordinance consequential upon an amendment of section 4 of the Summary Offences Ordinance.

SUPPLEMENTARY APPROPRIATION (1966-67) BILL 1967

THE FINANCIAL SECRETARY moved the First reading of: —“A Bill to authorize a supplementary appropriation to defray the charges of the financial year ended the 31st day of March 1967.”

He said: —Sir, this Bill seeks to give final legislative authority, so far as that is necessary, for the supplementary expenditure already authorized by resolution of this Council, and is the final stage in disposing of expenditure incurred during the last financial year.

THE COLONIAL SECRETARY seconded.

The question was put and agreed to.

The Bill was read a First time.

BOILERS AND PRESSURE RECEIVERS (AMENDMENT) BILL 1967

MR R. M. HETHERINGTON moved the First reading of: —“A Bill to amend the Boilers and Pressure Receivers Ordinance.”

He said: —Sir, the Boilers and Pressure Receivers Ordinance, which became law in 1962, was a comprehensive measure of a technical nature to ensure the safe operation of boilers and pressure receivers. Following the enactment of the Ordinance, the Commissioner of Labour was appointed Registrar of Boilers and Pressure Receivers and a new section, the Pressure Equipment Section, was established in the Labour Department to administer the Ordinance. A senior professional officer with appropriate qualifications was seconded from the Marine Department and appointed Principal Surveyor of Boilers and Pressure Receivers.

The experience gained by officers of the Pressure Equipment Section over the past few years revealed certain deficiencies in the principal Ordinance. The amending Bill now before Council attempts to repair them.

HONG KONG LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL—18th October 1967 427

Sections 16 and 20 at present require the registration number of a boiler, pressure receiver, steam container, or pressure vessel merely to be marked in a conspicuous position. In practice, it has been found that these marks may become undecipherable over a period of time if they are painted over or obliterated in some other way. The purpose of identifying these registration numbers in the interests of safety is thereby thwarted. A more satisfactory way which in no way imperils the condition of the equipment is to require the registered number to be engraved either by impression or incision. The proposed amendments to sections 16 and 20 seek to ensure that, even when equipment moves or changes hands, the registered number will remain legible and easily identifiable because it is engraved on the equipment.

Section 3 of the present Ordinance has caused difficulties over interpretation with regard to a boiler, pressure receiver, or steam container which is part of the equipment of a ship, boat, or other such vessel or of a motor vehicle or tramcar. The original intention was to exclude from the provisions of the Ordinance those items which were an integral part of the motive power of the vehicles. It was not intended to exclude, for example, mobile equipment on trailers towed by vehicles or independent compressors mounted on vehicles and used at engineering and building sites. The proposed amendment to section 3(1)(c) seeks to clarify the position and to restrict the exemptions, as originally intended, to the integral motive parts of vessels or vehicles.

The use, especially in industry, of vessels supplying gaseous fuel forced out by compressed air, for example, petrol vapourizing plant, presents a hazard against which no protection is afforded under the Ordinance. It is desirable, in the interests of safety, that these vessels should be brought under control and the proposed amendment to section 3(1)(d) has this effect. Pressure vessels with a maximum storage capacity of one gallon or less of liquid fuel are excluded from control because there is little risk in their use. A similar situation exists with regard to such vessels containing gaseous fuel. As there is no simple equivalent to one gallon in terms of cubic capacity, it is necessary for practical purposes to equate one gallon of liquid fuel with 277 cubic inches of fuel vapour. This equivalent is included in the amending Bill.

Section 27 of the Ordinance relates to the periodical examination of boilers and pressure receivers which must be subjected to a thorough internal and external examination every 14 months. Experience in Hong Kong and elsewhere indicates that, because of modern methods of construction and improved design of certain types of large water-tube boilers, a relaxation of this requirement can be safely granted to those which fall into defined categories. Examinations of these special types of boilers are now considered sufficient every 26 months. An amendment to section 27 of the Ordinance provides for such a relaxation. This would mean that Hong Kong would adopt a practice which was introduced by statute in the United Kingdom in 1964.

HONG KONG LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL—18th October 1967 428

Experience has shown a defect in the existing Ordinance with regard to the period of validity of a certificate issued after the examination of equipment. To ensure that there can be no further misunderstanding, section 27 is also amended to provide that the validity of the certificate dates from the actual time of examination of the equipment and not from the date of issue of the certificate which dates, generally, do not coincide.

THE COLONIAL SECRETARY seconded.

The question was put and agreed to.

The Bill was read a First time.

Objects and Reasons

The “Objects and Reasons” for the Bill were stated as follows:—

Clause 2 extends the definition of a “pressure vessel” to provide for cases where the type of fuel stored and expelled is fuel vapour.

2. Certain appliances are presently exempted from the pro visions of the Ordinance under section 3 thereof. The effect of clause 3 is to include among such exemptions appliances which supply motive power to any road vehicle and pressure vessels of a limited storage capacity which expel fuel vapour.

3. Clauses 4 and 5 seek to ensure that the markings showing the registration numbers of appliances subject to the Ordinance are permanent and legible.

4. Clause 6 replaces the current provisions relating to the regular examination of boilers and pressure receivers by provisions under which the period between examinations varies according to the type and age of the boiler and pressure receiver.

BILLS OF SALE (AMENDMENT) BILL 1967

THE ATTORNEY GENERAL moved the Second reading of:—“A Bill to amend the Bills of Sale Ordinance.”

THE COLONIAL SECRETARY seconded.

The question was put and agreed to.

The Bill was read the Second time.

Council then went into Committee to consider the Bill clause by clause.

HONG KONG LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL—18th October 1967 429

Clauses 1 to 7 were agreed to.

Council then resumed.

THE ATTORNEY GENERAL reported that the Bills of Sale (Amendment) Bill 1967 had passed through Committee without amendment and moved the Third reading.

THE COLONIAL SECRETARY seconded.

The question was put and agreed to.

The Bill was read the Third time and passed.

ADJOURNMENT

THE COLONIAL SECRETARY moved the adjournment.

THE ATTORNEY GENERAL seconded.

The question was put and agreed to.

NEXT MEETING

HIS EXCELLENCY THE GOVERNOR: —Council will now adjourn. The next meeting will be held on 1st November.

PRINTED BY THE GOVERNMENT PRINTER, HONG KONG