OFFICIAL RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
ミ猭Ы穦某筁祘タΑ魁
Wednesday, 7 February 1996
せるら琍戳
The Council met at half-past Two o'clock
とだ穦某秨﹍
MEMBERS PRESENT
畊某
THE PRESIDENT
THE HONOURABLE ANDREW WONG WANG-FAT, O.B.E., J.P.
畊独Щ祇某O.B.E., J.P.
THE HONOURABLE ALLEN LEE PENG-FEI, C.B.E., J.P.
腜某C.B.E., J.P.
THE HONOURABLE MRS SELINA CHOW LIANG SHUK-YEE, O.B.E., J.P.
㏄辩睶┥某O.B.E., J.P.
THE HONOURABLE MARTIN LEE CHU-MING, Q.C., J.P.
琖皇某Q.C., J.P.
DR THE HONOURABLE DAVID LI KWOK-PO, O.B.E., LL.D. (CANTAB), J.P.
瓣腳某O.B.E., LL.D. (CANTAB), J.P.
THE HONOURABLE SZETO WAH
畕地某
THE HONOURABLE LAU WONG-FAT, O.B.E., J.P.
糂祇某O.B.E., J.P.
THE HONOURABLE EDWARD HO SING-TIN, O.B.E., J.P.
︙┯ぱ某O.B.E., J.P.
THE HONOURABLE RONALD JOSEPH ARCULLI, O.B.E., J.P.
甃ㄎ瞶某O.B.E., J.P.
THE HONOURABLE MRS MIRIAM LAU KIN-YEE, O.B.E., J.P.
糂胺祸某O.B.E., J.P.
DR THE HONOURABLE EDWARD LEONG CHE-HUNG, O.B.E., J.P.
辩醇翬某O.B.E., J.P.
THE HONOURABLE ALBERT CHAN WAI-YIP
朝岸穨某
THE HONOURABLE CHEUNG MAN-KWONG
眎ゅ某
THE HONOURABLE CHIM PUI-CHUNG
糕蚌┚某
THE HONOURABLE FREDERICK FUNG KIN-KEE
毒浪膀某
THE HONOURABLE MICHAEL HO MUN-KA
︙庇古某
DR THE HONOURABLE HUANG CHEN-YA, M.B.E.
独綺笽某M.B.E.
THE HONOURABLE EMILY LAU WAI-HING
糂紌某
THE HONOURABLE LEE WING-TAT
ッ笷某
THE HONOURABLE ERIC LI KA-CHEUNG, J.P.
產不某J.P.
THE HONOURABLE FRED LI WAH-MING
地某
THE HONOURABLE HENRY TANG YING-YEN, J.P.
璣某J.P.
THE HONOURABLE JAMES TO KUN-SUN
襖略ビ某
DR THE HONOURABLE SAMUEL WONG PING-WAI, M.B.E., F.Eng., J.P.
独篿某M.B.E., F.Eng., J.P.
DR THE HONOURABLE PHILIP WONG YU-HONG
独﹜グ某
DR THE HONOURABLE YEUNG SUM
法此某
THE HONOURABLE HOWARD YOUNG, J.P.
法У地某J.P.
THE HONOURABLE ZACHARY WONG WAI-YIN
独岸藉某
THE HONOURABLE CHRISTINE LOH KUNG-WAI
嘲糠某
THE HONOURABLE JAMES TIEN PEI-CHUN, O.B.E., J.P.
バ玊某O.B.E., J.P.
THE HONOURABLE LEE CHEUK-YAN
某
THE HONOURABLE CHAN KAM-LAM
朝挪狶某
THE HONOURABLE CHAN WING-CHAN
朝篴篱某
THE HONOURABLE CHAN YUEN-HAN
朝胞糭某
THE HONOURABLE ANDREW CHENG KAR-FOO
綠產碔某
THE HONOURABLE PAUL CHENG MING-FUN
綠癡某
THE HONOURABLE CHENG YIU-TONG
綠模磁某
DR THE HONOURABLE ANTHONY CHEUNG BING-LEUNG
眎▆某
THE HONOURABLE CHEUNG HON-CHUNG
眎簙┚某
THE HONOURABLE CHOY KAN-PUI, J.P.
讲蚌某J.P.
THE HONOURABLE DAVID CHU YU-LIN
Χギ棚某
THE HONOURABLE ALBERT HO CHUN-YAN
︙玊く某
THE HONOURABLE IP KWOK-HIM
腑瓣辆某
THE HONOURABLE LAU CHIN-SHEK
糂ホ某
THE HONOURABLE AMBROSE LAU HON-CHUEN, J.P.
糂簙煌某J.P.
DR THE HONOURABLE LAW CHEUNG-KWOK
霉不瓣某
THE HONOURABLE LAW CHI-KWONG
霉璓某
THE HONOURABLE LEE KAI-MING
币某
THE HONOURABLE LEUNG YIU-CHUNG
辩模┚某
THE HONOURABLE BRUCE LIU SING-LEE
郭Θ某
THE HONOURABLE LO SUK-CHING
霉睲某
THE HONOURABLE MOK YING-FAN
馋莱某
THE HONOURABLE MARGARET NG
艷祸某
THE HONOURABLE NGAN KAM-CHUEN
肅繟某
THE HONOURABLE SIN CHUNG-KAI
虫ヲ昂某
THE HONOURABLE TSANG KIN-SHING
纯胺Θ某
DR THE HONOURABLE JOHN TSE WING-LING
谅ッ闹某
THE HONOURABLE MRS ELIZABETH WONG CHIEN CHI-LIEN, C.B.E., I.S.O., J.P.
独窥ㄤ军某C.B.E., I.S.O., J.P.
THE HONOURABLE LAWRENCE YUM SIN-LING
ヴ到圭某
MEMBERS ABSENT
畊某
THE HONOURABLE NGAI SHIU-KIT, O.B.E., J.P.
ぶ城某O.B.E., J.P.
PUBLIC OFFICERS ATTENDING
畊そ戮
THE HONOURABLE MRS ANSON CHAN, C.B.E., J.P.
CHIEF SECRETARY
︽現Ы某ガ現朝よネC.B.E., J.P.
THE HONOURABLE DONALD TSANG YAM-KUEN, O.B.E., J.P.
FINANCIAL SECRETARY
︽現Ы某癩現纯疆舦ネO.B.E., J.P.
THE HONOURABLE JEREMY FELL MATHEWS, C.M.G., J.P.
ATTORNEY GENERAL
︽現Ы某現皑碔到ネC.M.G., J.P.
MR CHAU TAK-HAY, C.B.E., J.P.
SECRETARY FOR RECREATION AND CULTURE
ゅ眃約冀㏄紈撼ネC.B.E., J.P.
MR HAIDER HATIM TYEBJEE BARMA, I.S.O., J.P.
SECRETARY FOR TRANSPORT
笲块纉ゅネI.S.O., J.P.
MR DOMINIC WONG SHING-WAH, O.B.E., J.P.
SECRETARY FOR HOUSING
┬独琍地ネO.B.E., J.P.
MRS KATHERINE FOK LO SHIU-CHING, O.B.E., J.P.
SECRETARY FOR HEALTH AND WELFARE
徖ネ褐繬霉璼O.B.E., J.P.
MR RAFAEL HUI SI-YAN, J.P.
SECRETARY FOR FINANCIAL SERVICES
癩竒ㄆ叭砛くネJ.P.
MR PETER LAI HING-LING, J.P.
SECRETARY FOR SECURITY
玂兢紋圭ネJ.P.
MR KWONG KI-CHI, J.P.
SECRETARY FOR THE TREASURY
畐叭馣ㄤвネJ.P.
CLERKS IN ATTENDENCE
畊
MR LAW KAM-SANG, DEPUTY SECRETARY GENERAL
捌霉繟ネネ
MISS PAULINE NG MAN-WAH, ASSISTANT SECRETARY GENERAL
瞶ゅ地
MR RAY CHAN YUM-MOU, ASSISTANT SECRETARY GENERAL
瞶朝窜璟ネ
PAPERS
The following papers were laid on the table pursuant to Standing Order 14(2):
Subject
Subsidiary Legislation L.N. No.
Census and Statistics (Annual Survey of Banks,
Deposit-Taking Companies, Restricted Licence
Banks and Representative Offices of Foreign
Banks) (Amendment) Order 1996 64/96
Prisons (Amendment) Order 1996 65/96
Prisons (Hostel) (Amendment) Order 1996 66/96
Minor Employment Claims Adjudication Board
(Fees) (Amendment) Rules 1996 67/96
Official Languages (Authentic Chinese Text)
(Defamation Ordinance) Order (C) 10/96
Official Languages (Authentic Chinese Text)
(Foreshore and Sea-Bed (Reclamations)
Ordinance) Order (C) 11/96
Official Languages (Authentic Chinese Text)
(Animals (Control of Experiments)
Ordinance) Order (C) 12/96
ゅン
ゅン沮盽砏材14(2)兵砏﹚τ矗ユ穦某畊凝
兜ヘ
妮猭ㄒ 猭そ絪腹
1996炊琩の参璸蝗︽钡蹿そ
Τ礟酚蝗︽の蝗︽緉翠快ㄆ矪
参璸秸琩璹 64/96
1996菏夯璹 65/96
1996菏夯盝璹 66/96
1996肂羱筍纕ヲ掉矪禣ノ
璹砏玥 67/96
猭﹚粂ゅいゅ痷絋セ节两兵ㄒ (C)10/96
猭﹚粂ゅいゅ痷絋セ玡镭の
恶祘兵ㄒ (C)11/96
猭﹚粂ゅいゅ痷絋セ笆龟喷恨
兵ㄒ (C)12/96
Sessional Papers 1995-96
No. 54 The Lord Wilson Heritage Trust
Annual Report 1994-1995
No. 55 Report of the Public Accounts Committee on the Reports of the Director of Audit on the Accounts of the
Hong Kong Government for the year ended 31 March 1995 and the Results of Value for Money Audits
(January 1996 - PAC Report No. 25)
No. 56 Hong Kong Council on Smoking and Health
Annual Report 1994-95
き︓せ穦戳ず矗ユゅン
材54腹 徖獺颈里ゅ獺癠
︓き厨
材55腹 現┎眀ヘ〆穦碞︓き计
竝竝翠現┎眀ヘ糵の颗秖Α计厨 矗ユ厨せる現┎眀ヘ〆穦 材き腹厨
材56腹 翠废籔胺眃〆穦厨
︓き
ADDRESS
Report of the Public Accounts Committee on the Reports of the Director of Audit on the Accounts of the Hong Kong Government for the year ended 31 March 1995 and the Results of Value for Money Audits (January 1996 - PAC Report No. 25)
MR ERIC LI: Mr President, on behalf of the Public Accounts Committee, I have the honour to table the Committee's Report No. 25 today.
This Report contains the conclusions reached by the Committee in considering the Reports of the Director of Audit on the accounts of the Hong Kong Government for the year ended 31 March 1995 and the results of value for money audits completed between March and September 1995. It also assesses the actions taken by the Administration in response to the recommendations made by the Committee in previous reports. Whilst we appreciate the positive attitude adopted by the Administration generally in implementing the Committee's recommendations, there remain, nonetheless, some areas of concern, which I would like to highlight.
First, the Committee is concerned about the long-standing problem of indebtedness of police officers as manifested by a number of recent press reports. This issue was first raised in the Director of Audit's Report No. 21 tabled in this Council on 17 November 1993. However, in spite of the various measures taken by the Commissioner of Police, the situation has remained less than satisfactory. We, therefore, urge the Commissioner to undertake more effective measures to tackle the problem and to keep our Police Force free from undue anxiety and stress arising from financial predicaments.
Another outstanding issue raised in the same Report concerns the superannuation schemes of tertiary institutions. Although we only focused our attention previously on the financial position of the superannuation schemes managed by the University of Hong Kong (HKU) and the Chinese University of Hong Kong (CUHK), it is now apparent that the two institutions are not the only ones in trouble. We understand that good progress has already been made by the CUHK in resolving its problem. On the other hand, the situation of the HKU remains unresolved and we have therefore asked the Director of Audit to continue keeping us apprised of the wider situation including the financial position of similar Schemes of other University Grants Committee-funded institutions.
I shall now turn to the Director of Audit's Report No. 25. The Public Accounts Committee found the slow recovery of the huge advances made by the Hong Kong Government to meet the expenditure of the United Nations High Commission for Refugees (UNHCR) for the care and maintenance of Vietnamese migrants (VM) in Hong Kong most disturbing. The Director of Audit also questioned the propriety of the Administration on the use of advance accounts to pay for the VM's expenditure under section 20 of the Public Finance Ordinance. After examining the policy intent of the legislation, the lack of legal enforcement avenues in the event of default, the evasive position taken by the UNHCR, its current financial position and the poor track record of repayment, we are in full agreement with the Director of Audit, and that is, the premises which the Financial Secretary has relied upon to justify the use of the advance accounts mechanism are no longer valid. Despite the technical legal arguments advanced by the Administration, it is still plainly obvious, to a reasonable person, that the prospect of recovering the huge debts from the UNHCR in full, and within a predictable timeframe, is highly doubtful. It is our view that the legislative intent of the Public Finance Ordinance be directed to the proper control of public expenditure by this Council and that the definition of "recoverable advances" under section 20 should carry a strict and unambiguous meaning rather than the liberal interpretation currently self-adopted by the Administration. We urge the Administration to define more precisely the scope of the delegated authority of the Financial Secretary under the Ordinance and, in the meantime, discontinue the practice of charging VM expenses to the advance accounts and should henceforth seek prior funding approval from the Finance Committee for all items of such expenditure. We also consider that by imposing the policy of "Port of First Asylum" on the territory, the British Government has undeniable obligations towards Hong Kong in helping us resolve this matter before 1997. The Public Accounts Committee vows to keep a vigilant eye on this matter. We have therefore invited the Director of Audit to conduct a follow-up study with a view to submitting a further report to you, Mr President, in October this year.
Another issue which causes us great concern is the slack management and criminal activities of the public cargo working areas. The Committee has found it difficult to accept: firstly, the Marine Department knew right from the start in 1982 that the first-come-first-serve basis of berth allocation had never worked. They had made no attempt to change this ineffective policy and little action was taken to genuinely address the problem; and secondly, notwithstanding that police investigations have uncovered long-standing criminal and triad activities in the public cargo working areas, the Marine Department still refuses to recognize this prevalent problem. In the course of the Committee's inquiry, we also noted that the Administration does not seem to have a good grasp of the cargo handling trade. We thus call on the Marine Department to face the problems squarely, adopt a positive approach in bringing the management of the public cargo working areas under control and make greater effort to understand the economics and the modes of operation of the trade. We were informed that a consultancy study has already been completed on the future development of public cargo working areas. We urge the Administration to consult the barge operators with a view to devising an open, fair and economically viable system of allocating berth spaces, which best meets the needs of the trade.
There is also one recurring issue which the Committee has asked me to express dismay and, that is, the seemingly habitual dependency of the Administration on external consultants. Whilst we recognize the fact that external consultants may be useful in some cases, we would still like to see that prior to the appointment of consultants, the Administration will critically examine the feasibility of undertaking such tasks in-house. To achieve good value for money, it is also crucial for the departments concerned to be up-to-speed on the subject matter themselves so as to appoint consultants with the right qualifications and experience, be well placed to give proper and detailed briefs of the task entrusted. All too often, as in this particular Report, we find cases passing through our desks where the departments concerned were themselves ill prepared to select, brief and then monitor the progress of the external consultants. To these culprit departments, I would strongly remind them that we would still hold them fully responsible for the wastage of public funds caused by the ineffective co-ordination with or the unsuitable appointment of consultants.
Finally, I should perhaps say a few words about the issue concerning the review of the housing benefits provided by the Hospital Authority (HA) to its employees. This issue has indeed attracted much media attention. We regret not being able to table a full report on this subject today. At the time of finalizing our report for printing on 30 January, we were still waiting for a reply from the Administration in respect of the Committee's request to examine the relevant documentary evidence concerning the formulation of the relevant policy and the Government's analysis of the long-term financial implications of the HA remuneration package. We have now got the Administration's reply and the Committee will be meeting tomorrow to consider the matter further. We will put in our best endeavour to finalize the report to the Council at the earliest opportunity.
The Committee has worked exceedingly hard in the last three months, and during which, we particularly owe our thanks to the dedicated and highly efficient Legislative Council Secretariat as well as the wise counsel of our always dependable Legal Adviser.
Thank you, Mr President.
ORAL ANSWERS TO QUESTIONS
Methadone Treatment Programme
1. 肅繟某拜畊ネΤ闽‵喱獀励璸购Θの‵喱獀励いみ笲現┎セЫ
(a) ‵喱獀励琌瑀з埃瑀舽
(b) 穦浪癚‵喱獀励璸购Θのㄤゼㄓ祇甶笆
(c) 穦浪癚‵喱獀励いみ狝‵喱祘の玂惫琁の穦σ納糤讽计ヘňゎ狝盢‵喱盿ǐの
(d) Τσ納︙搭‵喱獀励いみㄏノ癸綟﹡チ┮盿ㄓ逮耑
玂氮畊ネ
(a) 瑀琌贺篊┦穦確祇洛厩痝狡馒穦のみ瞶┮紇臫и-
砮現郸琌蹦贺家Αз瑀獀励㎝眃確狝叭ちぃ瑀贺惠璶‵喱禘獀励璸购ぃ続﹜㎝ぃ钡︘皘з瑀獀励瑀矗ㄑ贺з瑀獀励狝叭硂璸购珹痜矗ㄑ‵喱ノ狝叭㎝з瑀狝叭з瑀獀励Ξ硋˙搭ぶ–ら警秖痜亥亥з埃瑀舽︓-
Чз埃瑀聖ゎ硂贺家Α癸瑀舽耕睱瑀耕続ぃ筁瓣悔竒喷陪ボ璶笷┮Τ瑀常Чз瑀ヘ夹琌Τ螟㎝ぃち龟悔ㄤ龟计瑀常匡拒把‵喱ノ璸购癸-
ㄓ弧ノ璸购琌耕龟悔ヘ夹硂璸购ㄏ瑀穝щタ盽㎝Τ竒蕾ネ玻ネㄏ-
獶猭瑀珇癸胺眃┮盿ㄓ穕甡ㄏ-
ぃ疉の瑀τ盿ㄓデ竜笆
(b) 讽Ы纯癸┮Τз瑀獀励㎝眃確狝叭珹‵喱獀励秈︽現郸浪癚硂Ω浪癚絋粄‵喱獀励璸购セ翠俱砰з瑀獀励の眃確郸菠祇揣ノ硂璸购瑀矗ㄑ甧莉眔猭洛厩㎝Τ蠢珇-
獶猭緙摸瑀媚硂璸购穦盿ㄓ矪碞琌搭ぶ瑀珇惠―㎝瑀拜肈癸穦硑Θ鹤甡
и-
ョる竨叫瓣悔帝瑀拜肈盡產耙洛ネㄓ翠踞ヴ臮拜碞Τ闽拜肈矗ㄑ種ǎㄤい珹‵喱獀励璸购穝﹚硂璸购基嘿苂赣璸购琌"翠Θ北瑀拜肈膀ホ"
きる窽瑀盽叭〆穦〆癠翠穦狝叭羛穦秈︽兜╯浪癚セ翠┮蹦ノ贺з瑀家Αヘ夹㎝狦ㄤい珹‵喱獀励璸购硂兜╯盢惠丁ЧΘ
(c) 徖ネ竝龟琁玂ňゎ痜旅癬莉矪よ‵喱痜ゲ斗玡┕㏕﹚禘励┮―禘パ洛ネ秨矪警秖τ警秖ョ腨盞菏恨┮Τ矪よ‵喱斗禘┮菏服禘励┮ず狝ノ礛痜瞒秨羆砰τē硂笲▆︓禘励┮戮ヘ玡礚惠璶糤徖ネ竝ョ穦癸‵喱獀励璸购笲薄鶪浪癚酚笲竒喷㎝硂よ穝祇甶ぃ耞秈︽э到
(d) и-
獺璶Т到矪瞶跋ず﹡チщ禗逮耑拜肈程ㄎ快猭琌Τ闽场霍み蹦惫琁秆∕硂拜肈硂ㄇ惫琁珹
(i) 眏牡よ磅猭︽笆ゴ阑禘励┮獶猭笆
(ii) 眏毙▅㎝徊旧珹笆钡牟跋ず瑀毙旧-
斌竚皐旦タ絋よ猭腢抠-
钡獀励ョ跋ず膚快は瑀肚笆
(iii) 蹦э到吏挂惫琁ㄒ竒盽睲间よ睲埃斌竚皐旦э到縊酚单の
(iv) 躬纘钡‵喱獀励だノパв腀刮砰矗ㄑ跋㎝眃贾狝叭
Τ闽現┎场龟琁瓃贺惫琁
肅繟某拜畊ネ玂璶氮滦材场だ矗龟琁玂ňゎ痜旅癬莉矪よ‵喱ぃ筁Τ﹙龟悔碞Τ担粇盢撤耫ず‵喱讽卷ツ都ノτ璓硂陪ボΤ盢‵喱盿ㄓ產い沮и龟悔芠诡ㄇ‵喱いみ竒盽祇瞷ノㄓ狝ノ‵喱狹叫拜瞷Τぶ洛励硂ㄇいみず‵喱狝ノ矗ㄑ狝叭叫拜も琌ì镑㎡
玂氮畊ネи璶氮滦い竒矗徖ネ竝穦ぃ浪癚‵喱獀励禘┮狝叭狦赣竝粄Τ惠璶糤も碞穦蹦Τ闽惫琁肅某矗纯竒Τ陪ボ禘┮祇瞷‵喱и┯粄絋Τ硂贺薄鶪иぃ玂靡–贺玂惫琁常琌κだぇκ箂⊿Τ瑈国沮и┮‵喱禘┮祇瞷τ砆牡よ⊿Μ‵喱计秖筁计碩搭羭ㄒτē‵喱禘┮祇瞷‵喱计秖警Τ20 794采τ警玥Τ3.5そどき˙计陪ボ警‵喱计秖︓212采τ警玥︓0.02そど
腑瓣辆某拜畊ネ‵喱いみ纯竒Ω祇ネ砆叛ㄆンㄆ讽Ыボ穦э▆玂砞琁現┎セЫΤ闽秈甶︙玂牡よ㎝徖ネ竝︙皌
玂氮–丁‵喱禘┮ず玂惫琁常琌パ赣禘┮徖ネ竝ㄆ璽砫狦Τ惠璶杠牡よ讽礛穦-
矗ㄑ
谅ッ闹某拜ㄇ盡產з埃‵喱耕з埃ㄤ瑀珇ㄒフ螟叫拜現┎ㄆ龟琌㎡ノ‵喱τΘз瑀珹з埃‵喱Τぶ狦计熬︙
玂氮畊ネиビ翴‵喱璸购璶獶з瑀τ琌‵喱ノ珇τ‵喱セō癸砰礚甡パ狝‵喱碞礚斗狝緙摸瑀珇珹璣硂ㄇ瑀珇穦癸砰Τ甡瞷‵喱ノ珇璸购ㄏノ瞯獶盽約獂讽狝‵喱τ礚斗狝緙摸瑀珇癸赣单㎝穦τēΤ矪
и璶氮滦い矗璶Чз埃瑀舽龟悔琌獶盽螟ㄆ瓣悔穦㎝產常粄硂翴瑀祏丁ずз埃瑀舽パみ瞶㎝穦и-
玌嘿┮孔"み舽"-
穦琕瑀聖ㄏノ‵喱Чз埃瑀舽のЧぃ惠璶狝‵喱计‵喱璸购砞ミㄓ眔233
朝篴篱某拜畊ネパ瞷‵喱いみ籔炊硄禘场ノ初τ‵喱いみㄏノ︽︑и竒盽羘迟糓酵佛何谋の废癸近禘カチ硑Θ逮耑禘┮玱ぶ瞶穦┪箇叫拜現┎︙矪瞶硂ㄇㄆ薄
玂氮狦‵喱璸购獀励いみずㄇ痜︽ぃ浪綟痜┪ㄏノよㄤ砞琁‵喱いみ戮щ禗-
穦荷腢狝êㄇ把‵喱璸购︽浪翴ㄇ
DR LEONG CHE-HUNG: Mr President, from the answers, it is very obvious that there is some use in the methadone clinics and yet there are so many complaints about these clinics. Could the Government tell us how many of these so-called complaints are actually due to discrimination? If so, what is the Government's plan to ensure that there is no such discrimination against these people who need help?
PRESIDENT: I fail to see any relationship between this supplementary and the main question and answer.
Electronic Road Pricing Scheme
2. 独篿某拜畊ネΤ闽笲块竝瞷タ秈︽筿笵隔Μ禣︽┦╯現┎セЫ
(a) 赣兜╯瞷秈甶の箇璸ЧΘら戳︙
(b) 笲块竝ず盡穨瞷︽絪琌ì莱赣兜╯┮ま璓肂秖
(c) 璝(b)兜氮﹚琌穦糤竨戮璝礛冈薄︙の
(d) 琌纯碞龟琁兜╯┮矗某箇代┮惠肂戈方璝礛冈薄︙
SECRETARY FOR TRANSPORT: Mr President, our proposal for Electronic Road Pricing (ERP), as a measure to combat traffic congestion, received general public support during the consultation exercise. Indeed, during the debate in this Council last February, the concensus also was that ERP should be supported in principle. Honourable Members, quite understandably, asked that they be further consulted on details before implementation.
The Administration believes that ERP, which adopts the "user pays" approach, offers a more efficient, equitable and flexible way of dealing with traffic congestion.
The brief for the feasibility study on ERP has just about been completed. We shall consult the Legislative Council Transport Panel on the broad approach regarding the study later this month prior to approaching the Finance Committee in April for funds to both appoint consultants to carry out a feasibility study on ERP and for a pilot project. The study is expected to start later in the year and will take about two years to complete. The study will include the development of a transport model to evaluate various ERP strategies and to assess their impact, the evaluation of suitable technologies for an ERP system including field evaluation of the equipment, and the preparation of a conceptual design for the system.
Given existing and other new commitments, it will not be possible for the Transport Department to handle the extra workload arising from the ERP study without additional staff. To manage and supervise the study, funds have been sought in the 1996-97 estimates for the creation of a small dedicated project team comprising professional engineering and technical staff.
It is too early to indicate the staffing requirements for the implementation of a full ERP system. One of the tasks of the consultants will be to look into the resources required.
DR SAMUEL WONG: Mr President, the feasibility study on ERP is expected to start later in the year for completion in about two years. I think this is taking too long since, only 10 years ago, the Government spent some $30 million to study or research into quite a similar scheme and something must have been learnt therefrom. Our neighbouring city, Singapore, has just signed a contract for a similar scheme ......
PRESIDENT: Could you come to your question, please?
DR SAMUEL WONG: Could this study be shortened rather than taking, say, 24 months?
SECRETARY FOR TRANSPORT: Mr President, there is no full ERP system in any major city in the world. The Singapore scheme will be, I understand, implemented in 1997. The authorities there started their studies, I think, in 1993 and it has taken them three or four years. The point about ERP is that we must very carefully evaluate all the options and that is why we need to be very careful with how we proceed and make sure that we examine all the different possibilities.
The 1985 ERP scheme to which the Honourable Member referred is outdated in terms of the pricing strategy and the technology options that are now available. This is mainly because of the significant changes in the vehicle fleet size, land developments and the transport infrastructure. The traffic conditions, of course, are also very, very different. A new consultancy is therefore required to examine the various issues to which I have referred.
To give a bit more detail on what the consultancy will be asked to examine, it will include, for example, the development of a transport model for assessing the effectiveness of the ERP in reducing congestion; to identify the preferred strategy; to formulate the various options; and to experiment with a pilot scheme. The two-year period to which I referred includes experimenting with the pilot scheme and I do not think it is practical to cut the timetable short.
糂胺祸某拜畊ネ笲块氮滦材琿現┎穦るミ猭Ы癩〆穦ビ叫挤蹿〆Λ臮拜そ秈︽硂筿笵隔Μ禣︽┦╯の崩︽刚喷璸购叫拜笲块︙ぃ臮拜そ秈︽︽┦╯Τ挡狦絋﹚Τ闽璸购痷続翠崩︽礛秈︽硂刚喷璸购τ玱る盢ㄢ兜ヘㄖ矗ユ癩〆穦ビ叫挤蹿㎡
SECRETARY FOR TRANSPORT: Mr President, the Legislative Council Transport Panel will be consulted, as I have said, later this month and we will be providing more details of our approach and the pilot scheme. I think if we simply ask the consultants to devise a theoretical scheme, we will still need to experiment. And from the information we have drawn from various studies overseas, including Singapore, we believe that it will be useful to combine the two into one package, but of course we can look into this in more detail.
霉不瓣某拜畊ネ璣瓣現┎阀ぇ玡∕窗龟琁筿笵隔Μ禣璸购叫拜璣瓣現┎∕﹚よ┮σ納琌眔翠現┎描㎡
SECRETARY FOR TRANSPORT: Mr President, I believe that there are various reasons why the proposal in London was dropped. One of them has to do, I think, with the costs involved and perhaps for other local political reasons. Obviously, the situation in London is quite different from that in Hong Kong. But having said that, our project team will, as I have said, of course refer to the literature now available and to other studies that have been undertaken, so that we implement the most up to date system that is possible for Hong Kong.
辩模┚某拜畊ネ笲块矗の盢秈︽兜︽┦╯ㄤい珹╯祇甶笲块家Α璓蝶︳筿笵隔Μ禣╰参┮蹦ノм砃叫拜笲块╯╯硂璸购龟琁ぇ穦癸笲块穨ぷㄤ琌ㄇㄏノ隔ユ硄ㄣ珹砯ó单┮盿ㄓ紇臫疭琌Μ禣Θセの硄砯勘等单よ紇臫
SECRETARY FOR TRANSPORT: Mr President, our proposal for the ERP scheme is that when introduced, all types of vehicles could be included in the scheme, but we have yet to decide precisely what class of vehicles will or will not be exempted. Obviously, when it comes to light goods vehicles, this is one particular aspect that we have to consider during the course of the study. And the impact on fares for light goods vehicles, if they are included in the scheme, will of course depend on what charges are levied in respect of this category of vehicle.
MR HOWARD YOUNG: Mr President, the Secretary mentioned, in his reply to Dr Samuel WONG's supplementary, that Singapore will implement its scheme in 1997. Would it not make more sense for our study to be edged back slightly, that is, not to start at the end of this year but start shortly after Singapore has implemented, in order to shorten the time for consultancy and perhaps come up with a more effective consultancy?
SECRETARY FOR TRANSPORT: I think, Mr President, with respect, different administrations have different policies insofar as transport is concerned, and whilst we will certainly draw on the Singapore experience, to defer our own study will not in fact shorten the lead time, but will in fact mean that the actual implementation will be much delayed.
㏄辩睶┥某拜畊ネ挪筁箂扳穨ぃ春╬產ó綪扳计碩τ旧璓硂︽穨璚硈ぱ現┎穦╬產ó糤瞯ゑ箇戳砛τ┑筐崩︽筿笵隔Μ禣刚喷璸购
SECRETARY FOR TRANSPORT: Mr President, the short answer is no. I, of course, appreciate that there has been a decline in the growth in the private car industry. But as I said in my main reply, the benefit of ERP is that it offers a more efficient, equitable and flexible way of dealing with traffic congestion. If and when this system is implemented, because it adopts a "user pays" principle, I hope that it will mean that in the long term we will not have to rely simply on taxes on vehicles to deal with traffic congestion.
