1997 — Page 340

Urban Council Proceedings 市政局議事錄 All AI Reviewed

Page 340 of 654

336

HONG KONG PROVISIONAL URBAN COUNCIL

The second point is that as we can see, very often fresh provision shops allow some greengrocers and fishmongers to operate next to the shops. They could be street-hawkers. They have a way and a strategy in running their business. When our hawker control teams come near, they would claim themselves to be part of the shop and are therefore outside the scope of control of Hawker Control Officers. Accordingly, no action can be taken against them, as the Chairman of the Select Committee said just now, under section 4A of the Summary Offences Ordinance, Cap. 228 and section 83B of the Public Health and Municipal Services Ordinance, Cap. 132 for obstruction of public place. However, when Health Inspectors arrive to inspect the place, the shop-owner would claim that they are hawkers and therefore have nothing to do with them. At the same time, the law being enforced by Health Inspectors is the Food Business Bylaws of the Urban Council and they are therefore not responsible for controlling hawkers. Accordingly, when Health Inspectors arrive, they can do nothing to the vegetable or fish stalls around the shops. In connection with this loophole, I wish to ask whether the existing law and distribution of the duties of the law-enforcing staff can be reviewed so that Hawker Control Officers and Health Inspectors are at the same time vested with the authority to execute the Food Business (Urban Council) Bylaws, including prosecuting shops for extended hawking, unauthorized selling of fresh fish, and the authority to execute the ordinances related to obstruction of public place, such as section 4A of the Summary Offences Ordinance and section 83B of the Public Health and Municipal Services Ordinance, Cap. 132 as quoted by the Chairman of the Select Committee just now?

MR. JOSEPH CHAN YUEK-SUT (in Cantonese): Mr. Chairman, about the working timetable of the law-enforcing staff and the earliest hour they go to work, I don't have the information now. I will give it to Mr. CHAN after the meeting.

If it is found that most of these irregularities take place at 7 a.m., we could refer the issue to the Urban Services Department to make improvement and step up law-enforcement during that hour.

As to the second part concerning operating outside the shop or at the shop front, if they deny this, we could take prosecution action against them for obstruction of public place under section 4A of the Summary Offences Ordinance, Cap. 228. If the goods belong to the shop, the additional charge of illegal extension of shop area may be made and if they are unlicensed hawkers, they may be prosecuted for unlicensed hawking. We would take joint action with the hawker control staff.

As to the need to amend the legislation, a review can at present be conducted to find out whether there is such a need, whether the current situation is so bad and whether it is not possible for us to deal with them. If it was confirmed that we couldn't deal with them, the first step would be to delegate authority empowering the hawker control staff and health inspectorate to take the same

£654

Page 340

Page 341

Edit History

2026-05-16 03:52:37 · NVIDIA / meta/llama-4-maverick-17b-128e-instruct

Live

View comparison

AI Proofread

Page 340 of 654 Page 340 of 654 Page 340 of 654 336 HONG KONG PROVISIONAL URBAN COUNCIL The second point is that as we can see, very often fresh provision shops allow some greengrocers and fishmongers to operate next to the shops. They could be street-hawkers. They have a way and a strategy in running their business. When our hawker control teams come near, they would claim themselves to be part of the shop and are therefore outside the scope of control of Hawker Control Officers. Accordingly, no action can be taken against them, as the Chairman of the Select Committee said just now, under section 4A of the Summary Offences Ordinance, Cap. 228 and section 83B of the Public Health and Municipal Services Ordinance, Cap. 132 for obstruction of public place. However, when Health Inspectors arrive to inspect the place, the shop-owner would claim that they are hawkers and therefore have nothing to do with them. At the same time, the law being enforced by Health Inspectors is the Food Business Bylaws of the Urban Council and they are therefore not responsible for controlling hawkers. Accordingly, when Health Inspectors arrive, they can do nothing to the vegetable or fish stalls around the shops. In connection with this loophole, I wish to ask whether the existing law and distribution of the duties of the law-enforcing staff can be reviewed so that Hawker Control Officers and Health Inspectors are at the same time vested with the authority to execute the Food Business (Urban Council) Bylaws, including prosecuting shops for extended hawking, unauthorized selling of fresh fish, and the authority to execute the ordinances related to obstruction of public place, such as section 4A of the Summary Offences Ordinance and section 83B of the Public Health and Municipal Services Ordinance, Cap. 132 as quoted by the Chairman of the Select Committee just now? MR. JOSEPH CHAN YUEK-SUT (in Cantonese): Mr. Chairman, about the working timetable of the law-enforcing staff and the earliest hour they go to work, I don't have the information now. I will give it to Mr. CHAN after the meeting. If it is found that most of these irregularities take place at 7 a.m., we could refer the issue to the Urban Services Department to make improvement and step up law-enforcement during that hour. As to the second part concerning operating outside the shop or at the shop front, if they deny this, we could take prosecution action against them for obstruction of public place under section 4A of the Summary Offences Ordinance, Cap. 228. If the goods belong to the shop, the additional charge of illegal extension of shop area may be made and if they are unlicensed hawkers, they may be prosecuted for unlicensed hawking. We would take joint action with the hawker control staff. As to the need to amend the legislation, a review can at present be conducted to find out whether there is such a need, whether the current situation is so bad and whether it is not possible for us to deal with them. If it was confirmed that we couldn't deal with them, the first step would be to delegate authority empowering the hawker control staff and health inspectorate to take the same £654 Page 340 Page 341

