Page 93 of 654
HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL
91
body. Let me cite a simple example. The Town Planning Board issued guidelines in the beginning of 1996 that establishments (massage parlours and bathrooms) causing great nuisance should not be opened in places without separate access or those of conflicting users like schools or churches. In the guidelines, there are discussions on whether to approve the opening of massage parlours and bathrooms. It is not to say that a free economy when set free will not cause nuisance to others.
I want to mention here that several Members went on a trip abroad and supplied a report. Although the suggestions connected with foreign countries have not been accepted by this Council, it has been revealed that there are clear license issuance guidelines for Vancouver, Los Angeles and others. In Vancouver, it is ruled that applicants for liquor licenses should conduct an opinion poll to be carried out by a private market studies company within the environs (100 or 200 feet radius) on the attitude of residents. In Los Angeles, liquor licenses are sub-divided into 9 categories. The point raised by a Member just now about wanton and noodle shops and other respectable places not getting licenses will not occur because the types of licenses are restricted in accordance with individual circumstances. Also, reference can be made to improvements suggested by the Town Planning Board on the nuisance issue.
It is now very late, but I still want to reiterate one point. The motion moved by Mr. KAM Nai-wai and seconded by Mr. Ambrose CHEUNG Wing-sum is a good one. As Vice-Chairman of the Liquor Licensing Board, I can see room for improvement in our handling of liquor license applications. I have so spoken to solicit your support.
Mr. Wong Kwok-HING (in Cantonese):—I can see it is now 6.35 pm. I had intended not to speak, but having heard the speech of Mr. Stanley NG Wing-fai, I must respond. Or else, I would be considered to have given my silent agreement.
He cited a wrong example and called the discussion now in process equivalent to the first motion debate. That is violation of logic because provisional licenses for cinemas are to get around the grey area of unlicensed cinemas. That point is very clear. Mr. KAM's motion asks to restrict the number of and step up control of liquor licenses in residential areas. I think the motion is kind of loose and it lacks detailed consideration.
We do not support the motion not because it is one moved by the Democratic Party, but because the motion is unscientific, unsound and brings out many negative effects. I call on members of the public to note that even if the motion is carried, they should not think that licenses now held are gems. I feel we must pay attention to this message because the Urban Council will consider cases thoroughly. Members have voiced their opinions, I do not wish to repeat. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Page 93 of 654
Page 93 of 654
Page 93 of 654
Page 93 of 654
HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL
91
body. Let me cite a simple example. The Town Planning Board issued guidelines in the beginning of 1996 that establishments (massage parlours and bathrooms) causing great nuisance should not be opened in places without separate access or those of conflicting users like schools or churches. In the guidelines, there are discussions on whether to approve the opening of massage parlours and bathrooms. It is not to say that a free economy when set free will not cause nuisance to others.
I want to mention here that several Members went on a trip abroad and supplied a report. Although the suggestions connected with foreign countries have not been accepted by this Council, it has been revealed that there are clear license issuance guidelines for Vancouver, Los Angeles and others. In Vancouver, it is ruled that applicants for liquor licenses should conduct an opinion poll to be earned out by a private market studies company within the environs (100 or 200 feet radius) on the attitude of residents. In Los Angeles, liquor licenses are sub-divided into 9 categories. The point raised by a Member just now about wanton and noodle shops and other respectable places not getting licenses will not occur because the types of licenses are restricted in accordance with individual circumstances. Also, reference can be made to improvements suggested by the Town Planning Board on the nuisance issue.
It is now very late, but I still want to reiterate one point. The motion moved by Mr. KAM Nai-wai and seconded by Mr. Ambrose CHEUNG Wing-sum is a good one. As Vice-Chairman of the Liquor Licensing Board, I can see room for improvement in our handling of liquor license applications. I have so spoken to solicit your support.
Mr. Wong Kwok-HING (in Cantonese):—I can see it is now 6.35 pm. I had intended not to speak, but having heard the speech of Mr. Stanley NG Wing- fai, I must respond. Or else, I would be considered to have given my silent agreement.
He cited a wrong example and called the discussion now in process equivalent to the first motion debate. That is violation of logic because provisional licenses for cinemas are to get around the grey area of unlicensed cinemas. That point is very clear. Mr. KAM's motion asks to restrict the number of and step up control of liquor licenses in residential areas. I think the motion is kind of loose and it lacks detailed consideration.
We do not support the motion not because it is one moved by the Democratic Party, but because the motion is unscientific, unsound and brings out many negative effects. I call on members of the public to note that even if the motion is carried, they should not think that licenses now held are gems. I feel we must pay attention to this message because the Urban Council will consider cases thoroughly. Members have voiced their opinions, I do not wish to repeat. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Page 93 of
Page 93 of 654
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.