Enrolment of Traditional Chinese Medicine Practitioners
3. 馋莱某拜畊ネ挪磅穨い洛祅癘セるら篒ゎ現┎セЫ
(a) Τぶビ叫祅癘
(b) ヘ玡ゎΤぶ﹙ビ叫癶临倒ビ叫の癶临璶︙
(c) (b)兜┮瓃ビ叫砆癶临Τ⊿Τ诀ㄑ/-
禗の
(d) 磅穨い洛祅癘祘Ч拨現┎盢穦蹦︙贺蛤秈
徖ネ褐氮畊ネΤ闽セ翠磅穨い洛祅癘ビ叫讽Ыセるら篒ゎ祅癘钡莉7 504﹙ビ叫
い洛媚祇甶膚称〆穦"膚〆穦"烈盡砫舱Θミ糵舱璽砫糵瓃ビ叫篒︓セるらゎ糵4 237﹙ビ叫ㄤい79﹙ぃ莉钡
瓃79﹙ビ叫ゼ莉钡珹
- 59﹙ビ叫ゼ矗ユì镑ゅンやㄤビ叫
- Τ13﹙ビ叫祅癘絛瞅ㄓ︑"崩"""洛畍のい媚籹硑坝单ビ叫
- Τ﹙ビ叫ㄓ︑獶翠﹡チ
膚〆穦矪穦硄ビ叫祅癘砆┶睲贰秆睦ㄤい矗眶-
Τ舦14らず矗禗膚〆穦∕﹚盢妮程沧∕﹚
糵ЧΘи-
穦盢Μ栋眔ㄓ戈块筿福獽秈︽だ猂箇戳セる獽穦Τ挡狦硂ㄇ戈盢Τ膚〆穦だ秆い洛翠磅穨薄鶪の纯钡ㄇ癡絤獽碞︙ミ猭﹚猭﹚琜篶玃秈祇甶の砏恨セ翠い洛媚盡穨の磅穨い洛砞ミ爹矗ㄑ種ǎΤ闽猭ㄒョ盢砏﹚Θミ猭﹚舱麓猭ㄒ莉眔硄筁獽膚〆穦
馋莱某拜畊ネи稱矗计兜蛤秈借高材и稱笵......
PRESIDENT: I am sorry, Mr MOK Ying-fan, you are only allowed one supplementary. If you wish to ask a further supplementary, I can put you at the end of the queue.
馋莱某拜琌畊ネ瘤礛祅癘耕箇戳ぶ狦痷Τㄇ岿筁硂Ω祅癘戳叫拜現┎穦倒ぉ-
诀穦秈︽祅癘
徖ネ褐氮さΩ祅癘计籔и-
箇璸獶盽澸狦Τㄇ疭薄τ筐祅癘玥斗パ膚〆穦盡產舱∕﹚琌钡-
ビ叫и-
さΩ┮蹦ノよ猭琌荷秖糴肞矪瞶拜肈ぃ稱Τ岿簗辨荷秖笵翠磅穨い洛畍薄鶪
辩醇翬某拜и璶ビ厨痲и琌硂膚〆穦Θ徖ネ褐璶氮滦矗膀琘ㄇΤ79ビ叫祅癘砆┶荡┪癶ビ叫狦らΤ闽い洛爹兵ㄒ辅龟磅︽穦琵硂79磅穨璝硂穦-
ネ璸瞷拜肈璝穦杠琌蛮夹非
PRESIDENT: May I ask you whether or not there is money involved, Dr LEONG?
DR LEONG CHE-HUNG: I am sorry, I did not catch you, Mr President.
PRESIDENT: May I seek clarification as to whether or not there is money involved in your being a member of the preparatory committee?
DR LEONG CHE-HUNG: Not this preparatory committee, Mr President. I do not know about the other one.
徖ネ褐氮и-
瞷┮弧琌祅癘璸购狦盢ㄓ砞ミ爹玥礚阶さΩΤ祅癘常ぃ穦紇臫ヴ︙盢ㄓ爹戈
郭Θ某拜叫拜膚〆穦烈糵舱Θ琌膚〆穦Θ叫拜琌パ糵舱矪瞶禗
徖ネ褐氮膚〆穦烈盡產舱Θ场だ膚〆穦Θ场だ玥膚〆穦糵舱穦硓筁舱ず盡穨糵琩┮Τ禗ビ叫τ┮Τビ叫ョ斗ユパ膚〆穦Ω糵
糕蚌┚某拜畊ネ﹁洛よΤ盡砞ミㄒ泊┪辩某"浻"洛ネ現┎糵硄筁4 158﹙いΤ盡砞ミ︙癸-
蝶︳讽-
磅穨現┎穦砛-
︑и肚摸盡洛ネ
徖ネ褐氮Τ闽硂祅癘璸购戈斗膚〆穦糵┮Τ祅癘戈だ猂и-
箇璸セるр┮Τ戈だ猂筁眔某┮矗の戈
Section 88 of Inland Revenue Ordinance
4. 眎▆某拜畊ネ挪Τ厨旧祙叭Ы纯獺璶―琘厩厩ネ穦эㄤ穦彻ずΤ闽現獀ヘ夹兵ゅ㎝氨快ㄣ現獀┦借笆才祙叭兵ㄒ材88兵碞稯到刮砰砏﹚現┎セЫ
(a) 瞷Τぶ盡皘厩ネ刮砰砆跌祙叭兵ㄒ材88兵┮﹚稯到刮砰τ莉僚煤祙
(b) 络﹚厩ネ刮砰琌妮祙叭兵ㄒ材88兵┮﹚稯到刮砰ㄣ砰非玥︙の
(c) 現┎︙﹚パ赣单厩ネ刮砰羭快Ξ矗そチ毙▅闽みㄆの穦ㄆ叭笆琌笻は(b)兜┮瓃非玥
畐叭氮畊ネ眎某拜肈だ场だи瞷氮滦
(a) 瞷Τ盡皘厩ネ刮砰砆祙叭Ы粄稯到刮砰τ莉僚煤祙
(b) 沮琂﹚祙叭玥祙叭Ы钡"玃秈毙▅"祙叭兵ㄒ莉僚煤祙稯到ノ硚
盡皘厩ネ刮砰砆跌妮"玃秈毙▅"舱麓約竡τē赣单刮砰笆琌Ч俱盡毙▅场だ
(c) 砆跌稯到刮砰τ莉僚煤祙舱麓璶蝴ㄤ莉眔僚煤祙︗眖ㄆ瞶薄鶪砆跌笷璓ㄤ稯到ヘ笆厩ネ刮砰璝璶蝴ㄤ莉眔僚煤祙︗獽眖ㄆ瞶薄鶪砆跌笷璓ㄤ"玃秈毙▅"ヘ笆
ㄓ弧羭快矗そチ毙▅の闽み穦单厩ネ笆砆跌才"玃秈毙▅"ヘ琌安羭快㎝"玃秈毙▅"礚闽笆獽ぃ穦才"玃秈毙▅"τ莉僚煤祙非玥
眎▆某拜畊ネ畐叭秈˙弧安盡皘厩ネ刮砰碞ㄇ穦ㄆン秈︽帽笲笆┪ボ叫腀笷癸現┎惫琁ぃ骸┪–羭︽饱├せ笆琌才畐叭氮滦(c)场だ┮弧"瞶薄鶪砆跌笷璓ㄤ"玃秈毙▅"ヘ笆"璝礛赣刮砰莉僚煤祙㎡
SECRETARY FOR THE TREASURY: Mr President, may I have your ruling as to whether this is in order according to Standing Order 18(1)(h)?
PRESIDENT: I think Dr CHEUNG was asking you for a further elucidation of your original answer as to whether certain activities are political or not for the advancement of education.
SECRETARY FOR THE TREASURY: Mr President, if I heard Dr CHEUNG's question correctly, his question was on the hypothetical situation where a student body is engaged in various sorts of activities.
PRESIDENT: Would you like to rephrase it, Dr CHEUNG?
眎▆某拜畊ネи借高獶安砞┦借畐叭氮滦琌ノ琘ㄇ安砞ㄒ羭快ㄇ矗そチ毙▅の闽み穦厩ネ笆玥砆跌才"玃秈毙▅"ヘи琌辨蛤秈硂翴
PRESIDENT: Dr CHEUNG, please state the fact.
眎▆某拜安厩ネ癸ㄇㄣ砰穦ㄆン笷-
猭-
闽み穦瞷┪羭︽–饱├せ笆闽み穦瓣產瞷硂琌才"玃秈毙▅"ヘ夹㎡
PRESIDENT: Was that a fact, as stated by you, for certain purposes? Can you cite one case in which the charity status is lost?
眎▆某拜畊ネ︙и穦硂妓拜㎡и璶借高ず┮厩厩ネ穦羭快ㄇ饱├せ笆の-
穦彻ず弧穦玃秈チ︑獀弘τ綝祙叭Ы祇獺牡
PRESIDENT: I am afraid you are seeking the Secretary's answer on a hypothetical situation. Unless you know which case he is referring to Secretary for the Treasury?
畐叭氮畊ネ沮祙叭兵ㄒ材4兵иぃ酵阶祙戈
︙玊く某拜畊ネи稱畐叭坚睲讽-
蝶︳舱麓诀篶┪刮砰笆琌ㄣ現獀┦穦σ納或眎某矗碞琌ㄣ砰ㄒΤ厩ネ穦把ㄇ笆のㄤ穦彻ず矗の矗チ︑獀弘碞砆跌妮現獀┦狦э宽猭┪宽膀セ猭弘琌砆跌現獀┦㎡┪Τ闽刮砰├きτぃ琌├せ琌砆跌現獀┦㎡畊ネ狦畐叭氮滦琌﹚杠玥-
夹非琌現獀夹非τぃ琌猭夹非
PRESIDENT: I am afraid that even if the question were not to be regarded as hypothetical, you are seeking an opinion from the Secretary for the Treasury as to what activities are not to be regarded as directed at advancing the charitable purpose for which the organization was established. I have to rule that out of order.
︙玊く某拜畊ネㄤ龟и稱拜現┎︙莱ノ-
現郸-
跋だぃ笆穦蹦ノ現獀夹非τぃ琌猭夹非畐叭玂靡-
ノ琌猭夹非
PRESIDENT: Secretary for the Treasury, please state the government policy.
畐叭氮畊ネ祙叭Ыσ納矗ビ叫刮砰琌稯到刮砰璶琌まノ璣瓣猭畑癸稯到獺癠诀篶┮﹚盡﹚竡
某拜畊ネ叫拜畐叭狦刮砰砆﹚稯到刮砰琌ボ硂ㄇ稯到刮砰ぃ把籔ヴ︙現獀笆и稱羭ㄣ砰ㄒ┮硂ぃ琌兜安砞┦借高產常笵程Τは癸玠搭綟糷璸购羛幅秈︽笲笆穦狝叭诀篶把籔ㄤいτ硂ㄇ诀篶琌稯到刮砰ê或-
︽現Ы秈︽村弧ミ猭Ы秈︽村弧弧琌現獀笆и稱ㄣ砰拜拜沮瞷猭ㄒ琌翠┮Τ稯到刮砰常ぃ把籔ヴ︙現獀笆
畐叭氮畊ネヴ︙刮砰璶猭薄鶪常把ヴ︙猭笆и-
瞷弧琌稯到刮砰稱膥尿蝴ㄤ僚煤祙︗┮и氮眎某璶氮滦(c)场だ弧眔睲贰狦êㄇ刮砰璶蝴莉眔僚煤祙︗眖ㄆ瞶薄鶪砆跌笷璓ㄤ稯到ヘ笆硂薄鶪碞璶跌赣刮砰笆セō籔ㄤ砆钡稯到刮砰璶﹙Ξ琌澸琌钡の璶Τ闽
ッ笷某拜畊ネ畐叭碞璶氮滦(c)琿矗の"玃秈毙▅"硂翴秈˙哪睦"elucidate""玃秈毙▅"琌珹崩約膀セ猭の├き笲笆㎡
PRESIDENT: June 4th or May 4th?
ッ笷某拜畊ネ珹├きのせ笆
畐叭氮畊ネи(c)场だ氮滦い弧眔睲贰ㄓ弧羭快矗そチ毙▅の闽み穦单厩ネ笆砆跌才"玃秈毙▅"ヘ讽礛狦и-
癸笆ヘΤ好拜杠и-
穦璶―Τ闽刮砰矗ㄑ戈
PRESIDENT: Mr LEE Wing-tat, are you claiming that your question has not been answered?
ッ笷某拜畊ネи谋眔畐叭⊿Τ氮и借高и弧眔ㄣ砰и辨畐叭碞и借高elucidate"秆睦"├き㎝せの崩約膀セ猭笆琌妮┮孔"玃秈毙▅"絛瞅
PRESIDENT: I think the question was answered. It is not the name of the activity. It is the purpose of the activity.
眎▆某拜畊ネ畐叭癹磷碞ㄣ砰笆蝶阶и辨矗現郸好拜沮畐叭璶氮滦(c)场だ安瞶薄鶪秈︽ㄇ"玃秈毙▅"笆碞才稯到刮砰﹚竡и辨畐叭Ω坚睲╯澈"玃秈毙▅"笆琌珹ㄇ現獀笆Τㄇ現獀笆琌"玃秈毙▅"Τㄇぃ琌叫拜現┎沮瞷︽非玥㎝現郸︙络﹚︙孔瞶薄鶪㎡
畐叭氮畊ネи獶稱癹磷硂ㄇ借高τ琌–薄鶪и-
ぃ虫眖笆碞∕﹚Τ闽稯到刮砰琌膥尿蝴ㄤ莉僚煤祙︗иぃ弧硂兜笆┪ê兜笆ぃ穦紇臫ㄤ莉僚煤祙︗и-
琌璶俱刮砰兜笆籔ㄤ﹙Ξゑ耕琌瞶и-
∕﹚
Tram Accidents
5. 朝篴篱某拜畊ネ戳祇ネ﹙疉の筿óユ硄種借好翠筿óΤそ筿ó┦の诀借沮眡瞷琌パ筿óそ矗ㄑ癡絤㎝σ诀緍緋м砃莱跑の癸ユ硄砏玥剪眡祘碞現┎セЫ
(a) 現┎穦σ納ミㄒ砏﹚穝戮筿ó诀斗竒パ笲块竝σㄤ緍緋戈絋玂诀種祇ネ莱跑秈˙絋玂㎝︽の
(b) 诀筿祘竝瞷︙磅︽癸筿ó浪琩蝴菏诡穦σ納ま摸癸丁ぺそ阑┾琩菏诡
SECRETARY FOR TRANSPORT: Mr President, the occurrence of several tram accidents recently has understandably caused a degree of alarm. But, in perspective, the fact remains that tram accidents account for less than 1% of the annual number of accidents on our roads.
Section 38 (1)(e) of the Tramway Ordinance (Cap. 107) provides for the Governor in Council to make regulations for the licensing of tram drivers. However, no such regulations have been made. The Administration's view is that Hong Kong Tramways Limited is in the best position to train and qualify its drivers. This approach is consistent with international practice for operators of transport modes running on fixed tracks.
What is important is that Hong Kong Tramways Limited has a comprehensive training programme that provides drivers with the requisite skills covering road use, the handling of tram equipment, passenger safety, procedures in dealing with emergencies, and practical on-the-road training. At the end of the course, trainees are required to pass a written and a driving test.
In view of the recent incidents, the Company has decided to appoint a consultant to review and advise on its recruitment procedures and training programme. The Administration welcomes this initiative. The findings should be available in about three months' time and on which we will be consulted. Meanwhile, the Company will provide a dummy tram in the depot for practical fire drill and emergency practice during the initial and annual re-certification training of tram drivers.
Hong Kong Tramways Limited is responsible for the maintenance and inspection of its tram cars. General functional checks are carried out on all tram cars daily before they leave the depot and also on their return. The Company has a well established preventive maintenance scheme under which various components of tram cars are regularly checked, replaced and maintained.
In addition to this programme, engineers from the Electrical and Mechanical Services Department carry out inspections on tram cars before giving approval for any modification or improvement works proposed by the Company. They also carry out investigations into tram accidents, making recommendations for any necessary remedial action and monitor their implementation. Although this system has worked satisfactorily, the Director of Electrical and Mechanical Services will, in conjunction with the Company, review the existing maintenance programme to determine whether the Tramway Regulations need to be strengthened to prescribe operational and maintenance requirements to further enhance safety.
朝篴篱某拜畊ネ沮戈陪ボき翠筿óそΤ150进筿óㄤいΤ进纯祇ネ筁ユ硄種羆计75%–进筿óい獽Τ翴き进纯竒祇ネ種计ぇ蔼闽猔︽の诀セōョ陪ボ筿ó摧侣ぃ臭現┎Τσ納┑尿筿ó盡犁舦ㄤキАó闹
SECRETARY FOR TRANSPORT: Mr President, the exact number of tram cars is in fact 163 and on average there are over 2 500 trips every day. When it comes to accidents, if we consider the actual number vis-a-vis the size of the fleet, yes, it is very, very high. But having said that, our records show that the majority of accidents have not been caused by negligence on the part of tram drivers. For example, over 30% have been caused by pedestrians jay-walking, and other accidents have been attributed to other vehicles.
Having said that, obviously, it is important to ensure that the Tramways Company maintains a safe fleet and certainly, in ongoing discussions with the company, we will pursue the point suggested by the Honourable Member.
糂胺祸某拜畊ネ筿óそ妮笲块竝恨烈絛瞅龟悔笲块竝癸筿óそ菏恨程ぶゑ诀筿祘竝临璶ぶ眔笲块セЫ笲块竝穦σ納ш簍縩伐à︹笆籔诀筿祘竝㎝筿óそ﹚戳浪癚筿ó拜肈㎝э到诀蚌癡璸购
SECRETARY FOR TRANSPORT: Mr President, the Honourable Member is quite correct. In comparison to other transport motors, input by the Transport Department in monitoring the operation of the Tramways Company is comparatively minor. Having said that, I think, again, we have got to recognize the size of the tram fleet vis-a-vis the size of the vehicle fleet which is nearly 500 000 if we include all types of vehicles. But the Honourable Member has made a very valid point and certainly I shall ask the Transport Department to see how their relationship with the company can be enhanced, and certainly the Government will take a more active interest in their training programme.
独岸藉某拜畊ネ笲块氮滦程场だ矗筿óそΤЧ到箇ň┦蝴璸购﹚戳浪琩传箂ン粄瞷诀筿祘竝菏诡笲骸種筿óセō计ヘ琌κき进┮種瞯琌1%沮笲块氮滦碭る硈尿祇ネき﹙ゑ耕腨筿óㄆ珿琂礛笲块氮滦い弧ΤЧ到㎝菏诡τ現┎骸種或硂或祏丁ず祇ネき﹙ゑ耕腨筿ó種
SECRETARY FOR TRANSPORT: Mr President, indeed there has been a spate of five accidents within about three or four weeks. But having said that, as I indicated in my main reply, it is perhaps unfair simply to focus on this very short period. If we look at the overall record of the Tramways Company operations, their performance is satisfactory. I have explained the current maintenance and inspection programme. As I have said, the Director of Electrical and Mechanical Services will review this in conjunction with the Tramways Company senior management.
朝胞糭某拜畊ネи闽み現┎场弧Τ闽κせ进筿ó–ぱó祘ΤΩτ疉の︽筿ó隔瓂種笷30%瞷現┎癸筿ó菏诡╯澈笷或祘拨澈硂ㄇ隔︽ǐ常琌筿ó-
端ㄒ筿óэ臫腹羘玡琌""瞷玱籔═ó妓現┎妓蝶︳ㄇρユ硄ㄣ跑て
SECRETARY FOR TRANSPORT: Mr President, obviously, I am not in a position to give details regarding the specific accident to which the Honourable Member referred. But as a general rule and as part of our ongoing Road Safety Campaign, we do draw attention to the hazards of jay-walking and we shall continue to spread this message. Having said that, the Transport Department will continue to liaise with the Tramways Company to see how the publicity can be enhanced so as to minimize the scope for accidents.
谅ッ闹某拜畊ネ筿óΤ92菌Τ诀ン氨玻現┎癸筿ó㎝ㄤユ硄ㄣΤぃ非玥ぺ惠笲块竝祇礟τ筿ó腨ㄓ弧琌礚礟惠璶诀筿祘竝菏恨叫拜笲块穦σ納祇礟ぉ筿ó璝或
SECRETARY FOR TRANSPORT: Mr President, the Administration does not propose to license trams. As I have explained in the main reply, trams operate on fixed tracks, they are not like the vehicle fleet and not everyone can obtain a tram licence. Given the nature of the operations and the size of the fleet, we do not think it is necessary. Mr President, the Administration does not believe that we should regulate simply for the sake of regulating.
腑瓣辆某拜畊ネ笲块氮滦い矗筿ó種瘤礛笵隔ユ硄種羆计ぃì1%戳筿óま癬ユ硄種獶盽и-
癸硂よだ闽みㄤい程璶獽琌Τ闽筿ó蝴㎝玂緄拜肈笲块セЫ穦璶―筿óそ硑ㄇ穝ó进ヘ玡τē硂163进常獶盽ρΤ硂摸璸购璝礛秈︙
SECRETARY FOR TRANSPORT: Mr President, I hope I have not given the impression that because of the few number of accidents comparatively we should be complacent. Certainly not, we must take all possible steps to try and avoid accidents. As I indicated, the Tramways Company will be engaging a consultant and one of the aspects that the consultant will be asked to study pertains to the maintenance and the operation of the fleet. Certainly the age and the safety of tramcars will be one aspect of this consultancy. We will ask the Transport Department to draw these points to the Tramways Company so that they can pursue this. And, of course, as I said in my main reply, the Government will be consulted on the findings of the consultancy and we can certainly then pursue the need pertaining to the modernization, if necessary, of the tramcar fleet.
PRESIDENT: Mr IP Kwok-him, are you claiming that your question has not been answered?
腑瓣辆某琌
PRESIDENT:The Secretary has stated that the Tramways Company is going to engage a consultant to study your proposal.
腑瓣辆某и拜肈い拜のΤ⊿Τ硑穝ó进㎝璸购秈⊿Τ氮
SECRETARY FOR TRANSPORT: Mr President, I do not have details of that. I shall try and find out and provide the Honourable Member with a written response. (Annex I)
朝篴篱某拜畊ネ笲块ゼ纯Ч氮滦и拜肈и拜現┎σ納┑尿筿ó盡犁舦穦ㄤキАó闹瞷êㄇó进А摧侣
SECRETARY FOR TRANSPORT: Mr President, I did indicate that one of the key considerations is to ensure that the fleet is safe and in this respect, of course when it comes to franchise negotiations, we will want to ensure that the company has a fleet which meets present day requirements.
Pathogen Infection
6. 朝挪狶某拜現┎セЫ
(a) 筁痜の洛臔そ犁洛皘現┎禘励┮の╬產洛皘痜颠稰琕计のΤ闽稰琕硚畖︙
(b) 筁Τ痜痜颠稰琕τま癬ㄖ祇痝τ
(c) 現┎Τ砏﹚痜竒盽ㄏノ徊祸竟ㄒ竛の块Э恨单睲间の瑀祘
(d) 穦蹦ㄤ惫琁搭痜の洛臔痜颠稰琕诀穦の
(e) パ场だ洛皘の禘┮綼チ﹡現┎Τ蹦惫琁ňゎ痜颠繦钠疊ㄏ綟﹡チ胺眃ぃ璓紇臫
徖ネ褐氮畊ネ讽Ы⊿ΤΜ栋朝某拜肈(a)の(b)┮璶―矗ㄑ戈ぃ筁洛皘恨瞶Ы耕Ν秈︽兜╯陪ボセ翠痜洛皘痜颠稰琕ゑ瞯7%籔ㄇ祇甶瓣產ゑ耕程蔼10%薄鶪﹟衡骸種
洛皘痜颠稰琕痜ㄒい荡场だ琌痜砰ず灿颠翺ネ┮ま璓硂ㄇ稰琕璶琌パ痜钡獀励ō砰╄к畉τま癬
︓胺眃洛臔よ-
╄к硄盽耕痜ㄎ洛皘痜颠稰琕诀穦ョ耕礚阶︙讽Ы硓筁蹦兜惫琁珹崩︽稰琕北璸购﹚戳羭快毙▅量畒の﹚矪瞶肚琕痜眞玥┪祘璓搭胺眃洛臔痜颠稰琕诀穦
洛恨Ы碞┮Τ洛励ノㄣ㎝竟タ絋瑀祘そガ甅ま┮Τそ犁洛皘А砞Τ稰琕北〆穦璽砫参膚Τ闽搭ぶ痜洛皘痜颠稰琕薄鶪╬產洛皘ョ斗酚徖ネ竝"洛皘狝叭キ玭"﹚㎝﹚戳浪癚稰琕北現郸㎝祘
镑い氨痙竒肚冀秨痜颠计ぶカチそ犁┪╬產禘励┮―禘稰琕硂ㄇ肚琕痜诀穦ぃ蔼ら盽ネい肚琕珿荡ぃ穦癸綟洛励砞琁﹡チ篶Θ肩繧
朝挪狶某拜畊ネ徖ネ褐氮滦耕泞参瘤礛и-
現┎蹦ㄇ惫琁ňゎ洛皘ず痜痜颠稰琕и-
ョ翠Τ7%痜稰琕┮徖ネ褐и-
現┎穦秈︽╯㎝だ猂瞷稰琕痜琌竒パ︙贺硚畖稰琕の摸痜颠ňゎ荡㎝搭ぶ硂摸洛皘灿颠稰琕
徖ネ褐氮畊ネи璶氮滦ぇい竒冈灿弧洛皘い痜颠稰琕ゑ瞯琌琌7%籔ㄤ祇甶い瓣產ゑ耕琌单︓琌纔秤硂ㄇぶ计痜ㄒぇいи-
ョ笵-
稰琕琌︑セō砰ず灿颠-
︑ネ痜薄鶪τ稰琕┮–痜ㄒ惠璶パ洛ネ∕﹚︙禘獀ぃ阀珹∕﹚莱赣︙矪瞶硂摸薄鶪
︙庇古某拜畊ネ氮滦ソ琿矗痜颠︙床冀ョ肚琕琌翧Τ氮滦⊿Τи-
盽ǎ痜颠琌︙肚琕ㄒ瞷场だ硂ㄇ肚琕常琌硓筁┦钡牟端﹀睪单琌膀セ-
ぃ璊睼杠琌ぃ穦肚琕現┎и-
︙タ﹡チ┪某穦某ㄇ岿粇芠翴-
睲贰笵洛皘禘┮┪ρ皘獶ㄇγ漏┪穦旧璓灿颠稰琕よτぃ穦礚は癸ㄇΤ闽砞琁砍
徖ネ褐氮畊ネ闽タ絋粄醚灿颠︙肚冀㎝︙稰琕徖ネ竝㎝洛皘恨瞶Ы﹚Τ量畒Τ肚ョ籹砛肚矗ㄑ硂よ戈и璶氮滦ず荡场だ痜颠獶竒肚冀и-
獺翠–跋睲贰秆硂薄闽狦Τヴ︙よ癸硂よΤ粇秆拜肈徖ネ竝穦贾種逼ㄇ揭祘┪疭量畒秆睦–﹙痜ㄒ–摸痜颠タ絋醚и-
ョ籹肚祏㎝籹ㄤ肚獽カチタ絋粄醚–贺痚痜薄鶪
谅ッ闹某拜畊ネ戳翠Τ猍跌瞷ㄒ纒芖腞垂堕场だ﹡チは癸砍侯禘┮‵バ碔腳堕は癸砍龟ノい厩
PRESIDENT: It is out of order.
谅ッ闹某拜и稱拜現┎┮猍跌琌贺灿颠穦拜肈(e)场だ┮弧繦钠疊﹡チ︓ミ猭Ыず㎡
PRESIDENT: In your good humour, Secretary?
徖ネ褐氮и荷秖辨ぃ穦ミ猭Ы穦某芔ぇず肚冀硂摸灿颠
霉璓某拜畊ネΤ稲逮痜い肚冀猍跌稲逮痜虑叫拜徖ネ褐倒ぉセЫ絋﹚氮滦稲逮痜琌ぃ穦竒肚冀
徖ネ褐氮畊ネи絋龟玂靡稲逮痜琌ぃ穦い肚冀
朝挪狶某拜畊ネи獶稱矗借高ぃ筁谅ッ闹某弧и-
Τ猍跌痜ぇ尔и獺畊ネョи借高Ч⊿Τ矗硂よ
PRESIDENT: I had ruled the question out of order. But I let the Secretary answer in her good humour.
WRITTEN ANSWERS TO QUESTIONS
River Training Projects in North District
7. 眎簙┚某拜沮眡跋猠笵獀瞶祘璸购盢瞣疉窾╬產琿Μτ跋現矪礚ì镑戈方矪瞶兜癸現┎セЫ
(a) 現┎琌穦糤跋現矪も矪瞶赣兜Μ璝礛盢糤砞ぶ穝戮︗の
(b) 璝(a)兜氮﹚現┎琌穦盢跋現矪瞷Τ戈方秸皌栋い秈︽兜Μ璝礛穦紇臫ㄤタ盽
SECRETARY FOR PLANNING, ENVIRONMENT AND LANDS: Mr President,
(a) The various river training projects in North District require the resumption and clearance of around 465 hectares of private and government land. 38 additional posts have been approved and a special team set up in the District Lands Office to undertake the task. An interdepartmental steering group is also looking at ways to further speed up land acquisition.
(b) Internal staff redeployment in the North District Lands Office has already taken place without affecting other normal duties of the office.
Restricted Use of Wanchai District Court Elevators
8. 綠產碔某拜沮厨旧耕Ν玡芖よ猭皘秨糵﹙ンㄤ砆ㄏノ猭﹛の猭皘戮盡ノ筿辫瞒秨猭皘発磷癘砐拜㎝尼紇碞現┎セЫ
(a) 瞷琌Τ砏ㄒ窽ゎカチㄏノ赣摸筿辫璝礛Τ闽砏ㄒ冈薄︙の︙瓃砆ㄏノ赣盡ノ筿辫
(b) 現┎Τ︙蛤秈ňゎ摸ㄆン祇ネの
(c) 璝瓃(a)兜氮﹚琌穦σ納﹚砏玥窽ゎカチㄏノ赣摸筿辫璝礛赣单砏玥盢︙龟琁
CHIEF SECRETARY: Mr President, the elevators reserved for the use by Judges and Judiciary staff are located within the restricted areas of the Wan Chai Law Court Building. Only authorized persons are allowed access to the restricted areas through electronically-controlled doors. These are administrative arrangements made by the Judiciary. No regulations apply, nor are any considered necessary.
In the case referred to by the Honourable Member, the Judiciary was not able to ascertain exactly how the defendant entered the restricted areas.
In the light of the reported incident, the Judiciary has stepped up security measures in the Wan Chai Law Court Building to ensure that only authorized persons are allowed access to the restricted areas.
Development of Ambulance Services
9. MRS ELIZABETH WONG asked: Will the Government inform this Council what is the policy on the development of ambulance service in the territory?
SECRETARY FOR SECURITY: Mr President, the Government's policy on the development of ambulance service is based mainly on the conclusions of two consultancy studies, carried out in 1986 and 1995 respectively.
Stemming from the recommendations of the 1986 consultancy study, the following main policy guidelines were established:
(i) a 10-minute travel time target, within which 95% of emergency calls should be answered, should be adopted throughout the territory;
(ii) ambulance depots should continue to be built in strategic locations, with temporary use of fire stations to station ambulances;
(iii) non-emergency calls should be responded to as soon as practicable without jeopardizing the resources for responding to emergency calls, which must be accorded higher priority;
(iv) the quality of pre-hospital care to patients should be improved by expanding the existing paramedic ambulance service on a phased basis; and
(v) the Fire Service Communication Centre (FSCC) should ensure effective mobilizing and control of ambulance resources and should provide operational information on ambulance services.
The delivery of ambulance services was reviewed by a consultancy study in 1995. The Executive Summary of this consultancy study was circulated to Honourable Members on 13 November 1995. A list of the various recommendations are annexed.
Our current efforts in developing the ambulance service are concentrated in three areas:
(a) to hive off the remaining non-emergency ambulance services. The Hospital Authority completed taking over all its non-emergency services in October 1995. We are now pursuing the hiving off of the remaining non-emergency caseload, so that the Ambulance Command of the Fire Services Department may focus its resources on emergency ambulance services;
(b) to achieve efficiency improvements in the short term, through a better distribution of ambulance stations, more effective deployment of personnel and similar management initiatives; and
(c) to seek the additional resources necessary to improve the ambulance services' performance so that we can meet our travel time target on a regular basis.
Annex
Measures recommended by the 1995 Consultancy Study
Short-term Measures
(a) To station ambulances in fire stations in addition to ambulance depots to extend emergency ambulance cover. The fire stations involved include North Point, Kotewall Road, Ap Lei Chau, Kwai Chung, Sheung Shui and Sha Tau Kok.
(b) To redeploy ambulances and their crews from stations with relatively adequate manning to those where manning is inadequate to meet local demand.
