Minutes of the 2Nd Meeting of the District Facilities Management Committee (2020-2021) of the Tuen Mun District Council

Minutes of the 2nd Meeting of the District Facilities Management Committee (2020-2021) of the Tuen Mun District Council

Date: 21 April 2020 (Tuesday) Time: 9:30 a.m. Venue: Tuen Mun District Council (TMDC) Conference Room

Present Time of Arrival Time of Departure Ms WONG Lai-sheung, Catherine (Chairman) TMDC Member 9:30 a.m. End of meeting Mr LAM Kin-cheung (Vice-chairman) TMDC Member 9:33 a.m. End of meeting Ms CHAN Shu-ying Josephine TMDC Chairman 9:39 a.m. End of meeting Mr WONG Tan-ching TMDC Vice-chairman 9:30 a.m. End of meeting Ms KONG Fung-yi TMDC Member 9:30 a.m. End of meeting Ms HO Hang-mui TMDC Member 9:30 a.m. End of meeting Mr LAM Chung-hoi TMDC Member 9:31 a.m. 10:49 a.m. Ms CHU Shun-nga Beatrice TMDC Member 9:30 a.m. End of meeting Mr YEUNG Chi-hang TMDC Member 9:30 a.m. End of meeting Mr YAN Siu-nam TMDC Member 9:31 a.m. End of meeting. Mr WONG Tak-yuen TMDC Member 9:42 a.m. End of meeting.. Mr LEE Ka-wai TMDC Member 9:46 a.m. End of meeting Mr HO Kwok-ho TMDC Member 9:30 a.m. End of meeting Mr LAM Ming-yan TMDC Member 9:41 a.m. End of meeting Mr CHOW Kai-lim TMDC Member 9:33 a.m. End of meeting Mr MA Kee TMDC Member 9:30 a.m. End of meeting Mr CHEUNG Ho-sum TMDC Member 9:30 a.m. End of meeting Mr CHEUNG Kam-hung Kenneth TMDC Member 9:30 a.m. End of meeting Mr LEUNG Ho-man TMDC Member 9:30 a.m. End of meeting Mr WONG Hung-ming TMDC Member 9:48 a.m. End of meeting Mr TSANG Chun-hing TMDC Member 9:30 a.m. End of meeting Mr TSANG Kam-wing TMDC Member 9:43 a.m. End of meeting Mr YAN Pui-lam TMDC Member 9:30 a.m. End of meeting Mr POON Chi-kin TMDC Member 9:30 a.m. End of meeting Mr LAI Chun-wing Alfred TMDC Member 9:30 a.m. End of meeting Mr LO Chun-yu TMDC Member 9:43 a.m. End of meeting Ms LAI Ka-man TMDC Member 9:31 a.m. End of meeting Mr FUNG Ying-chee, Derek (Secretary) Executive Officer (District Council)3, Tuen Mun District Office, Home Affairs Department Absent with Apologies Mr CHAN Yau-hoi, BBS, MH, JP TMDC Member

By Invitation Ms CHU Suet Wa, Ivy Town Planner/Tuen Mun 2, Planning Department Mr LEUNG Chun-yeung Police Community Relations Officer (Tuen Mun District), Hong Kong Police Force

In Attendance Ms FUNG Ngar-wai, Aubrey District Officer (Tuen Mun), Home Affairs Department Ms TSUI Man-yee, Joanna Assistant District Officer (Tuen Mun)1, Home Affairs Department Mr NG Chi-keung, Vincent Senior Liaison Officer (3), Tuen Mun District Office, Home Affairs Department Mr CHEUNG Chi-keung, Endy Senior Executive Officer (District Management), Tuen Mun District Office, Home Affairs Department Ms SIU Wai-mei, Minnie Liaison Officer i/c (District Facilities), Tuen Mun District Office, Home Affairs Department Mr LEE Kit-wai Senior Inspector of Works, Tuen Mun District Office, Home Affairs Department Mr LEE Wang-yui, Eddie Architect (Works)7, Works Section, Headquarters Division II, Home Affairs Department Ms LO Lai Fong, Jackie Chief Leisure Manager ( New Territories North), Leisure and Cultural Services Department Ms TAM Yin-ting, Pat District Leisure Manager (Tuen Mun), Leisure and Cultural Services Department Ms MAN Pui Shan, Erica Deputy District Leisure Manager (District Support) Tuen Mun, Leisure and Cultural Services Department Ms LAW Lai Chun, Gladys Senior Executive Officer (Planning)32, Leisure and Cultural Services Department Ms LAM Pui-yin, Gloria Senior Manager (New Territories West) Promotion, Leisure and Cultural Services Department Ms LAM Fong Senior Librarian (Tuen Mun), Leisure and Cultural Services Department Mr TAM Kwok-leung Administrative Assistant/ Lands (District Lands Office, Tuen Mun), Lands Department Ms Angela LEE Police Community Relations Officer (Tuen Mun District), Hong Kong Police Force

Action I. Opening Remarks The Chairman welcomed all to the 2nd meeting of the District Facilities Management Committee (“DFMC”). She also extended welcome to representatives of government departments in attendance at the meeting.

1. The Chairman said that to minimise the risk of community transmission of the virus, the Tuen Mun District Office (“TMDO”) would implement the following measures at the meetings of TMDC and its committees/working groups: Before entering the conference room, participants and media representatives must put on their own surgical masks, fill in health declaration forms and have their body temperature checked by the Secretariat staff. Those with body temperature higher than 37.6°C would be denied entry; no members of the public were allowed to observe the meeting except media representatives, whose personal particulars (e.g. name, respective media organisation and staff number) would be recorded properly so that health authorities could trace all media representatives admitted to the conference room when necessary; and tea service was suspended and participants could bring water and drinking utensils on their own. The TMDO also arranged for a cleaning team to conduct thorough cleaning and disinfection of the conference room after the meetings.

2. The Chairman reminded Members that any Member who was aware of a personal interest in a discussion item should declare the interest before the discussion. She would, in accordance with Order 38(12) of the Tuen Mun District Council Standing Orders, decide whether the Member who had declared the interest might speak or vote on the matter, might remain in the meeting as an observer, or should withdraw from the meeting. All cases of declaration of interests would be recorded in the minutes of the meeting.

