Page 122 of 126
Page 122 01 126
296
HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL
As regards liaison with the Immigration Department, the names of foreign visitors convicted of illegal hawking have been referred to that Department for a number of years, with particular attention being drawn to repeated offenders. In 1991, 190 such referrals were made. Follow-up action, if any, pursuant to immigration law is a matter for the Immigration Department and not the USD or this Council. Nevertheless, the Immigration Department has stated publicly that it does give warnings to offenders and is prepared to consider refusal of further application for entry or extension of stay in respect of repeated offenders.
As to any particular difficulties in dealing with foreign hawkers, GDT staff can face some problems because these hawkers are non-Chinese or non-English speaking or simply pose as such. However, experience indicates that foreign hawkers invariably speak at least some simple English or Cantonese since, otherwise, it would be difficult if not impossible for them to engage in this illegal activity. In any event, irrespective of whether there is any genuine language gap, a foreign hawker will be dealt with in the same way as any local illegal hawker by being brought to a Police Station and charged under the normal arrest procedures.
MS. ANNA TANG KING-YUNG (in Cantonese): Mr. Chairman, I have two follow-up questions. I would like to ask whether Filipino hawkers have been included as foreign hawkers? Secondly, Mr. CHAN has said in his reply that in 1991, a total of 270 foreign illegal hawkers were prosecuted. Is the Department satisfied with this figure? Has there been any improvement on the situation? Has the Department reviewed the situation on foreign illegal hawkers and is there a trend of more foreigners trading as illegal hawkers?
MR. CHAN TAK-CHOR (in Cantonese): Thank you, Mr. Chairman. There are two parts to Ms. TANG's question. Firstly, she asks whether foreign hawkers include Filipino illegal hawkers. In fact, for any person who is not holder of HK Identity Card, will be considered as foreign hawkers. For Filipinos, they are no exception. The second question asks whether the Department is satisfied with the prosecution figure of 270. Actually, the Council in taking action against illegal hawkers will mainly look at the serious nuisances caused by hawkers, for example, obstruction to streets, or pedestrian traffic. The Urban Council has its own priority in dealing with illegal hawkers in different districts. For example, in the industrial area, like San Po Kong or Kwun Tong, during day time, we have to be careful in dealing with illegal hawkers to prevent fast food vehicles or illegal vans from selling food illegally. Our principle has all along been that in dealing with illegal hawkers, we deal with them as a whole and, we do not have any exception or different procedures in dealing foreign hawkers. The most important thing is that we can deal with the problem properly so I do not want to say any more on illegal prosecution figures. Our aim is to disperse illegal hawkers, which is said to be successful.
MS. ANNA TANG KING-YUNG (in Cantonese): Thank you for Mr. CHAN's reply that Filipino hawkers are also considered to be foreign hawkers. If that is the case,
HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL
297
I think the prosecution number of 270 in 1990 is low because as you know, during holidays and weekends a lot of Filipinos are selling items in UC parks. This is a commonly known fact. I think that the Department should review the situation on foreign hawking problem. In Mr. CHAN's reply, in comparison, the scale of foreign hawkers is relatively so small, in other words, the effects caused is small. I am not satisfied with this answer because I think foreign hawkers have caused great impact on the public and Council's facilities.
MR. CHAN TAK-CHOR (in Cantonese): Mr. Chairman, it seems that Ms. Anna TANG has expressed her personal opinion. If the Chairman allows, I will attempt to answer.
THE HON. MARVIN CHEUNG KIN-TUNG (in English): Sorry, Mr. Chairman, can I draw your attention to Standing Orders No. 12 and No. 15. Standing Order No. 12 subsection 11 says the question shall not contain opinions. Standing Order No. 12 subsection 13 also says that question must not be asked for the purpose of obtaining an expression of opinion. I do believe the last two supplementary questions do breach these Standing Orders.
CHAIRMAN (in English): I also agree. Ms. TANG, would you like to withdraw your statement because it is not in a question form.
MS. ANNA TANG KING-YUNG (in Cantonese): Mr. Chairman, perhaps allow me to rectify my question or to modify my question. I do not want to withdraw the two questions raised, I think I can modify them. I like to ask them again. Mr. CHAN has already given a reply to my question. Since some members said that I was in breach of the Standing Orders, so allow me to modify the question. I put it in a question form.
CHAIRMAN (in Cantonese): What I mean is that you are expressing your personal opinion. Perhaps could you put it in question form so that Mr. CHAN will be able to answer your question.
MS. ANNA TANG KING-YUNG (in Cantonese): So allow me to do that, MR. CHAIRMAN. I would like to ask the Department regarding foreign hawkers hawking in UC parks. How many prosecutions will be taken out?
THE HON. MARVIN CHEUNG KIN-TUNG (in English): Mr. Chairman. I think that question still breaches Standing Order 12,(13) because it asks for hypothetical proposition.
CHAIRMAN (in English): In that case, I have to rule that this question can not be asked and if you like, you can put it under strictly a question mark form. O.K.?