(c) To streamline the operational procedures for ambulance deployments to achieve more effective mobilization.
(d) To transfer the residual non-emergency cases to another agency to enable FSD to better concentrate on its delivery of emergency ambulance services.
(e) To include the performance of ambulance aid motorcycles, which provide life-saving first aid before an ambulance reaches the scene, in the calculation of emergency ambulance performance.
Long-term Measures
(a) To provide an additional 31 ambulances and crew and 10 ambulance aid motorcycles, identified as necessary to meet the 95% performance target.
(b) To adopt a new establishment manning formula that will allow for relief for staff absences, including training, leave and sickness.
(c) To plan for new ambulance depots at North Point, Sheung Wan, Kwai Chung and Kowloon Tong.
(d) To extend paramedic services, which are currently provided in up to 13% of the total ambulance fleet, to all ambulances and AAMCs.
Smithfield Terrace Slope Maintenance
10. 腑瓣辆某拜绊ェ滇隔古谨堕弊℡蝴砫ヴ拜肈╈┑蝴祘綝竝祇呗旧璓蝗︽┶荡赣稨虫︗矗ㄑ处穨痲τ紇臫現┎セЫ
(a) セ翠瞷Τ摸薄鶪╬加虫︗计ぶ硂ㄇ加だガㄇ跋の
(b) 穦σ納蹦惫琁砏﹚祇甶坝钡弊℡呗斗﹚丁ずЧΘ呗祘搭ぶ癸穨┮硑Θ紇臫
SECRETARY FOR PLANNING, ENVIRONMENT AND LANDS: Mr President,
(a) The Buildings Department does not compile statistics on the number of flats affected by its repair orders relating to slope maintenance/repair. Given the large number of repair orders issued, it is also not practicable to extract the number from records. Nevertheless, the numbers of outstanding orders in each district are as follows:
DistrictNumber of Outstanding Orders
Central and Western 52Wan Chai 32Eastern 16Southern 19Islands 12Kowloon City 2Kwun Tong 1Sai Kung 5Tsuen Wan 10Tuen Mun 2Wong Tai Shin 1Sha Tin 8Kwai Tsing 1
----Total :161
There are no outstanding repair orders relating to slope maintenance/repair in four districts, that is, Yuen Long, Sham Shui Po, Yau Tsim Mong and the North District.
(b) The duty to maintain private slopes rests with the owners. As regards public slopes, the duty generally rests with the Government, although sometimes the relevant lease conditions impose the duty on owners of adjoining lots.
The Buildings Department always specifies a time limit in its repair orders within which the concerned owners shall complete the remedial works. The time limit given will depend on the scale and complexity of works involved.
Paper Cutter Criminals
11. MRS SELINA CHOW asked: In regard to the recent trend of criminals using paper cutters to commit crimes, will the Government inform this Council of the following:
(a) whether any measures will be taken to combat this problem; and
(b) whether there is any loophole in the law which could be plugged in order to prevent such crimes?
SECRETARY FOR SECURITY: Mr President,
(a) We do not keep separate statistics on crimes involving the use of paper cutters. However, they are grouped under the category crimes involving the use of "razor blades". Honourable Members may wish to note that while the number of reported cases of robbery committed using razor blades has increased from 253 in 1993 to 336 in 1994, it actually decreased to 293 in 1995. These in any case represent a small proportion of the total number of reported cases of robbery involving the use of different kinds of weapon; viz 3.6% for 1993, 5.4% in 1994 and 5.3% in 1995. In addition, the total number of reported cases of robbery has also declined by 21% between 1993 and 1995.
Police officers on frontline operational duties are regularly briefed on the latest trends in crimes, including the types of weapon used, so that special attention can be given to suspects in possession of these weapons.
(b) Under section 17 of the Summary Offences Ordinance (Cap. 228), any person who has in his possession any offensive weapon or other instrument fit for unlawful purpose, with intent to use the same for any unlawful purposes, shall be liable to a fine of $5,000 or to imprisonment for two years.
In addition, section 33 of the Public Order Ordinance (Cap. 245), provides that any person who, without lawful authority or reasonable excuse, has with him in any public place any article made or adapted for use, or suitable, for causing injury to the person, shall be liable to imprisonment for three years.
Although the possession of a paper cutter is not an offence per se, the criminal who has in his possession a paper cutter and intend to use it to commit crime will be arrested and prosecuted. The criminal intent can be proved from the prevailing circumstances, such as the nature and condition of the article, the time, the place, what legitimate use it might have at such a time and in such a place, and the reaction of the person when approached by the police and so on. Thus, during the last three years, a total of 273 persons were successfully prosecuted for illegal possession of razor blades (including paper cutters).
These provisions give adequate powers to the police to tackle the problem of using paper cutters for committing crimes.
Rate of Return of Fiscal Reserves
12. 独綺笽某拜現┎癩現纗称だ蹲膀㎝蝗︽Μ碞現┎セЫ
(a) 程癩現現┎–蹲膀癩現纗称肂ぶ–┮ΜΜ痲ㄤ肂籔厨瞯だぶの络﹚厨瞯非玥㎝瞶沮︙の
(b) 璝(a)兜氮┮瓃癩現纗称蹲膀厨瞯籔蹲膀戳丁厨瞯ぃ︙
SECRETARY FOR FINANCIAL SERVICES: Mr President,
(a) The amount of fiscal reserves deposited with the Exchange Fund, the amount of interest earned and the rate of return in each of the past three years are set out in the following table:
Year (1)
Fiscal reserves placed with the Exchange Fund at the end of the year
HK$million
Interest
earned
HK$million
Rate of return
(per annum)1993115,6833,8453.63%1994131,2405,3304.32%1995125,9167,4365.78%
(1) The Exchange Fund uses calendar year accounting periods. To facilitate direct comparison between the Exchange Fund and the fiscal reserves, the data provided are on the basis of the Exchange Fund's financial years.
The rate of return is the percentage calculated by dividing the interest earned in the year by the average fiscal reserves placed during the year, that is, opening balance plus closing balance divided by two.
The yields on the placement of the fiscal reserves with the Exchange Fund are determined by reference to the corresponding yields of Exchange Fund Bills (for placements not exceeding 12 months) and United States Treasury Notes (for placements over 12 months). Investment of the fiscal reserves is guided by the following principles:
(i) the Government's fiscal reserves should, as far as possible, be made immune from exchange rate and other risks;
(ii) the availability of funds to enable the Government to effect timely payment must not be placed in jeopardy; and
(iii) within these constraints, the Government should through the Exchange Fund seek to obtain the best possible yield on its investment.
The above arrangement ensures that the Government is able to meet its liquidity requirements and to insulate the fiscal reserves from the various investment risks that would otherwise have to be assumed if they were directly invested in financial assets.
(b) The rates of return of fiscal reserves deposited with the Exchange Fund as shown in the last column of the table at (a) above differ from the rates of return of the Exchange Fund in the corresponding periods. The Exchange Fund's figures for 1993 and 1994 are 6.80% and 0.28% respectively. The year end figure for 1995 is not yet available.
The major reason accounting for the difference is that while the rates of return of fiscal reserves are affected by the prevailing interest rates which are determined at the time of placement, the corresponding rates of return of the Exchange Fund are affected by a host of other factors, for example, currency fluctuations, movements in interest rates and prices of bonds and equities. Unlike the fiscal reserves, the Exchange Fund needs to assume investment risks through exposure to different financial assets in various currency markets.
Embezzlement or Theft Losses Suffered by Post Office
13. 地某拜沮眡秎現竝︓丁ず场戮祍ノそ蹿┪ア叛┮ま璓穕ア蔼笷窾じ癸現┎セЫ
(a) 秎現竝︑る犁笲膀笲︙矪瞶ず场戮祍ノそ蹿┪ア叛┮ま璓穕ア
(b) 瓃(a)兜┮穕ア穦锣儿︓禣ōの
(c) 現┎穦蹦或惫琁ňゎ秎現竝瞷ア叛薄鶪
SECRETARY FOR ECONOMIC SERVICES: Mr President,
(a) Since the Post Office changed to trading fund operation in August 1995, there has not been any loss arising from embezzlement or theft. As a general rule, losses arising from embezzlement or theft, if proven to be irrecoverable, are written off in the accounts. A civil servant, whether in a vote-funded department or a trading fund, is subject to the standard government surcharge provision and will be held liable for any losses caused by mismanagement.
(b) Since the Post Office has not suffered any loss after the change to trading fund, the question of consumers bearing losses does not arise. Whereas it is the standard procedure to write off any irrecoverable loss, the amount involved, even by taking the 1992-93 losses as an example, would have negligible effects on the costs of services. In that year, the losses of $400,000 represented 0.016% of the total service costs of $2,475 million.
(c) The Post Office has taken the following measures to prevent theft:
(i) For stamp vending machines installed at the frontage of post offices, additional bolts and locks have been installed after the 1993 incident. Furthermore, the police have offered assistance by alerting policemen on beat patrols to pay closer attention to the machines after office hours.
(ii) As to control measures to safeguard the security of cash and valuables held under the custody of the staff, after the 1992 incident, additional monitoring procedures have been introduced to help detect possible irregularities, including daily checks on sales revenue by a centralized accounts office at the Post Office Headquarters. Furthermore, a review of the overnight cash holding limit for each branch post office has been conducted and the limits have been adjusted downwards to minimize risk.
(iii) As regards prevention of burglary, after the 1992 incident, on the advice of the Crime Prevention Bureau of the police, additional security measures, including installation of security alarm systems and roller shutters at external doors of post offices, have been introduced.
Education of "Gifted" Children
14. 谅ッ闹某拜Τ闽ぱㄠ担毙▅ㄆ﹜現┎セЫ
(a) 現┎琌Τㄤ瓣產ぱㄠ担计戈璝礛籔セ翠ぱㄠ担计ゑ耕薄鶪︙璝Τヴ︙畉钵︙
(b) 祇备㎝挪﹚ぱ厩担筁祘い現┎矗ㄑ︙贺戈方籔砞琁Τ闽盡穨も琌ì镑笿︙贺螟の現┎Τ︙环癸郸э到
(c) 現┎琌Τ碞ぱㄠ担毙▅毙畍矗ㄑ戮玡の戮蚌癡璝礛Τぶ瞷毙畍纯钡兜癡絤
(d) 現┎ぱㄠ担矗ㄑ︙贺揭祘㎝徊戈方の
(e) 現┎Τ璸购癸ヘ玡ぱ厩担毙▅Θ秈︽浪癚τ磅︽ヘ玡ぱ厩担毙▅璸购笿︙贺螟現┎Τ︙环癸郸э到
SECRETARY FOR EDUCATION AND MANPOWER: Mr President,
(a) Academically gifted children, as referred to in Education Commission Report No. 4, are those who show exceptional achievement or potential in one or more of the following areas:
(i) high level of intelligence, as measured on standardized intelligence tests;
(ii) specific academic aptitude in one or more subject areas; or
(iii) high ability in creative thinking.
To ascertain the number of academically gifted pupils in Hong Kong, the Education Department commissioned a study on a sample of 81 primary schools by a team of researchers from the University of Hong Kong, the Chinese University of Hong Kong and the Hong Kong Polytechnic University between 1992 and 1995. The initial findings of the study revealed that around 1 240 pupils or about 2% of the pupils in these schools could be classified as academically gifted. This is in line with the percentage of academically gifted pupils identified in other developed countries. On this basis, we estimate that there are some 20 000 academically gifted pupils aged between six to 18 in Hong Kong.
(b) In the past three years, the research team conducted studies on suitable assessment tools for the identification and assessment of academically gifted pupils. On the basis of these studies, the research team recommended the following assessment tools:
- a behavioural rating scale for completion by parents;
- a behavioural rating scale for completion by teachers;
- the Hong Kong Attainment Tests on the three basic subjects, that is, Chinese, English and Mathematics;
- the Hong Kong Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children or equivalent standardized intelligence tests administered by psychologists; and
- the Hong Kong Torrance Tests of Creativity administered by psychologists.
Academically gifted children were identified through behavioural rating scales completed by teachers and parents who had received the required training from the research team. These children were then assessed by the team's psychologists or personnel with training in assessment and interpretation of test findings. No problem was encountered in the assessment process.
(c) Of the 81 schools which had participated in the research study referred to in paragraph (a) above, 19 volunteered to participate in a three-year Pilot School-based Programme for Academically Gifted Children commencing in September 1994.
Training in gifted education has been provided to teachers of these 19 schools by the Education Department (details at Annex). Educational psychologists of the Education Department also make regular visits to the schools in the pilot project to give the teachers the necessary support.
There is no formal pre-service teacher training programmes on gifted education. The Education Department has made suggestions to teacher education institutions to include gifted education as one component in their teacher training courses. Nevertheless, the Department of Education of the University of Hong Kong has incorporated gifted education in its in-service teacher training programme. In 1994-95 and 1995-96, the School of Continuing Education of the Hong Kong Baptist University conducted two training courses on "Identifying and Helping Gifted Children", each attended by 25 teachers.
(d) For the 19 schools which have participated in the pilot project, they provide the academically gifted children with enrichment or extended learning programmes to supplement their normal curriculum. Such programmes take the form of:
(i) additional learning materials and exercises given by the teachers of the schools; and/or
(ii) additional courses or programmes conducted at the Fung Hon Chu Centre for the Gifted Children established in July 1995.
Regarding (i) : the school teachers from the 19 schools are responsible for the extra learning intended for the children concerned.
Regarding (ii) : the teachers at the Centre are responsible for extra learning that will take place when the gifted children from the 19 schools are brought together to attend courses or programmes.
The additional learning resultant from (i) and (ii) is complementary to each other.
(e) The Education Department will conduct a review in 1996-97, when the pilot project is completed and the outcome more clearly identified and measured. The review will focus on the effect of the support programmes provided to students, parents and teachers. The improvements in the students and the attitudinal change in parents and teachers will be assessed. Improvements to, and extension of the programme including its mode of delivery as well as the long-term strategies for its development will be considered in the light of the findings from the review.
Annex
Training provided for school heads and teachers on Gifted Education
TopicNumber of
ParticipantsDates
(Duration)
Seminar for school heads to brief on the plan of Pilot School-based Programme for Academically Gifted Children
80 school heads
14.5.94 (1 day)
Teacher Training Workshop I
45 teachers
11.7.94 - 20.7.94
(9 days)
Teacher Training Workshop II45 teachers12.12.94 - 15.12.94
(4 days)
Two repeated video seminars on teaching strategies - "Challenging the Gifted in Regular Classroom"
60 teachers
25.3.95 and 1.4.95
(1 day)
11th World Conference on the Gifted and Talented
29 teachers
31.7.95 - 4.8.95
(5 days)
Seminar on assessment and teaching of creativity by consultants from Taiwan
Workshops on the teaching of English: teaching to multiple intelligence, whole language strategies, performance-based teaching and testing, creative rhythms, learning centres.
200 teachers
50 teachers
19.12.95 - 20.12.95
(2 days)
5.1.96 and 6.1.96
(2 days)Experience sharing session with school heads12 school heads and 2 teachers1.12.95 (halfday)
Seminar on identification, enrichment programmes, and programme evaluation by consultants from United States
200 teachers
8.1.96 - 10.1.96
(3 days)
British Parliament Resolution on Speeches of Members
15. 糂紌某拜挪Τ厨旧璣瓣瓣穦硄筁兜∕某窽ゎ纯莉觅砐拜現┎瓣穦某瓣穦碞赣单瓣產ㄆ叭祇ē現┎セЫ
(a) 琌眡赣∕某冈薄︙
(b) 穦蝶︳赣兜∕某癸セ翠硑Θ紇臫膥τ浪癚戈瓣穦某砐翠暗猭の
(c) 筁ずΤぶ璣瓣瓣穦某莱淋砐翠戈-
秨や羆肂︙
SECRETARY FOR HOME AFFAIRS: Mr President,
(a) A United Kingdom Parliamentary Committee chaired by Lord NOLAN published recommendations in May 1995 relating to disclosures of interests and the holding of consultancies by MPs. These recommendations were considered by the House of Commons Select Committee on Standards in Public Life. A new Select Committee was subsequently set up called the Select Committee on Standards and Privileges which proposed the post of Parliamentary Commissioner of Standards. The Commissioner is now considering the recommendations including the issue of paid visits to foreign countries. No decision has yet been taken.
(b) The practice of sponsoring British MPs to visit Hong Kong will be reviewed in the light of any decisions reached by the House of Commons.
(c) The information is set out below.
1993-941994-951995-96
(up to end Jan 96)
Fully-sponsored Visits
by United Kingdom MPs
161515Partially-sponsored Visits by United Kingdom MPs
6118Programme-only Visits arranged for United Kingdom MPs
5*7(11)*3(4)*Total Expenditure
(in HK$)
0.79m0.78m0.88m* Figures outside the brackets denote the number of delegations; figures inside indicate the number of individual visitors.
Staffing of Family Service Centres
16. 独岸藉某拜碞穦褐竝產畑狝叭いみも拜肈現┎セЫ
(a) 筁跋穦褐快ㄆ矪矗ㄑ狝叭跋办ず计のㄤ–糤瞯の跋穦褐快ㄆ矪烈產畑狝叭いみもの矪瞶计だ︙
(b) 絪ゑ瞯–斗矪瞶ぶ﹙τ瞷–キА璶矪瞶ぶ
(c) ヘ玡Τぶだ跋穦褐快ㄆ矪┮矪瞶キА计ヘ禬瓃(b)兜┮瓃ゑ瞯
(d) Τ蝶︳筁秖穦紇臫矪瞶借の
(e) 現┎琌穦σ納糤も搭淮秖璝礛︙龟琁の現┎︙络﹚糤も非玥璝︙
SECRETARY FOR HEALTH AND WELFARE: Mr President,
(a) Annex I shows the population in each of the districts served by the 13 District Social Welfare Offices of the Social Welfare Department (SWD) as at end of March 1993, 1994 and 1995, and the year-on-year growth rates. Annex II shows the caseload and the number of caseworkers in the Family Services Centres (FSCs) under each District Social Welfare Office as at the end of December of the corresponding years.
(b) A manning ratio of 1 caseworker : 70 cases was set in the 1991 White Paper on Social Welfare into the 1990s and Beyond. As at the end of 1995, each caseworker was handling an average number of 71 cases.
(c) As at the end of 1995, there were seven District Social Welfare Offices where the average number of cases handled by each caseworker had exceeded the ratio mentioned in (b) above.
(d) Excessive workload will obviously affect the quality of service provided by caseworkers. While efforts are being made to provide more caseworkers to reduce the caseload per worker, measures have been introduced to help maintain the service standard. These include the strengthening of staff supervision, close monitoring of case management, streamlining of administrative procedures, enhanced skills training for caseworkers and the provision of additional family support services such as family aide and clinical psychology services.
(e) We are committed to meeting the increase in demand for family casework services without reducing the quality of service provided to individuals and families in need. In 1995-96, 103 additional caseworkers have so far been provided in FSCs of SWD. 26 more caseworkers will be provided by the end of this financial year. Subject to the approval of the Legislative Council, we will be proposing that resources should be provided to increase the manpower in 1996-97 by providing an additional 49 caseworkers. With these improvements, the caseload per worker is expected to reduce to an average number of 68 cases.
Two pages of table
Disposal of Central Market Site
17. 馋莱某拜沮厨旧砏购吏挂現览эい吏いァ刁カ瞷ノ硚盢赣碩╃芥碞現┎セЫ
(a) ∕﹚╃芥赣碩玡穦吭高カ現Ыカ砏购〆穦Τ闽跋舱麓のカチ種ǎの
(b) ╃芥赣碩ㄣ砰璸购㎝丁︙
SECRETARY FOR PLANNING, ENVIRONMENT AND LANDS: Mr President, the possible redevelopment of the Central Market site has been considered from time to time during the last 20 years or so. There is as yet no firm plan or timing for this to be done. More studies would need to be carried out before the proposal can be drawn up. When this is available, the Administration will consult the Urban Council, Town Planning Board, District Board on the specific proposals, as well as the public through amendments to the Outline Zoning Plan.
Noise Nuisance to Choi Yuen Estate
18. 眎簙┚某拜碞娩挂24秨硄ó癸眒堕恏﹡チ┮硑Θ吏挂靖紇臫現┎セЫ
(a) Τ︙祏戳の环惫琁秆∕瓃吏挂靖拜肈の
(b) ら膚购ヴ︙穝璸购穦σ納玻ネ吏挂靖拜肈τ龟琁璸购玡﹚箇ň惫琁
SECRETARY FOR PLANNING, ENVIRONMENT AND LANDS: Mr President,
(a) Before the 24-hour opening of the Lok Ma Chau border road crossing from 3 November 1994, the following noise mitigation measures had been put in place as recommended by consultants:
(i) laying of a noise reduction friction course along the New Territories Circular Road near Choi Yuen Estate;
(ii) installation of a noise barrier on the side of the flyover facing Choi Yuen Estate:
(iii) installation of noise barriers on San Sam Road; and
(iv) installation of noise barriers on the section of New Territories Circular Road near Chuk Yuen Tsuen.
These measures have brought about a noise reduction.
To address the longer-term problem, a second consultancy study was carried out in 1995. A series of further measures including, for example, the paving of noise reduction surface layer, erection of noise barriers, noise canopies and noise enclosures at certain location, were examined by the consultants. Their report is nearing completion.
(b) Since 1992, all public projects have been required to carry out Environmental Impact Assessments to ensure that potential environmental problems, including noise nuisance, are identified and that comprehensive prevention and mitigation measures are implemented. The Environmental Impact Assessment Bill, which was gazetted on 19 January 1996, will make such arrangements statutory and provide for the enforcement of preventive measures through an Environmental Permit.
Mental Patients' Rights under Patients' Charter
19. MRS ELIZABETH WONG asked: Will the Government inform this Council whether mental patients have the same rights as any other patients under the Patients' Charter; if so, what are these rights; if not, why not?
SECRETARY FOR HEALTH AND WELFARE: Mr President, the Patients' Charter promulgated by the Hospital Authority makes no distinction between different types of patients. All patients of Hong Kong's public hospitals are entitled to the rights as set out in the Patients' Charter, and mental patients are no different.
The rights enjoyed by all patients, including mental patients, include the right to receive medical advice and treatment which fully meets the currently accepted standards of care and quality; the right to information about what health care services are available and what charges are involved; the right to be given a clear description of the medical condition with diagnosis, prognosis and treatment including common risks and appropriate alternatives; the right to know the names of any medication to be prescribed, its normal action and potential side-effects; the right to accept or refuse any medication, investigation or treatment and to be informed of the likely consequences of doing so; the right to a second medical opinion; the right of access to medical information relating to the condition and proposed treatment, and to have such information kept confidential; the right to make a complaint through the appropriate channels and to have the complaint dealt with properly and fairly; the right to choose whether or not to take part in medical research programmes.
The Mental Health Ordinance confers further rights on mental patients by regulating their reception, detention and treatment. An application to a District Judge or magistrate for the detention of a patient in a mental hospital for observation shall be founded on the written opinion of a registered medical practitioner who has examined the patient, and the patient shall have the right to see the District Judge or magistrate prior to their determination on whether to approve the application. A mental patient can only be detained in a mental hospital for observation, investigation and treatment upon certification by two registered medical practitioners and a District Judge.
Furthermore, an application may be made to the Mental Health Review Tribunal for the case of any mental patient to be examined after 12 months of detention in a mental institution. If the person or his relative does not exercise this right to apply to the Tribunal 12 months after the right first became available to him, the officer in charge at the mental institution shall, at the expiration of the period for making the application, refer the patient's case to the Tribunal.
Gambling among Prisoners
20. 腑瓣辆某拜現┎セЫ
(a) ヘ玡菏夯ずデ戒痴琌炊筂璝礛デ戒痴贺摸︙のデ戒痴Τ癸胓毙竝恨瞶菏夯篶Θ螟の
(b) 胓毙竝璸购蹦︙贺惫琁筀ゎ菏夯ず戒
SECRETARY FOR SECURITY: Mr President,
(a) Gambling in prisons takes various forms, such as betting on horses, playing self-made cards and self-made pai kau and is usually conducted amongst long-term prisoners. Gambling sometimes gives rise to disputes between prisoners, particularly over debts. These disputes undermine discipline and order in prisons and pose management problems, such as when indebted prisoners seek protection from the management from their creditors, refuse to work or refuse to return to accommodation which they share with their creditors.
(b) Because of the potential problems gambling by prisoners can cause, the Correctional Services Department is determined to keep the problem under control. As with other discipline problems in prisons, the Department adjusts its priority in accordance with the prevalence of the problem. Activities have been stepped up to combat gambling by prisoners in response to the rise in number of illegal betting slips found in prisons. These activities include strengthened supervision and increased searches. Those caught gambling will be subject to disciplinary action, as provided in the Prison Rules. These measures have proved to be effective and will continue.
BILLS
First Reading of Bills
CORONERS BILL
IMMIGRATION SERVICE (AMENDMENT) BILL 1996
Bills read the First time and ordered to be set down for Second Reading pursuant to Standing Order 41(3).
Second Reading of Bills
CORONERS BILL
THE ATTORNEY GENERAL to move the Second Reading of: "A Bill to make provisions for the appointment, duties and powers of coroners, for the reporting of certain deaths, for the duties of registered medical practitioners in connection with dead bodies, for matters preliminary to inquests, for matters relating to inquests, and for matters incidental thereto or connected therewith."
He said: Mr President, I move that the Coroners Bill be read the Second time. The Bill aims to reform the coroners system in Hong Kong.
The Coroners' Court was first established in 1967. In April 1984, the Law Reform Commission appointed a subcommittee to review the coroners system, including the duty to report a death to coroners, the arrangements relating to the reporting of deaths to coroners, the investigatory role of the coroners and the functions of the Coroners' Court relating to a death.
The Law Reform Commission Subcommittee completed its deliberations in October 1986 and the Law Reform Commission itself subsequently issued a Report on Coroners in August 1987. Extensive public consultation was carried out by the Law Reform Commission in the course of the compilation of its Report. A number of defects were identified in the existing system and a comprehensive reform of the system was recommended.
The Administration accepts almost all the recommendations of the Report. In view of the substantial legislative changes required to implement the recommendations of the Report, the Bill will have the effect of repealing and replacing the existing Coroners Ordinance. I shall now outline the salient points of the Bill below.
At present, there is no legal duty to report any death to the coroner. A list of reportable deaths is now prescribed in Part 1 of Schedule 1 of the Bill. Clause 4(1) also imposes a duty on certain categories of persons specified in Part 2 of Schedule 1, including, for example, doctors, the Registrar of Births and Deaths and the police, to report a death specified in Part 1 of that Schedule as soon as is reasonably practicable after the death comes to their knowledge.
The powers of a coroner are enhanced by the Bill. Clause 10 empowers a coroner to issue a warrant to a police officer to enter and search any premises where the coroner is satisfied on reasonable grounds that relevant evidence is likely to be found in such premises. Clause 11 empowers a coroner to first conduct a pre-inquest review to determine how the inquest may be disposed of in a just, expeditious and economical manner.
Clauses 13 to 19 set out the circumstances in which a coroner may or must hold an inquest. Clause 13 provides that a coroner may hold an inquest, whether with or without a jury, where a person dies suddenly, by accident or violence or under suspicious circumstances. Clause 14 makes it mandatory for a coroner to hold an inquest with a jury where a person has died in official custody. Clause 15 makes it mandatory for a coroner to hold an inquest when required by the Attorney General to do so. Clause 19 provides that the High Court may, on the application of a properly interested person or the Attorney General, order an inquest to be held into a death including, where an inquest has already been held, a new inquest into that death.
The present three-person jury will be expanded to a five-person jury. Clause 22 provides that five jurors shall be selected to form the jury at an inquest.
Clause 34(1) provides that the coroner may during the course of an inquest refer a case to the Attorney General for a decision as to whether or not criminal proceedings should be instituted against a person, and obliges the coroner to do so where the suspected criminal offence is murder, manslaughter, infanticide or death by reckless driving.
Clause 40 empowers a coroner to issue in certain circumstances a certificate of the fact of death to assist in the transport of a dead body to another country for burial, in particular where the relevant authorities of that country require official documentation that the deceased did not die from an infectious disease.
Clause 46 makes it an offence for a person to obstruct, resist or delay a coroner, including a person assisting a coroner, in the lawful discharge of his duties and lawful exercise of his powers under the Bill.
Mr President, this Bill represents a further reform to the administration of justice in Hong Kong and I commend it to this Council for early passage into law.
Question on the motion on the Second Reading of the Bill proposed.
Debate on the motion adjourned and Bill referred to the House Committee pursuant to Standing Order 42(3A).
IMMIGRATION SERVICE (AMENDMENT) BILL 1996
THE SECRETARY FOR SECURITY to move the Second Reading of: "A Bill to amend the Immigration Service Ordinance."
He said: Mr President, I move that the Second Reading of the Immigration Service (Amendment) Bill 1996. This Bill seeks to give members of the Immigration Service powers of investigation into offences relating to registration matters, and in certain forgery offences under the Crimes Ordinance. It also seeks to regularize the procedures relating to the handling of persons arrested by members of the Immigration Service.
The Immigration Service took over the work of the Registration of Persons Office in April 1979 and the work of registration of births, deaths and marriages in July 1979. Members of the Immigration Service, however, do not have clearly defined powers to deal with the investigation of offences relating to these responsibilities. When such offences are encountered, immigration officers may make initial enquiries into the suspected offences and, if there is prima facie evidence, they are obliged to refer the cases to the police for full investigation and prosecution. This gives rise to unnecessary duplication of work and inefficiency.
Members of the Immigration Service are at present empowered to investigate certain offences relating to forged documents, but they do not have powers to investigate other forgery offences involving forged dies, stamps and instruments which may be used in making the forged documents. When these forgeries are encountered during investigation, they have to be referred to the police for further action. This duplication of work and the separate handling of evidence again give rise to inefficiency.
The proposed Bill enables members of the Immigration Service to pursue the investigation of these offences entirely on their own. These powers include the power to stop, search, and to arrest suspected persons; to enter places and search for suspects; and to search for and seize evidence under warrant.
To regularize the handling of arrested persons, we propose to give members of the Immigration Service the power to detain and arrest persons and to grant bail. We also propose to extend the time limit to deliver an arrested person to the police station from the existing 12 hours to 48 hours, in line with the requirement imposed on other law enforcement agencies. The 12-hour period has caused practical difficulties in that there is insufficient time for members of the Immigration Service to make enquiries in order to determine whether the person should be charged, delivered to a police station, or released. This is particularly so when a large number of illegal workers are arrested during operations against illegal employment.
The offences for which these new powers are applicable will be specified in a Schedule to the Ordinance.
Mr President, the proposed amendments will enable the responsibility of investigating the specified offences to be entirely assumed by the Immigration Service. This would allow the investigation of these offences to be conducted more effectively and efficiently, since members of the Immigration Service are specifically trained to deal with offences in their own areas of responsibilities. It would also allow police resources which are tied up in dealing with these offences to be redeployed for other important police work in maintaining law and order. The powers we have proposed for the Immigration Service in respect of the specified offences are in line with existing powers already conferred on the police and other disciplined services, and are also consistent with the Bill of Rights Ordinance.
To prevent the possibility of abuse, the exercise of these new powers will also be subject to the same stringent safeguards that are now applicable to existing powers entrusted to the Immigration Service. A set of guidelines has been established for law enforcement officers to follow when questioning suspects and taking statements. These rules also stipulate the rights and facilities available to persons when they are arrested or questioned. Further, the Director of Immigration has, under section 9 of the Immigration Service Ordinance, issued standing orders governing the proper exercise of statutory powers by immigration officers. They are subject to supervisory control of their senior officers and are liable for disciplinary action under section 8 of the same Ordinance for any abuse of power.
Thank you, Mr President.
Question on the motion on the Second Reading of the Bill proposed.
Debate on the motion adjourned and Bill referred to the House Committee pursuant to Standing Order 42(3A).