II. Absence from Meeting 3. The Secretariat had received no applications by Members for leave of absence.

III. Confirmation of Minutes of Last Meeting 4. The minutes of the 1st meeting and the 1st special meeting held on 25 February and 9 March respectively were confirmed. The Chairman asked the Secretariat to send the minutes to Members for perusal as soon as possible in future.

- 3 - Action IV. Matters Arising (A) Request Planning Department to Report Immediately on Detailed Planning Arrangements for Community Facilities Currently Lacking in Tuen Mun (DFMC Paper No. 9/2020) 5. The Chairman welcomed Miss Ivy CHU, Town Planner/Tuen Mun 2 of the Planning Department (“PlanD”) to the meeting.

6. The Chairman continued to say that the PlanD representative had said at the 1st special meeting of the DFMC on 25 February that the PlanD had earmarked two locations for the development of sports centres and there was a shortfall of an earmarked location for the construction of a clinic in the Tuen Mun District.

7. The first proposer of the paper said that there was a shortfall of three sports centres in the district for the population size of 620,000 in the Tuen Mun District according to the Hong Kong Planning Standards and Guidelines. Currently, there were two sites earmarked for the construction of two sports centres but there was no siting for the third sports centre. She had repeatedly suggested the construction (of the sports centre) in the Tuen Mun East on different occasions. She said that the government department did not provide sufficient explanations and suggested setting a deadline to avoid a delay on the construction of the sports centre.

8. A Member said that the PlanD did not provide further information so an impromptu motion was moved to request the PlanD and other departments concerned to commence the works as soon as possible.

9. A Member said there were a shortage of various facilities in the Tuen Mun District indeed. She said that the government department representative had the responsibility to explain why there was no response. Moreover, the TMDC relayed to the government about the problems in the district on behalf of residents. The PlanD representative should respond to Members’ enquiries positively. She also expected that the District Officer (Tuen Mun) (“DO (TM)”) could contact the government departments for improvement of the community in Tuen Mun.

10. The Chairman said that the current-term of Tuen Mun District Council (“TMDC”) was different from the TMDC of the previous term. Government departments should not continue the same old routine.

11. Miss Ivy CHU of the PlanD said that the PlanD would explore with the LCSD for the earmarking of a suitable site for the construction of the sports centre according to the

- 4 - Action population growth and distribution in the Tuen Mun District.

12. The Chairman said that the information that the PlanD provided was insufficient and she hoped that the department would provide the document and information concerned when discussing this agenda item next time. She also hoped that the department would conduct a study on the construction of the sports centre in the Tuen Mun East.

13. Miss Ivy CHU of the PlanD said that she would study Members’ suggestion and provide supplementary information after the meeting.

14. The first proposer of the paper was disappointed at the response from the PlanD, saying that the department kept delaying the implementation of the community facilities lacking in the Tuen Mun District and did not submit a specific action plan to the DFMC. Besides, she said that the DO (TM) had the responsibility to ensure co-operations from departments in solving the problems in the Tuen Mun District promptly. As the PlanD did not provide specific response, she hoped that the DO (TM) would explain whether there was any plan to ensure co-operations and discussions between departments and provide community facilities to the Tuen Mun residents as soon as possible.

15. The DO (TM) said that works of the recreational and leisure facilities mentioned in the five-year action plan of the Policy Address 2017 had commenced gradually, e.g. the sports ground in Area 16, etc. She noted the views of Members and the PlanD on the construction of a sports ground in the Tuen Mun East. The TMDC could lead with the department concerned after the meeting to have an in-depth study. The TMDO of the previous term formed a working group on the planning of the Tuen Mun town centre. She suggested that the TMDC should study the formation of a working group or follow up proactively at the DFMC in the future.

16. A Member said that the response from the PlanD was not satisfactory and he enquired when the PlanD and the Leisure and Cultural Services Department (“LCSD”) had convened a meeting to follow up on the planning issues since the commencement of the current-term TMDC. He agreed that the PlanD should provide more details.

17. The first proposer of the paper said that the response of the DO (TM) was vague and she opined that she had the responsibility to contact the representatives of various departments to follow up. She suggested that the Chairman should continue to discuss this agenda item at the next meeting and she expected that the DO (TM) would report on the progress of follow-up action at the next meeting.

- 5 - Action 18. Miss Ivy CHU of the PlanD said that the PlanD and the LCSD would study this agenda item actively and provide supplementary information after the meeting.

19. The Chairman requested the PlanD to follow up with the department concerned and report at the next meeting of the DFMC.

20. A Member requested the departments concerned to follow up immediately after the meeting and report to Members when the Tuen Mun East Sports Centre could be completed.

21. The Chairman announced that discussion about this agenda item would continue at the next meeting.

22. The Chairman received an impromptu motion on this agenda item from Members as follows:

Current Situation According to the latest estimate by the PlanD, the planned population in the vicinity of the Hanford Garden to the Tai Lam Chung (including the So Kwun Wat area) was about 70,000, an increase of about 53% than the 45,500 people currently. However, there were insufficient and severe shortage of community facilities in the Tuen Mun East such as public clinics which were needed by the residents. Basically, there was zero supply in the whole Tuen Mun East. If residents needed to use community facilities, they needed to take means of transport to the area of the Tuen Mun town centre, thus increasing the loading of transport and the usage of the facilities in other areas.

Motion 1. According to the Hong Kong Planning Standards and Guidelines, the government authorities should plan and implement the provision of community facilities correspondingly according to the proportion of population including clinics, community complex buildings, carparks, open spaces and pet gardens, etc. having regard to the population growth in the Tuen Mun East to satisfy the needs of the residents. 2. The government department was urged to provide explanations on the short, medium to long term development plan of the several idle government land in the Tuen Mun East. The authorities concerned of the government should also plan to develop the sites concerned immediately for the “Government, Institution and Community” (“GIC”) purposes without delay any more.

- 6 - Action 3. With the “GIC” site lacking in the vicinity of the So Kwun Wat Road, we urge the government department to plan the “GIC” site at the end of the So Kwun Wat Road for the provision of the Tuen Mun East Regional Public Clinic. carpark and community centre to meet the needs of the community in the So Kwun Wat area. Moved by: Mr MA Kee Seconded by: Mr YEUNG Chi-hang Mr HO Kwok-ho Ms Beatrice CHU

23. The mover wanted to set out Members’ requests in the motion and requested the departments concerned to follow up. He continued to say that there were not only a shortfall of sports facilities and clinics, but community complex buildings and carparks were also lacking in the Tuen Mun East. The above problems had been included in the motion and he took this opportunity to urge the departments concerned to provide planning and construction of the above facilities.