MR. MOK YING-FAN (in Cantonese): Mr. Chairman, I have two questions. First, I think members are aware of the fact the number of foreign hawkers has
Page 122 of 126
Page 122 of 126
Page 122 01 126
296
HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL
As regards liaison with the Immigration Department, the names of foreign visitors convicted of illegal hawking have been referred to that Department for a number of years, with particular attention being drawn to repeated offenders. In 1991, 190 such referrals were made. Follow-up action, if any, pursuant to immigration law is a matter for the Immigration Department and not the USD or this Council. Nevertheless, the Immigration Department has stated publicly that it does give warnings to offenders and is prepared to consider refusal of further application for entry or extension of stay in respect of repeated offenders.
As to any particular difficulties in dealing with foreign hawkers, GDT staff can face some problems because these hawkers are non-Chinese or non-English speaking or simply pose as such. However, experience indicates that foreign hawkers invariably speak at least some simple English or Cantonese since, otherwise, it would be difficult if not impossible for them to engage in this illegal activity. In any event, irrespective of whether there is any genuine language gap, a foreign hawker will be dealt with in the same way as any local illegal hawker by being brought to a Police Station and charged under the normal arrest procedures.
MS. ANNA TANG KING-YUNG (in Cantonese): Mr. Chairman, I have two follow-up questions. I would like to ask whether Filipino hawkers have been included as foreign hawkers? Secondly, Mr. CHAN has said in his reply that in 1991, a total of 270 foreign illegal hawkers were prosecuted. Is the Department satisfied with this figure? Has there been any improvement on the situation? Has the Department reviewed the situation on foreign illegal hawkers and is there a trend of more foreigners trading as illegal hawkers?
MR. CHAN TAK-CHOR (in Cantonese):-Thank you, Mr. Chairman. There are two parts to Ms. TANG's question. Firstly, she asks whether foreign hawkers include Filipino illegal hawkers. In fact, for any person who is not holder of HK Identity Card, will be considered as foreign hawkers. For Filipinos, they are no exception. The second question asks whether the Department is satisfied with the prosecution figure of 270. Actually, the Council in taking action against illegal hawkers will mainly look at the serious nuisances caused by hawkers, for example, obstruction to streets, or pedestrian traffic. The Urban Council has its own priority in dealing with illegal hawkers in different districts. For example, in the industrial area, like San Po Kong or Kwun Tong, during day time, we have to be careful in dealing with illegal hawkers to prevent fast food vehicles or illegal vans from selling food illegally. Our principle has all along been that in dealing with illegal hawkers, we deal with them as a whole and, we do not have any exception or different procedures in dealing foreign hawkers. The most important thing is that we can deal with the problem properly so I do not want to say any more on illegal prosecution figures. Our aim is to disperse illegal hawkers, which is said to be successful.
MS. ANNA TANG KING-YUNG (in Cantonese):-Thank you for Mr. CHAN's reply that Filipino hawkers are also considered to be foreign hawkers. If that is the case, Page 122 of 126
HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL
297
I think the prosecution number of 270 in 1990 is low because as you know, during holidays and weekends a lot of Filipinos are selling items in UC parks. This is a commonly known fact. I think that the Department should review the situation on foreign hawking problem. In Mr. CHAN's reply, in comparison, the scale of foreign hawkers is relatively so small, in other words, the effects caused is small. I am not satisfied with this answer because I think foreign hawkers have caused great impact on the public and Council's facilities.
MR. CHAN TAK-CHOR (in Cantonese):-Mr. Chairman, it seems that Ms. Anna TANG has expressed her personal opinion. If the Chairman allows, I will attempt to answer.
------
THE HON. MARVIN CHEUNG KIN-TUNG (in English): Sorry, Mr. Chairman, can I draw your attention to Standing Orders No. 12 and No. 15. Standing Order No. 12 subsection 11 says the question shall not contain opinions. Standing Order No. 12 subsection 13 also says that question must not be asked for the purpose of obtaining and expression of opinion. I do believe the last two supplementary questions do breach these Standing Orders.
CHAIRMAN, (in English):—I also agree. Ms. TANG, would you like to withdraw your statement because it is not in a question form.
MS. ANNA TANG KING-YUNG (in Cantonese):-Mr. Chairman, perhaps allow me to rectify my question or to modify my question. I do not want to withdraw the two questions raised, I think I can modify them. I like to ask them again. Mr. C HAN has already given a reply to my question. Since some members said that I was in breach of the Standing Orders, so allow me to modify the question. I put it in a question form.
CHAIRMAN (in Cantonese):-What I mean is that you are expressing your personal opinion. Perhaps could you put it in question form so that Mr. CHAN will be able to answer you question.
MS. ANNA TANG KING-YUNG (in Cantonese):-So allow me to do that, MR. CHAIRMAN. I would like to ask the Department regarding foreign hawkers hawking in UC parks. How many prosecutions will be taken out?
THE HON. MARVIN CHEUNG KIN-TUNG (in English):-Mr. Chairman. I think that question still breaches Standing Order 12,(13) because it asks for hypothetical proposition.
CHAIRMAN, (in English): In that case, I have to rule that this question can not be asked and if you like, you can put it under strictly a question mark form. O.K.?
MR. MOK YING-FAN (in Cantonese):-Mr. Chairman, I have two questions. First, I think members are aware of the fact the number of foreign hawkers has
Page 122 of 126
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.