MEMBER'S MOTIONS
INTERPRETATION AND GENERAL CLAUSES ORDINANCE
MRS SELINA CHOW to move the following motion:
"That in relation to the -
(a) Merchant Shipping (Seafarers) (Fees) Regulation published as Legal Notice No. 9 of 1996;
(b) Merchant Shipping (Fees) (Amendment) Regulation 1996 published as Legal Notice No. 10 of 1996;
(c) Companies Ordinance (Amendment of Eighth Schedule) Order 1996 published as Legal Notice No. 11 of 1996;
(d) Limited Partnerships Ordinance (Amendment of Schedule) Order 1996 published as Legal Notice No. 12 of 1996;
(e) Companies Ordinance (Fee for Taking Affidavit, Affirmation or Declaration) (Amendment) Notice 1996 published as Legal Notice No. 13 of 1996;
(f) Trustee Ordinance (Amendment of First Schedule) Notice 1996 published as Legal Notice No. 14 of 1996; and
(g) Clubs (Safety of Premises) (Fees) (Amendment) Regulation 1996 published as Legal Notice No. 16 of 1996,
and laid on the table of the Legislative Council on 10 January 1996, the period referred to in section 34(2) of the Interpretation and General Clauses Ordinance for amending subsidiary legislation be extended under section 34(4) of that Ordinance until 14 February 1996."
MRS SELINA CHOW: Mr President, I move the motion standing in my name on the Order Paper. The purpose of extending the scrutiny period is to enable Members to have more time to deliberate the seven Regulations, Notices and Orders, namely, Merchant Shipping (Seafarers) (Fees) Regulations published as Legal Notice No. 9 of 1996, Merchant Shipping (Fees) (Amendment) Regulations 1996 published as legal Notice No. 10 of 1996, Companies Ordinance (Amendment of English Schedule) Order 1996 published as Legal Notice No.11 of 1996, Limited Partnership Ordinance (Amendment of Schedule) Order 1996 published as Legal Notice No.12 of 1996, Companies Ordinance (Fee for Taking Affidavit, Affirmation or Declaration) (Amendment) Notice 1996 published as Legal Notice No.13 of 1996, Trustee Ordinance (Amendment of First Schedule) Notice 1996 published as Legal Notice No. 14 of 1996 and Clubs (Safety of Premises) (Fees) (Amendment) Regulations 1996 published as Legal Notice No. 16 of 1996.
Mr President, I beg to move.
Question on the motion proposed, put and agreed to.
PRESIDENT: I have accepted the recommendations of the House Committee as to the time limits on speeches for the motion debates and Members were informed by circular on 5 February. The movers of the motions will have 15 minutes for their speeches including their replies and another five minutes to speak on the proposed amendments. Other Members, including the movers of the amendments, will have seven minutes each for their speeches. Under Standing Order 27A, I am required to direct any Member speaking in excess of the specified time to discontinue his speech.
MAINTAINING HONG KONG'S COMPETITIVENESS AS A LEADING INTERNATIONAL FINANCIAL CENTRE
MR PAUL CHENG to move the following motion:
"That, as Hong Kong's future prosperity depends to a great degree on maintaining the territory's competitiveness as a leading international financial centre and despite the Government's efforts to date, including the draft Strategy Paper prepared on this issue last year by the Monetary Authority, progress in producing a blueprint for the future has been slow, this Council urges the Government to formulate, in consultation with the industry and the public, a comprehensive plan of action and speed up the implementation of short-term and long-term initiatives focusing on:
i. promoting Hong Kong's strengths as an international financial centre;
ii. improving the financial infrastructure in terms of the operating systems, training and development, and access to our financial markets;
iii. formulating the necessary regulatory framework and legal requirements to ensure that the financial market forces operate fairly and efficiently, thus improving the protection of investors; and
iv. providing tax and other appropriate incentives to continue to attract key financial services;
to ensure that Hong Kong's position as a leading international financial centre can be further enhanced not only in the remaining years of the nineties but in the next millennium."
MR PAUL CHENG: Mr President, I move the motion standing in my name in the Order Paper.
Hong Kong is regarded as one of the world's leading financial centres. It is routinely ranked as one of the freest, most competitive economies in the world in various international surveys. But such surveys focus on the present. They are no guarantee for the future.
Of course, at present the picture appears bright. At the end of 1995, the market capitalization exceeded US$270 billion, making Hong Kong's stock market the eighth largest in the world, and the largest in Asia behind only Japan. Hong Kong is rated as the third largest international banking centre in the world, behind only New York and London, with 85 of the largest banks of the world operating here. And in the asset management sector, Hong Kong has over 1 000 authorized funds and unit trusts domiciled in various jurisdictions, making it the number one choice for Asia fund management operations. Despite our success, there are worrying signs that we may be losing our edge in an increasingly competitive region. Hong Kong is, after all, a dynamic, fast-moving society that thrives and depends on constant action and renewal. Standing still is not an option if we wish to avoid slipping behind our competitors in the Asian region.
A few years ago, it seemed that Hong Kong was poised to be the only serious player in the region. Since then many more competitors have entered the fray. Singapore, for example, often provides not only customized tax packages but also offers fund managers access to government funds to attract them to relocate to the island state. As a result, Singapore is fast becoming the chief competitor to Hong Kong. Malaysia established the Labuan Offshore Finance Centre in 1990, and endowed it with tax incentives and infrastructure support to take advantage of its position in the midst of the dynamic ASEAN region. Sydney, Australia has also offered attractive tax rates to offshore banking transactions. And even Shanghai aims at becoming a world-class financial centre by using its connections to the hinterland of China to attract international suitors.
I am not calling for government intervention. Any major erosion of the existing free and liberal economic policies will be adverse to Hong Kong's future. Instead, I believe the Government needs to provide the necessary leadership and, in partnership with all concerned parties, create a market environment which not only ensures adequate investor protection and stability but also encourages innovation and growth.
In view of the time constraint, I can only briefly touch on the four broad points mentioned in my motion statement. I am sure some colleagues in this Council will cover in greater detail areas of their respective interest and expertise.
Promoting Hong Kong's strengths as an international centre
Hong Kong has many advantages which have helped make it a leading international financial centre, including:
- the openness of its markets;
- the presence of up-to-date stock and futures exchanges;
- attractive corporate and individual tax systems;
- the presence of many fund management operations;
- a trusted and objective legal system;
- stable currency with no exchange controls; and
- its opportunity to play a key role in the rapid development of China's economy and financial markets.
All of these advantages need to be aggressively marketed overseas. Singapore and London have proved that self-promotion can work. The Hong Kong Government, together with the Trade Development Council, Securities and Futures Commission, Stock Exchange and the private sector, should therefore craft an international promotional campaign. This campaign should convey the message that Hong Kong is not resting on its laurels, but rather is proving even more competitive, innovative and understanding of the needs of sophisticated global financial markets. Strong support from the relevant mainland authorities and institutions would make the campaign all the more effective.
Improving the financial infrastructure in terms of the operating systems, training and development, and access to Hong Kong's financial markets
Hong Kong's strength in this category stems in part from its ability to offer a wide variety of financial products tailor-made to the customer. However, we must continue to develop and enhance this product range in the years ahead. This is something that has been recognized both in the Monetary Authority's Draft Strategy Paper last year and in some of the initiatives currently being undertaken by the Stock Exchange as mentioned in the Securities and Futures Commission Corporate Plan released earlier this week.
Measures could include:
- Taking steps to open the Stock Exchange to encourage regional companies to list and raise funds on the exchange, with specific emphasis on mainland enterprises.
- Developing the Chinese government and enterprise debt equity market that is bound to expand as China's major infrastructure projects get underway.
- Bettering the clearing and settling infrastructure in the foreign exchange industry so that Hong Kong can both close the gap with regional competitor Singapore and prepare for the day that the Chinese Renminbi (RMB) is fully convertible.
- Strengthening and encouraging interaction between banks in Hong Kong and those developing on the mainland.
Having well-trained professionals is vital to Hong Kong's continued development as an international financial centre. We are strong in the fields of accounting, legal services and information services, but we lack some of the more specialized financial skills, like asset and risk management, derivative trading and actuarial skills, that we need to stay ahead of the pack. Additionally, Hong Kong's standards for business-related English are regarded to be in a state of decline.
To correct these problems, we should encourage and actively develop joint curricula programmes between the private sector and local universities that focus on practical content more than academic theory. Programmes should be developed that address the potential problems that could adversely affect Hong Kong's status.
Formulating the necessary regulatory framework and legal requirements to ensure that the financial market operates fairly and efficiently
The question here is: When does a regulatory system change from adequately monitoring risks and behaviour to that of endangering the very market it aims to oversee? While we must continue to protect the investor and adopt rules to fit Hong Kong's environment, international financial business will avoid markets where the regulatory burden is overly restrictive. Unfortunately, with the rush to adopt the "best" rules from the United Kingdom, Canada, and Australia, Hong Kong is running the risk of becoming over-regulated.
The negative effects from the rush to "regulate-away" the image of 1987 has been most immediately felt in the foreign exchange markets, where Hong Kong's position vis-a-vis its main regional rival Singapore has steadily slipped. In order to avoid strangling the markets we have so painstakingly developed, the Government should work with the Securities and Futures Commission, Stock Exchange and the market makers themselves to undertake cost-to-benefit analyses of any newly proposed regulations and scrutinize the existing regulatory system for areas which might be improved.
What I am advocating is a balanced approach so that investors are not only protected but are also eager to do business in Hong Kong.
Providing tax and other incentives to continue to attract key financial services
Hong Kong is currently the offshore fund management centre of Asia. This is of vital importance as fund management is the key international finance business to attract and retain. The strong presence of fund managers in Hong Kong is what attracts stock brokers, bankers and custodians, all of whom receive business from them. But Hong Kong's position is eroding as Singapore gives tax concessions, both corporate and individual, to those who relocate their fund management operations there, and further sweetens the pot by providing them access to the provident fund and other government funds. Additionally, places as far afield as Tokyo, Taiwan, and Thailand all currently offer offshore centres with incentives aimed at fund managers.
There are also broader tax-related issues which have been highlighted by the migration and turnover in Hong Kong-listed equities to markets such as New York, London and Singapore, where transaction costs are lower and stamp duty fees are a fraction of Hong Kong levels. That is why I believe, as a matter of urgency, that the Government should undertake a complete review of the current taxation structure of Hong Kong's financial markets, including exploring the possibility of new incentives in order to bolster our status as an international financial centre. Incentives should not be seen as intervention by the Government. They are simply practical responses to a changing and more competitive environment.
I hope today's debate will help underscore the urgency of this matter and provide useful input to all concerned in both the public and private sectors. I would like to take this opportunity to thank those I have consulted with both within and outside this Council for their advice and support.
Mr President, with these comments, I beg to move the motion.
Question on the motion proposed.
PRESIDENT: Miss Christine LOH has given notice to move an amendment to this motion. Her amendment has been printed on the Order Paper and circularized to Members. I propose that the motion and the amendment be debated together in a joint debate.
The Council shall now debate the motion and the amendment together in a joint debate. I now call on Miss Christine LOH to speak and to move her amendment. After I have proposed the question on the amendment, Members may express their views on both the motion and the amendment.
MISS CHRISTINE LOH's amendment to MR PAUL CHENG's motion:
"To delete "including the draft Strategy Paper prepared on this issue last year by the Monetary Authority, progress in producing a blueprint for the future has been slow, this Council urges the Government to formulate, in consultation with the industry and the public, a comprehensive plan of action and speed up the implementation of short-term and long-term initiatives focusing" and substitute with "the Government could do more to provide an even better environment in order to support the private sector in developing financial services; and that it should focus"; to delete "improving the financial infrastructure in terms of the operating systems, training and development, and access to our financial markets;" and subsitute with "ensuring that the necessary conditions, including world-class infrastructure, open access and a highly skilled workforce, are in place; and"; and to delete "and; iv. providing tax and other appropriate incentives to continue to attract key financial services;"."
MISS CHRISTINE LOH: Mr President, I move that Mr Paul CHENG's motion be amended as set out under my name on the Order Paper. Mr President, the Honourable Paul CHEUNG's motion is not as helpful as it could be because it does not contain any very clear direction. It is of a general nature, and asks the Government to "do something". I wish to amend the motion because it has a number of worrying aspects.
Our difference is not necessarily fundamental but certainly we differ in emphasis. The Honourable Paul CHENG is worrying about competition. I agree that we should not be complacent, but I do wish to highlight that whilst both Hong Kong and Singapore are international finance centres, any similarities must profound (sic) differences of philosophy and strategy. This goes for Malaysia, Australia and Shanghai as well. But since Singapore appears the most threatening, let me deal with this first.
Singapore's international financial sector exists on an offshore platform where participants are largely barred from the domestic sector. Mr President, I believe there are only seven foreign members of the Singapore Stock Exchange. They have no voting rights, and they cannot execute any but the very largest transactions for local investors. Singapore's banking, futures, and fund management sectors all have various kinds of restrictions, too.
Contrast that with us in Hong Kong. We are almost entirely open to international participation. For example, our stock exchange has over 90 foreign controlled members with the same rights as local members. Since the underlying philosophy, and strategies, between Hong Kong and Singapore are entirely different, there really is not much point in suggesting that Hong Kong should copy a little bit of Singapore's strategy, like a few tax incentives here and there. It is for this reason that I am seeking to delete part (iv) of the original motion. And, anyway, let us not forget that Hong Kong has a very competitive tax system overall.
Therefore, I would like Members to consider the totality of the market environment between Singapore and Hong Kong, and not just pick on one area where another market provides some tax incentives. In terms of tax, doing business here is very much more attractive than in Singapore. In terms of market access, Hong Kong is very much more open. In terms of regulation, Singapore wins hands-down.
We should not only concentrate on worrying about competition. The various Asian financial centres, including up-coming ones, like Shanghai, complement each other as well. Investment is not a zero-sum game. Projects initiated elsewhere could create subsidiary, or knock-on effects through Hong Kong, or vice versa.
Another reason I am seeking amendment to the motion is that I believe the motion's emphasis on what the Government's role should be in promoting Hong Kong as a financial centre is wrong. The motion suggests that the Government should be the chief protagonist. It is precisely this conception of the Government's role that I disagree with. The Government should be a facilitator, not protagonist.
A further reason to amend follows on from what I think is Mr CHENG's confusion of these roles. The motion is confused about what constitutes government support, and what constitutes unnecessary government intervention.
Let me first examine the role of support. I firmly believe that the Government's role in business is to provide the right environment to facilitate the private sector in the exercise of its entrepreneurial spirit. The kinds of things the Government should do include the maintenance of the rule of law, the free flow of information of all kinds, keeping corruption at bay, and so on, now and beyond 1997. The Government has the responsibility to continue to keep law and procedures under review to ensure that the needs and aspirations of a modern society are met.
I am seeking to delete part (ii) of the original motion. Here, we can see the difference in interpretation between what I regard as support and intervention, and how the Honourable Paul CHENG sees it. In part (ii), the Honourable Member proposes that the Government should be involved in the operating systems of the financial markets. He did explain himself a little just now, but I remain disturbed by the tone of the motion. I cannot actually quite believe that that is what Mr CHENG is proposing as it is written in the motion. On the face of it, he is suggesting, for example, that the Government should intervene in the financial market operating system. Let us take an example, should the Government intervene in the Stock Exchange's operating system? Mr President, surely not.
Further, part (ii) also calls for the Government to improve "training and development". I heard Mr CHENG also developing this point. The Government is not a suitable provider of training of those working in financial services. The Government cannot do a good job. Professional training is the task exclusively of the private sector.
Indeed, I wish to substitute part (ii) with what I regard as some of the necessary conditions for the financial services industry to remain competitive in the next century. I think Mr CHENG actually agrees with some of these points. The necessary conditions must include maintaining a world class infrastructure. For financial services, this means telecommunication policy to ensure that it will be at the cutting edge of development.
Further, there must be a highly skilled workforce. While the provision of professional training is essentially for the private sector, the provision of a strong general education is clearly for the public sector. This Council could help to maintain Hong Kong's competitive edge by adding its voice to improving general education. I agree with Mr CHENG we need to pay particular attention to English skills.
On the areas where the Government should intervene, I am in full agreement with part (iii) of the motion but I must say our framework is very good. The Honourable Paul CHENG is worried about an increase in regulation. He did not mention it in his speech, but in today's newspaper he is against new legislation to allow auditors to report any malpractice they discover in company accounting records to the Securities and Futures Commission. Surely, he cannot possibly mean this. Any decent sophisticated financial market has such a provision. Going backwards would be to adopt an idea like not passing such legislation.
To conclude, I am seeking to delete the reference to the Monetary Authority's Strategy Paper. It is simply a paper with general observations and no philosophy and strategy. That is why I am suggesting we should not include it in a motion to be passed by the legislature. Thank you.
DR DAVID LI: Mr President, the motion before us states a simple truth the future prosperity of Hong Kong does depend to a great degree on maintaining our competitiveness as a leading international financial centre. But the reality underlying that truth is not so simple. A financial centre is a complex infrastructure, a cluster of sophisticated intermediaries. Hong Kong has been attractive as the site for an international financial centre because it has provided the best available environment.
That environment has been created and maintained by a reliable legal system and regulatory framework, freedom of information, and internationally acceptable accounting standards. Laissez-faire administration that provides prudent supervision with the minimum of regulation, and an attractive tax regime, have been vital to our success. For this, the Administration, and the Monetary Authority, deserve our commendation.
But we must not be complacent. If we are to remain a leading international financial centre, we must demonstrate that we understand the changing needs of the financial intermediaries that choose to operate here. In his regard, the Hong Kong Monetary Authority released a Strategy Paper eight months ago.
But what has the Administration done? Are the Hong Kong Monetary Authority's sensible suggestions being implemented? Is Hong Kong promoting offshore financial business by introducing tax incentives that rival our competitors'? Are we working to attract the listings of international companies to the Stock Exchange of Hong Kong? No.
The Hong Kong Monetary Authority is not alone in its efforts. The private sector has also contributed a series of recommendations. But has the Administration considered implementing proposals made by the Finance Constituency? Has the Administration introducted a form of group relief that would compare with that offered by other international centres? Recommended by the Hong Kong Association of Banks, group relief would allow the tax losses of one company in a business group to be offset against the taxable profits of another.
Has the Administration adjusted the tax treatment of banks' general provisions for bad and doubtful debts to match those of our competitors? Has it stopped encouraging capital outflows by lowering estate duty? No. Why penalize those who use our services?
The Strategy Paper drawn up by the Hong Kong Monetary Authority was released at a Seminar organized by the Preparatory Working Committee for the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region. A reading of the speeches made at the Seminar readily illustrates one point that we, as Members of this Council, or of the Administration, should keep foremost in our minds. The people of Hong Kong live and work in one of the world's most economically cosmopolitan of cities. Their best interests cannot be served by focusing purely on domestic concerns.
We need to ask: What effect will good intentions that become policy have beyond the headlines? Will they end in higher costs that drive companies from the territory, taking with them jobs and tax revenues? Just imagine Mrs Household's delight when she reads that her social assistance payments have been increased. But will the extra money help support her daughter who cannot get a job because she is poorly educated and does not speak English or Putonghua? Will it help support her son, who lost a job as a fund manager when the Provident Fund was legislated out of private-sector hands? I think not.
Our position as a leading international financial centre, and our future prosperity, depend on policies that affect the international competitiveness of Hong Kong. I urge the Administration to review these policies whether they address education, technology, land use, housing or cross-border links.
Competitiveness is about providing value-added service to business. It is central to providing opportunity to our people. Together, we have achieved a great success in the past. The Administration can work productively with the Hong Kong Monetary Authority and the private sector to build on that success. With you, my Constituency looks forward to setting a clear agenda a Path to Prosperity for the future.
With these remarks, Mr President, I support the motion.
PRESIDENT: Honourable Members, I have inadvertently omitted proposing the question on Miss Christine LOH's amendment. I will make amends by proposing the question to you now.
Question on the amendment proposed.
朝挪狶某璓勉畊ネ翠磕いみ镑ミさぱ瓣悔︗よ琌瞶纔墩い瓣翠竒蕾浮よ琌磕砰╰の菏恨诀祇甶ら镣Ч到癸ら痲眏玪癸もи-
琂ぃ礚跌硂ㄇ珼驹τヘ贾芠ぃ莱筁だ床ガ磀芠薄狐τ┛菠э到セō兵ン璶и-
镑膥尿玂┕纔墩莱ゼㄓ祇甶秈˙綿㏕磕菏恨诀のЧ到Τ闽猭ㄒи獺翠琌Τ兵ン膥尿蝴ㄤ瓣悔璶磕いみ︗
翠┎祇Τ闽翠瓣悔磕いみ郸菠ゅン弧琌のㄣΤ縩伐種竡堡タ綠癡某某惫迭い翠┎览璹屡瓜秈甶讽絯篊ゅンゼΤ╰参碞紇臫翠磕いみ︗τだ璶"い瓣"郸菠┦╯τ┛菠穝盪癬盢ら镣Θ剪磕カ初ョ盢穦Θ翠璶膙癸も
膀セ猭砏﹚翠瞷︽砯刽の磕盢ぉ玂痙τ玂毁磕穨㎝磕カ初竒犁㎝秈︑パ琌蝴臔翠瓣悔磕いみ︗璶現獀㎝猭玂毁
い瓣ず竒蕾尿胺眃祇甶穝瓣悔竒蕾カ初癸禩盢碩糤坝ずщ戈ョぃ耞ど皌ず竒蕾祇甶翠Τぃぶ蝗︽の磕诀篶タ硋˙ず秨砞だ︽の妮そ瞷タ琌翠磕祇甶▆诀
繦チ刽购蹲瞯の盢箂箂箂玡砯刽カ初︑パ传チ刽璴ネㄣ盢穦琌伐ㄣ肩借カ初τず祇甶膀兜ヘ盢穦秖硓筁瓣悔カ初杜ㄩΑ栋戈ョΤ翠祇甶杜ㄩカ初の矗ㄑ戈皌い瓣竒蕾祇甶
翠瞷程膙癸も琌穝℡瘤礛穝℡そ眔祙祙瞯琌27%耕翠16.5%蔼穝℡現┎瞷タ酚竒蕾耎甶纔磃現郸龟琁硈﹃祙叭纔磃惫琁珹盢磕诀篶"瞒─"柬︓10%の矗ㄑ耎眎纔磃щ戈祙杜璸购㎝舦禣单硂ㄇ纔磃瘤礛続ノ疭﹚︽穨┪穨叭癸瓣щ戈ョㄣま
穝℡籔计瓣產帽璹"蛮揭祙"﹚ョ会まㄇ祙瞯耕蔼瓣產щ戈砞ミ磕诀篶㎝跋办羆场
翠┎筁ぃ跌祙よ矗ㄑ纔磃惫琁㎝眏秸"縩伐ぃ箇"現郸ㄤ龟瞷龟Τゲ璶穝タ跌㎝浪癚
︓翠肩膙癸も瘤礛ヘ玡瓣悔磕カ初逼环环辅翠磕穨肩借㎝膙ㄤ龟タら痲糤眏
パ局Τ动玴穨毙▅㎝м膀娄ョ琌い瓣現┎翴祇甶磕いみ膀娄砞タ硉祇甶阁瓣そ硄癟笲块㎝瞶︗竚惠璶τ竒蕾よ布カ初ョ瞷磕эτい瓣﹛ら亥来眔骸ì瓣щ戈惠璶
癸贺Τ兵ン螟┣翠Τ粄盢Τ溃︓翠诀穦
ぃ筁いよ﹛のい瓣蝗︽捌︽朝じネ┏ㄊ癚穦纯竒癸翠㎝硂ㄢゼㄓ妮い瓣磕いみ﹚︗弧"翠耴盢い瓣瓣悔磕いみ玥盢璶ш簍ず磕いみà︹"ㄤ量杠い┮矗ㄇ芠翴常琌い瓣現┎癸膥尿玂翠磕いみ︗璶獺み玂靡
癸穝℡㎝硂ㄢ眏玪膙癸もи種綠癡某某現┎莱眖硉﹚侯︽笆璸购е辅龟兜祏戳の环惫琁ㄤい程璶и粄Τ碭翴
1. 膥尿玂蝴臔翠じ铆﹚現郸の蹲膀璶ノ铆﹚翠じ蹲瞯現郸
2. 玂羛么蹲瞯ぃ跑蝴臔そ渤㎝щ戈癸砯刽獺み
3. 繦穝磕の璴ネㄣぃ耞崩朝穝秈˙胺磕菏恨磕カ初ぃゲ璶耑
4. 荷еЧΘ穝诀初のΤ闽み祘糤の耎砯耫絏繷眏セ翠砯笲瑈硄
5. 縩伐篈﹚現郸н坝穨祇甶ㄏ磕穨セ穨矗ㄑ戈㎝щ戈诀穦
6. 翠┎莱籔磕㎝盡皘硉蚌癡盡穨矗蔼眖穨借璶矗ど翠璣粂キ蝴臔㎝玂セ翠磕穨瓣悔カ初▆羘臕
畊ネ鲸恨翠玡ご穦窱ぃぶず留紐のㄓ膙パ翠磕カ初Τ綿㏕膀娄の竒菌筁Ω硂ㄇいΘи谋眔璶翠┎镑蹦続讽惫琁の秈˙Ч到菏恨猭ㄒи-
龟礚斗癸翠蝴ㄤ瓣悔磕いみ︗筁だ紐納
セ略朝勉
糕蚌┚某璓勉畊ネи绊獺筁寸翠現獀盢礚或拜肈阶緇程璶琌磕拜肈さぱ某臛阶и盢穦碞靡菏穦ㄢぱ玡祇材厨莱
渤┮㏄翠磕ㄆ穨布カ初旧и-
靡菏穦祇材厨い┮矗のㄆ薄玱Τ睼瞔跌钮ぇ尔セ翠現郸﹚琌场砫ヴ传ēぇちΤ闽磕現郸﹚莱赣琌磕ㄆ叭砫ヴㄢユ┮布ユ┮㎝戳砯ユ┮︑Τㄤ盡戮璽砫セō笲程靡菏穦琌菏恨硂ㄢ丁ユ┮琌镑タ絋ЧΘ現┎現郸狦靡菏穦簔跌磕ㄆ叭杠и獽蠢磕ㄆ叭ぃ狦暗ぃ癸∕郸Τ紇臫临Г硂暗或и辨祔磕ㄆ叭だ莱硂翴
靡菏穦厨矗のΤ场だ瓣щ戈疭琌唉筿癟布翠ユぃ筁笷ユ肂34%传ēぇㄤ緇琌璣瓣㎝瓣カ初ユ琂礛Τ硂贺薄靡菏穦瞶莱浪癚琌翠布び蔼產莱笵ぃ琌琌翠祙ぃ瞶и粄琌┮莱癩現琁溃獽浪癚ユ祙琌び琌拜肈菏恨琌び腨兵ㄒび硂ㄇ拜肈常眔靡菏穦╯瘤孔璶まщ戈ㄓ翠ユ礛τ璝и-
兵ンぃ镑︙まщ戈㎡
靡菏穦筁だ荐癑崩約び璴ネㄣ㎝戳砯穨叭斗笵璴ネㄣ㎝戳砯セㄓ琌ノ干瞷砯カ初ぃì瞷╯澈琌笷硂ヘ臛阶и纯伐は癸┋瞷ゎ筁る⊿ΤΘユ筁もì靡硂崩約琌ア毖и-
璶秆璴ネㄣ㎝戳砯ぃ琌Τ或篡禕┪ぃ磅︽ぇ矪硂贺ユ琂礛嘿箂㎝笴栏碞ゲ﹚Τ块墓Τ竭Τ寥щ戈˙戒初狦現┎砏﹚–戒初戒︓ㄢもê或–戒初常穦超パ芠禦璴ネㄣ㎝戳砯把籔程穦块或⊿Τ甅▆щ戈矗ㄑ玂毁玡靡菏穦獽伐璶崩笆硂兜穨叭硂翴琌眔蔼糷﹛σ
戳称粄舦靡ユ┮龟Τ獂垒镣墩–ぱАΤ计唉粄靡崩カ┯エ溃瘤礛產弧瞷カΤ"カ"猑┮钡硂瞷禜环ㄓ弧玱籹硑カ初ぃそキΤ200货じ膀獽祇揣紇臫崩称粄舦靡癸ㄤ床めτē-
秆ぃ镑睲贰竒盽把籔щ戈程常穦瞋瓣悔膀"翴み"矗膀畊ネ临癘眔せ玡┦膀翠禴膀瞷瘤礛寥窥產ぃ璶а癘菌毙癡硂ㄇ菌ㄨ常穦簍┮璽砫ヴ靡菏穦讽礛ゲ﹚璶ň眞ゼ礛
翠現┎︽縩伐ぃ箇現郸パ瞷靡菏穦もび玱縩伐箇籔ユ┮㎝靡菏穦Τ琌舼籹硑ぃゲ璶ベ禣現┎戈方瘤礛瞷靡菏穦竒禣獶钡パ現┎挤蹿и-
斗略癘ョ矗の竒禣琌眖祙い眔ㄓ琌カチщ戈┮倒-
戈方
靡菏穦厨ョ矗の翠筁щ戈布Θ程ぶΤ19%︓20%瞷眔9%╯澈琌或獺琌靡菏穦ぃ秆琌ㄤ現郸岿粇︓澈礛借拜场だщ戈或潦禦琘唉布硂琌伐箇舦菏恨诀篶ぃぃ浪癚はτ崩砫ヴ弧ぃ笵и眖ㄓぃ琌ぃ琵靡菏穦菏恨㎝糹︽ㄤ戮砫ㄒ场だ竒筁Τ┮孔"ρ公"靡菏穦俱厨ず⊿Τ癸﹚竡或玱伐у蝶硂拜肈狦靡菏穦璶祑ㄓи穦笲ノи秖猭畑ビ叫猭滦讽礛畊ネセ翠いァ挡衡︓さ笲ごゼ荷到荷и-
辨镑э秈籔辨癩現е盢祇癩現箇衡いそ秨┯粄蝗禩初︗ㄏ翠よ暗眔荷到荷и荡癸Τ獺み翠玂磕いみ︗
畊ネ略朝勉や某
綠產碔某璓勉畊ネ埃糕蚌┚某盿烩и-
ミ猭Ыì瞴钉琌и祔粄ぇ癸糕蚌┚某┕ミ猭Ыず┮祇猭и常琌ぃ骸種ぃ筁糕某矗の靡菏穦à︹τ硂翴иさΩ琌や糕蚌┚某眖靡菏穦程祇甶璸购ずи-
癸羛ユ┮à︹Τ睼瞔и辨癩竒ㄆ叭の癩現さぱ硂痙種臮竡靡菏穦琌菏诡翠靡ㄩユ笆ぃ琌崩約闽蝴セ翠瓣悔磕いみ膙よи辨ㄢ︗﹛さΩ某臛阶ず痙種硂翴
沮参璸竝陪ボきる磕玂繧玻の坝ノ狝叭ず沟计笷38窾琌セ翠沟程材︽穨иō材舱沟さぱ览眖硂38窾沟痲祇癚阶翠瓣悔磕いみ祇甶и龟ぃ辨ǎ硂痁磕眖穨˙籹硑穨沟剐籹硑穨砍脖ねぃ┤⊿Τ暗さぱ籹硑穨典罽ね戈ぃ耞︓砆瞊∣τ讽┮孔м砃さぱョぃゅ癸硂窾┪磕眖穨τē暴Τぃ耞矗どм砃の玃秈磕いみ膙瞊∣翠璶膥尿蝴瓣悔磕いみ︗磕穨沟膥尿Τ暗
畊ネ翠磕狝叭眖穨礚阶借籔计秖А留旅诀沮パ穝℡膟竒瞶蝶︳ㄈ瑆瓣骋瞷厨ず翠蒥初м砃穦璸м砃恨瞶м砃よ耕ㄤㄈ瑆瓣產蔼玱还︹穝℡璣粂祘よ辅穝℡皑ㄓ﹁ㄈの滇猾続莱吏挂籔笆┦よ翠骋玥蔼锦︗恨Ы郸菠┦ゅンョ瓣悔磕いみ窗ㄤΘ闽龄┦局Τ秖盡穨堡翠硂よ眖借籔秖τēА瞷ㄑぃ莱―綠某籔嘲某Τ矗の翠璣粂キ菲辅の戈玻籔繧恨瞶弘衡单盡穨мАぇョだ眔и-
闽猔
畊ネ璝璶蝴翠瓣悔磕いみ︗現┎ゲ斗縩伐癸瓃戈方ぃτ獶膥尿蹦纊尘現郸┪"╈砕"–讽癚阶穨┪磕現郸и-
常穦钮ㄆまノ穝℡ㄒさぱぃㄒ瘤礛穝℡チ祇甶よ┕┕砆у蝶筁縒掉穝℡絋龟琌眔描ㄒㄤ竒蕾砏家戈方籔挡篶蛤翠獶盽ㄢ現┎暗猭玱伐ぃ穝℡現┎縩伐や穿︽穨祇甶τ翠現┎玥蹦ぃ箇現郸穝℡竒蕾Θ狦籔翠ぃヲ︓Τ筁ぇτ礚ぃの磕穨ㄒㄤ蹲杜ㄩ磕璴ネㄣ蒥初獽烩翠┮翠現┎ぃ莱ぃ箇現郸τ玫︑琅讽礛ョぃ莱赣ㄆㄆ箇с炳穨竒犁︑パ┮и-
チ囊璶―現┎膥尿玂︑パ竒犁吏挂纔墩ョ莱癸俱砰竒蕾祇甶や穿蚌癡м砃砞琁单
さぱиョ穦ま瓃穝℡現┎祇甶よㄇ暗猭穝℡現┎躬纘Θミ玂繧穨癡絤いみ矗ㄑΤ闽玂繧穨揭祘癚穦籔癡絤疭琌ㄇ盡穨σ刚揭祘穝℡いァ蝗︽ョ縩伐蚌癡翠┎莱眏籔玂繧蹲戈セ蒥初单羛穦矗ㄑ蚌癡揭祘籔眖穨邻盡穨て翠┎ョ莱躬纘の眏磕穨揭祘龟悔莱ノ籔厩砃挡硈瓣ㄇよ-
蔼い揭祘砞璸穦籔穨羛么ㄇ磕狝叭膀セм癡絤羭Τ矗ど戮沟借現┎ョ莱躬纘戮蚌癡磕穨栋いよㄒい跋牧矗ㄑよ籔砞琁よ獽ぃ磕そ沟矗ㄑ癡絤
畊ネи稱戈方よ干兜矗и-
留紐琵иまノネ玻玃秈Ы羆掉琿弧杠"︓丁磕笲块单狝叭穨龟借戈糤蔼骋笆ネ玻"и矗硂翴ぃボ璶溃戈はぇ琌粄璶矗蔼︽穨ネ玻眏磕穨竒蕾痲ㄆ龟环τē璝磕眖穨ネ玻⊿Τ龟借э到戈盢穦螟糤ネキョ礚猭蝴現┎┮Θミ磕穨舱〆穦莱碞ヘ玡現郸浪癚籔矗环某
程畊ネи稱菠酵杜ㄩ蒥初祇甶ゼㄓㄈび跋い瓣杜ㄩ蒥初祇甶肩动玴翠莱р搐诀穦ш簍璶à︹瞷︽兵ㄒ靡ㄩ兵ㄒの瞷︽╰参ㄒ挡衡╰参А惠э到皌ㄆ龟蝗︽籔蹲穨羛穦常碞翠杜ㄩ蒥初祇甶矗砞┦種ǎΘミ处靡ㄩ祇︽诀篶祇甶甅杜ㄩ玂繧璸购矗ㄑ祙叭纔磃单и-
粄翠┎ョ莱毙▅崩約籔よ崩笆杜ㄩ箂扳て翠┎続﹜碞硂兜某縩伐莱や穿杜ㄩ蒥初祇甶
畊ネセ略朝勉や某
DR SAMUEL WONG: Mr President, the motion calls for a comprehensive plan. The question I want to address is "How comprehensive does it need to be?" Are we seeking a financial plan, or a plan covering all that we need to maintain Hong Kong's competitiveness as an international financial centre? Should we not be focusing on Hong Kong's image as a financial centre and all that entails?