24. The DFMC held a vote on the impromptu motion with 26 in favour, 0 against and 0 PlanD abstention. The Chairman announced that the motion was passed and asked the department concerned to implement the requests in the motion.

Voting in favour: Ms Catherine WONG, Mr LAM Kin-cheung, Ms Josephine CHAN, Mr WONG Tan-ching, Ms KONG Fung-yi, Ms HO Hang-mui, Ms Beatrice CHU, Mr YEUNG Chi-hang, Mr YAN Siu-nam, Mr WONG Tak-yuen, Mr LEE Ka-wai, Mr HO Kwok-ho, Mr LAM Ming-yan, Mr CHOW Kai-lim, Mr MA Kee, Mr CHEUNG Ho-sum, Mr Kenneth CHEUNG, Mr LEUNG Ho-man, Mr WONG Hung-ming, Mr TSANG Chun-hing, Mr TSANG Kam-wing, Mr YAN Pui-lam, Mr POON Chi-kin, Mr Alfred LAI, Mr LO Chun-yu and Ms LAI Ka-man

(B) Follow Up on Works Concerning Sports Ground in Area 16 and Tuen Mun South Extension (DFMC Paper No. 10/2020) 25. The Chairman said the DFMC had decided at its first meeting held on 25 February that it would only discuss the part of the paper about the sports ground in Area 16. The part on the works of the Tuen Mun South Extension would be followed up by the Traffic and Transport Committee (“TTC”). At the above meeting, the LCSD representative said the TD hoped that there would be provision of a public carpark at the sports ground in Area 16 for 400 to 500 cars so the project definition statement and other documents needed revisions owing to the changes in the works. The LCSD would consult the DFMC again

- 7 - Action when there were preliminary design and other progress.

26. Ms Gladys LAW of the LCSD said that the sports ground in Area 16 was capital public works. Implementation of public works by government departments needed to follow the established procedures which were summarised as follows: (i) The LCSD planned the proposed facilities of the project according to factors such as the demands for recreational and sports facilities in the district, restrictions on the works sites and the suggestions in the Hong Kong Planning Standards and Guidelines and then consulted the TMDC. After obtaining support from the TMDC and confirming the project areas, the LCSD would prepare a project definition statement and apply to the policy bureau concerned for approval. The project definition statement would set out details of the proposed project and a summary of demands for facilities. Upon approval of the project definition statement, the policy bureau would entrust the ArchSD for conducting a technical feasibility study to confirm that the works were feasible technically. At that time, the ArchSD would consult the departments concerned such as the EPD, the TD and the TMDLO;

(ii) If the project was feasible technically, the ArchSD would commission a consultant to conduct a conceptual design and the LCSD would consult the DFMC on the conceptual design of the project with the ArchSD. Then, the ArchSD and the consultant would refer to Members’ views for conducting an in-depth design of the projects. Subsequently, the department would provide the project estimate and apply for funding according to the established procedures of the public works project. As there were a lot of capital works projects and the government resources were limited, it would take certain time for the approval of the project. Before the public works project was granted funding, it needed to be submitted to the Panel on Home Affairs, the Public Works Subcommittee and the Finance Committee of the Legislative Council for approvals. After the funding was granted, the ArchSD would invite tenders for the implementation of the project. Therefore, implementation of public works would take years unlike the District Minor Works (“DMW”); and

(iii) On the district level, the TMDC was an effective platform of consultation and district councillors were representatives of residents’ opinions. Therefore, the LCSD would report on the progress of the works in the district to the TMDC in due course so that members of the public and the stakeholders would have a better understanding of the works, and the LCSD could relay the views on the works through different channels including district councillors. In this regard,

- 8 - Action the LCSD would consult the TMDC or Members concerned in due course in different stages during the implementation of the project. The LCSD would consult the TMDC on the proposed facilities and the preliminary design of the proposed project during the implementation of the project. After obtaining the funding from the Finance Committee of the Legislative Council and commencing the projects, the LCSD would report to the TMDC on the works progress in due course.

27. Ms Gladys LAW of the LCSD continued to say that there were a shortage of parking facilities in the area so the TMDC of the previous term supported the TD’s proposal for the provision of 400 to 500 parking spaces in the project of the sports ground and open space in Area 16 according to the principle of Single Site, Multiple Uses. Besides, the proposed sports ground would meet the venue standards of the International Amateur Athletic Federations on the application for organising major international athletic event. The 11-a-side soccer pitch inside the running tracks could be used flexibly and the ancillary facilities needed to satisfy the requirements of the Asian Football Confederation for organising the events of the Asian Football Confederation Champion League and the Asian Football Confederation. Therefore, the LCSD would discuss with the TD and the ArchSD and needed to consult the organisations concerned such as the Hong Kong Amateur Athletic Association.

28. Ms Gladys LAW of the LCSD continued to say that the LCSD would consult Members after the conceptual design of the works was launched. She understood Members’ concern about the project and would consult the TMDC on the project as soon as possible.

29. The proposer of the paper said that other parts were discussed in 2017 except for the proposal for the provision of carpark in 2019. In this connection, he enquired about the works progress during the period from 2017 to 2019 and queried whether it would take so many years for the drafting of the project definition statement.

30. A Member said that the works progress was too slow and opined that the LCSD only needed to deal with the carpark. She continued to say that the works progress at the current stage had nothing to do with the amount of expenditure but the changes in the works. There were carparks in the many venues of the LCSD so it was difficult to understand why it would take so much time to revise the project definition statement. She hoped that the LCSD would provide the completion time of the project definition statement.

- 9 - Action 31. A Member said rumours had it that the area of the Tuen Mun Swimming Pool would be used for the construction of the station of the Tuen Mun South Extension. In this regard, he suggested the provision of a station at the area of the sports ground in Area 16 instead of the Tuen Mun Swimming Pool. He said that the sports ground in Area 16 was still at the preliminary design stage so the land should be properly used for the provision of station according to the principle of Single Site, Multiple Uses.

