PROVISIONAL URBAN COUNCIL
231
do businesses. Some even give computer peripheral (such as scammers) as gifts. In this respect, I have the following questions:
(a) If these companies ply at such public places and successfully do businesses and the payment is settled by credit cards without any cash transactions, are these activities tantamount to hawkers hawking on the street? Up to now, has the Department adopted any measures to regulate these activities?
(b) If these companies only register the consumers' information and collect fees only after the consumers have used their services, are these transactions tantamount to hawkers hawking on the street?
(c) Regarding the notice boards and wooden stands used by these companies for publicizing their businesses, are the Department's Hawker Control Teams empowered to take out prosecution and confiscation actions? If yes, what is the number of prosecution and confiscation actions taken in the past six months in this respect?
MR. IP Kwok-Chung, Chairman of the Markets AND STREET Traders SELECT COMMITTEE, replied (in Cantonese): This three-part question enquires about the legislative control over the promotional activities conducted by some telecommunications companies including those for provision of telephone, television and internet services at the entrances of MTR and shopping arcades.
The first part of the question enquires whether the activities are tantamount to hawkers hawking on the street if these companies ply at the entrances of MTR and shop arcades and successfully do businesses and the payment is settled by credit cards without any cash transactions. The answer is 'no'. According to legal advice, the activities in question do not amount to hawking because they do not fall within the ambit of the statutory definition for ‘hawker' in section 2(1) of the Public Health and Municipal Services Ordinance, Cap. 132. As regards whether the Department has adopted any measures to regulate these activities, the answer is also 'no', for the same reason that such activities fall outside the ambit of ‘hawking'. As a matter of fact, these activities may have constituted a 'touting' offence, against which action may be taken by the Police under section 6A of the Summary Offences Ordinance, Cap. 228. The Police may also consider prosecution under section 4A of the Summary Offences Ordinance where the activities constitute obstruction in a public place.
The second part of the question enquires whether the transactions are tantamount to hawkers hawking on the street if these companies only register the consumers' information and collect fees only after the consumers have used their services. For the same reason as stated above, these activities also do not amount to 'hawking' and therefore the answer to this part of the question is 'no',
Page 236 of 606
Page 236 of 606;
Page 236 of 606
PROVISIONAL URBAN COUNCIL
231
do businesses. Some even give computer peripheral (such as scammers) as gifts. In this respect, I have the following questions:
(a) If these companies ply at such public places and successfully do businesses and the payment is settled by credit cards without any cash transactions. are these activities tantamount to hawkers hawking on the street? Up to now, has the Department adopted any measures to regulate these activities?
(b) If these companies only register the consumers' information and collect fees only after the consumers have used their services, are these
transactions tantamount to hawkers hawking on the street?
(c) Regarding the notice boards and wooden stands used by these companies for publicizing their businesses, are the Department's Hawker Control Teams empowered to take out prosecution and confiscation actions? If yes, what is the number of prosecution and confiscation actions taken in the past six months in this respect?'
MR. IP Kwok-Chung, Chairman of the Markets AND STREET Traders SELECT COMMITTEE, replied (in Cantonese): This three-part question enquires about the legislative control over the promotional activities conducted by some telecommunications companies including those for provision of telephone, television and internet services at the entrances of MTR and shopping arcades.
The first part of the question enquires whether the activities are tantamount to hawkers hawking on the street if these companies ply at the entrances of MTR and shop arcades and successfully do businesses and the payment is settled by credit cards without any cash transactions. The answer is 'no'. According to legal advice, the activities in question do not amount to hawking because they do not fall within the ambit of the statutory definition for ‘hawker' in section 2(1) of the Public Health and Municipal Services Ordinance. Cap. 132. As regards whether the Department has adopted any measures to regulate these activities, the answer is also 'no', for the same reason that such activities fall outside the ambit of ‘hawking'. As a matter of fact, these activities may have constituted a 'touting' offence, against which action may be taken by the Police under section 6A of the Summary Offences Ordinance, Cap. 228. The Police may also consider prosecution under section 4A of the Summary Offences Ordinance where the activities constitute obstruction in a public place.
The second part of the questions enquires whether the transactions are tantamount 10 hawkers hawking on the street if these companies only register the consumers' information and collect fees only after the consumers have used their services. For the same reason as stated above, these activities also do not amount to 'hawking' and therefore the answer to this part of the question is 'no',
Page 236 of 606
Page 236 of 606;
Page 236 of 60
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.