The support needed for the financial services, in particular to encourage overseas investors and businesses, includes an efficient infrastructure; a good environment; reasonable rents; an appropriately trained workforce with a good command of the English language; immunity of the economy from politics; freedom of expression; a legislative framework friendly to entrepreneurism, innovation and drive; and maintenance of the overall image that Hong Kong has achieved so far of being one of the most friendly places on earth to do business.
Infrastructure could be one of Hong Kong's greatest strengths. Our compactness leads to cheap, efficient utilities. The buildings are world class, as are the power supplies and communications in some respects world beaters. The deregulation of telecommunications is proceeding well.
I cannot say the same for broadcasting and transport. The authorities have dithered over broadcasting policy for 10 years and have finally, in effect, abandoned it, leaving international broadcasters to settle their headquarters in Singapore. What a disaster for our image!
As for transport, that has been developed piecemeal for far too long and needs its own comprehensive plan. The Mass Transit Railway (MTR) is a huge success. No doubt its airport extension, so essential for future business travel, will fare as well. I cannot say the same of roads, which have lagged far behind demand.
However, a great weakness in the infrastructure has been in technology transfer. When the MTR was completed, much of the expertise was allowed to disperse overseas and we were unable to compete in a major way in other mass transit projects in the region. The same is likely to happen in all the Airport Core Programme projects. Now the Kowloon-Canton Railway extension is being treated in the same way. There is a clear indication of preference for overseas expertise. There is no contractual indication so far of any intention to transfer a substantial amount of technology to the local workforce for future consultancy use. Hong Kong's image is not that of a source of consultancy for many of its major technological achievements.
Environmentally, the image of Hong Kong, as one of the dirtiest cities in the world, is not conducive to attracting business. Environmental matters are too tied up in politics and should be dealt with more pragmatically. If the public wants pollution checks at street level, give it to them.
By the year 2000, 60% of new jobs will require professional skills possessed by only 20% of young people entering the labour market. Half of the high-wage jobs are estimated to require the use of networked computers. Access to the information superhighway is already a critical means to full participation in our society. Unless education and continued training is genuinely geared to the next millennium, unemployment will get worse, not through shortage of jobs, but because the workforce does not have the right skills. In particular, the reported deterioration in English language skills needs to be reversed, otherwise we will hand yet more of our business to Singapore and greatly tarnish our image as a financial centre.
Confidence in our economic future is essential to our image and our continued success. The plan must contain drastic measures to divorce politics from the economy. The cost to our taxpayers of the delay to the Airport Core Programme is already horrendous. Hong Kong is so rich that it can probably afford the cost. However, it cannot afford the damage done to its image of being vulnerable to political interference. That cost could be death.
Likewise, the fears of threats to our freedom of expression could be catastrophic in deterring foreigners from doing business here. If there is the slightest suggestion that incoming economic information will be censored or restricted, or that self-censorship is significantly practised, our financial status will topple. Yet, in a survey of journalists in Hong Kong, 23% admitted prasticing self-censorship and 51% said their colleagues did.
Finally, I would plead against too much conservatism, defined in the dictionary as opposed to innovation. We need innovation and entreprenurism to maintain our image as a financial centre.
So the comprehensive plan this motion advocates needs to be truly comprehensive covering all the periphery needed to support an international financial centre. It needs to maintain and develop Hong Kong's superb business image, an image that will not survive without careful nurturing.
Mr President, with these remarks, I support the motion.
MR RONALD ARCULLI: Mr President, the Honourable Paul CHENG has given a very thorough speech on the areas we need to address to maintain Hong Kong as an international financial centre. He has covered the need to promote our strengths, to improve our financial infrastructure, to formulate the necessary regulatory framework and to consider the need to provide tax and other incentives to attract key players in the financial services area.
There is not much more I could comment on these areas except perhaps to sound a note of caution on two particular areas. The first is in our regulatory framework and the second is our cost competitiveness. Since the overhaul of our securities and Stock Exchange laws in the late eighties, we have continuously introduced more and more laws regulating our financial markets.
There is some concern in the marketplace that we are tending or heading for an over-regulated market. Some of us tend to over-react when something happens, however trivial the incident may be. It is not always easy to get the right balance, and to do so would really need for us to look at our position very carefully. So, the last thing we want to do is to over-indulge ourselves in excessive regulation. And I know sometimes it is not easy to resist the temptation to try and over-regulate, but I hope our regulators would pay heed to the concerns in the marketplace.
As to our cost competitiveness, there are two particular aspects that concern me. The first is operating costs and the second is in the execution costs. I shall only deal with the second because it is in this area that the Administration can do something about it, and I do hope that the Financial Secretary will not be too harsh on the Secretary for Financial Services if we are able to persuade him to propose a reduction in the cost of share transactions, particularly in stamp duty.
Hong Kong's success, Mr President, as a financial centre could also be attributed to an equal extent by the qualities of a clear and predictable legal system, of information, of ease of entry, of ease of travel and of our respect for law and order. But more importantly, it really is our strategic position and location, particularly in relation to our hinterland and that developing economy in China. And it is really our ability to enhance this quality by building excellent air and sea and telecommunication links, as well as providing sound and modern infrastructure and offices, that we are able to provide an environment with adequate back-up from professionals and financial infrastructure that really has got together to make Hong Kong what it is today.
Consequently, we must not only have top-notch financial infrastructure in terms of operating systems, training development or the necessary regulatory framework and legal requirements or incentives to attract business, but we must also ensure that our physical infrastructure, in terms of our land, sea and air routes are fast and efficient, that our telecommunication systems are advanced. Furthermore, we also need to look at, perhaps, the quality of our schools, our recreational facilities and other areas which the financial services community take for granted in other leading financial centres.
Mr President, our office buildings, for instance, are currently being designed to be able to cope with the latest communication and computer technology. The private sector has taken this on in terms of the design of the building, in making them not just environmentally friendly, but also, as it were, intelligent buildings. And in addition, as far as the Government is concerned, it could provide incentives to the industry so that everyone there will embrace these concepts.
Mr President, it is important that we acknowledge what Hong Kong is today in terms of a financial centre and maintain that very important role because, if we look at North America and at Europe, looking at the financial centres there on those two continents, and looking at China and at Asia, we certainly have a very unique position. We must not be complacent and we must always be on guard to improve ourselves and to keep up-to-date with our competitors elsewhere.
As regards Miss LOH's amendment, the essential difference between her amendment and Mr CHENG's motion is really in the area of the tax and other incentives. Miss LOH has deleted part (iv) of Mr CHENG's motion, thereby removing from consideration that particular area. Whilst I think we should be slow in introducing what I call custom package, or indeed any major overhaul in terms of our tax structure and tax system, I do believe that, if the trend in other financial cities and centres is in fact to look at these incentives, we should at least look at them, if only to consciously reject them. But we should not rule them out of order at this early stage. So, for that reason, I believe that we cannot in fact support Miss LOH's amendment and we will support Mr CHENG's original motion.
Thank you, Mr President.
独綺笽某璓勉畊ネи㎝チ囊琌獶盽や綠某某さぱ臛阶某肈弧琌狝叭穨臛阶┑尿讽и矗某璶―現┎浪癚翠狝叭穨祇甶惠―﹚Τ闽現郸のΘミΤ闽〆穦堡翠現┎╈ㄢきい崩崩約狝叭穨厨τ︓Οパ癩現Θミ舱も╯磕穨現郸螟┣さぱ現┎ョゼ碞蝴翠瓣悔磕いみ矗ㄣ砰郸菠籔よ
程︗竒蕾厩產翠磕いみ︗篤臫牡牧蹲カ初磕璴ネㄣカ初靡ㄩカ初㎝杜ㄩカ初い穝℡竒Τよ烩翠靡菏穦ョセ秅ボ翠靡ㄩユΤ瑈ア镣窗籔穖ǐ场だユ
靡菏穦籔磕いみ祇甶舱程だ┯空穦さ碞翠磕いみ︗厨и辨硂ㄢ厨ぃ穦ア辨碞兜璶竒犁Θセ戈方硄癟㎝м砃の菏恨籔祙叭瞏だ猂籔ㄣ砰某и稱眏秸翴碞琌┮そガゅン吭高癸禜ぃ莱穨ず璓渡琘よ痲щ戈羘砆被籠и-
钮糕蚌┚某簍勉┽阑靡菏穦ㄤ龟だ瞷щ戈舦痲┕┕ぃ碙穝磕ㄣョ琂眔痲ゎ祇甶翠ら痲甧Θ瑈磕いみ
畊ネ膙︑㎝猭砏硂じ常琌玃秈翠磕いみ︗臟à膙穦玃秈膙穦玃秈эの秈˙瞊∣朝侣辅琌翠ヘ玡玃秈そキ膙よご礛ぃì︓甧砛胋耞蝴臔琂Τ痲靡ㄩカ初よ玡靡菏盡繬搂竡ネ纯翠惠璶ユ┮ぃ琌钩瞷硂妓パ羛ユ┮胋耞︗戳ǔ硉皌磕カ初俐窾跑锣跑祇甶玻珇祇甶跋┦靡ㄩカ初初ユ材カ初单ヘ玡竒璹ミよΑ笻璉︑パ膙玥糤ユ禣ノ锚щ戈種饼蝗︽よ現┎ゎ蝗︽︑パ膙甧砛蝗︽参や禣痲穕ョ参Μ禣ㄒ秨ミき窾じ獺ノ獽璶や0.25%も尿禣紉Μ翠じぃぶ坝癸稰极螟キ蝗︽"Cartel"某玂臔蝗︽膙穦–鶪稶τ獶ら亥秈˙и辨獺︑パカ初玥嘲某籔綠某ョ穦タ跌硂ㄇ胋耞薄鶪τぃ虫ゎ瑌璶―ぃ箇︓砏恨よチ囊ぃ觅Θ筁だ菏恨カ初浚も浚竲チ囊粄胺菏恨眏そ渤獺みΤ︽穨祇甶㎝翠Θ痷タ瓣悔磕いみタ羛ユ┮秸琩陪ボΤ9%セΘщ戈靡ㄩカ初耕ㄤ瓣悔磕カ初22%キАゑ╯ㄤ璶Τㄢよ材Τ種щ戈癸カ初いざ刮砰竒单そタ┦獺み材癸セカ初粄醚э到Τ闽いざ刮砰菏恨搭ぶ篡禕︽確щ戈獺みの眏毙▅崩約盢ま床めщカ初Τ瞏и獺眏ヘ玡カそ硓そガ赋ㄆデ竜魁冈灿穨罿厨单ョΤまщ戈堡ヘ玡τē羛ユ┮琌ぃ腀種赋ㄆビ厨デ竜魁よ糤硓τ靡菏穦硂よ琌肞もセぃ穦璶―羛ユ┮糤硓
穨ず︑琌祇甶磕カ初ゲ惠兵ン穨ず禫︑菏恨禫搭ぶ堡ヘ玡磕穨︑ぃì竒基蛮羛禦芥ず辊ユ扳芥ぃ続讽щ戈玻珇蝗︽ず场繧菏恨ぃì蝗︽超硂ち常弧Τゲ璶ま菏恨︓猭砏﹚и-
ぃ粄笷筁だ˙癸玂毁щ戈τēセ琌伐ぇ痢畓虫ヲ昂某祔穦硂よ秈˙だ猂
程嘲某タ埃蹦ノ祙叭纔磃惫琁龟螟フ祙叭よ翠琌Τ惠璶э到瞒─Μ紉祙よ絢ぃ祙兜よョ逼眔ぃ続讽絋﹚糤щ戈单の祙叭纔磃А琌Τ翠祇甶и-
⊿Τ快猭や嘲某タ
糂簙煌某璓勉畊ネ璶蝴セ翠瓣悔璶磕いみ膙Τゲ璶р翠璶膙癸も籔セ翠ゑ或畉钵礛彼祏郸菠ㄓ蹦惫琁玂の祇甶セ翠纔墩
ㄈ瑆跋穝℡狥ㄊ芖琌珼驹翠磕いみ︗璶膙
穝℡纔墩琌ウ琌ㄈ瑆じいみ膀舱麓の獶蝗︽磕诀篶ゑ翠祇笷ユΘセ狥幅竒蕾祇甶矗ㄑΤ兵ンㄤま戈ㄤ墩琌龟︽腨蹲恨挂瓣ず磕穨叭ㄢだ瞒布磕カ初ゑ翠还︹
狥ㄊ纔墩琌蝗︽砏家㎝紇臫常Τ眏竒蕾龟ㄓ"叉瞒稼瑆τ秈ㄈ瑆"癸翠磕︗Θ珼驹ㄤ墩碞琌現┎癸磕穨北候瓣悔磕穨叭籔瓣ず磕穨叭琌だ筳
芖纔墩玥琌Ν碞ミ挂磕カ初芖崩笆磕︑パて瓣悔て秈祘蹦╰惫琁ヘ玡ЧΘ"ㄈび磕いみ"砏购ㄤ墩磕膀セ砞琁㎝ぃì縒笆硑Θ現獀ぃ铆﹚紇臫щ戈獺み
Τ粄ョ琌翠膙癸もи粄环τē籔翠ノ琌が干盢ш簍瓣ず磕いみà︹τ翠玥盢ш簍い瓣瓣悔磕いみà︹
ゑ耕ぇセ翠莱赣蹦癸郸琌
矗ㄑ祙叭のㄤ続讽躬纘惫琁ま摸ㄓщ戈ㄏщ戈篫摸磕狝叭穦篫沮穨竝るらそガ兜秸琩厨戈㎝現獀琌戈翠笿螟そ翠砞ミ跋秸琩ㄒ钡Θ砐粄の戈蔼琌-
翠竒犁璶螟挪の戈蔼拜肈へ獶らぇ碒螟秆∕セ粄セ翠莱矗ㄑ祙叭のㄤ続讽躬纘惫琁よひ
и-
ぃ翠そ祙祙瞯τ珿˙︑莱Τ皐癸┦矗ㄑま瓣щ戈祙叭纔磃珹
材阁瓣そ璝翠砞ミ犁笲羆场矗ㄑ恨瞶м砃┦┪ㄤや穿狝叭倒ぉセ翠ㄤそ硂犁笲羆场斗煤祙瞯莱ぉ纔磃
材坝狦セ翠肂穨щ戈玥-
犯ㄉΤ琿瞶祙叭糴搭戳
埃磅︽某某セ粄現┎莱い璣ㄢ瓣窗㎝ㄊ笷Θ醚や膚〆穦抖秨甶ㄏ翠現獀Τま戈
畊ネセ略朝勉や綠癡某某
MRS ELIZABETH WONG: Mr President, Hong Kong's pre-eminent position as a financial centre is best illustrated as follows. For example, we have possibly the largest representation of international banks in the world. We have one of the largest gold trading centres in the commodities market. Our equity market is already the largest in Asia outside Japan. Hong Kong, together with other Asian financial giants like Japan and Singapore, dominate foreign exchange trading in the Asian time zone. We have one of the most competitive insurance markets in the world in Asia. With the Reminbi moving towards full current account convertibility in trading by the year 2000, Hong Kong is likely to increase its role as a bridge between the nascent forex market in China and those in the rest of the world.
So, what makes Hong Kong tick? Many features of attraction together contribute to Hong Kong's success as a financial centre. Hong Kong is, as many people have spoken, geographically and strategically placed as a gateway to China, which is itself a fast-growing economy. We have a low tax regime, an open market and a resourceful, skilled and efficient workforce. This is supported by prudential supervision and a fiscal discipline which makes it possible to encourage entrepreneurship without encouraging "fly-by-nights".
More importantly, since financial transactions involve rights and obligations which need to be verified by legal contracts capable of enforcement, we have a legal framework and comprehensive laws and codes of conduct. These laws are well-established over time and tested in the courts which have gained an admirable reputation for impartiality. We also have an international standard technological infrastructure to ensure efficiency.
But our financial clout must be watched with great care for money markets migrate just as easily as people who have money. Already warning signs are there. Our standard of education, essential to the maintenance of Hong Kong as a financial centre, shows signs of slipping. There is also an unwelcome tendency towards over-regulation. Our overhead costs are high, which can make us less competitive with our neighbours. As we sail up the uncharted waters of "one country, two systems", we are not sure that the things we take for granted will be there. There is no certainty that the practices and values which have served us well over the years will be maintained. For a start, our current legislature is to be dismantled and what is to replace it is unsure. Whilst the promises of the Chinese and British Governments, which are signatories to the Joint Declaration, are crystal clear, how to make these promises turn into reality remains a mystery. We talk about confidence, but confidence cannot be willed and it is there. It cannot be summoned and it will come.
Financial arrangements are always risk-laden⌒liquidity risks, settlement risks, legal risks, operational risks and so on. We must seek to ensure a predictable environment in this dynamic, risk-laden area of finance. We need to guarantee a level playing field, a sound legal system, and a stability of fiscal environment to instil trust and boost confidence. Confidence is built on predictability of a legal system, clarity of approach and certainty of policy. Confidence takes time to build up, but can be destroyed overnight. No empty promises can coax either confidence or money into the market. Investors seldom put their money where their mouth is. They need peace of mind to ensure that money today will not turn into mist tomorrow.
So, let us not talk about overturning or derailing our legislature or overturning our laws. Let us endeavour to achieve a smooth transition. I hope, Mr President, today's debate will help the Government to assume a leadership role in planning for the future, not to intervene but to provide the right environment and the right infrastructure to maintain Hong Kong's position as a viable financial centre. Thank you.
讲蚌某璓勉畊ネ翠竚ō瞴磕いみぇ籔狥ㄊの窗霍︑パ竒蕾砰翠荷ぱ㎝办畉┮盿ㄓ纔翴翠籔ㄤ磕いみが干ìㄏ瞴磕カぃ耞笲まщ戈Θセ翠の瓣ず穨璶栋戈初┮瞴竒蕾確礵い翠竒蕾虑磕ㄆ穨眔玙癬翠磕砰╰Ч到局Τ▆瓣悔磕坝穨の狝叭穨祇笷の戈癟肚患︑パǔ硉承硑伐ㄎщ戈吏挂ぉщ戈竒蕾锣い翠磕穨癸翠竒蕾祇甶┮︗ら痲璶τ翠埃癸瞴磕ㄆ穨祇甶璶磕いみ癸い瓣竒蕾祇甶癪膍瞏环
礛τ﹡и-
癸ヘ玡翠磕ㄆ穨瓣悔┮ㄉΤ︗稰︑花ご莱ぃ耞浪癚のЧ到и-
磕玂瓣悔膙琌だ框狙現┎筁︑骸縩伐ぃ箇現郸埃矗ㄑ膀セ笲琜篶癸蚌癡┹甶カ初玂毁щ戈单よ惫琁А砆笆┪ぃì┪秈甶絯篊
現┎莱承硑ㄎ竒犁吏挂の﹚縩伐惫琁のや穿╬犁诀篶щ戈方┹甶の祇甶磕ㄣカ初のまщ戈硂妓ぃ玃秈セ翠磕穨祇甶糤セ翠俱砰碞穨诀穦磕いみ玂瑈磕琌兜ぃ┪筁現┎硂よ┮暗龟びぶ現┎莱籔╬诀篶盡穨刮砰の厩砃诀篶坝癚络﹚ㄇ耕环蚌癡璸购
セ獺セ翠磕穨祇甶琌Τ苦▆︑パカ初硂磷ぃゲ璶︽現箇τ笷瞶のΤ笲闽龄現┎琌矗ㄑ続讽惫琁ノ崩笆硂︑パ吏挂承硑ㄓ纔墩ㄏщ戈眔そキの瞶厨眏щ戈獺み
現┎埃︑パそキの瞶カ初承硑兵ン斗秈︽Τ菏恨矗ㄑщ戈続讽玂毁堡現┎硂よ猭ㄒの現郸﹚秈ゑ耕絯篊ㄒ現┎莱縩伐﹚俱瞶㎝侯┮Τ籔靡ㄩの戳砯Τ闽兵ㄒ舱麓發の瓣悔非糵菏恨琜篶搭щ戈カ初┮玙ぃゲ璶繧祇备磕カ初瞏玴肩眔矗琌挪羬筁寸現┎癸磕カ初斗秈︽Τの腨盞菏恨の砞ミ莱诀瓣悔щ诀玡癸セ翠磕砰╰硑Θぃゲ璶≧阑
畊ネセ略朝勉や某谅谅
霉不瓣某璓勉畊ネセ籔チ某常琌や綠癡某某ョ璓種綠某祇ēず甧︗某祇ē疉の芠翴硂и矗莱赣闽猔薄鶪翠磕穨い璶吏竊礚阶琌蝗︽穨靡ㄩ穨玂繧穨膀恨瞶穨单璶常琌パ戈穨ぷㄤ琌璣戈┮胋耞㎝北セ地戈穨磕穨祇甶獶盽螟のぃ硂薄鶪琌荡礚度Ττ璶ぇ琌翠現┎戳崩︽崔チ竒蕾現郸
セ硂ぃ琌躬疷筰玂臔竡セ粄現┎莱σ納縩伐現郸躬纘セ地戈穨磕穨祇甶籔Τ闽拜肈琌磕穨戈秖沟ノ骋硂ぃ琌蔼糷恨瞶硈い糷盡穨㎝︽現チ挂ㄆ叭矪耕糴肞現郸ョ秖瑈翠硂紇臫セ盡穨㎝厩拨穨ネ碞穨诀穦セ某現┎瞷崩︽セ纔碞穨玥㎝現郸ョ莱続ノ磕穨獶蔼糷恨瞶
翠ㄈび璶磕いみ癸膙癸もぃ琌穝℡盢祇甶Θい瓣磕いみの芖ョΤ祇甶"ㄈび犁笲いみ"∕み常翠ゼㄓ祇甶翠現┎癸セ膙癸も薄鶪秆ぃì镑
и程Μ現┎パ穝℡快ㄆ矪┮絪糶厨ノ絞碩厨穝℡厨癸翠Θミ膚〆穦蔼ア穨闽猔┏翠Τ丁そ穝℡カの丁膀恨瞶そр跋羆场綞穝℡薄鶪澈Ч⊿Τи-
厨笵и粄┘琌獶盽璶
翠快ㄆ矪琌Τ惠璶眏穓栋竒蕾薄厨腊翠現┎﹚続讽磕現郸
セのチΩビ翠莱Θミ"竒蕾祇甶Ы"﹚続讽环竒蕾祇甶郸菠珹ま秈続讽磕現郸
狦ΤΘミ"竒蕾祇甶Ы"┪摸诀篶碞琌崩︽璸购竒蕾碞﹚粄俱ㄈび跋瞷常琌璸购竒蕾砰╰硂翴и琌荡癸ぃ種
セ略朝勉や某
MRS SELINA CHOW: Mr President, in recent years there has been a growing chorus of complaint that the standard of English is continuously deteriorating down a slippery slope in Hong Kong. Those who have joined in include local and foreign companies, big and small. Others, like myself, watch in dismay how the standard of English in our growing service sector lose out in comparison to neighbouring countries and territories such as Taiwan, Singapore, Thailand, and so on.
In spite of the fact that such complaints are gathering momentum, there has so far been an absence of any comprehensive strategy to tackle the problem. Earlier, we heard Mr CHENG and others mention it in their speeches, but the point is conspicuously absent from the original motion as well as from the amendment.
So far, the initiatives undertaken by the Government have been unimpressive and piecemeal. The problem of language deficiency in our schools in both English and Chinese has long been identified. Measures to tackle the problem, however, have been relatively slow and ineffective. The more worrying tendency is that in our promotion of learning in the mother tongue, English is pushed further and further down the priority list.
The tertiary institutions have complained about the same problem. Professor WANG Gang-wu has in fact used this as one of the justifications for his proposal to adopt a four-year instead of a three-year first degree course for the University of Hong Kong. While I do not agree with him that the university should be used to substitute the schools in foundation language training, Professor WANG's views nevertheless reflect a general dissatisfaction over falling standards.
Apart from what is taught in our schools and higher institutions, there is a lack of training for English for professionals in our respective service sectors. Adult education addressing specific areas of need must be looked into and addressed by the Government. In short, in order to maintain Hong Kong's competitiveness as a leading international financial centre, there is an urgent need for the Government to take the initiative to establish a mechanism to focus attention with a view to upgrading the standard of English across the board.
Much has been said recently about the Government's U-turn on an omnibus Broadcasting Bill. While I remain sympathetic with the Government's predicament, I believe there is an urgent need for the Government to take immediate steps to cement Hong Kong's place as a regional broadcast centre, as the free flow of international information is a vital pillar on which Hong Kong's position as an international financial centre must rest. Four years ago, the Government took the right decision to deregulate subscription TV, yet to this day, the regulatory framework has not yet been put in place.
Furthermore, there has not been any government initiative to attract broadcasting interests to establish in Hong Kong, despite our having had an early start in developing our own talents in the broadcasting industry and our advantage of being the gateway to China. Foreign interest in this industry have eyed Hong Kong for some time, but uncertainty in government policy and the lack of legislation have presented too many unknowns for them to make the final decision to be stationed here, and have as a result turned their attention to India and Singapore. I submit that immediate action must be started to remedy this undesirable situation.
Mr President, I support Mr CHENG's motion.