32. The Chairman enquired the LCSD representative why the expenditure for the sports ground in Area 16 amounted to “billions of dollars” when the expenditure for the Tseung Kwan O Sports Ground was $350 million. She continued to say that the LCSD had had the preliminary design of the sports ground so there should not be any further delays owing to the provision of the carpark. It had been ten years since the LCSD proposed the project and there had been changes in the social environment. The development of the Tuen Mun South Extension and other works might affect the works progress of the sports ground in Area 16 so the sports ground should be constructed as soon as possible. Moreover, she enquired the LCSD representative whether the works progress could be submitted at the next meeting.

33. Ms Gladys LAW of the LCSD said the LCSD hoped that the sports ground would meet the requirements of the International Association of Athletes Federation for organising major events and the 11-a-side soccer pitch in the sports ground would satisfy the requirements of the Asian Football Confederation for organising major events if needed. Therefore, the LCSD needed to examine the summary of the design requirements and the project definition statement. Besides, the carpark that the TD proposed at the sports ground in Area 16 was a large carpark and the underground of some facilities in the sports ground such as the running tracks and javelin areas were not suitable for the provision of the carpark. Therefore, the department concerned needed to consider the design of the carpark thoroughly. She continued to say that the LCSD had targeted the completion of the draft project definition statement within this year and she expected that it would be approved by the policy bureau this year so that the ArchSD could be entrusted to commence the technical feasibility study. On the worries that the works would be affected by the Tuen Mun South Extension, she said that the proposed facilities of the project would not be affected by the Tuen Mun South Extension according to the information of the department concerned. The department would continue to have co-ordinations and mutual co-operations on the project concerned with the policy bureau and the department concerned.

34. A Member expected that the LCSD would provide the schedule for the completion of the works so that Members could know and follow up. She did not want that the sports

- 10 - Action ground in Area 16 would take over ten years of time from the discussion to the completion of the building like the Siu Lun Complex Building.

35. A Member said that most of the 11-a-side soccer pitches in Hong Kong met the requirements of the Asian Football Confederation for organising major events and only such ancillary facilities as lighting, communications equipment and complementary transport measures were lacking. It had satisfied the standard when the design of the soccer pitch was discussed in 2017 so there should be no delay in the construction of the sports ground by reason of meeting the requirements of the Asian Football Confederation. He continued to say that the provision of the carpark was proposed in 2019 and the progress had not been satisfactory so far as it was still at the stage of drafting the project definition statement. He hoped that the LCSD would explain in detail at the next meeting.

36. Ms Gladys LAW of the LCSD said that the LCSD’s target was to complete the project definition statement within this year and then it would apply to the policy bureau for approval. She hoped that the ArchSD would be entrusted to conduct technical feasibility study within this year. As the project definition statement was an internal document, the LCSD would not consult Members at this stage but the department could report to Members so that Members could know the progress. There was a funding of $2 billion allocated to the LCSD under the Policy Address 2017 for the redevelopment or provision of facilities and the sports ground in Area 16 was on the list of the above funding so it was estimated that funding would be granted more quickly.

37. The Chairman requested the LCSD to consider Members’ views and the LCSD LCSD would be asked to report on the latest development when discussion of this agenda item would continue at the next meeting.

(C) Request for Expeditious Construction of Community Hall and Sports Centre in Area 54, Tuen Mun (DFMC Paper No. 12/2020) 38. The Chairman said the LCSD representative had said at the first meeting of the DFMC on 25 February that the LCSD had commenced the advance preparation work and studied the provision of library and public carpark. Besides, there were two big trees in the works site selected so the LCSD needed to consult the department concerned. The LCSD would submit a paper to the DFMC on the facilities of the project to consult Members.

39. Ms Gladys LAW of the LCSD said that there were two big trees in the works site.

- 11 - Action After consulting the Trees Section, the department opined that these two trees needed to be kept. As the big trees were situated in the middle of the works site and became a constraint in the design of this facility, the LCSD would discuss the design of the sports ground with the ArchSD. She said that this project was in the stage of planning facilities and the department concerned was being consulted whether the provision of children play room, fitness room, community hall, public carpark and small library in the sports ground would comply with the plot ratio.

40. The first proposer of the paper did not expect that the captioned project would be completed in a short period of time. However, she felt upset as this project had not been included in the five-year plan so she said that the TMDC should continue to monitor the works progress . She suggested that the LCSD should provide the works schedule and the expected date of completion. Moreover, the LCSD should construct the complex building within five years and provide community facilities to the residents in the area in light of the gradual population growth in Area 54, Tuen Mun.

41. Ms Gladys LAW of the LCSD said that the five-year plan in the Policy Address 2017 had been worked out by the policy bureau after reviewing the need for the provision of new or redevelopment of recreational and sports facilities throughout Hong Kong. She emphasised that the LCSD would try to implement the works even if the project had not been included in the five-year plan. The department was consulting the policy bureau and the departments concerned at this stage and the target was to submit the proposed facilities of the works to the TMDC and consult Members within this year.

42. The Chairman enquired the LCSD whether the information concerned could be submitted for discussion at the next meeting.

43. Ms Gladys LAW of the LCSD said that the LCSD was consulting the departments concerned whether the facilities in the building could comply with the plot ratio. If there were no comments from the departments, the LCSD would submit a paper to the TMDC as soon as possible. Somehow, there would be further arrangements if the departments opined that there could be more facilities accommodated in the building. She emphasised that the LCSD’s target was to consult the TMDC within this year and it would submit a paper to the TMDC as soon as possible.

44. The Chairman announced that discussion about this agenda item would continue at LCSD the next meeting and the LCSD was requested to continue to follow up on this project.

(D) Barrier-Free Facilities in Hing Tsak

- 12 - Action (DFMC Paper No. 26/2020) 45. The Chairman said that the DFMC had resolved at its first special meeting on 9 March that the DFMC would request the HyD and the TD to send representatives to attend the meeting to explore the feasibility of the works before deciding whether to put the works on the waiting list of the DMW. However, the HyD and the TD did not send officers to attend the meeting and the Secretariat had distributed the written response from the TD before the meeting for Members’ perusal.

46. The first proposer of the paper was worried that the rain shelter mentioned in the written response from the TD was not the shelter that he had wanted to construct. It was hoped that the TMDO would submit a paper to the TMDC for consultation after the design was available to ensure that it would meet the needs of the residents.

47. The Chairman requested the TMDO to explain the plan for the construction of a rain shelter in the written response from the TD.

48. Mr LEE Kit-wai of the TMDO said that the project for the provision of a rain shelter mentioned in the written response from the TD had meant this discussion item of the DFMC. If the DFMC agreed to put this project on the waiting list of the DMW, the TMDO would follow up in due course.

