Page 50 of 606
PROVISIONAL URBAN COUNCIL
earnestly hope that the Government will introduce a new type of fast testing method. In fact, a fast testing solution has already been developed in the USA. And some of the wholesalers in the trade have already adopted this fast testing method, whereby the result is known 30 to 45 minutes after a piece of fish meat is put into the testing solution. However, the Department of Health maintains that since the World Health Organization considers that this method is not 100% accurate, it cannot be adopted. As seen from the avian flu incident, neither the method used by the Government could tell with 100% accuracy whether there were any antibodies in the chickens, but the test would at least provide protection to the public. I hope that the Government will introduce this fast testing method to test the existence of ciguatoxin in big live fish when they are imported, so as to safeguard public health. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
MR. KAM NAI-WAI (in Cantonese): I wish to say something about the response of Mr. CHUNG Shu-kun and Mr. IP Kwok-chung to Mr. Li Wah-ming's statement about the content of the motion.
It has been the Democratic Party's principle to take note of the practice of other Members in past motion debates. We have never resorted to the practice of referring by means of a procedural motion a colleague's motion to the relevant select committee for discussion. I consider that in terms of the spirit and system of motion debate, if one considers that the wording of a certain motion to be unacceptable, one should propose amendments to it, as in today's case, in which Mr. Cheung Yu-yan moved an amendment to the motion because he considered that overseas visits should be frozen not just for one year but for three years. I don't know the principles of the Liberal Party, which might be more liberal. When someone moves a procedural motion to their amended motion, they consider that since it is only an amended motion, even if it was rejected, it wouldn't cause any problem. On the other hand, the Democratic Party's principle is that if any Member considers the wording of a motion to be dubious, he should propose amendments. For example, as Mr. IP Kwok-chung mentioned just now, if he doubted the idea of 'source registration for shellfish recommended in Mr. Li Wah-ming's motion moved at the March meeting, why didn't he propose any amendments then? If the idea had been struck out, the wording would have been in line with that of the motion moved by the DAB today.
Mr. Chung Shu-kun mentioned just now that the motion moved by Mr. WONG Kwok-hing today was targeted at deep-water coral-reef fish, a kind of high-risk seafood, and that since it was targeted at this only without covering any source registration system, the motion was all right. Why didn't members of the DAB propose such a simple amendment in March? The issue would have been solved with an amended motion, without having to resort to referral to the select committee for discussion.
I also hope that in replying, Mr. WONG Kwok-hing will clearly tell our colleagues in the DAB whether the 'high-risk seafood' in the motion of
Page 50 of 606
Page 51
Page 51 of 606
ge 50 of 606
u
Lage sʊ of 606
Page 50 of 606
72
PROVISIONAL URBAN COUNCIL
earnestly hope that the Government will introduce a new type of fast testing method. In fact, a fast testing solution has already been developed in the USA. And some of the wholesalers in the trade have already adopted this fast testing method, whereby the result is known 30 to 45 minutes after a piece of fish meat is put into the testing solution. However, the Department of Health maintains that since the World Health Organization considers that this method is not 100% accurate, it cannot be adopted. As seen from the avian flu incident, neither the method used by the Government could tell with 100% accuracy whether there were any antibodies in the chickens, but the test would at least provide protection to the public. I hope that the Government will introduce this fast testing method to test the existence of ciguatoxin in big live fish when they are imported, so as to safeguard public health. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
MR. KAM NAI-WAI (in Cantonese):-I wish to say something about the response of Mr. CHUNG Shu-kun and Mr. IP Kwok-chung to Mr. Li Wah- ming's statement about the content of the motion.
It has been the Democratic Party's principle to take note of the practice of other Members in past motion debates. We have never resorted to the practice of referring by means of a procedural motion a colleague's motion to the relevant select committee for discussion. I consider that in terms of the spirit and system of motion debate, if one considers that the wording of a certain motion to be unacceptable, one should propose amendments to it, as in today's case, in which Mr. Cheung Yu-yan moved an amendment to the motion because he considered that overseas visits should be frozen not just for one year but for three years. I don't know the principles of the Liberal Party, which might be more liberal. When someone moves a procedural motion to their amended motion, they consider that since it is only an amended motion, even if it was rejected, it wouldn't cause any problem. On the other hand, the Democratic Party's principle is that if any Member considers the wording of a motion to be dubious, he should propose amendments. For example, as Mr. IP Kwok-chung mentioned just now, if he doubted the idea of 'source registration for shellfish recommended in Mr. Li Wah-ming's motion moved at the March meeting, why didn't he propose any amendments then? If the idea had been struck out, the wording would have been in line with that of the motion moved by the DAB today.
Mr. Chung Shu-kun mentioned just now that the motion moved by Mr. WONG Kwok-hing today was targetted at deep-water coral-reef fish, a kind of high-risk seafood, and that since it was targetted at this only without covering any source registration system, the motion was all right. Why didn't members of the DAB propose such a simple amendment in March? The issue would have been solved with an amended motion, without having to resort to referral to the select committee for discussion.
I also hope that in replying, Mr. WoNG Kwok-hing will clearly tell our colleagues in the DAB whether the high-risk seafood' in the motion of
Rose 50 of 606
Page 50Page 51
Page 51 of 606
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.