產不某璓勉畊ネиさぱ祇ē琌稱弧ㄢ芠翴иョ稱瞶阶㎝龟悔薄鶪琌Τぶぃи穦疭酵酵瓣悔膙τぃ虫ゎ弧坝穦ㄓ翠щ戈ㄆ龟êㄇ癩叭そ蝗︽翠セō穨单琘祘笷非吏挂ぃ虫ゎ疉の琌ま瓣そョ穦疉のセそ穦盢ㄤ场だネ種┪戈秸瞒翠┪瓣硄筁瓣犁笲よΑ矪瞶
狦Τ某癸祙叭糴搭硂场だΤヴ︙好拜и辨ㄇ坚睲祙叭糴搭琌現┎絛瞅ず暗ㄆτ琌ゲ斗パ現┎暗ㄆ琌⊿Τㄤ快︓ミ猭ЫぃΤㄇㄆ谋眔祙叭糴搭⊿Τ或ノ谋眔綠某某Τ闽场だぃ眔やиぃ稱弧び弧兜秸琩硂兜秸琩琌丁瓣悔┦穦璸畍ㄆ叭┮1 000丁程穨┮秈︽拜秸琩高拜-
璶瓣よщ戈程璶σ納琌或讽礛產笵現獀琌铆﹚琌璶σ納癩叭繧︓琘よщ戈Τ厨ョ琌璶σ納材璶獽琌祙叭硂祙叭σ納琌耕粂ゅ蔼耕-
琌钡讽ゅてョ耕讽菏恨┪菏诡σ納蔼
赣兜秸琩祇瞷Τ39%そ痷琌σ納祙粄祙ぃ続-
獽ぃщ戈Τ28%そ琘よ祙纔磃τ旧璓щ戈ΤΘ79%щ戈常ゲ﹚穦癸讽祙瞏╯礛╯┮眔現郸场だσ納穦щ戈眖硂ㄇ计ㄓ陪癸–瓣悔щ戈ㄓ弧瘤礛祙叭ゼゲ琌斑σ納﹚祙叭σ納琌璶︗и-
穦璸伐や祙浪癚и-
タ弧瓣悔膙и-
ぃ琌弧璶纔磃场だ坝狦и-
琌璶癸瓣悔吏挂τ弧杠玂毁и-
翠膙и-
粄ゲ斗浪癚
材嘲糠某纯竒矗の綠癡某ㄇ厨彻厨旧弧闽琌璶穦璸畍現┎羭厨ㄇ闽砱γ┪ぃ猭︽и獺嘲某祇ē籔ㄆ龟琌Τ讽禯瞒狦嘲某琎ぱΤ把и-
癩竒ㄆ叭〆穦穦某穦癸硂ㄆΤ翴秆ㄆ龟現┎⊿Τ矗ユ某璶―穦璸畍羭厨ㄇ砱γ籖国薄鶪現┎瞷そガ某琌辨玂毁穦璸畍讽穦璸畍笿硂摸薄鶪匡拒琌羭厨璝匡拒羭厨杠穦莉眔猭玂毁ㄏぃ穦羭厨τ砆め北反反胊籔め闽玒┮ê兵猭ㄒセ碞ぃ琌嘲某┮弧ㄆ
嘲某ョ矗ㄤ瓣產ョΤ摸猭ㄒи禗嘲某穦璸畍そ穦纯竒暗筁冈灿╯ョ⊿Τ硂ㄇ猭ㄒ︓摸猭ㄒ玥璶妓﹚"摸"и稱睲贰璣瓣ョ纯╯硂摸猭ㄒ璣瓣セō∕ま摸猭ㄒ璶穝絃╯瓣ㄓ弧Τㄇσ納ョ睲捶盢ㄇ︽ㄓぃ琌泞参弧"ぃ阶或璶Τ胔好獽璶羭厨"荡癸ぃ琌硂妓琌睲捶璹ミㄇ砏ㄒ㎝睲捶τΤ糷Ω厨旧ョ俱厨旧穦キ颗カ初セō︑穦璸畍盡穨ōだ㎝籔現┎菏诡琜篶が皌单硂妓タタ琌穦璸畍そ穦㎝カ初珹ㄢ坝穦タ現┎肚笷癟и獺讽らи-
穦某ョ籔現┎Τ瞶秆璶穝╯讽礛安笷璓よΑ琌カ初钡τカ初ョ蝴场だ︑杠и-
盡穨荡癸腀種現┎秆∕拜肈ゼт︽よ猭玡и獺瞷坝㎝盡穨琌ぃ觅Θ嘲某粄琌瞶┮讽礛矗某
癸瓣悔膙吏挂и-
Τㄢ贺篈琌и-
闽︑计计и-
︑Τぶ计计︑Τぶ簀璝粄︑Τ龟杠獽ぃ瞶穦材篈琌埃蝶︳︑龟ョ蝶︳и-
膙癸も龟蝶︳┘薄鶪礛场竝и獺綠癡某琌妮иョ辨セЫ蹦ゑ耕縩伐㎝秆癸も篈ぃ璶闽︑吏挂ぃ岿ㄤ贺贺兵ンぃ岿獽粄或ぃ暗谅谅畊ネ
肅繟某璓勉畊ネセ碞綠癡某"蝴セ翠瓣悔璶磕いみ膙"某チ羛祇ē
さぱ翠磕穨セネ玻羆獶盽璶ゑㄒτ沟ノ骋笆獶盽胑Θ翠璶竒蕾㏑翠磕穨筁┕獶盽Θ龟Τ苦▆瞶︗竚胺猭現┎坝穨︑パ現郸の眖穨竒犁┮璓綟翠カ磕穨叭よタ繷话τ翠┮局Τ纔▆兵ンョ秨﹍獻籯ㄒ场だщ戈癸筁寸戳蹦芠辨篈の璣粂キ硂薄鶪龟眔и-
闽猔
ㄆ龟瓣悔戈㎝磕诀篶瑈笆┦戈秸笆獶盽艶翠璝祔Τ肞居獽穦辅ㄤ癸もネ種獽瑈ㄤ膙癸ももи-
ゲ斗玂蔼牡谋ぃ居蹦贺祏戳惫琁矗蔼セ翠磕いみ膙絋玂瞷︓ゼㄓ磕穨胺眃祇甶玻ぃ耞矗蔼膥尿俱砰竒蕾癪膍チ羛粄現┎硂よ琌砫礚禪
パヘ玡瞴磕カ初购だぃ跋τユ挡衡╰参晃钡ごゼ篫硄瓣悔щ戈璶秈︽贺阁瓣戈秸挤ご癸狡馒挡衡筁祘現┎莱荷セ翠磕穨祇甶程秈挡衡╰参眖τ婚硄ぃ跋办カ初щ戈繧㎝ユΘセㄏ翠Θ程ㄣ瞯磕いみ
畊ネ翠璣粂キ炊筂瞷硂翴癸セ翠瓣悔磕穨叭Τぃ紇臫и-
莱籔毙▅坝癚﹚現郸矗蔼翠璣粂ョ斗璶眏莱ノ磕穨盡璣粂蚌癡磕羱どョе硂は琈Τㄑ莱ぃì薄鶪厩︓Τ闽蚌癡揭祘莱だち磕穨惠璶糤蚌緄盡絋玂и-
磕穨Τì镑戈方
よい瓣竒蕾эЩ芠秸北現郸竒眔讽Θ狦τ材き璸购せ︓0000ョ秨甶箇戳い瓣膀娄砞惠璶膚栋秖翠じ戈硂癸翠杜ㄩカ初穦盿ㄓ祇甶チ刽ゼㄓ计盢硋˙︑パ传翠莱眔场だチ刽禦芥穨叭い瓣穨嘲尿翠カ本礟翠カ盢眔祇甶
и-
ゲ斗泊盢ㄓ縩伐非称珹╯カ初诀穦蚌緄剪眡い瓣磕穨叭盡矗蔼炊硄杠キㄏ翠眖硂ㄇΤい眔程痲
и-
笵穝℡龟︽兜祙叭纔磃まщ戈竒犁磕穨叭翠瞷︽眔祙瞯耕癸щ戈ㄓ弧ㄣΤ讽ま癸穝℡眏疨膙現┎莱ぃ眔祙瞯玡矗縩伐╯︽祙叭惫琁皐癸┦莱炒砆笆矪挂
羆τēぇ瞷琌現┎Гē癬︽иだ戳辨恨Ы祇郸菠ゅン┮矗の盡砫吭高〆穦荷еΘミ崩︽贺祏戳惫琁矗蔼翠瓣悔磕いみ︗
畊ネи略璓勉や某
虫ヲ昂某璓勉畊ネиさぱ盢穦栋い癚阶闽菏恨拜肈矗菏恨и福碞疊瞷ㄇ磕忌硂ㄇ常琌籔現┎菏恨簗瑌κΤ闽ㄓ獺ノ超ま祇蹿そ诀订獺癠ッ古地蝗︽ョ膥瞷癩現诀τ砆現┎㎝╬犁诀篶钡恨﹙碞琌╝讽現┎縩伐肚翠瓣悔磕いみ砞Τ秈ユ┮ㄓ肛模︑Θ材计戳砯カ初ē礢φ碞ミㄨ祇ネ氨カ㎝戳砯カ初盰检翠瓣悔磕いみ羘臕荷反τぇ琌磕カ初砆玜"礚恨"戒初┪琌╬穦┮羘硂硈﹃ㄆン常ㄏ現┎ㄤΘミ蝗菏矪㎝靡菏穦ㄓ秈︽続秖菏恨確㎝糤セ㎝瓣悔щ戈癸翠磕いみ獺み
и矗瓃菌毙癡琌稱弧ンㄆ璶蝴瓣悔磕いみ︗碞ゲ斗Τ菏恨Τ続讽菏恨⊿Τ腀種甧г国篡禕カ初竒犁㎝щ戈讽礛ョ⊿Τ穦觅Θ筁だ菏恨с炳カ初祇甶㎝竒犁礚瓜続讽菏恨琌獶盽璶斗よ秖が笆笷璓
チ囊┮眎菏恨挡篶籔兵ㄒ琌辨镑ミそキ㎝Τ瞯カ初そキ﹚竡約獂︓ぶョ莱珹材ぃ店安戈┮籜超材–常Τキ单诀穦莉眔キ单戈材碞琌瞯よ瞯種琌パそキ膙┮笷璓程ㄎ基翠ヘ玡菏恨兵ㄒ㎝挡篶籔瓃ヘ夹Τ讽禯瞒и-
竒盽钮ㄇу蝶ㄒ弧赋ㄆ砊筁蔼狥辰ψ蹲そ睲絃щ戈﹀セ礚耴┪琌蝗︽瞯某熬腊蝗︽单ㄆ龟籔瓣悔磕いみゑ翠菏恨祘琌讽糴肞沮膙厨癸癩竒诀篶猭砏恨続讽祘のそ渤癸癩竒诀篶獺みㄢ兜ヘ翠眔だАи-
膙癸も穝℡秸琩厨ョ陪ボ菏恨猭ㄒ㎝吏挂の菏恨诀篶腨略祘τē狥玭ㄈ跋穝℡琌程腨翠程糴肞糴肞種珹戈硓硂ョ琌ぃΤ獺砯蝶㎝癸蝗︽蝶и-
ヘ玡踞み獶現┎璹ミび猭砏璓罛狿筁タはτ琌筁糴肞и-
莱玃叫現┎э到菏恨挡篶兵ㄒ獽磕カ初镑绰Τ铆胺㎝港龟よ祇甶
蝗︽菏恨よ礷阶ぇ磕恨瞶Ыのきだ顶琿﹚戳瞯某琌Ο磕恨瞶Ы碞焊は焊⊿Τヴ︙ㄣ砰瞶パぇ現獀瞶パ咀絙礟盢瞯某┑┿︓ぇ崩︽跑沧ゎ瞯某磕恨瞶Ы硂贺硑猭琌熬腊蝗︽㎝栋刮痲笻璉そキ膙玥ョ癸禣ぃそキチ囊癸稰獶盽框狙埃瞯某ぇ磕恨瞶Ыョ钡〆穦场だ某ㄒそ秨ず场纗称タだ顶琿秈︽и辨磕恨瞶Ы镑砮过﹍沧ぃ璶繷矰Ю﹠狝栋砰溃ぇ
︓翠靡ㄩ穨菏恨ヘ玡璶琌蹦︑弘チ囊粄︑ぃ单逼埃┪猭菏恨ㄢ莱赣琌徊Θㄆ龟瞷︑ョゼΘ剪临Τぃぶ眔э到よΤ秸琩ョ翠そ恨瞶ご礛辅ゼ镑笷瓣悔キカそ莱赣眏戈┸臩ㄒ赋ㄆ砊璸衡よ猭眏穨盡穨巨の璶―蹲そ潦禦港獺玂繧┪砞ミ竭纕膀单
よヘ玡カ砏玥琌カそ㎝羛ユ┮ぇ丁┦某璝カそ笻は硂砏玥羛ユ┮︽笆琌宁砫耕腨糉暗猭ョ琌盢赣そ氨礟┪埃礟硂贺よΑョ穦狥礚猭扳布τ瞒秨カ初挡狦琌籜穕アチ囊粄Τゲ璶盢场だカ砏玥ミ猭砏﹚ㄒ赋ㄆ砫ヴ㎝戈┸臩单笻猭眔莱Τ胓籃щ戈竭纕パщ戈戈方璓ゼ碻猭硚畖眔莱Τ竭纕チ囊ョ某靡菏穦σ納ラ禣〆穦Θミ禗砠膀暗猭щ戈矗ㄑ癩現や穿籔猭旧┪把σ稼瓣產璴ネ禗砠よΑそ赋ㄆ︽狦狥舦痲穕ヴ︙狥Аㄤ狥そ矗禗砠礚阶北Θ┪ア毖┮Τ绑禣Аパそや
セ略朝勉や綠癡某某は癸嘲糠某タ
PRESIDENT: I now invite Mr Paul CHENG to speak for a second time in order that he may speak on the amendment to his motion. Mr CHENG do you wish to speak? You have five minutes.
MR PAUL CHENG: Mr President, the Honourable Miss Christine LOH obviously misinterpreted both the wording and the spirit of my motion, resulting in her taking the trouble in her presumably very busy schedule to make her amendment. I would like to reiterate that I am not advocating government intervention. I am instead calling on the Government to urgently assume a leadership role to help us compete more effectively in an increasingly competitive real world, not in an idealistic dream world, so that we do not wake up one morning and find that Hong Kong is no longer in a leading position.
The Honourable Miss Christine LOH said Singapore's situation is different and we should not copy them or worry about them. Allow me, as a tennis player, to draw a parallel. When you play in a match, you do not just say your opponent plays a different game, so do not worry, you just carry on and play your own game, ignoring the strengths and weaknesses of your opponent. Having played the game for some 30 odd years, I have found the most important factor in winning is to know your opponent's strengths and weaknesses so that you can vary your own game accordingly to gain an upper hand.
As I was prepared to move this debate before this Council, I consulted widely with the financial community in Hong Kong. The response to my motion was overwhelmingly positive with each sector, each providing sector focus and analysis of the challenges we face. While some recommendations for action differed, there was one area on which everyone agreed and that was on my call for the Government to undertake a review of the current taxation structure as it relates to the financial markets. Furthermore, The Honourable Eric LI just passed me a copy of the Hong Kong Society of Accountants' proposals to the Government on the 1996-97 Budget, entitled "Preserving Hong Kong's Competitiveness". In it, as mentioned by the Honourable Eric LI in his comments just now, the tax issue is one of the more important factors multinationals consider in choosing where they locate their operation. I was therefore surprised that the Honourable Miss Christine LOH felt compelled to eliminate this important element from my motion in her amendment.
I trust Members will bear this in mind when making their decision as to whether they support the amendment or my original motion.
SECRETARY FOR FINANCIAL SERVICES: Mr President, I very much welcome today's debate on an issue which is crucial to the continued stability and prosperity of Hong Kong. By most international standards, Hong Kong is already a leading international financial centre.
It has been a wide-ranging and valuable debate, and Honourable Members have put forward to us some valuable suggestions on how Hong Kong can maintain our competitive edge in the face of keen competition. I wish I could acknowledge and respond to the views of each and every Member who has spoken, but obviously time does not permit this, and I therefore look forward to having continued discussion with Members, market practitioners and the public over this very important topic. And indeed a number of items raised this afternoon could well be very usefully and constructively discussed, and further discussed at the Financial Affairs Panel.
I cannot agree more with Mr Paul CHENG that Hong Kong's future prosperity depends to a great degree on maintaining our competitiveness as a leading financial centre. Indeed, in the past decade or so, financial services have been the key growth component in our economy. The average growth rate for trade and financial services since 1980 stood at an impressive 21% per annum in value terms. I will not quote further statistics today to illustrate our astounding achievements in becoming one of the leading financial centres in the world. Mr Paul CHENG has done so in his speech as have other Members, as well as Miss LOH. I will only reiterate, however, that despite this remarkable achievement, the Government has never been complacent and I believe this is true for the private sector in Hong Kong as well.
Indeed, there is no place for complacency. Asia, being the fastest-growing region in the world and expected to continue to be so in the future, presents immense opportunity in financial services. While Hong Kong is well placed to tap this potential and the associated benefits, both established players and emerging and aspiring financial centres in the region are also seeking to capture the same potential and benefits. And, as Miss LOH has pointed out, it is not a zero-sum game. We are keenly conscious of the need to maintain Hong Kong's competitiveness in the face of increasing competition.
Over the years, we have regularly reassessed the role of the Government in supporting the efforts of the private sector, but we continue to believe that our market-based economic philosophy and policies are sound. They have served Hong Kong well over the decades and it is this very distinctive feature that has given us the edge over other competitors in the region.
We also believe that there is considerable consensus over markets, enterprise and free trade in the community, and I am glad to know that Mr CHENG is not advocating government intervention. The Government should not actively manage the financial markets or interfere with market forces. Our role should be to support business by helping to enhance productive capacity, improve efficiency and sharpen competitiveness. In other words, to maintain a competitive and favourable operating environment.
Through our regular consultation with market practitioners and experts in the international arena, there exists a consensus that Hong Kong's comparative advantages primarily draw from a host of factors. To name just a few: sound economic fundamentals such as strong international trade performance and prudent fiscal position; strategic geographically, for example, our time zone and our location; robust supervisory framework which inspires confidence; an effective anti-corruption regime; advanced infrastructure such as telecommunication links, settlement and clearing systems; business-friendly policies; predictable and low taxes, the rule of law; free flow of people and capital, open markets, and so on; and finally, special, long-standing experience and expertise and relationship with the China market. The list can go on and on. This not only reflects the width and depth of our strengths, but also presents a daunting task for the Government and the private sector to keep up the very high standards in the face of increasingly keen competition.
As many Members have pointed out, the Hong Kong Monetary Authority has compiled a Strategy Paper last year on Hong Kong as an international financial centre. The Paper reaffirmed the many opportunities and threats for Hong Kong and identified a number of continued work on various fronts. These include initiatives to further develop our debt market, encasement of sectorial studies on individual sectors, improvements to the operating environment in general, and workforce upgrading in particular. Most of these proposals represent ongoing efforts which predate the Hong Kong Monetary Authority's study, and these will continue. The evolving markets and the competition and opportunities that these bring effectively present us with a never-ending challenge. While some new initiatives have been launched, the dynamism of the environment dictates that we keep moving ahead. Since then we have, for example, engaged in new studies, initiated structure consultations with the industries, and I can assure Members that we will continue to maintain the momentum.
And as pointed out by Dr HUANG, the key issues and tasks involved in the concerted promotion of Hong Kong services are the subjects under active consideration by a task force of services promotion chaired by the Financial Secretary which was set up in August last year. A series of specific initiatives, including proposals to consolidate Hong Kong's leading position as an international financial centre, will be announced by the Financial Secretary in association with his Budget.
At this juncture, perhaps I should respond very briefly to the four areas of focus identified by Mr CHENG in the original motion, and in the process the three areas advanced by Miss LOH in her amendment. The first area referred to by both Members relates to promoting Hong Kong's strengths as an international financial centre. I fully agree that this is an important task. Indeed it is very much on the Government's list of ongoing commitments. Promoting Hong Kong's role as an international financial centre has been one of the major themes of our publicity efforts, both in Hong Kong and overseas in recent years. These includes promotion tours by senior government officials, speaking engagements in local and overseas seminars, and active participation in international organizations and forums. Through such efforts we have raised Hong Kong's profile internationally. I can assure Members that we will continue our endeavours and seek to further improve our promotional activities by undertaking more focused, finely-targeted and co-ordinated campaigns specially adapted for use in the promotion of financial services.
Both Members have called for improvements to our market infrastructure, manpower training and access to our financial markets. Again, I shall express the Government's full support of the idea. In respect of market infrastructure, Hong Kong's present set-up is amongst the most advanced in the world. The technologies and infrastructural support available to, say, our banking, securities and futures and insurance industries all measure up to international standards. We continue to move forward progressively. In the banking sector, we are introducing a payment system based on real-time gross settlement later this year. In the debt market, after the link-up of our local custodian and settlement systems with two established international clearing systems, we will seek to expand the range of services of our system to non-government debt papers and further upgrade its efficiency.
The markets themselves are, of course, very much alive to the need to improve market infrastructure. For instance, the recent launch by the Stock Exchange of Hong Kong of the second trading terminal has enhanced the operational efficiencies of the Exchange's trading system, expanded market capacity, shortened communication time and provided more secure back-up facilities. The Government fully supports such initiatives and encourages the markets to continue such efforts.
One of the most invaluable assets of Hong Kong is our well-trained and adaptable workforce. In the financial services sector, human resources are of particular importance. The Government is committed to ensuring that there is an adequate supply of trained manpower at various levels to continue to service our financial services industries. A case in point is the focus on language proficiency, arguably one of the most essential ingredients for a competent workforce for the financial services sector, and I am glad that almost all Members this afternoon have also expressed concern regarding the standards of language skills of our workforce.
Related initiatives include the establishment of a Language Fund with a Government injection of $300 million to fund projects to raise the standards of English and Chinese. The draft Education Commission Report No. 6 has specifically addressed the subject of language proficiency where it is recommended that as a priority, the Government should put in place an institutional framework to enable research to be conducted into the language needs of Hong Kong, to develop policies and to have such policies monitored and evaluated in a coherent and systematic manner.
Regarding access to our financial markets, Hong Kong is probably one of the most open systems in the world. International service providers are free to enter the Hong Kong market, subject to their meeting the prudential criteria for admission, which seeks to ensure that fit and proper persons are admitted. There is no discriminatory treatment against overseas companies. We have actively participated in the negotiations on the General Agreement on Trade in Services in the context of the World Trade Organization, and intend to maintain our open system and seek to ensure access for Hong Kong companies.
As for investors and buyers of financial products available in Hong Kong, there is again no barrier for entry into our markets. Such openness has attracted a critical mass of providers of financial services and products as well as investors to Hong Kong. Their presence and active participation in Hong Kong's financial markets have ensured liquidity and diversity, all essential ingredients to a successful financial market. We are firmly committed to maintaining our open system.
The third area referred to by both Members relates to a sound regulatory framework and legal requirements to ensure that the financial markets operate fairly and efficiently, thus improving the protection of investors. I should reiterate that the Government is again fully committed to this. Over the years this has indeed been one of our primary objectives. We recognise that the integrity and effectiveness of the financial services regulatory regime are of utmost importance to our financial markets. The system must be fair and transparent so as to inspire confidence and market practitioners and investors.
Hong Kong has always sought to adopt the leading international prudential standards so as to protect the interests of the depositors, shareholders, insurance policy holders, members of registered retirement schemes, and so on. And regular reviews of the relevant legislation in banking, insurance, securities and futures have resulted in a number of amended legislation and subsidiary legislation, which have contributed to the continued robustness and effectiveness of our regulatory system. Nevertheless, without compromising our supervisory regime, we also strive to ensure that the system is as market-friendly as possible and to be ever vigilant regarding over-regulation.
Several Members have sounded a very important warning that we should be extremely wary about over-regulation. I am very grateful for this reminder. Indeed, the Government and the financial services regulators must always be mindful of the impact of over-regulation which undermines the attractiveness and competitiveness of our markets. However, at the same time, we must also be mindful that the primary objective of financial services regulation is to protect the interests of investors. To live up to its reputation as a leading international financial centre, Hong Kong's financial services regulatory system must measure up to international standards which is a form of quality control, if you like, of the high quality products we are trying to sell. It is essential, therefore, that Hong Kong adheres to the high industry standards set by international bodies.
What is involved, therefore, is a balancing act to enhance market-friendliness without compromising robustness and effectiveness of our regulatory system. To this end, the Government is committed to review regularly our regulatory requirements so as to ensure that they continue to be sound and effective in the face of rapidly-changing environments, but also to streamline procedures and lessen the reporting burden wherever appropriate, and to ensure that the criteria for authorization and reporting requirements of Hong Kong's regulatory regime are objective and transparent. Examples of lessening the regulatory burden in recent years include the promotion of self-regulation, for example, in the insurance industry, and in the streamlining of listing securities by vesting more power in the Stock Exchange of Hong Kong from the Securities and Futures Commission (SFC), and we shall continue such endeavours.
And talking about the Stock Exchange and the SFC, I note Mr CHIM's, by now, characteristically strong and passionate feelings for the SFC, which I am sure will take careful note of the views from one of its most ardent critics. I also note that market development is in fact a statutory responsibility of the SFC, but I also accept that the role of market development should rest primarily with the market and the industry concerned.
Mr CHENG has further advocated the use of tax and other incentives to continue to attract key financial services. I note that Miss LOH has considered this unnecessary. As Members know, the Financial Secretary will deliver his Budget on 6 March. Today, therefore, is obviously not an opportune time for me to pre-empt his Budget proposals on taxation matters, if any. Perhaps I should echo what the Financial Secretary has recently alluded to on this subject. It is worth repeating that the standard profits tax rate in Hong Kong is already very low by international standards. It has helped to foster a competitive business environment as a whole in which the financial services sector benefits. If what Mr CHENG meant by tax incentives referred to preferential tax rates for selected industries for a certain period of time, it may compromise our current simple, predictable and easy-to-understand taxation system. Selective, preferential treatment entails picking of winners by the Government, and would ultimately be tantamount to the Government making commercial decisions on behalf of the private sector, an area which bureaucrats anywhere may not be very good at.
In conclusion, Mr President, maintaining Hong Kong's leading position as an international financial centre is an ongoing challenge which the Government is committed to meet and will continue to do so. Come 1997, this will even become a mandatory requirement, as Article 109 of the Basic Law stipulates that the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region shall provide an appropriate economic and legal environment for the maintenance of the status of Hong Kong as an international financial centre.
Mr President, before I end today, I should express my gratitude for the overwhelming support of Members in working to maintain Hong Kong's leading status as an international financial centre. There is one major initiative, the success of which will greatly enhance such a position. I am referring, Mr President, of course, to the Mandatory Provident Fund (MPF) Scheme. As Members are aware, we have submitted for the approval of the Finance Committee a funding proposal for the MPF scheme the day after tomorrow. While the system is intended for the much-needed but long-delayed retirement protection of our workforce, I should take this opportunity to reiterate the very advantageous side-effects of the MPF system, where Hong Kong's financial services sector will be given a timely and invaluable boost on the establishment of the system. The potential benefits to the Hong Kong debt market, fund management, insurance and associated sectors and the economic activity so generated are obvious. Mr Paul CHENG has in fact alluded to the importance of fund management, having their operation localised in Hong Kong. In our regular and frequent contacts with the fund management industry in Hong Kong, the message is loud and clear: forget about special incentives, not even tax concessions. Just get on with the MPF.
This is indeed a very substantial and tangible gain for Hong Kong's status as an international financial centre. I am most grateful to those Members who have already indicated their support for the funding proposal, and would urge those Members who have not yet decided and those who were previously opposed to it to reconsider, having regard to what Members have said today in this debate, including Mr Andrew CHENG's strong support for developing our debt market, for which the MPF is an ideal vehicle. I am certain that they will seriously ponder over their position, as a rejection of the MPF proposal will deprive Hong Kong of an invaluable opportunity to enhance our position in an increasingly competitive world.
Thank you, Mr President.
PRESIDENT: I am very much tempted to say that is a most ingenious move indeed.
Question on the amendment put and negatived.
PRESIDENT: Mr Paul CHENG, you are now entitled to reply and you have three minutes 51 seconds out of your original 15 minutes. Do you wish to speak, Mr Paul CHENG?
MR PAUL CHENG: Mr President, I merely want to thank all those Members who have given me very valuable advice and support in this motion debate, and I also must compliment the Secretary for Financial Services on his being very opportunistic.
Thank you.
Question on the original motion put and agreed to.
SALE OF FLATS TO SITTING TENANTS SCHEME
MR EDWARD HO to move the following motion:
"秆∕カチ﹡︘拜肈笷璓痷タ"︘Τㄤ"ヘ夹セЫ玃叫現┎荷е扳そ虫︗倒ぉ瞷そ﹡チ盢扳そ┮眔Μノе砍穝そ虫︗の侣そ"
︙┯ぱ某璓勉畊ネи笆某硄筁某ㄆ祘┮更и竡矗兜某
翠竒蕾羉篴Θ碞藕弧眔羭礚蛮讽и-
灿み翠Θ璉Τ龟ぃび埃纔▆翠㎝矪玭い瓣Τ︗竚и-
酵ぃ局Τ或ぱ礛戈方
龟弧и-
璶戈方碞琌и-
カチのи-
︑ネ肚参弘翠对灸㎝玦承穨ǎ嘿璉笆タㄓ︑硂︑ネ弘翠埃獶吏挂伐璚┪ō眞摧痚ρ邻玥-
常ぃ穦┪ぃ稱ㄌ苦現┎褐穿筁
畊ネさぱи矗某и绊獺崩︽︑竚﹡┮璸购穦蝴τ眏硂︑ネ弘
瞷よタΤ惠璶矗ㄑì﹡┮и某ぃ虫礚穕硂贺贺はτΤ砍そㄓ骸ìタ近そカチのêㄇご礛ゼ︘そカチ惠璶
そ犁┬璸购籉﹍き︓瞷ㄓ弧現┎щ秖戈方ゑㄤ摸跋┪穦狝叭临璶さぱセ翠Τ计﹡︘現┎戈┬
琌セ翠┬拜肈ご礛环环酵ぃ眔秆∕筁и纯セЫず弧筁現┎Τ惠璶糤籔膀よщ戈ㄓ砍ㄇそ龟瞷环┬郸菠┮﹚ヘ夹箂箂┮ΤΤ惠璶カチ矗ㄑ┬
ぃ筁瘤礛現┎щ硂或戈方稰控琌ごΤΤ┋︘そ﹡チ⊿Τ骸ì稰谋恏恨瞶借のㄤ拜肈А镣現獀て┕┕稴ㄓ贺妓у蝶ㄤい硂ㄇそ﹡チу蝶程縀疨
计玡讽Ы硄筁そ戈現郸璶―碔肝︘め煤ユ┪ㄢ场だ︘めボぃ骸程某局Τ禬筁﹚戈玻︘めゲ斗煤ユカ穦ま癬某硂兜某盢穦琍戳セЫずΤ初縀疨臛阶
ぃ骸薄狐琌甧珼癬τ硂ぃ骸薄狐方и-
谋眔狦カチぃ琌︘︑竚﹡┮ず-
ッ环常穦Τ硂ぃ骸薄狐常ぃ稱ッ环穦戈и-
﹚璶砞猭硂ㄇカチ-
︑碙み琵-
咎︑秖ㄓ潦竚︑﹡┮и-
常フそ﹡チ璶潦禦╬加琌伐ㄤㄆ瘤礛現┎伐粄琌и-
盽谋眔Τ蔼基現郸癸そ﹡チ潦禦﹡Τㄤ虫︗竒禬-
┮и-
瞷辨︘め扳そ虫︗よ笷糤﹡チ局Τ︑﹡┮ヘ夹
瞷︘め扳虫︗獶兜穝篶畉ぃせ玡┬〆穦"┬〆穦"竒Τ硂篶箂┏︓秈︽約獂吭高ㄆ龟┬〆穦いョ觅Θ硂璸购挡狦硂璸购ぃ莉︽現Ыу弧琌馋ㄤМ礚痚τ沧馋ㄤМぇ矪︽現Ыは癸硂璸购痷タ瞶パ⊿Τ┬〆穦Θ┪そ渤そ秨肚籇琌︽現Ыぃ獺硂璸购穦Θ讽某基︘め斗禬筁-
ㄑ蹿и種硂贺蝶︳
る┬〆穦璹兜某竒璹某るΩ綝︽現Ы∕笷Θ某玡计Ω穦某┬〆穦贝癚せ络﹚基よ猭竒璹眔12キА基よ猭–虫︗讽パ58,000じ︓552,000じぃ单ぃ基碞穦ぃ计ヘ眔猔種琌┬竝┬〆穦Θ崩滤ㄤい贺竒璹よ猭だ琌ㄢ瞷瞓肂竚ΘセΤ肂の竚Θセキ颗
и某琌蹦ノㄓ縱Θセ璸衡猭硂琌︑パ囊某硂璸衡よ猭ヘ絋玂┬〆穦矗ㄑ虫︗┮Θセ加基琌ㄓ縱Θセ︑加辅Θ竒犁秨や㎝瞯琌–き往硂タ琌┬〆穦現┎蹿瞯扳基珹竚Θセ35%璸衡Θセ禣ノ硂璸衡よΑ–虫︗133,000じ狦и-
ノ糽加虫︗ㄓ弧安さぱ扳キА基莱190,000じ硂琌и︑璸衡τ硂基斗跌扳赣糽加加闹鶪翴τ祔Τ糤搭
鲸恨ㄓ縱Θセ猭ぃ竚虫︗矗ㄑ┮惠竒禣︘め耕璽踞-
潦禦虫︗碞┬τや秨や珹处ㄑ蹿畉昏恨瞶禣单璸ぃ穦禬筁-
ㄢ莱赣琌ぶ筁ㄢ硂基τ眔︑穨и谋眔莱赣琌瞶
眖︘めㄓ安加基瞶-
獽局Τ︑﹡┮ぃノらΜ┪戈玻糤τ斗癸蛮┪瞷┮弧カ单拜肈耑-
р虫︗肚倒┪ら锣传ㄎ﹡┮
и某ㄨ種р基络﹚会キ虹い程瞶パ琌扳そ種現┎璶挤程Ω戈獽ぃノ︘め戳瑉禟┬〆穦ョぃノ恨瞶硂ㄇそ虫︗τ瞷莲籯はτ穦眔竒禣Τ惠璶カチ砍┬
パ硂摸虫︗疉の掸戈┮瞶莱耕﹡Τㄤ璸购и某硂摸虫︗锣扳ぉそ﹡チτそ﹡チゲ斗程ぶそ﹡︘骸きΤ戈潦禦硂摸そ虫︗
畊ネ羆服纯┯空セ翠︑竚穨瞯︓盢穦笷60%ヘ玡︑竚穨瞯眔52%环ㄤ瓣產ㄒらセ60%㎝瓣65%狦瞷秈箇璸埃獶現┎縩伐腊カチ︑竚﹡┮玥羆服┯空ぃ穦瞷и矗扳そ璸购琌崩︽﹡よ猭ぇㄤ緇﹟Τ瞷竒龟︽い﹡Τㄤ璸购и-
ョ某扳贺耕稧基穝そ倒そ﹡チиㄆ㏄辩睶┥某繦穦贝癚硂扳そ璸购
畊ネиョ绊獺狦场だカチ︑竚穨俱穦獽穦磃瘤礛и谋眔и-
莱ㄇщ戈砍そи-
ぃ莱斌糤﹡τ栋い砍そ
程畊ネ甧砛иま瓃┬〆穦祇扳そぉ︘め盡砫舱〆穦厨弧杠"︑竚﹡┮玃秈穦﹚ō穨ぃ穦稰︑花穦癸穦玻ネ耴妮稰"и辨Ыず┮Τㄆ常やи硂兜某眖τи-
穦盿ㄓ环痲
Question on the motion proposed.