49. The Chairman clarified that what the proposer of the paper proposed for construction was a covered walkway and she suggested that the TMDO and the proposer of the paper would pay a site visit to have a better understanding of the works proposal.

50. Mr LEE Kit-wai of the TMDO said that if the DFMC put the works proposal on the waiting list of the DMW, the TMDO would contact the proposer of the paper in due course to have a better understanding of the actual works proposal.

51. There being no objections from Members, the Chairman announced that the works proposal would be put on the waiting list of DMW. She asked the Secretariat to follow TMDO, up in due course and requested the TMDO to contact the proposer of the paper to have a Secretariat better understanding of the works proposal.

(E) Provision of Rain Shelter at Ho Wong Street (DFMC Paper No. 28/2020) 52. The Chairman said that the DFMC had resolved at its first special meeting on 9 March that the DFMC would request the HyD and the TD to send representatives to attend the meeting and conducted a site inspection of the proposed works site to explore the

- 13 - Action feasibility of the project before deciding whether to put the works on the waiting list of the DMW. It was scheduled to conduct the site inspection on 3 April but it was postponed owing to the epidemic. Somehow, the HyD and the TD did not send officers to attend the meeting and the Secretariat had distributed the written response from the TD before the meeting for Members’ perusal.

53. The first proposer of the paper said that the proposed rain shelter would not be used by residents for waiting only. As the proposed location was the residents’ main access and there was rain shelter lacking nearby, residents could use the captioned rain shelter when it was raining. He felt regret for the cancellation of the site inspection and he hoped that Members could endorse to put the works proposal on the waiting list of the DMW before communicating with the TD and the HyD later.

54. The Chairman suggested that Members should also pay attention to the works proposal for the DMW that the first proposer of the paper had submitted earlier.

55. A Member enquired why the rain shelter mentioned in the proposal was removed so the Member needed to submit a paper to suggest the construction of a rain shelter. She said that the situation was peculiar and hoped that the TMDO could explain to prevent the recurrence of the same problem in the future.

56. The first proposer of the paper said that the rain shelter had nothing to do with the TMDO and it was demolished by the district people. He submitted a paper on this as the people in the area wanted the re-provision of the rain shelter. He said that there was a media report that the district councillor of the constituency concerned of the previous term built the rain shelter out of his/her own pocket many years ago. However, the residents made complaints in late 2019 so the government requested demolition. After the rain shelter was demolished eventually in December last year, it the residents felt that it was inconvenient.

57. The Chairman said that a minibus company wanted to build the rain shelter so the then district councillor built a rain shelter at the planter and she said that the rain shelter had nothing to do with the TMDO. She suggested that Members should enquire her about the details of the matter after the meeting.

58. A Member opined that explanations on the matter should be made at the TMDC for the public to know. She enquired which department requested demolition of the rain shelter. She said that there might be a problem for the demolition of the rain shelter if it was a donation.

- 14 - Action

59. The Chairman said that the rain shelter was built at the private planter by the minibus company which operated the route between the Greenland Garden and the town centre. Somehow, the rain shelter was demolished after members of the public complained that it was an illegal structure.

60. A Member enquired whether the rain shelter proposed currently would also be an illegal structure if that rain shelter was an illegal structure.

61. The Chairman said that the rain shelter that had been demolished was built on the planter of a private housing estate. The rain shelter proposed currently would be built at a suitable location so they were different.

62. A Member said that the rain shelter demolished was built at the planter of a private housing estate but the shelter had extended to the pavement and became an illegal structure. It was wrong for the government to have allowed the existence of this illegal structure for many years. As this works proposal could provide the construction of a rain shelter properly, she supported to endorse the paper.

63. A Member said there was a report that the district councillor of the constituency concerned of the previous term built the rain shelter out of his/her own pocket. However, the BD and the TMDLO received complaints after the election of the district council saying that the rain shelter was an illegal structure. Therefore, the district councillor of the previous term demolished it. He said that this illegal structure had existed for many years but it could benefit the residents indeed. In this regard, he proposed that the rain shelter should be built in a proper way to help the residents.

64. There being no objections from Members, the Chairman announced that the works Secretariat proposal concerned would be put on the waiting list of DMW. She asked the Secretariat to follow up in due course.

V. Discussion Items (A) Urgent and Minor Improvement Works for Recreation and Leisure Grounds Managed by the LCSD (DFMC Paper No. 35/2020) 65. Ms Pat TAM of the LCSD said that this was a regular application for funding. There might be unexpected situations in the daily operations of recreational and sports facilities, which required funding provision for carrying out urgent and minor improvement works. In order to provide flexible arrangements and avoid waiting for the dates of

- 15 - Action meeting and multiple applications for minor funding, the LCSD intended to apply to Members for the funding concerned so that there could be flexible use of the funding in future according to actual needs for the urgent and minor improvement works in the coming year.

66. A Member enquired whether there was any source of funding for this works apart from the funding from the TMDC, e.g. internal funding from the department.

67. A Member said that this works involved greater amount of funding and enquired whether the LCSD would use the funding freely without applying and reporting to the DFMC if this project was approved.

68. A Member enquired whether the LCSD could provide the breakdown of the expenditure concerned of this works for the previous year for Members’ reference.

69. A Member said that she had requested the LCSD in the previous year to provide the breakdown of the expenditure for the past years but the department did not follow. She said that the arrangement was not satisfactory.

70. A Member suggested that discussion of this works should continue at the next meeting and requested the LCSD to provide the breakdown of the expenditure in the past for Members’ reference.

71. Ms Pat TAM of the LCSD added that the funding used according to the actual need for the past year was $844,326 in total and the remaining funding had been returned to the TMDC. The department would submit the list of works completed at the next meeting of the DFMC for Members’ reference.

72. A Member said that the LCSD representative did not response why the funding from the TMDC was needed for urgent maintenance and repairs.

73. Ms Pat TAM of the LCSD said that departmental funding would be mainly used for the general operating expenditure of recreational and sports facilities. Since the functions of the TMDC were enhanced in 2007, the TMDC had commenced to participate in the management of the district recreational and sports facilities and services of the LCSD. The TMDC would also receive funding to carry out district minor improvement works through the DMW programme covering the district facilities that the TMDC participated in the management. Since then, the LCSD had applied to the TMDC for funding on the improvement works every year.