Baseline (Original)

Page 340 of 654 Page 340 of 654 Page 340 of 654 336 HONG KONG PROVISIONAL URBAN COUNCIL The second point is that as we can see, very often fresh provision shops allow some greengrocers and fishmongers to operate next to the shops. They could be street-hawkers. They have a way and a strategy in running their business. When our hawker control teams come near, they would claim themselves to be part of the shop and are therefore outside the scope of control of Hawker Control Officers. Accordingly, no action can be taken against them, as the Chairman of the Select Committee said just now, under section 4A of the Summary Offences Ordinance, Cap. 228 and section 83B of the Public Health and Municipal Services Ordinance. Cap. 132 for obstruction of public place. However, when Health Inspectors arrive to inspect the place, the shop-owner would claim that they are hawkers and therefore have nothing to do with them. At the same time, the law being enforced by Health Inspectors is the Food Business Bylaws of the Urban Council and they are therefore not responsible for controlling hawkers. Accordingly, when Health Inspectors arrive, they can do nothing to the vegetable or fish stalls around the shops. In connection with this loophole, I wish to ask whether the existing law and distribution of the duties of the law-enforcing staff can be reviewed so that Hawker Control Officers and Health Inspectors are at the same time vested with the authority to execute the Food Business (Urban Council) Bylaws, including prosecuting shops for extended hawking, unauthorized selling of fresh fish, and the authority to execute the ordinances related to obstruction of public place, such as section 4A of the Summary Offences Ordinance and section 83B of the Public Health and Municipal Services Ordinance, Cap. 132 as quoted by the Chairman of the Select Committee just now? MR. JOSEPH CHAN YUEK-SUT (in Cantonese):-Mr. Chairman, about the working timetable of the law-enforcing staff and the earliest hour they go to work, I don't have the information now. I will give it to Mr. CHAN after the meeting. If it is found that most of these irregularities take place at 7 a.m.. we could refer the issue to the Urban Services Department to make improvement and step up law-enforcement during that hour. As to the second part concerning operating outside the shop or at the shop front, if they deny this, we could take prosecution action against them for obstruction of public place under section 4A of the Summary Offences Ordinance, Cap. 228. If the goods belong to the shop, the additional charge of illegal extension of shop area may be made and if they are unlicensed hawkers, they may be prosecuted for unlicensed hawking. We would take joint action with the hawker control staff. As to the need to amend the legislation, a review can at present be conducted to find out whether there is such a need, whether the current situation is so bad and whether it is not possible for us to deal with them. If it was confirmed that we couldn't deal with them, the first step would be to delegate authority empowering the hawker control staff and health inspectorate to take the same £654 Page 340Page 341

2026-05-16 03:52:37 · Baseline

View content

Page 340 of 654

336

HONG KONG PROVISIONAL URBAN COUNCIL

The second point is that as we can see, very often fresh provision shops allow some greengrocers and fishmongers to operate next to the shops. They could be street-hawkers. They have a way and a strategy in running their business. When our hawker control teams come near, they would claim themselves to be part of the shop and are therefore outside the scope of control of Hawker Control Officers. Accordingly, no action can be taken against them, as the Chairman of the Select Committee said just now, under section 4A of the Summary Offences Ordinance, Cap. 228 and section 83B of the Public Health and Municipal Services Ordinance. Cap. 132 for obstruction of public place. However, when Health Inspectors arrive to inspect the place, the shop-owner would claim that they are hawkers and therefore have nothing to do with them. At the same time, the law being enforced by Health Inspectors is the Food Business Bylaws of the Urban Council and they are therefore not responsible for controlling hawkers. Accordingly, when Health Inspectors arrive, they can do nothing to the vegetable or fish stalls around the shops. In connection with this loophole, I wish to ask whether the existing law and distribution of the duties of the law-enforcing staff can be reviewed so that Hawker Control Officers and Health Inspectors are at the same time vested with the authority to execute the Food Business (Urban Council) Bylaws, including prosecuting shops for extended hawking, unauthorized selling of fresh fish, and the authority to execute the ordinances related to obstruction of public place, such as section 4A of the Summary Offences Ordinance and section 83B of the Public Health and Municipal Services Ordinance, Cap. 132 as quoted by the Chairman of the Select Committee just now?

MR. JOSEPH CHAN YUEK-SUT (in Cantonese):-Mr. Chairman, about the working timetable of the law-enforcing staff and the earliest hour they go to work, I don't have the information now. I will give it to Mr. CHAN after the meeting.

If it is found that most of these irregularities take place at 7 a.m.. we could refer the issue to the Urban Services Department to make improvement and step up law-enforcement during that hour.

1997 — Page 340

Edit History

Comments

Private Research Note