PRESIDENT: Miss CHAN Yuen-han and Mr Frederick FUNG have separately given notices to move amendments to this motion. As there are two amendments to the motion, I propose to have the motion and the amendments debated together in a joint debate.
The Council shall now debate the motion and the amendments together in a joint debate. As Members were informed by circular on 2 February, I shall ask Miss CHAN Yuen-han to speak first, to be followed by Mr Frederick FUNG; but no amendments are to be moved at this stage. Members may then express their views on the main motion as well as on the two proposed amendments listed on the Order Paper.
朝胞糭某璓勉畊ネ癸扳そぉ︘め璸购и-
玥琌や︓︙┯ぱ某さΩ┮矗某и-
璶稱ㄢ兜タビи-
癸現┎そ犁┬現郸砮ミ初
材и-
粄璶秆∕カチ﹡︘拜肈そ犁┬現郸ごゲ斗"砍そ﹡徊"荷е竚近15窾单"加"瓁
︓и-
や扳そ璸购躬纘そ﹡チ︑竚穨莱跌"そ旧"現郸干"扳そ"種琌讽ㄇ眖玡Τ戈︘そ﹡チ瞷Μ糤仓縩﹚癩碔-
莱赣Τ舦匡拒琌璶潦禦﹡︘虫︗硂ㄇ荡癸琌そ﹡チ舦
瘤礛さΩ某盿癟Τ场だそ﹡チΤ︑竚穨惠―腀種稧基窥潦禦瞷﹡︘そ虫︗琌и辨ぃ穦τ倒翠┎虑碩搭ぶ砍そ虫︗эτ栋い砍﹡┪扳そ璸购簔跌ちそ虫︗惠―и-
タい疭眏秸そ犁┬現郸ゲ斗"砍そ"旧
и獺︗钮筁耕Ν玡纯Τ肚┬〆穦("┬〆穦")Τ種箂箂氨そ砍﹡ヘ琌躬纘瞷そ︘め潦禦﹡乃そ虫︗ぉ近﹡チ瘤礛┬独琍地ネ粄┪ゼㄓ┬〆穦現郸臩拜肈現┎┮砍そ籔﹡ゑㄒ笷ゑ籔玡ゑㄒΤ┮癶τ甶辨ゼㄓ﹡ゑㄒ盢蔼笷せΘセ钮肚ēぃ稰礛и谋眔┬〆穦ㄤ龟ΝΤ種メ硂そ钓
и-
璶┯粄ㄆ龟Τ辨禦加竚穨暗穨琌Τ硈程膀セ﹡拜肈秆∕ぃ┬〆穦はτ盢程惠璶酚臮竤竚窖ぃ瞶癸-
碿﹡︘吏挂跌τぃǎ癸-
ビ禗㊣羘钮τぃ籇
畊ネセ穝玃叫現┎ぃ莱赣氨ゎ砍そ临璶蝴砍そゑㄒせΘ狦現┎箂箂氨そτョゼ現┎┮箇戳Τуそ﹡チΤì镑ョ腀種潦禦﹡┪そ硂妓獽ぃ乃秖そ虫︗τ15窾﹡チ眔膥尿逼钉璚莉皌そ
畊ネㄓ翠﹚﹡簿チら亥糤眖–ぱ75︓105糤︓150-
琌⊿Τ竒蕾︘┪潦禦╬加竤τㄌ綼現┎┮矗ㄑ虫︗﹡︘癸胑︘惠―現┎莱赣膥尿砍そ磷盢ㄓそ腨祏τ玻ネ贺穦拜肈
︓材兜タ琌Τ闽現┎"扳そ璸购"莱獶θ玥纔磃基ま瞷そ﹡チ潦禦ㄤ﹡┮現┎莱"ぃ籯ぃ寥"竚Θセ基扳そ
パさΩ某⊿Τㄣ砰弧︙孔"纔磃基"и矗タи谋眔┬〆穦矗そ璸购讽纯竒ま癬穦約獂癚阶讽穦ぃぶ常辨現┎基よ竚Θセ阀├络璹膀硂瞶├и-
盢ㄤタいタ某酚讽現┎┪穦癚阶竚Θセ璹基種琌┬〆穦瞷硑虫︗禣ノ埃Ι埃加闹чΙ翴夹斗煤禣ノτ璹扳基硂筁祘い讽礛临Τㄇ拜肈ぃび睲贰и谋眔硂篶稱琌眔躬纘ョ穦惠―и谋眔硂よ猭琌┮и盢ㄤタい
癸扳そ璸购ㄤ玥┦某иぃゴ衡膥尿哪睦Τ翴ゲ斗眏秸そカ初ぃ籔╬加カ初睼瞔絋玂そ加基ぃ╬カ初ど禴紇臫蝴铆﹚τ稧基そカ初斗パ┬〆穦钡参膚璽砫┮Τ禦芥
и-
ョ荡癸種盢扳そ┮眔Μノе砍穝その侣そ罽搭胑近そ钉ヮ
畊ネ甶辨ゼㄓ翠穦癸そ惠―и-
獺镣墩琌ㄌ礛獶盽候眎и辨翠┎ぃ璶簔跌硂よ┯踞ゲ斗腊Τち︘拜肈カチ"﹡"硂琌и-
辨
セ略朝勉矗タ
THE PRESIDENT'S DEPUTY, DR LEONG CHE-HUNG, took the Chair.
毒浪膀某璓勉瞶畊ネ扳そ璸购ㄤ龟Νい戳パチ丁刮砰矗τソ戳┬〆穦"┬〆穦"も秨﹍╯戳璸购ョ碭莉眔龟琁礛τ戳丁璸购ぃ莉眔︽現Ыやτ""︽現Ы扳そ璸购祇"靡"ぇチ辨硂璸购Τぱ確τ羆服き琁現厨ずョ矗扳そ璸购︽┦┯空穦秈︽╯
癸材Ω扳璸购璍浮いチ粄璶パ扳基ゼ才﹡チ戳辨τ稨恨瞶の蝴┬竝Τ癹磷Τ闽砫ヴ硂ㄇ︘め潦禦種饼碩搭
ㄤ龟┬〆穦纯碞︑竚﹡┮拜肈秈︽╯砐拜4 000﹡チ硂╯さぱㄓ弧ごΤ讽把σ基讽い碞扳そ璸购ㄆ兜Τ禬筁31%﹡チボぃ穦潦禦琌癸加基ぃ骸種珿扳そ璹基琌︘め程璶σ納
и-
戳丁碞扳そ﹚よ扳基拜肈よи-
┮芠翴琌┬〆穦硂璸购程沧ヘ琂礛琌矗蔼︑竚﹡┮ゑ瞯の盢┮莉眔戈ノㄓ砍その侣そ癸瞷Τそ﹡チそキ癬ǎ┬〆穦莱赣Μ竚Θセ基ぃ莱ノθ
琌︙孔竚Θセ㎡虏虫ㄓ弧竚Θセ基琌┬〆穦瞷穝硑虫︗Θセ硈︽現禣ノ加闹ч侣秸俱传ēぇ加闹禫玥ч侣基禫戳丁┬〆穦纯そ渤矗ㄑ竚Θセ肂よ┮孔"肂"琌Τ緇Τ窥寥硂よ琌竚Θセ盢扳基跋畉肂琌禫蒥跋玥肂禫熬环跋玥礚肂ㄌ硂よΑ┬〆穦程羆Μ痲ご穦蔼竚Θセ基莉眔柬и-
某蹦竚Θセキ颗よ硂よ膀セ玥琌讽扳虫︗禫钡蒥跋玥膀セ基ず肂禫禫环瞒蒥跋玥Ι搭肂禫Τ肂扳基辣干Ι搭肂扳基よΑ程沧┬〆穦ぃ穦р扳そθノ硚ョぃ穦籯セ琂ぃθぃ籯セタ琌チ某弘琌籔︙┯ぱ某┮矗某縱禣﹚基畉┬〆穦吭高ゅンず竚Θセ基琌–虫︗20窾じτ縱Θセ琌13窾じ传杠弧狦и-
"ぃ莲籯ぃθ"よ籔︙┯ぱ某"縱基"よゑ耕и-
よ–芥丁そ虫︗┬〆穦礚寥礚籯τ蹦ノ︙┯ぱ某よ–芥虫︗玥籯窾じ
某璶―現┎龟琁扳そ璸购и瞶秆硂某计﹡チ闽猔そ刮砰の現囊┮钡はτ璸购ず┮览﹚扳基琌そ渤程闽み肈ヘ讽︽現Ы∕璸购沮セ瞶秆ㄤい碞琌﹡チゼゲ钡讽览﹚扳基τ刮砰の現囊у蝶眔程ョ琌闽┬〆穦﹚基ぃ瞶拜肈セタ盢玥の基络﹚玥笷睲贰磷и-
硄筁琌"催"
ㄤ龟チ某扳そよぃ加基兜и-
矗琌俱甅種ǎи-
粄┬〆穦р加闹︓せY2-4その硈稨︽だу扳礛讽璸购Θ盢璸购硋˙耎甶︓┮"兵"そ讽礛瞷㎝坑Αそ莱σ納綪扳璸购ぇず
и-
某籔︙┯ぱ┮矗種ǎぃぇ矪︙┯ぱ某璶―┬〆穦芥そ獽メ奔钓礚斗璽ヴ︙砫ヴτи-
某玥璶―┬〆穦ご礛璽程砫ヴ┬〆穦盢琘糽そ扳ノ硚玡ゲ斗ゲ璶呗盢玂靡蝴戳﹚ㄢ扳そ祇瞷Τ挡篶拜肈┬〆穦斗縒┯踞の穝竚﹡チ
锣扳戳よи-
某窽ゎそ虫︗扳蒥初禦芥传ēぇ琌ッぃ锣扳穨璝惠璶锣扳ョ扳倒┬〆穦ヘ琌窽ゎ芥そノそ瓜
恨瞶ㄆ﹜┬竝莱赣璽癬稨恨瞶砫ヴ磷睼穨舦┮ま璓恨瞶拜肈τ局Τそ虫︗穨膥尿玂痙厚よΑビ叫﹡舦程ョ莱甧砛痷タΤ癩現螟︘め確ōだ
扳そ硂璸购狦镑Т到秆∕扳基㎝睼穨舦拜肈琌Τ覸絯﹡チ癸﹡惠―盢┮眔戈ノ砍その侣跋ノ硚ㄤ龟戈よиぃ踞み┬〆穦癩現鶪玂▆и踞みはτ琌┬〆穦ず琌Τ稱矗ぃ砍そ某らㄓΤ厨旧ボ現┎箂箂氨そ璓砍﹡Τ﹛絋龟纯竒獶タΑ矗の瓃稱猭и辨現┎┬〆穦㎝┬ゼ吭高そ渤玡ぃ璶非称盢硂某窖磅︽и辨-
钮蒥チ種ǎ砍そ秈˙┯踞ぃ璶崩砫ヴ
瞶畊ネセ略朝勉
ッ笷某璓勉瞶畊ネ竚穨﹡琌–瞶稱ぷㄤ琌翠ぶ竚穨螟吏挂ㄤ龟竚穨﹡穦玻ネ璶铆﹚ノΤ旅碔チ種竡瞷╬加基硂妓蔼叉瞒カチ潦禦ぃ虫╬加︓カ跋﹡虫︗扳基ョ蔼笷150窾じセ琌い顶糷カチ┮ぃ璽踞基チ囊玥や扳そ璸购硂妓程ぶ倒ぉ膀糷カチ︑竚穨诀穦
瞶畊ネ俱扳そ璸购い稴癬程某獽琌扳基拜肈┮и稱栋い酵阶硂翴и辨現┎┬㎝┬〆穦ぃ璶ょょ璸耕琌Τ柬拜肈扳そ拜肈柬ぃ琌程璶σ納はτ︙︑笆竚穨玻ネ铆﹚穦ノ璶
瞶畊ネㄤ龟и琌箂扳そ璸购舱〆穦Θ纯把籔癚阶硂璸购ず甧㎝吭高狦и⊿Τ癘岿杠赣璸购羆矗12兵よ祘Α﹚扳基夹非パ程獽﹜"ㄑ"箂︓基璸衡–虫︗キА基琌58,000じ︓︙┯ぱ某┮弧"縱Θセ基"13窾じ︓毒浪膀某㎝朝胞糭某┮矗"竚Θセ基"20窾じи谋眔瞷顶琿程璶琌穦㎝ミ猭ЫΤ参羘и-
琌常觅Θ秈︽扳そ璸购и谋眔硂ゑ耕瞷顶琿﹚琘兵扳基よ祘Α璶
讽и琍戳笵ミ猭ЫΤㄆ稱タ︙┯ぱ某某и纯腢抠毒浪膀某朝胞糭某㎝辩模┚某ぃ璶矗タ辩模┚某钮и種ǎ矗タ堡毒浪膀某㎝朝胞糭某玱ㄌ礛矗セōタи-
腢抠琌癚阶タ筁祘い﹚穦癚阶基拜肈τи谋眔祏祏だ牧ずセぃ过┏臛阶硂拜肈パ腢抠ア毖и-
さぱ扳基よ瞷臛阶и谋眔瞷顶琿硂妓暗琌⊿Τ或痲矪
瘤礛и癸毒浪膀某㎝朝胞糭某┮矗竚Θセ基ぃ﹚は癸硂妓穦и-
逼埃ㄤ11兜络﹚扳基よ猭狦畊ネ拜и程尺舧よ猭и﹚穦弧"ㄑ"琌程﹡チ煤ユ常ノㄑ加硂よ猭琌程Τㄆ弧и硂某琌稱癸﹡チΤ匡布ㄤ龟眖そ﹡チàㄓ弧膥尿加礚穕ア瞷侣恏虫︗–る1,000︓1,500じ安砞︘40ヴパ┬〆穦妓基ぃ琌び筁だ杠ぃ筁琌じ┪じτ-
琂ぃノユ恨瞶禣ぃノ踞み蝴玂緄拜肈и稱独琍地ネ㎝霉璖丛常笵眖虫︗よ琌⊿Τ莉眔緇硂琌ッ环常穦瞷íめ"ㄑ"硂よ猭癸﹡チΤㄤ龟琌"產獽﹜ㄢ產"よ猭
畊ネチ囊ㄤ龟ぃ稱さぱ硂妓Γ碞р︑Ы琘兵扳基よ祘Αи-
辨臛阶秈︽そ吭高∕﹚╆簆и-
さぱ璶癸毒浪膀某㎝朝胞糭某タщは癸布ぃ﹚琌は癸竚Θセ基τ琌ぃ辨チ囊硂或е獽∕﹚や琘扳基よ祘Αㄆ龟и璶癸朝胞糭某弧癸ぃ癬и癸タ材场だ"虫︗﹡徊"琌伐ぇや堡さぱ臛阶獶τ琌扳そ㎝基礘翴┮癸ぃ癬иぃぉや
畊ネи稱酵阶翴扳そ璸购ず埃┮癚阶扳基拜肈程ㄏ﹡チ踞み翴獽琌蝴玂緄拜肈ㄤ龟﹡穨ㄑき︓溃獽硋亥覸絯程繷礹琌狦-
匡拒加瞷拜肈ら蝴玂緄璽踞┮盿ㄓ狦玱だ腨
и谋眔現┎崩︽扳そ璸购莱穨Θミ琘贺Α蝴膀程и钡щ禗ぷㄤ琌Τ闽êㄇ侣﹡璪ㄒべ眃璪釜疐腞璪单蝴よ瞷腨拜肈穨常ぃ腀種戈秈︽蝴┮ㄏ罷措穕胊γ函俱畒加ぃ暗或狦現┎扳硂ㄇ虫︗耕暗猭琌扳加琘贺Α眏穨Θミ蝴膀き┪璶秈︽蝴產璽踞獽搭ぶ讽礛暗猭琌络璹扳基σ納ら蝴璽踞拜肈传ēぇ扳基琌15窾じ虫︗箇璸斗蝴玂緄や︓窾じ玥р扳基搭窾じ跑Θ12窾じτê窾じ獶倒ぉ穨τ琌膚栋癬ㄓΘ膀ら蝴玂緄ぇノ
畊ネиだ種︙┯ぱ某矗ㄤい兜種ǎ碞琌и-
或よ猭矪瞶そ虫︗ずネ莉э到﹡チ┬〆穦㎝┬瞷┮σ納よ猭琌蹦ノ胓籃よΑ碔め現郸㎝瞷戈玻糵琩璸购ㄤ龟и-
ノ躬纘㎝耕まΑネ莉э到﹡チ︑腀┪︑笆︑谋︑竚穨э到︑﹡︘吏挂乃ㄤ︘虫︗ぉ近產畑㎝ㄤ睲╊紇臫﹡チи谋眔狦┬㎝┬〆穦钡崩︽﹡璸购扳そ璸购のㄤ躬纘よ猭セ礚斗龟︽碔め現郸礚斗秈︽戈玻糵琩
㏄辩睶┥某璓勉瞶畊ネタ︙┯ぱ某┮弧┬〆穦"┬〆穦"き玡扳そ璸购ぃびΘ︑パ囊眖そ﹡チ┮Μ眏疨癟常琌-
眖⊿Τ氨ゎ戴辨そ扳倒-
硂碞ボ扳そ阀├﹚Τカ初拜肈磅︽非玥㎝灿竊膀硂瞶パ︑パ囊︑﹍︓沧常绊ぃ斌そ﹡チ︑竚﹡┮璸购
獺產常種窾そめぇい埃︘そ產畑竒︘碭產畑ぃぶ竒蕾鶪竒Τ﹚э到︓Τ陪э到-
常辨ネ兵ン㎝借穦繦ぇτ矗蔼τㄤい璶碞琌镑︑竚﹡┮
σ納潦禦︘材璶臮の︑璽踞狝硂闽碞穦秈˙辨︘穝翴翴㎝吏挂翴传杠弧ㄇ匡拒癸-
龟瞷︑竚﹡┮冠琌Τ腊
Τǎの︑パ囊さΩ矗帹竚穨匡拒碞琌莱そ﹡チじて㎝璶―崩笆現┎Ω腊-
龟筋硂荡ぃ璙―冠稱
и-
粄и-
某タ皌瞷タ璶秈︽环┬郸菠㎝浪癚┬戈方だ皌ㄢ兜璶╯糤穨︑竚﹡┮ゑㄒョ盢そ┬戈方眖Τ耕︑臮︘め锣簿耕︑臮ō讽礛珹近羬糳泞ぱれのキ┬跋﹡チ
帹竚穨篶材帹琌瞷﹡そ﹡チゼゲ笷潦禦﹡キ–る璶ㄑ窾じぃ甧鶪厚ビ叫籔い乓ゑㄒ畉せぇ硂或腶ゑㄒ荡癸ぃ琌瞶稱匡拒︑パ囊矗ㄢ匡拒
材匡拒琌穝扳そ兵ン籔そ璝﹚基琌﹡硂琌だσ納そ﹡チ︘キ颗-
眔э到﹡︘兵ン痲
材匡拒琌瞷︘虫︗潦竚硂よ︙┯ぱ某竒冈灿秆睦и稱眏秸︑パ囊某琌扳基縱Θセ膀娄┮﹚基窥﹚ゑ朝胞糭某㎝毒浪膀某ㄢ︗某タ┮矗竚Θセи-
⊿Τやㄢ︗某タ硂单丁钡や耕и-
某蔼扳基
パи-
某扳瞷︘虫︗㎝穝扳そ虫︗常琌Ы竒︘そき┪め潦禦锣扳癸禜ョ才兵ンそめ硂ㄇ戈方ぃ穦瑈ぃ妮そ戈癸禜もい
瞷Τ44窾戈產畑τ计ヘタぃ耞糤购﹚硂カ初ぇи-
箇ǎ潦禦穝そ︑礛璶ユ-
Τそ虫︗τ禦そ虫︗τ锣扳倒ㄤそめ筁祘い侣穨眔掸戳潦禦╬加硂琌"加传加"阀├τ穝穨ユそ虫︗硂ㄇユ虫︗碞穝だ皌倒近е-
"加"丁
︓扳そ┮眔Μи-
眏秸ゲ斗ノ砍┪︘そи-
ヘ夹琌惠璶現┎酚臮產畑荷е︘そτそ︘めΤ種︑竚穨碞Τ贺ぃ硚畖-
笷Θ腀辨
硂甅が挡某癸近カチ辨暗穨そ﹡チ稱э到ネ吏挂そめ︓┬〆穦セō常琌Τκτ礚甡
瞶畊ネиフ戳常穦矗莱膥尿碩纔磃そ﹡チぷㄤ琌Τㄇ厨笵弧そいΤ窾碔花硂ㄇ琌ㄆ龟ぃ筁硂琌ㄆ龟场だ︓弧琌伐场だи稱镑︘そ常琌ゲ斗竒筁戈糵琩琌竒蕾兵ンぃ砛Μ┪瘆窰產畑-
常琌穦惠璶酚臮竤
︘╬加カチタиセō妓ちб"泊痝""泊"產獽﹜-
︘τぃ琵-
︑竚﹡┮ぃ琵-
э到ネ
瞶畊ネさぱ臛阶琌眏疨璶―┬〆穦㎝現┎そ﹡チ矗ㄑ︑竚﹡┮诀穦τ砞τぃ琌の扳そゑㄒ┪扳﹚基某и-
辨︗ㄆや某艶┦㎝┦のㄤ縀栋約痲臛阶┮и辨︗や某
瞶畊ネи略朝勉や某
霉睲某璓勉瞶畊ネи-
ō矪硂紆ぇ︾︘︽碭チネ拜肈讽い﹡︘拜肈┕┕琌场だ翠稰程繷礹ちō拜肈瞷︘╬加┪ㄑ加硄盽穦"ゴ"Μ硂琌瓣珹荡场だ祇笷い瓣產翧Τ薄鶪硑Θ硂贺ぃタ盽瞷禜埃翠ぶ程璶琌現┎︽蔼基現郸ㄏ计カチ串↖﹡︘璽踞ㄇ竒蕾セㄓぃ岿カチョ加基蔼蔼τぃ眔ぃㄌ苦現┎近┬〆穦矗ㄑそτパセ翠蔼坝穨竒犁Θセ蔼锦翠基ョτ矗蔼ぃぶ翠︽祙瞯現郸龟悔"ゴ"祙叭璽踞玱伐↖ぃ筁ㄤ祙叭璽踞эパΑτや硂碞琌現┎芥Μ痲-
钡┾羱祙τ
沮┬〆穦环┬郸菠︳璸せ獽膀セ秆∕讽近175 000めそ惠璶琌瞷琌せそ羆近いごΤ15窾め沮羆服琁現厨い┯空きごぃ秆∕硂拜肈粳辨р︘そ近丁パ罽祏き
硂碭ㄓ翠┬拜肈ぃ⊿Τ眔覸絯はτ惠―溃糤╯ㄤ琌現┎筁碭┬現郸ア粇┮璓硂碭ㄓ現┎罽搭挤砍そ犁┬疭琌搭︘そ┬〆穦ゼЧΘㄤ–砍窾そ虫︗ヘ夹τよずㄓ翠穝簿チ玱ぃ耞糤だ框狙パ現┎硂ア粇┬現郸ま癬硈玛は莱ㄏセ翠加基︓箂どΘτ︓ど碩笷ㄢパ加基の龟害︓獶盽繧娩絫現┎龟琁ㄇ放惫琁癸砍そ犁┬よ垦癸郸糤挤矗蔼砍虫︗计ヘ礛τ环ぃ毕τēパ挤︓Θ加斗禣き︓せрヘ玡ㄇ続そ虫︗纔磃基扳ぉ瞷そ﹡チ盢扳そ┮眔蹿兜ノе砍穝そ虫︗の侣そぃア舦﹜ぇ璸
礛τセゲ斗眏秸現┎荡ぃ莱扳瞷Τそ獽э糤そ犁┬璸购ら籇現┎Τ種э环┬郸菠璸购きぃ砍そτ扳芥﹡瘤礛┬竒そ秨粄硂篶マㄓㄆゲΤи-
荡ぃ辨現┎虑帝扳そ诀穦搭ぶ癸矗ㄑ︘そ┯踞現┎らぃэ蔼基現郸翠ㄌ礛蔼癸ぃぶい糷カチㄓ弧ごぃ眔ぃㄌ苦︘そи-
ぃ璶а癘セ翠–ごΤ计计窾穝簿チ︑ずㄓ翠硂计ヘ穦Τ糤礚搭τ硂ㄇ穝簿チ竒蕾Τセ翠︘そ惠―箇戳盢ㄓ穦Τ糤礚搭
瞶畊ネи-
┬現郸竒ぃ虫н砲毕╝τ莱赣跌戈方穝秸皌硚畖現┎瘤礛⊿Τ砫ヴㄏ–カチА局Τ︑﹡┮現┎琌Τ砫ヴ翠カチ秆∕︘拜肈硂琌チネ璶拜肈硂拜肈眔秆∕盢Τ玂毁и-
穦铆﹚癸翠竒蕾祇甶ョゴ绊龟膀娄
瞶畊ネセ略朝勉や朝胞糭某タ
朝挪狶某璓勉瞶畊ネカチミ︑贾痕琌讽現ぃ┛跌璶現郸カチ眔﹡琌穦尿羉篴﹚璶や琖タ–唉浇常莱赣Τ催τ硂催莱赣琌ê唉浇セō┯踞カチ眔﹡︑礛贾穨穦羉篴の﹚眔玂靡
チ羛粄┬現郸琌兜伐璶穦そ現郸翠┬現郸莱赣琌"そ犁┬"旧硂現郸и-
某現┎莱┬〆穦"┬〆穦"糤挤疭琌矗ㄑキ俱眖τ琵┬〆穦眖硉そи-
谋眔ぃ紇臫そ㎝﹡秖ゑㄒ薄鶪и-
ョ穦や﹚躬纘現郸ㄏΤめ硓筁潦禦セōそ虫︗┪潦禦﹡τΘ穨笷﹡Τㄤの︑竚﹡┮ヘ夹
﹚扳そ惫琁и粄讽Ыゲ斗σ納加基琌瞶挡篶琌蝴㎝恨瞶借琌眔玂靡の惠璶络﹚ら恨瞶舦㎝穨舦拜肈
よи-
某讽Ыσ納"ㄑ"よ猭そ︘め﹚兵ン煤ユ璝獽局Τ瞷虫︗
︓﹡よΤ闽扳基莱赣籔カ初叉恥и-
粄硂妓暗镑扳基瞶カチΤ肝┯踞︓︙﹚そ┪﹡扳基и-
粄"竚Θセ"琌程瞶璸衡夹非
讽礛璝㏄辩睶┥某┮矗某らそ扳基ゑ耕Θセ杠и稱產ぃ穦は癸
瞶畊ネ翠┎程秈︽环┬現郸浪癚╯︓箂箂せセ翠┬ㄑ莱の惠―ぃ耞硓臩ㄇぃよの穝篶︓程Τ肚ㄓ┬〆穦ゴ衡箂箂癬氨穝そ﹡┮孔マㄓゼゲ礚產癸硂兜某瞏胔好
ヘ玡そ近ご礛Τ窾產畑よㄓ︑ず簿チ计ヘぃ耞糤癸そ惠―篶Θ溃ゼ獴瑚羀┬〆穦ㄤ龟惠璶栋い弘縩伐砍そ糤ㄑ莱翠ǎ盢ㄓ癸そ犁┬ごΤ﹚惠―
瞶畊ネ瘤礛カチ癸︑竚穨Τ戴―龟悔硂碭ㄓカチ竚穨タ沮現┎兜参璸戈セ翠羱い︗计璸衡玡璶潦竚500キよ虫︗戈獽︓さぱ玥斗16戈パǎ加基ど碩┻瞒戈ど碩и-
辨讽Ы﹚そ扳璸购ゲ斗ぃ璶そ犁┬╬Τて碞秆∕ち拜肈ぃ瞶蔼加基薄鶪カチ戳辨竚穨ぃ单Τ竚穨
瞶畊ネи辨讽Ы膥尿玂"砍そ旧┬扳徊"┬現郸玡ョи獺硂琌穦羉篴ぇ┮ョ琌カチ﹡贾穨ぇ┮苦
セ略朝勉
THE PRESIDENT resumed the Chair.
糂胺祸某璓勉畊ネи獺–カチ常辨镑﹡贾穨局Τ︑贾痕ぃ筁癸﹡︘そカチㄓ弧竚穨︑︘ㄤ龟酵︙甧╬加扳基鰐ど竒琌獶產畑璽踞眔癬﹡加基瘤耕カョ獶基稧ㄏカチΤ禦﹡ㄑ莱计秖﹍沧讽Τ硄盽ㄑぃ莱―
︑パ囊某扳そ璸购纔翴琌耕Μそ︘め竚穨冠稱Θ痷カチ﹡贾穨穦㎝坑圭
璸购翴ㄤ艶┦皌そ﹡チぃ耞簍跑竒蕾兵ンの璽踞硂璸购瞷そ﹡チセō兵ンの種腀癸瞷︘虫︗"禦"硂ㄢ匡拒ぇ临匡拒潦禦穝そ虫︗
︑パ囊粄扳そ扳基莱籔カ叉恥瞷Τ虫︗扳基莱縱Θセ–5%穝扳虫︗莱﹡加基きΘ基窥盢穦讽龟悔︑パ囊某禦芥そ虫︗ゲ斗そ︘骸き砏﹚禦加ずぃ眔锣琵τ锣琵穨舦癸禜ョゲ斗琌そめ
︑パ穦い禦芥莱赣︑パτ礚斗穨锣琵ョ莱琌ぃ筁︑パ囊某璸购い扳そ礚斗干基τ龟悔扳基穦环环カ基传杠弧讽い琌現┎戈璝ぃ琘ㄇΤ闽璸购穦砆垒ノ
扳そ璝禦加膀セ戈の锣琵盢痷タそ︘め莉痲ňゎ垒禦垒芥秈τňゎ芥薄鶪穦戈方瞶そキだ笲ノ
畊ネヘ玡﹡Τぃ眔锣琵琌琿丁Τ┮孔"ㄆ碭礷穝"筁琿丁场だ﹡穨癩現耕︘伦肝τ稱传加锚τ礚猭硂妓暗沮秆Τぃぶτ穞い秈︽獶猭禦芥ㄤ龟硂贺"つ讽"癸蛮よ⊿Τ矪癸俱砰┬戈方だ皌ョ⊿Τ矪︑パ囊瘤礛某扳そゲ斗砞Τ锣琵砏﹚禦加璝丁ずぃ眔锣琵︑パ囊粄硂丁﹚耕瞶戳筁穨Τ杠传﹡传╬加ゲ斗盢虫︗扳ぉㄤそめそめ獽乃虫︗ぉ近そ孔羭计眔
┪砛Τ穦借好扳そ锣琵絛瞅そめカ初穦筁疷カ初┯钡紇臫蝗︽钡处┦
и稱そカ初莱赣籔╬加カ初だ秨ㄓи-
琌籹硑"︘Τㄤ"カ初τ獶籹硑"芥カ初"瞷翠Τ300窾﹡︘そ︘骸︘め禬筁30窾め讽いぃぶ竒蕾兵ンэ到τ仓縩ì镑潦禦虫琌そカ初讽胑
Τカ初︑礛Τ蝗︽腀種矗ㄑ处狦临Τ拜肈ㄤ龟σ納瞷﹡暗猭パ┬〆穦逼癩叭诀篶扳そ穨矗ㄑ兵ン耕カ纔磃处禪蹿パ┬〆穦讽踞玂扳そ穨ぃ临蹿璽砫竭纕诀篶穕ア
よΤ踞み扳场だそ恨瞶穦篶Θ拜肈ㄤ龟瞷そ珹恨瞶禣ず狦Τ︘そ琌ぃ惠煤恨瞶禣琌岿︘め潦禦虫︗讽礛斗煤恨瞶禣ぃ筁琌だ╊ㄓ煤瞷╬加ョ㎝穨︑︘睼薄鶪恨瞶⊿Τ拜肈鶪そ虫︗Τ筁穨舦扳Τ闽穨σ納Θミ穨ミ猭刮Μ恨瞶舦τ︑︽恨瞶︑穨獺硂妓ミ︘め耴妮稰
畊ネセ略朝勉や某
独岸藉某璓勉畊ネ癸︙┯ぱ某矗Τ闽扳そぉ︘め璸购某иチ囊栋い癚阶そ恨瞶㎝蝴拜肈
и粄盢そ虫︗扳ぉそ﹡チ礚好琌秆∕"︘Τㄤ"よ猭璶猔種琌┬竝莱扳そ玡浪琩┮Τ扳加挡篶㎝秈︽蝴疭琌ㄇ侣恏Τ闽加砞璸┪借琌и-
┮闽猔拜肈ㄒホ辅鲤纠函ど诀穕胊の逼措穕反单沮и┮虫る︓る戳丁┬竝碞翠259糽そ秈︽恨代刚挡狦祇瞷Τ171糽そ恨瞷拜肈斗秈︽传癸﹡チ硑Θぃ獽
狦瞷瓃薄鶪刚拜瞷そ﹡チ穦腀種掸ぃ滇肂潦禦ㄇ筁┪借そ㎡狦-
潦禦硂ㄇそ祇谋加蝴よΤ拜肈碞竒び筐и獺┬〆穦盢ぃ腀種璽Τ闽砫ヴ畊ネи略辨現┎臮のそ﹡チ痲扳そ虫︗ぉ︘め玡ゲ斗浪琩┮Τ扳加挡篶㎝秈︽Τ闽蝴
︓恨瞶よ畊ネセ粄眖┬〆穦恨瞶そ虫い竨叫恨瞶そ穨斗璽砫瞶恨瞶禣τそめ玥斗膥尿煤ユセ┬竝莱め计ヘゑㄒ┯踞Τ闽恨瞶禣ノ瞷┬〆穦璸购盢场だ穝辅Θそ恏恨瞶ユぉ╬穨恨瞶そ璽砫硂贺よ猭﹡チぃ骸種恨瞶そ狝叭篗传Τ闽恨瞶そぃ筁璶猔種琌┬竝斗腨糵琩㎝у戈恨瞶そ盢恨瞶ユパ╬穨恨瞶そ璽砫┬竝ご璶膥尿猔種恨瞶そ狝叭借絋玂硂ㄇ恨瞶そ┮矗ㄑ狝叭才現┎㎝﹡チ惠璶羭ㄒτē讽そ﹡チ┬竝钡щ禗恨瞶そ┬竝玱盢砫ヴ崩恏恨瞶そ程沧旧璓щ禗﹡チЖ┬竝㎝恨瞶そぇ丁硂琌︽現瞯
讽そユパ╬そ恨瞶ぃぶそщ夹玥常琌柬-
璶寥柬玡矗-
穦耕щ夹基管恨瞶舦τ穦蹦程竒蕾秨やΘセ恨瞶そΤ闽狝叭借穦紇臫硂琌и-
ぃ稱ǎ薄鶪
碞瓃┮ē狦┬竝镑и-
秆睦甅菏诡╬恨瞶そ笲玥┪砏﹚程沧匡拒竨ノ╬恨瞶そ硂ご琌耕よ猭硂贺Α矗ㄑ耕Τ玂靡恨瞶借硂ㄇ竒糵瞶そョ﹚耕ㄣ砏家恨瞶莱耕Ч到磷ㄇ垒计╬そ把籔ㄤい狝叭借ぃ笷璓続讽キ
パヘ玡縱兵ㄒのΤ闽穨猭刮猭ㄒい┮更穨Θミ穨ミ猭刮のΤ舦秆沟穨恨瞶そ兵ゅ続ノ╬加璶秆∕糽加いΤ┬〆穦㎝潦禦虫︗穨恨瞶舦拜肈и-
某Θミ穨〆穦穨㎝┬〆穦穨舦ゑㄒㄓだ皌恨瞶舦笷璓穨Τ舦恨瞶︑穨ヘ
畊ネ侯┮瓃セΩ璶―┬竝扳そぉそ﹡チ玡ゲ斗浪琩加挡篶の秈︽蝴τ穨ゲ斗Τ舦恨瞶︑穨竨ノ恨瞶そ莱﹚ㄓ玥菏诡恨瞶そ笲
畊ネセ略朝勉
MR RONALD ARCULLI: Mr President, home ownership has been one of the core housing policies of the Liberal Party. Home ownership is more than owning a home. It enables owners to build up their capital assets and participate in the growing affluence of our community. It also demonstrates our confidence and pride in Hong Kong.