- 16 - Action

74. A Member said that the LCSD had not provided the breakdown of the expenditure so it was not appropriate to approve the funding at this stage and suggested that discussion should continue at the next meeting.

75. The Chairman announced that discussion of this agenda item would continue at the next meeting and the LCSD was requested to provide the breakdown of the expenditure for reference so that Members could monitor whether the funding had been used properly.

(B) Improvement Works to the Spectator Stand of Yau Oi Sports Centre Main Arena (DFMC Paper No. 36/2020) 76. Ms Pat TAM of the LCSD said that the manual retractable spectator stand had been used for over 20 years and many component parts were worn out and aging. The department applied to the DFMC hereby for a funding of $555,000 to upgrade the six manual retractable spectator stands to electrical retractable spectator stands so that major activities could be organised for a large number of spectators or participants.

77. The Chairman enquired whether the funding application for $555,000 was a rough estimate or obtained from the experience of other works cost.

78. Ms Pat TAM of the LCSD said that the preliminary construction cost of the works was obtained by taking reference to the construction cost of the similar works of other sports grounds.

79. A Member said that there was no progress report on the DMW programme at this meeting and Members could not know the expenditure of the projects or the total expenditure for the previous financial year.

80. The Secretary said that the list of works was a report of the Working Group on Facilities and Works. As the meeting of the working group scheduled to be held at the beginning of April was cancelled owing to the epidemic, there was no report concerned at this meeting of DFMC.

81. A Member said that there was a financial and progress report of the DMW at the meeting of the DFMC in February when the Working Group on Facilities and Works had

- 17 - Action not been formed. She hoped that there could be an annual financial report of the DMW programme for Members’ reference apart from works report.

82. A Member said the list of works of the Working Group on Facilities and Works were drafted by the TMDO, which would then be submitted to the DFMC after scrutiny by the working group. The projects would not cease because the meeting was postponed and the list of works might not be necessarily given to the working group. It could be submitted to the DFMC directly.

83. A Member said that the DFMC had not known the total amount of funding for the DMW programme for this year and enquired the TMDO whether the amount could be provided.

84. Ms Joanna TSUI, ADO (TM)1 said that the DFMC was allocated funding of 20,447,000 for the DMW for this financial year for the improvement of district facilities, living environments and hygiene conditions in the Tuen Mun District. As in the past, the TMDO would submit the annual financial report on the projects to the Working Group on Facilities and Works describing the amount of expenditure for the past year and the information such as the project consultant fees. She suggested that the convenor of the working group should discuss the date of meeting with the Secretariat so that the TMDO could provide information.

85. There being no objections from Members, the Chairman announced that this project of $555,000 was endorsed. She further pointed out that even if the WGFW was not convened, the list of work reports could still be submitted to the DFMC directly. Besides, she requested the convenors of the three working groups of the DFMC to discuss the dates of meetings with the Secretariat as soon as possible.

(C) Improvement Works to Fitness Facilities of Wu Shan Tennis Court (DFMC Paper No. 37/2020) 86. Ms Pat TAM of the LCSD elaborated on the content of the paper. She said that the parks in the vicinity of the Yuet Wu had passive features mainly so some residents hoped that there would be some elderly fitness facilities. After site visits, the department proposed the provision of elderly fitness facilities at the rest garden in the Wu Shan Tennis Court. There were three sets of fitness facilities at the rest garden currently . One set of the “Sit-up” facilities had been in use since 2005 and they were aging with fewer users. Therefore, the LCSD proposed to use the more popular elderly fitness facilities to replace this set of facilities. The construction cost for this project was $130,000. She hoped that Members would show support.

- 18 - Action

87. A Member agreed with the content of the paper and said that the population at the Tuen Mun Pier area was aging seriously and the demands for elderly fitness facilities were increasing. Apart from replacing the old facilities with new ones, he suggested that the LCSD should increase the provision of facilities in the area. He also said that demolition of the “Sit-up” facilities would reduce other residents’ choices. He also said that many elderly fitness facilities were not so durable in the past. In this regard, he enquired whether this works would be carried out by the ArchSD or contractors. If it would be carried out by the contractors, whether the works would have period of warranty.

88. A Member agreed with the works in principle but said that there was no information showing the needs for the facilities concerned in the area. He said that there were similar facilities in the area and he wanted to get more information. For example, how many residents wanted the provision of the facilities concerned. On the other hand, he suggested that the LCSD should introduce more varieties of fitness facilities and provide more open space at the Wu Shan Garden for the elderly to do morning exercise. He had paid a site visit to the scene and written a letter to the LCSD suggesting that the LCSD should consider to open some areas of the Wu Shan Cycle Park for the residents to do morning exercise.

89. A Member enquired the LCSD about the meaning of a set of fitness facilities and queried whether a set of facilities would worth spending $130,000 and benefit 300,000 people. He had no objections to the construction of any fitness facilities but he opined that the facilities that the LCSD proposed was not cost-effective. He also said the paper showed that the design of the Tai Chi Wheels was not satisfactory and the elderly needed to squat halfway to use the facilities safely. He reiterated his support on the provision of fitness facilities for people of different ages but the LCSD should plan properly to avoid a waste of public money.

90. A Member said that he was the district councillor of the constituency concerned and thanked the LCSD for inviting him to pay a site visit to the scene together. Although he did not agree to replace the old facilities with new ones. However, there were no elderly fitness facilities in the three parks in the area and there was no way for the provision of new facilities so he could not but agree with the proposal. He hoped that the LCSD would continue to look for ways for the provision of new facilities.

91. Ms Pat TAM of the LCSD said that the expected number of 300,000 people benefited in the works proposal was calculated according to the population in the area and did not mean the number of users. She agreed that provision of new fitness facilities was

- 19 - Action more satisfactory than “One for one”. Somehow, as there was not sufficient space in the parks in local area for the provision of elderly fitness facilities and the “Sit-up” facilities were rather worn out, and considering that members of the public could still do sit-up at home, the LCSD recommended to replace those facilities with elderly fitness facilities to take care of the needs for fitness facilities of people at different ages. Besides, the department had studied the feasibility of the provision of fitness facilities in its parks. In the future, there would be provision of fitness facilities in the Butterfly Park to take care of the needs of people at different ages.

92. A Member enquired the LCSD whether residents had been consulted on the replacement of the fitness facilities and enquired the department whether there were any regular arrangements for consulting the residents on fitness facilities.

