Page 593 of 606
576
PROVISIONAL URBAN COUNCIL
MUS S/C and even I myself think they are worth considering. I will refer his viewpoints to the MUS S/C for further consideration. As to whether his proposals can be implemented, neither I nor the Department can give a reply today.
On the second point—whether we can approach more than one sponsor, I think the matter should be followed up by the MUS S/C. When we approach the firms, we do look forward to their sponsorship. Whether they are eager to respond would depend on the circumstances of individual commercial firms. As to whether the Department has approached other firms for sponsorship, I will inform Mr. CHAN of the details through the Department after this meeting.
(2) MR. CHAN Choi-hi asked (in Cantonese):—‘As the hours for prohibiting the sale of liquor are not specified upon submission of liquor licence applications (except for bars in Staunton Street and its neighbouring areas on Hong Kong Island, since the Council decided on 27 February 1997 to stipulate, by means of a by-law, that local bars within these areas should cease selling liquor after 11:00 p.m. each day) whereas the hours for the sale of liquor basically coincide with the duty hours of respective liquor licensees, I would like to ask:
(i) Would the Council consider specifying the hours for the sale of liquor according to the situations of individual districts? If yes, what are the hours? Would the Council separately formulate a provision for the exemption and set up an appeal mechanism? If no, what are the reasons?
(ii) Sale of liquor ceases after 12:00 midnight in places around the world like London. Would the Council consider following the practice of these places? If yes, would there be a transition period for the trade to make adjustments? If no, what are the reasons?
(iii) Would the Council consult the Provisional District Boards (PDBs) on the new licensing requirements/procedures?’
Mr. Sam Stephen Wong Hon-Ching, CHAIRMAN OF THE LIQUOR LICENSING BOARD (LLB), replied (in Cantonese):—Mr. Chairman, Mr. Chan Choi-hi's question, which can be divided into 3 parts, concerns restriction on liquor selling hours and related matters.
On the first part of the question, it is the existing practice of the LLB, having regard to the individual circumstances of each application, to impose licensing conditions to mitigate possible nuisance to nearby residents, including restricting the liquor selling hours, whenever considered necessary, at liquor licensed premises. For example, in certain residential areas where there is a cluster of liquor selling premises, such as the case in and around Staunton Street, the LLB has imposed conditions requiring that no liquor be sold between 11:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m. The LLB considers the present control mechanism which allows the LLB to impose special conditions to deal with specific locations to be adequate and more flexible and reasonable than
Page 593 of 606
Page 593 of 606
Page 593 of 606
Page 593 of 606
Page 593 of 606
576
PROVISIONAL URBAN COUNCIL
MUS S/C and even I myself think they are worth considering. I will refer his viewpoints to the MUS S/C for further consideration. As to whether his proposals can be implemented, neither I nor the Department can give a reply today.
On the second point—whether we can approach more than one sponsor,
1 think the matter should be followed up by the MUS S/C. When we approach the firms, we do look forward to their sponsorship. Whether they are cager to respond would depend on the circumstances of individual commercial firms. As to whether the Department has approached other firms for sponsorship, I will inform Mr. CHAN of the details through the Department after this meeting.
(2) MR. CHAN Choi-hi asked (in Cantonese);—'As the hours for prohibiting the sale of liquor are not specified upon submission of liquor licence applications (except for bars in Staunton Street and its neighbouring areas on Hong Kong Island, since the Council decided on 27 February 1997 to stipulate, by means of a by-law, that local bars within these areas should cease selling liquor after 11:00 p.m. cach day) whereas the hours for the sale of liquor basically coincide with the duty hours of respective liquor licensees, I would like to ask:
(i) Would the Council consider specifying the hours for the sale of liquor according to the situations of individual districts? If yes, what are the hours? Would the Council separately formulate a provision for the exemption and set up an appeal mechanism? If no, what are the reasons? (ii) Sale of liquor ceases after 12:00 midnight in places around the world like London. Would the Council consider following the practice of these places? If yes, would there be a transition period for the trade to make adjustments? If no, what are the reasons?
(iii) Would the Council consult the Provisional District Boards (PDBs) on the
new licensing requirements/procedures?'
Mr. San Stephen Wong Hon-Ching, ChairmAN OF THE LIQuor Licensing Board (LLB), replied (in Cantonese):—Mr. Chairman, Mr. Chan Choi-hi's question, which can be divided into 3 parts, concerns restriction on liquor selling hours and related matters.
On the first part of the question, it is the existing practice of the LLB, having regard to the individual circumstances of each application. to impose licensing conditions to mitigate possible nuisance to nearby residents, including restricting the liquor selling hours, whenever considered necessary, at liquor licensed premises. For example, in certain residential areas where there is a cluster of liquor selling premises, such as the case in and around Staunton Street, the LLB has imposed conditions requiring that no liquor be sold between 11:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m. The LLB considers the present control mechanism which allows the LLB to impose special conditions to deal with specific locations to be adequate and more flexible and reasonable than
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.