To achieve greater home ownership among public rental tenants, we have suggested to the Administration time and time again in the past to sell the existing public rental units at attractive prices to tenants. By doing so, this will not only increase home ownership amongst public rental tenants but will also permit better allocation of resources so that those in the community with real need, and I emphasize "with real need", for low-cost housing, and indeed, subsidized housing, we will ensure that they will receive the benefit.
In conjunction with the Housing Authority's consultation document on safeguarding rational allocation of public housing resources, we have refined our proposal to promote home ownership amongst the public rental tenants. The finer points of our proposal have been raised, and indeed might be raised by my Liberal Party colleagues, and I will therefore not take up too much of Members' time by discussing the details.
I would, however, like to remind the Administration and indeed my colleagues here, that there are two housing markets in Hong Kong. The debate today is centred on public housing, but we must not forget private housing. The private housing market provides homes for half of the population in Hong Kong. Just as we strive to ensure the Government allocates sufficient land for building public housing, whether it be for rental or for ownership, we have to ensure that an adequate supply of land is available for private housing, otherwise we may be faced with an unhealthy scenario of excessive speculation and rocketing property prices.
The long-term objective must be to enable and indeed to encourage ownership of private housing so that only those with real need will have to rely on public housing. Mr President, that ought to be the stated and clear policy of this Administration, and it is really with this in mind that we have put forward our proposal regarding the sale of public rental units to sitting tenants.
Mr President, with these words, I support the Honourable Edward HO's motion but do not support the amendments of the Honourable Miss CHAN Yuen-han and the Honourable Frederick FUNG. Thank you.
朝岸穨某璓勉畊ネセ翠ぶ基だ禥硂琌┮ㄆ龟タセ翠炊霉蒥チ疭琌顶糷蒥チセ礚︑竚﹡┮璽砫ヴ現┎硂у﹡チ矗ㄑ﹡┮琌砫礚禪セ翠そ犁┬璸购妒ネ︑き竧较玡ホ谄Юㄓ現┎翠计﹡チ矗ㄑッ﹡┮
沮┬〆穦"┬〆穦"︓き厨陪ボ篒ゎきるらゎ︘恏﹡チ计2 365 400τ﹡﹡璪﹡チ计396 400┬〆穦璝璶笷そガ环┬郸菠┮﹚夹ゼㄓせ璶砍290 000穝虫︗キА–璶砍48 000虫︗
ㄓ現┎┬〆穦矗ㄑ砍そ腨ぃì┬〆穦笷璓环┬郸菠┮璹ミヘ夹龟稰好碽パ現┎絯矗ㄑ砍そ簔跌そ惠―拜肈τそㄑぃ莱―瞷近︘穝蒥马の耎甶蒥跋恏近ビ叫近丁キА︓τビ叫︘蒥跋恏キА璶单︓ぶパ近そ丁龟び场だセ礚ì镑竚穨﹡チョ礚ー薄鶪竊︾罽潦禦熬环跋╬璪虫︗―﹡-
硂妓暗穦縀╬加蒥苑ぃぶу蝶現┎ぇ┮ぶ挤砍そㄤい璶ヘ琌虑縀加蒥ㄏ玻坝膥尿Τ瓜虑縀基ㄏ現┎芥Μ碩糤
璶过┏秆∕そㄑ―ぃキ颗拜肈絯㎝加基どの骸ì炊霉蒥チ癸そ惠―現┎ゲ斗秨┹穝骸ìそ惠―τ扳そぉ︘め琌ㄤい絯㎝惠―薄鶪よ猭
チ囊玥種現┎扳そぉそ︘め現┎ゲ斗膀糷蒥チ镑璽踞基扳耕穝そぉ瞷﹡そ﹡チτ扳そΤ闽Μ痲ゲ斗ノе砍穝そ虫︗の侣そτぃ莱赣虑θ痲
俱砰砏购の祘皌現┎Τ砫ヴ┬〆穦秨┹穝ノ砍そ硂琌程ち龟秆∕そ惠―快猭堡琌現┎筁癸秨┹よも惠璶︳璸筁だ玂τΤ闽场もぃìτ縩溃秖ㄑ―腨叉竊珿チ囊の玡翠幅Θ筁纯Ω某現┎穝蝶︳現┎秨┹よも惠璶ぃ莱膀肚参現┎癸秨や糤τ臮瞷龟惠璶τ兜惠―蝶︳莱珹現竝┹甶竝叭の砏购竝硂场Τぃぶ籔秨祇ㄑ莱㎝糵у常琌パ硂碭场┯踞現┎Τ港種秆∕ㄑ―ぃì拜肈碞ゲ斗硉秨┹骸ì砍そ惠―
畊ネиョ某現┎莱荷Ν絋璹﹚い戳の戳ㄑ莱璸购ㄏ俱砰ㄑ莱の秨┹璸购眔耕参膚の砏购
畊ネセ略朝勉や︙┯ぱ某某
郭Θ某璓勉畊ネセ璶―現┎环┬祇甶郸菠い稱快猭辅龟扳そ虫︗ぉそ﹡チ璸购
扳そぉそ﹡チ弧琌"羭眔"璸购癸そ﹡チㄓ弧-
匡拒礚斗逼钉碞ノ瞶基窥潦禦︑タ﹡︘虫︗Θ穨硂妓琂玂痙-
瞷Τ杆㎝伏綟闽玒龟瞷Θ穨局Τ穨戳辨癸現┎ㄓ弧е倍よ猭盢︑竚﹡┮ゑ瞯矗蔼τ癸穦ㄓ弧扳そ璸购程璶穦狦碞琌糤穦铆﹚┦
チ某竚Θセキ颗よ扳そ瞶パ琌辨さΩ矗よ琌ち龟︽よ竚Θセキ颗よ珹计よ
甧砛現┎Μ穝砍虫︗縱Θセ
︽現禣ノ璶砍虫︗ぃ琌パそ﹡チ秈︽τ琌パ現┎璽砫┮Μ闽︽現禣ノ琌瞶
跋畉肂ぃ跋﹚基よ莱赣眔続讽は琈
чΙ硂珹加闹加闹禫蔼莱莉眔耕蔼чΙ瞯
チ辨そ﹚基沮璶玥碞琌"ぃ瓜ぃ籯セ"┮孔ぃ瓜碞琌チは癸現┎硓筁扳そㄓ瓜┮孔ぃ籯セ碞琌チぃ種"芥埂Α"扳そ璸购狦現┎–芥丁そ碞璶籯セ窾窾杠硂妓璸购琌镑蝴㎡Τ闽︙┯ぱ某縱Θセ基よ㈱フ弧琌セ借璶―現┎挤程Ω戈ぉそ﹡チ狦璶Θ辅龟杠現┎﹚璶そ渤秆睦現┎Τ︙よ猭籯セよ环崩︽現┎琌惠璶ㄤよ挤戈方ㄓ戈そ﹡チ㎡
┬〆穦玡某よ琌寥窥瓜よτ︙┯ぱ某矗琌籯セよチ㎝朝胞糭某玥矗"ぃ瓜ぃ籯セ"よ狦и-
さぱ琌癚阶扳基よ琌程獽﹜杠莱赣蹦厨彻┮厨旧Τ﹛纯竒栏ē"じよ"じ盢そ芥倒┮Τそ﹡チ硂琌程獽﹜程Τまよぃ筁セ踞み"芥埂"よぃ穦硂璸购琌糤兜戈璸购パ穦渤戈场だそ﹡チΘ穨潦禦そ︑竚穨竚Θセキ颗よ矪碞琌狦璸购タΑ崩︽杠現┎礚斗踞み砍そ戈ㄓ方笷硂Τネ㏑璸购チ某現┎璹ミ膀扳そ┮眔Μ糤砍そ计秖
и钮ッ笷某チ囊矗は癸竚Θセ基瞶パ琌ぃ稱や竚Θセ基碞逼埃ㄤ扳そ﹚基よ讽礛⊿Τ冈灿弧硂瞶パ硂倒и禜琌и癘眔チ囊纯竒"よ"瞶パは癸朝胞ア穨穿某さぱチ囊玱や︙┯ぱ某某ず⊿Τ弧扳基よ猭"よ"痷琌秨泊
セ略朝勉や毒浪膀某㎝朝胞糭某タ
腑瓣辆某璓勉畊ネ︾︘︽琌ネ膀セ惠璶翠硂へよ璶秆∕"Τニ綛繷"拜肈絋龟ぃぶ翠カチ禣焚秖加基ど薄璶局Τ妮︑计κ虫︗﹡贾穨癸砛カチㄓ弧痷琌酵︙甧璶潦禦︑穨琌-
拨ネヘ夹
翠現┎ㄓ崩︽現郸砆カチ嘿砛酵眔琌"紈現"絋龟ぃ玡羆服沉瞶疎颈里崩︽そ現郸秖砍そ犁┬ぃぶ翠カチ秆∕︘拜肈琌眔苂い瓣﹍沧Τ肚参芠├︘┬拨澈ぃ琌︑ッ环局Τ
┬〆穦"┬〆穦"纯崩扳そぉ︘め璸购まそ﹡チ︑竚﹡┮讽璸购⊿Τそめ舧τ程沧懒竚ㄤ龟瞷ぃぶそめΤ﹚潦竚穨腀辨㎝τ扳そぉ︘め璸购弘ョ琌┮硂璸购琌Τ矗基ぃ筁狦璸购扳そ基璹眔ぃ瞶加挡篶蝴㎝恨瞶借ろ玂靡の穨ら恨瞶舦絢ぃ睲杠︑礛螟まめ潦禦そ
癸场だカチㄓ弧潦禦穨琌-
ネい斑﹙程禥ユ基琌瞶琌-
潦禦扳そ籔璶σ納璶ま瞷そ﹡チ潦禦﹡┮チ羛粄┬〆穦莱络璹甅竚Θセ基扳そ虫︗璸购络璹Τ種潦禦そ︘め钡瞶基
埃基σ納┬〆穦ョぃ┛跌扳そ挡篶の蝴そ挡篶ぃ瞷拜肈ぱ辅鲤函Τ種潦禦虫︗︘め讽礛ぃ腀種絘拨ネ縩籛琌禦眔丁ゑ娩れ畉﹡┮瘤礛┬〆穦璸购タΑ扳そ稨ぇ玡癸加秈︽吧诡獽扳加玡秈︽璶呗祘呗玂緄戳盢戳ㄢ琌或薄鶪┬〆穦秈︽"璶呗祘"┬〆穦Τゲ璶坚睲よ狦稨扳瞷挡篶拜肈┬〆穦穦┯踞Τ闽砫ヴ㎡
瘤礛カチ局Τ︑穨惠―ち硂ぃ单現┎崩ㄤ┯踞そ犁┬砫ヴ璶痷タ秆∕カチ﹡︘拜肈現┎┬現郸ゲ斗"そ﹡徊"ぃ莱ヴ種罽搭そゑㄒτ扳そΜ┮眔莱计ノ糤その侣そよ罽搭胑近そ钉ヮ
セ略朝勉
霉不瓣某璓勉畊ネさぱセЫ癚阶扳そ某狦弧玥τぃ弧扳基ㄤ甧砛艶矪瞶龟玥琌磷碞淮ミ初︓ぶ琌ぃ腀笆福惮暗猭狦Τ某や"ㄑ"璸衡扳基よΑ︙ぃタΑ矗癚阶狦弧瞷ミ猭Ы⊿Τì镑┦∕﹚叫拜︙ミ猭ЫΤì镑┦硂妓璶∕﹚
и-
チ矗ㄓ竚Θセ基扳そよ琌い丁辅茎"芥癳"瞶よ琂ぃ琌"芥埂"よΑ獽﹜﹡チぃ琌θ忌獽﹜┬〆穦и辨︗某繰σ納や毒浪膀某㎝朝胞糭某タ
セ略朝勉
PRESIDENT: I now invite Mr Edward HO to speak on the amendments to his motion. He has five minutes to speak on the two proposed amendment.
︙┯ぱ某璓勉畊ネи谅ッ笷某竒矗弧︙ぃや朝胞糭某㎝毒浪膀某タㄤ龟и某琌兜玥┦某и-
さぱぃノ臛阶灿竊ぃ筁и種霉不瓣某┮弧璶祔癚阶基拜肈
и瞷莱毒浪膀某種ǎ堡瞷ぃ穦某芔иぃ笵︙璸计弧и某穦–虫︗莲籯窾じ弧┮璸衡基蛤и某璝и猭┮孔竚Θセ基и-
き玡癚阶扳芥そ璸购璸衡猭êㄇ加加闹瞷琌加闹加セ縱Θセ玡縱Θセ竚Θセ碞琌瞷砍糽加Θセ籔玡縱禣ゑ瞷莱赣程ぶど狦иよΑ璸衡加基琌19窾杠の朝胞糭某よΑ璸衡玥莱赣琌40窾ぃ筁讽礛毒浪膀某矗ч侣ノ竚Θセ璸衡︙ч侣㎡琌钮и蹦ノ縱ΘセよΑ┮稱癸郸ч侣獽籔и某加基璝ぃ筁иぃ稱阶硂翴タッ笷某┮弧и-
さぱぃ琌阶硂翴
毒浪膀某矗и粄┬〆穦ぃノ璽砫и筁и簍勉иセ⊿Τ硂妓矗筁и琌弧и-
璶Ω筁戈-
或戈㎡碞琌ぃ璸衡基現┎竒倒ぉ戈ぃノ戈-
и觅Θゼ扳加玡璶秈︽蝴の盢ㄓ恨瞶璶璽砫
郭Θ某矗辨硂よぃ穦莲セ钩穞ボиよ琌"じよ""芥埂"ㄤ龟и弧眔睲贰и矗某よ琌ゲ斗Μ┮ΤΘセ程ぶ窥ㄓ砍秨や璶Μ妓ぃΜ碞琌基и-
砞碞琌-
ぃ"加"寥窥芥倒そ﹡チиぃ稱弧基拜肈
朝胞糭某弧莱赣"﹡徊"и会種硂種├ごΤ﹡チ单︘そиΩ矗現┎﹚璶糹︽┯空箂箂ゲ斗ЧΘ环┬郸菠翠Τ瞶﹡┮и谋眔и某籔┮弧タㄆ兜⊿Τ牟и-
扳そ莉眔戈方砍そи⊿Τ璶―現┎ぶㄇ砍︘そ
SECRETARY FOR HOUSING: Mr President, I have listened with interest to comments made by Honourable Members on the proposal to sell public rental flats to sitting tenants, and am grateful for their views and suggestions.
Importance of home ownership
Home ownership fosters a sense of belonging, and is a cornerstone of stability in any society. To borrow a fashionable phrase nowadays, it makes the members of a community stockholders. It is also the goal to which more and more of ordinary Hong Kong households aspire. Hence, one of the main objectives of our housing policy is to encourage home ownership. Where necessary, we will do so through the provision of subsidized housing or financial assistance. I welcome Members' support of this objective, but I must take this opportunity also to emphasize that the Government is still firmly committed to providing pubic rental housing to those who are in genuine need of housing assistance. As long as there is a demand from this group of people, we will continue to provide public rental housing. There is therefore no truth in any suggestion that the Government only attends to the demand of home ownership and ignores the continued need of public rental housing. In fact, we work on both.
Existing schemes
The means by which families in Hong Kong attain the goal of home ownership are various. The private sector provides the bulk of our supply: 41% of households in Hong Kong now own accommodation in the private sector. On the other hand, we have long recognized that private property prices are out of reach for many households. Thus, since 1978, we have successfully implemented four Home Ownership Schemes and two Loan Schemes to enable 11% of households in Hong Kong to acquire their own homes in the public sector.
These public schemes have helped to push the home ownership rate up from 23% in 1978 to 52% in 1995. But for the many less well-off families living in public rental housing, even assisted home ownership still remains out of reach at present. I agree therefore with the Honourable Edward HO and other Members that much needs to be done to encourage home ownership.
Housing Authority's proposed sale of flats to sitting tenants scheme in 1991
In recognition of the benefit of home ownership, the Housing Authority launched its first attempt to sell flats to sitting tenants in 1991. Support in principle was widespread in the community not least, Mr President, in this Council then where many Members, including some still present today, spoke in favour of it during the course of two debates in May and November 1991. However, the response from tenants was poor, with only more than 7% of eligible families indicating their intention to purchase.
There was much discussion over the causes of this poor response. Why did not more families come forward? Was the scheme too limited in scope? Were prices too high? Were tenants concerned over possible changes in their financial circumstances? Were tenants concerned over the responsibility for maintenance which comes with home ownership? Well, the main cause for the unpopularity of the scheme then seemed to have been the pricing level and the lack of incentive for tenants to incur much higher monthly expenditure in order to own a flat which they could rent easily for substantially less. This is a lesson we will need to remember. It may also be that the ideal of home ownership had not yet caught the public eye to the same extent as it has today. I believe that it was a good idea whose time for success had not yet come.
1995 Policy Commitments
The Government is mindful both of the attractiveness in principle of a scheme to sell public rental flats to tenants and of the need to avoid a repetition of the 1991 situation. In my 1995 Policy Commitments, I have undertaken to "examine ways to make it easier for tenants of public rental flats to own their own homes, including the option of selling public rental flats to existing tenants". I am indeed greatly encouraged this afternoon by the support implied for this commitment of Members of different political groupings in the debate today.
Major considerations in implementing sale of flats to tenants scheme
How then should we proceed? We need to devise a scheme which will actually work. I thank Members for providing some useful pointers this afternoon. At this initial stage, I would like to mention three areas to which we need to pay particular attention. The first concerns the responsibility for maintenance after acquisition by the tenant. We know that this may burden him financially or even put him off participating in the first place. Yet it would be wrong in principle for the seller to maintain continuously the property he had sold. The buyer must also have a genuine responsibility for the property in which he has invested. The Honourable LEE Wing-tat has suggested that one possible way forward would be the introduction of a compulsory maintenance fund right from the start. Some Members have mentioned something similar to this. All these are good suggestions which we will need to think through carefully.
The second area concerns the choice of blocks to be sold. In 1991, only 11 blocks with less than 7 000 flats were chosen. This was too limited a base from which to expect dramatic results. So we must choose the housing blocks carefully. If sales were confined only to the newer blocks, we would face a dilemma. If priced too high, there would be little incentive for tenants to come forward. If prices were pitched too low, we could undermine our existing subsidized Home Ownership Schemes since families could become owners of flats virtually comparable to HOS/PSPS units, but at a much reduced cost. At the other extreme, I must point out that it would be difficult to justify selling old or the oldest flats due for redevelopment. So we need to strike a balance.
The third area concerns pricing generally which is the key to the exercise. Our objective in selling flats, I agree, is to increase home ownership. I therefore agree with Members that the price must be realistic and genuinely affordable to the target group. On the other hand, I must point out that we cannot give away public assets for a notional sum. Here again, we must strike a balance. I have noted the amendments put forward by the Honourable Frederick FUNG and the Honourable Miss CHAN Yuen-han, suggesting that "replacement cost" be used as the pricing benchmark. This needs careful and more thorough consideration, and I am afraid I cannot respond to that immediately. In any case, I agree with Members that the profits or savings, which accrue to the Housing Authority as a result of the introduction of such a new scheme, should be ploughed back into the public housing programme.
Way forward
If we are to sell public rental flats to existing tenants, we must get the components of that scheme right. This idea is being carefully examined in our current review of the Long Term Housing Strategy and, if feasible, should feature in the public consultation document which I shall issue in the middle of this year.
With these remarks, Mr President, we support the spirit of the Honourable Edward HO's motion.
PRESIDENT: Miss CHAN Yuen-han has given notice to move an amendment to the motion. Her amendment has been printed on the Order Paper and circularized to Members. I now call upon her to move her amendment.
MISS CHAN YUEN-HAN's amendment to MR EDWARD HO's motion:
"埃"笷璓痷タ"︘Τㄤ"ヘ夹""現┎そ犁┬現郸ゲ斗"そ﹡徊""埃"荷е扳そ虫︗倒ぉ""穝﹚甅竚Θセ基扳そ虫︗璸购ま"の"瞷そ﹡チ""潦禦ㄤ﹡┮""
朝胞糭某璓勉畊ネи笆某タ︙┯ぱ某某タず甧某ㄆ祘ずи┮更
Question on Miss CHAN Yuen-han's amendment proposed and put.
Voice vote taken.
THE PRESIDENT said he thought the "Noes" had it.
MRS SELINA CHOW: Division.
PRESIDENT: Council shall proceed to a division.
PRESIDENT: I would like to remind Members that they are now called upon to vote on the question that the amendment moved by Miss CHAN Yuen-han be made to Mr Edward HO's motion. Will Members please register their presence by pressing the top button and then proceed to vote by choosing one of the three buttons below?
PRESIDENT: Before I declare the result, would Members please check their votes? Are there any queries? The result will now be displayed.
Mr Frederick FUNG, Miss Emily LAU, Mr LEE Cheuk-yan, Mr CHAN Kam-lam, Mr CHAN Wing-chan, Miss CHAN Yuen-han, Mr CHENG Yiu-tong, Mr CHEUNG Hon-chung, Mr CHOY Kan-pui, Mr IP Kwok-him, Mr LAU Chin-shek, Dr LAW Cheung-kwok, Mr LEE Kai-ming, Mr LEUNG Yiu-chung, Mr Bruce LIU, Mr LO Suk-ching, Mr MOK Ying-fan and Mr NGAN Kam-chuen voted for the amendment.
Mr Allen LEE, Mrs Selina CHOW, Mr Martin LEE, Mr SZETO Wah, Mr Edward HO, Mrs Miriam LAU, Dr LEONG Che-hung, Mr Albert CHAN, Mr CHEUNG Man-kwong, Mr Michael HO, Dr HUANG Chen-ya, Mr LEE Wing-tat, Mr Eric LI, Mr Fred LI, Mr Henry TANG, Mr James TO, Dr YEUNG Sum, Mr Howard YOUNG, Mr WONG Wai-yin, Mr James TIEN, Mr Andrew CHENG, Dr Anthony CHEUNG, Mr Albert HO, Mr LAW Chi-kwong, Mr TSANG Kin-shing and Dr John TSE voted against the amendment.
Mrs Elizabeth WONG and Mr YUM Sin-ling abstained.
THE PRESIDENT announced that there were 18 votes in favour of the amendment and 26 votes against it. He therefore declared that the amendment was negatived.
PRESIDENT: Now that we have disposed of Miss CHAN Yuen-han's amendment, Mr Frederick FUNG may formally move his amendment so that Members may take a vote on it.
MR FREDERICK FUNG's amendment to MR EDWARD HO's motion:
""セЫ玃叫現┎""竚Θセ基""荷е扳""続""
毒浪膀某璓勉畊ネи笆某タ︙┯ぱ某某タず甧某ㄆ祘ずи┮更
Question on Mr Frederick FUNG's amendment proposed and put.
Voice vote taken.
THE PRESIDENT said he thought the "Noes" had it.
Mr Frederick FUNG and Mr Bruce LIU claimed a division.
PRESIDENT: Council shall proceed to a division.
PRESIDENT: I would like to remind Members that they are now called upon to vote on the question that the amendment moved by Mr Frederick FUNG be made to Mr Edward HO's motion. Will Members please register their presence by pressing the top button and then proceed to vote by choosing one of the three buttons below?
PRESIDENT: Before I declare the result, Members may wish to check their votes. Are there any queries? The result will now be displayed.
Mr Frederick FUNG, Miss Emily LAU, Mr LEE Cheuk-yan, Mr CHAN Kam-lam, Mr CHAN Wing-chan, Miss CHAN Yuen-han, Mr CHENG Yiu-tong, Mr CHEUNG Hon-chung, Mr IP Kwok-him, Mr LAU Chin-shek, Dr LAW Cheung-kwok, Mr LEE Kai-ming, Mr LEUNG Yiu-chung, Mr Bruce LIU, Mr LO Suk-ching, Mr MOK Ying-fan and Mr NGAN Kam-chuen voted for the amendment.
Mr Allen LEE, Mrs Selina CHOW, Mr Martin LEE, Mr SZETO Wah, Mr Edward HO, Mrs Miriam LAU, Dr LEONG Che-hung, Mr Albert CHAN, Mr CHEUNG Man-kwong, Mr Michael HO, Dr HUANG Chen-ya, Mr LEE Wing-tat, Mr Eric LI, Mr Fred LI, Mr Henry TANG, Mr James TO, Dr YEUNG Sum, Mr Howard YOUNG, Mr WONG Wai-yin, Mr James TIEN, Mr Andrew CHENG, Mr Anthony CHEUNG, Mr CHOY Kan-pui, Mr Albert HO, Mr LAW Chi-kwong, Mr TSANG Kin-shing, Dr John TSE and Mrs Elizabeth WONG voted against the amendment.
Mr YUM Sin-ling abstained.
THE PRESIDENT announced that there were 17 votes in favour of the amendment and 28 votes against it. He therefore declared that the amendment was negatived.
PRESIDENT: Now that we have also disposed of Mr Frederick FUNG's amendment, Mr Edward HO, you are now entitled to make your final reply and you have exactly three minutes out of your original 15 minutes.
︙┯ぱ某璓勉и蔼砍さぱ︗ㄆ裤臘祇ēやи某︓矗タ某иㄖ-
璓谅產倒現┎腳禥種ǎ
┬弧纯秈︽吭高讽Τ7%稱潦禦そ⊿Τ弧讽ㄤ龟场だ稱禦琌Й基τぃ筁だ┚龟ㄓ矗扳基弧揭и辨さぱ揭ㄆ龟и-
辨镑Τ镑竚穨の基瞶иョ矗筁и-
ぃ琌稱"芥埂"τ琌辨┮﹚扳基よぃ穦┬〆穦莲籯τよ琌カチ璽踞
程и辨┬┬竝竝㎝┬〆穦┮Τ〆镑荷е╯さぱセЫ矗兜種ǎ崩︽硂︑竚﹡┮璸购﹡チ镑龟瞷-
冠稱
Question on the original motion put.
Voice vote taken.
THE PRESIDENT said he thought the "Ayes" had it.
MR LEE WING-TAT: I claim a division.
PRESIDENT: Council shall proceed to a division.
PRESIDENT: I am sure Members need no reminding that they are now called upon to vote on the original motion moved by Mr Edward HO. Will Members please register their presence by pressing the top button and then proceed to vote by choosing one of the three buttons below?
PRESIDENT: Before I declare the result, will Members please check their votes? Are there any queries? The result will now be displayed.
Mr Allen LEE, Mrs Selina CHOW, Mr Martin LEE, Mr SZETO Wah, Mr Edward HO, Mrs Miriam LAU, Dr LEONG Che-hung, Mr Albert CHAN, Mr CHEUNG Man-kwong, Mr Frederick FUNG, Mr Michael HO, Dr HUANG Chen-ya, Miss Emily LAU, Mr LEE Wing-tat, Mr Eric LI, Mr Fred LI, Mr Henry TANG, Mr James TO, Dr YEUNG Sum, Mr Howard YOUNG, Mr WONG Wai-yin, Mr James TIEN, Mr LEE Cheuk-yan, Mr CHAN Kam-lam, Mr CHAN Wing-chan, Mr Andrew CHENG, Mr Paul CHENG, Mr CHENG Yiu-tong, Dr Anthony CHEUNG, Mr CHEUNG Hon-chung, Mr CHOY Kan-pui, Mr Albert HO, Mr IP Kwok-him, Mr LAU Chin-shek, Dr LAW Cheung-kwok, Mr LAW Chi-kwong, Mr LEE Kai-ming, Mr LEUNG Yiu-chung, Mr Bruce LIU, Mr LO Suk-ching, Mr MOK Ying-fan, Mr NGAN Kam-chuen, Mr TSANG Kin-shing, Dr John TSE, Mrs Elizabeth WONG and Mr YUM Sin-ling voted for the motion.
THE PRESIDENT announced that there were 46 votes in favour of the motion and none against it. He therefore declared that the motion was carried.
ADJOURNMENT AND NEXT SITTING
PRESIDENT: In accordance with Standing Orders, I now adjourn the Council until 2.30 pm on Wednesday, 14 February 1996, Valentine's Day.
Adjourned accordingly at nine minutes past Eight o'clock.
LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL - 7 February 1996
14
ミ猭Ы せるら
LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL - 7 February 1996
1
ミ猭Ы せるら
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.