93. A Member enquired the LCSD how to arrive at the conclusion that the usage of the “Sit-up” facilities was low. He enquired the department whether the same method was used to calculate the usage of other facilities as he was worried that the construction of new facilities would have the problem of low usage. Moreover, he wrote a letter to the LCSD in May last year and hoped that the department would consider the provision of fitness facilities in the Tuen Mun Waterfront Promenade. 94. A Member welcomed the LCSD for the provision of elderly fitness facilities but opined that the practice of “One for one” was not satisfactory. He said that the LCSD provided many fitness facilities for the elderly at different locations but there were more facilities for other users in this area only. In this regard, he suggested the provision of elderly fitness facilities at the corner of the Wu Hong Street and the Wu King Road Garden. Besides, some residents said that the rest garden in the Wu Shan Tennis Court was rather remote. He opined that this factor would give rise to the low usage of the fitness facilities at that location and he queried whether it was suitable for the provision of fitness facilities at that location. Besides, he said that many elderly had reflected that they would suffer from the heat of the sun when using the fitness facilities outdoors so he suggested the provision of a shelter at the location.

95. A Member said that there were limitations of the Tai Chi Wheels proposed by the LCSD. For example, the whole wheel turning process could not be completed because of the problem of users’ height. He opined that the rope-handle facilities for the elderly was commendable as users of different heights could still use them. He suggested that the LCSD should consult the residents for a decision. Moreover, he suggested that the LCSD should refer to the practices of the parks in other areas, e.g. provision of pebble walking trails before the benches so that the elderly could have their feet massaged while sitting.

- 20 - Action 96. A Member hoped that the LCSD would respond whether the facilities would be built by the ArchSD or the contractors. He said that the facilities at the pier were popular at the beginning but they could not be used when they were damaged after several months. He was worried that the new facilities were not durable. In this connection, he enquired about the arrangements on maintenance and enquired the LCSD whether it had decided to provide Tai Chi Wheels instead of other equipment.

97. Ms Pat TAM of the LCSD responded that this works would go through tendering process through the Technical Section of the department to commission an outsourced contractor for the installation and provision of maintenance and warranty services for 1 year. If the facilities had any damage after the warranty period, the Technical Section of the LCSD would arrange for the contractor to carry out repairs. As stated in the paper, the LCSD proposed the provision of Pull-down Machines. If this works proposal was endorsed by the DFMC, the department would propose the installation of the Pull-down Machines to the Technical Section. Besides, the LCSD officers knew that the Sit-up facilities had low usage and members of the public wanted to have other alternative facilities through daily inspections and communication with the users. If Members had other views, the LCSD would study further but the installation time of elderly facilities would be extended. On the suggestion for provision of fitness facilities at the Tuen Mun Waterfront Promenade, there were elderly fitness facilities in that park with big trees at the flower bed in the middle of the elongated strip. A certain space needed to be released next to the elderly fitness and children playground. Owing to these venue limitations, the LCSD could not provide fitness facilities again in that park. Nevertheless, the LCSD would continue to review the use of fitness facilities in the Tuen Mun District and would provide more fitness facilities if needed.

98. The Chairman enquired the LCSD whether it would consider the provision of Pull-down Machines instead of Tai Chi Wheels and she enquired whether the Pull-down Machines had a similar price as Tai Chi Wheels.

99. Ms Pat TAM of the LCSD responded that the LCSD could not designate the variety of the facilities as limited by the tender process. However, she understood that the residents had preference to the Pull-down Machines. She would relay the views to the Technical Section so that the request would be set out in the breakdown of the tender. The construction cost in the works proposal was the initial estimate. The department would not know the actual construction cost until the completion of the tender.

100. There being no objections from Members, the Chairman announced that this works LCSD funding of $130,000 was endorsed.

- 21 - Action

(D) Urge the Lands Department to Enhance Transparency of Consultations in View of Unnoticeable Notices in Villages (DFMC Paper No. 38/2020) 101. The first proposer of the paper said that the usage of the village notice boards of the Lands Department (“LandsD”) was low and he opined that the government departments had insufficient consultation at the TMDC. Besides, the notice in the annex of the paper was found on the ground of the Tai Lam area in So Kwun Wat. The photo showed that notices of the LandsD would be disseminated to rural committees, indigenous residents and representatives of residents but district councillors were not on the distribution list. He felt regret for this and said that the LandsD should distribute the papers to the district councillor of the constituency concerned. In this regard, he requested the LandsD to distribute information to the stakeholders in the community including the district councillor of the constituency concerned, and review the arrangements of posting notices in the area of villages.

102. A Member said that the general public found it difficult to take note of the village notices. With the vast area of villages, government departments would hang the papers on the railings only if the consultation location was far away from the notice boards. He hoped that the department would review the posting arrangements.

103. Mr TAM Kwok-leung of the Tuen Mun District Land Office (“TMDLO”) said that the TMDLO would post notices for the works of the government departments and public utilities and the applications of villagers. These works had smaller scale and would affect the residents nearby directly only. Currently, the TMDLO would post notices on the notice boards of the village concerned, rural committees and the LandsD and the sites themselves according to the guidelines of the LandsD. The notice board of the LandsD was outside its office, i.e. at the lobby on the 6/F of the Tuen Mun Government Offices. The notice board was divided by villages for the villagers to read. Notices involving the works of the TMDO would also be posted on the notice board at the lobby outside the TMDO. The current practice was to inform the residents of the villages concerned mainly so that the villagers would express their views before the deadline to be relayed to the departments concerned. Villagers and district councillors could contact the officers concerned through the contact information on the notices. On the practice of hanging notices on railings, notices would be posted on railings if the notice like the one attached in this paper involved road works with railings at the roadside.

104, The Chairman said that the paper requested the TMDLO to distribute the information related to the land in villages to the stakeholders concerned including district

- 22 - Action councillors. She enquired the TMDLO about the difficulties of distributing information to district councillors.

105. Mr TAM Kwok-leung of the TMDLO that the aim of posting notices was to consult members of the public, including district councillors.

106. The Chairman said that the TMDLO should take initiative to distribute information to district councillors and she pointed out that may government departments were changing their practice gradually. In this regard, she consulted the TMDLO on the difficulties in implementation.

107. A Member said that the modes of consultations of many government departments could be improved to avoid improper management of notice boards and residents failing to know the notices. Besides, government departments should consider from the residents’ perspective to facilitate the residents reading the notices.

108. A Member said that the PlanD and the WSD would notify district councillors of the matters in the district currently. It was now the electronical era so government departments could inform Members through various channels via the Internet. He suggested that the TMDLO should review and change their current practice.

109. Mr TAM Kwok-leung of the TMDLO said that the TMDLO would relay Members’ views to the LandsD because Members’ suggestion was related to the amendment to the guidelines of the LandsD and the current information on the Internet needed to be released by the LandsD altogether.

110. The Chairman hoped that the TMDLO representative would promise to relay Members’ views to the LandsD.

111. Mr TAM Kwok-leung of the TMDLO said that the department had relayed Members’ views to the LandsD but there was no substantial reply for the time being.

112. The Chairman requested the TMDLO to consider Members’ views and report to the DFMC on any further information.

(Post-meeting note: the TMDLO had relayed Members’ views to the LandsD again after TMDLO the meeting.)

- 23 - Action (E) Proposal on Leisure and Cultural Services Department (LCSD)’s Free Cultural Programmes in Tuen Mun District (2020-21) (DFMC Paper No. 39/2020) 113. Ms Gloria LAM of the LCSD said that Members had discussions about the programmes concerned at the first meeting of the DFMC and suggested passing them to the Working Group on Community Involvement for in-depth discussions. In this connection, the department had wanted to submit details of the revised annual programme to the Working Group on Community Involvement for discussion at its meeting on 3 April. However, as the meeting of the working group was postponed, the paper concerned would be submitted to the DFMC for perusal as a progress report, which would be submitted to the Working Group on Community Involvement for in-depth discussions according to Members’ views.

114. The Chairman welcomed the LCSD to submit the paper to the DFMC and said that the Working Group on Community Involvement would make in-depth discussions about this document.

115. A Member said that the paper had set out an activity to be held on 18 July. The activity had been arranged to be held at the open space next to the water polo pool. However, it was mentioned in the previous meeting that the LCSD had applied to the owners corporation of the Siu Hong Court (Phase III and IV) twice for the use of the venue but in vain so the activity was cancelled. To avoid this activity from being cancelled owing to the problem of the venue, she suggested that the LCSD should change to hold the activity at the soccer pitch of the Tuen Mun Government Primary School instead. She said that the above venue was government site and applications needed to be made to the Housing Department (“HD”) only. Moreover, the primary school had operational commitment to the community and had opened the sports ground to the community after school hours.

116. The Chairman requested the LCSD to consider Members’ proposals and suggested in-depth discussion at the Working Group on Community Involvement.

117. A Member was delighted that the LCSD adopted Members’ proposals, including the arrangement of venue inspection for the proposed new venue at the Tsing Yin Garden. Members noted that the department would arrange Magic Show and Children’s Variety Show for this year. He said that the pedestrian flow at the Tsing Yin Garden was high and he suggested that the LCSD should consider to organise pop concert at that location.

- 24 - Action 118. A Member welcomed the LCSD for making adjustment by taking reference to Members’ view and hoped that the LCSD would provide the progress on contracting the performing groups at the Working Group on Community Involvement. The Member also suggested providing opportunities to the performing groups of which income had decreased because of the impact by the epidemic.

119. A Member was delighted that the LCSD adopted Members’ views, especially the provision of new performance venues at Members’ requests. He said that there were ethnic minorities living in the rural areas of Tuen Mun so he suggested that the department should increase the performing elements of ethnic minorities or use different languages in the activities of the variety shows. Besides, he enquired how the department would follow up if the activity to be held at the Nei Wai Soccer Pitch on 30 May was cancelled owing to the epidemic.

120. A Member welcomed the LCSD for making adjustment by taking reference to Members’ view and enquired the LCSD how to judge the impact of the current epidemic and the prohibition of group gathering on the activities which was planned to be held in May. The Member also enquired the department what action it would take.

121. A Member said the procedure of group selection was complicated currently and could not help the performing groups in time which were affected by the epidemic. In this regard, he suggested that the LCSD should simplify the procedure of selection, e.g. allowing the organisations which were subsidised by the Hong Kong Arts Development Council to perform.

122. Ms Gloria LAM of the LCSD thanked Members for providing an alternative venue at the open space next to the water polo court at the Siu Hong Court and she said the department would arrange to conduct a site inspection to the soccer pitch at the Tuen Mun Government Primary School as soon as possible. If the venue was suitable to be used for holding district free entertainment programmes, the department would arrange to hold the performance on 18 July. On the activities tentatively scheduled to be held in May, the department would pay close attention to the development of the epidemic. If needed, the activities would be postponed or they would be cancelled if there was no postponement. As far as the arrangement on the invitations to the performing groups, the LCSD was exempted from going through tenders for the engagement of artists by the Treasury Bureau but the arrangements concerned would need to be implemented according to the LCSD established procedures. Therefore, the Community Programmes Office had set up the current selection procedures and the department would consider the applications submitted to the LCSD by the performing groups subsidised by the Hong Kong Arts Development

- 25 - Action Council according to this procedure. Moreover, apart from the Community Programmes Office, other programme offices of the LCSD such as the Audience Building Office, etc. also co-organised plans for different activities with the performing groups subsidised by the Hong Kong Arts Development Council and other local performing groups. On the current impact of the epidemic on the local performing groups, the LCSD was considering to provide the groups in need with assistance through various ways, for example, contracting local performing groups to make pre-recording or live broadcast on the internet resource centre. She said that the LCSD would listen to Members’ views and try to co-operate.

123. The Chairman suggested that Members should join the Working Group on Community Involvement for in-depth discussion and requested the LCSD to consider Members’ views.

VI. Reporting Items (A) Report on Usage and Extension Activities of LCSD’s Public Libraries in Tuen Mun District (DFMC Paper No. 40/2020) 124. Ms LAM Fong of the LCSD said that libraries had been closed to public temporarily since 29 January so the paper showed no visit from members of the public and participation in the extension activities held in February.

125. A Member raised the following suggestions on mobile library vans: (i) the parking locations of the mobile library vans should be changed from time to time so that more residents could use the mobile library vans thus increasing the usage of the facility; and (ii) the mobile library vans were parked in north Tuen Mun mostly currently. The LCSD could consider to build a library in the north. Besides, he enquired the LCSD whether there was any plan to improve the number of visits and lending information of the library van at the Leung King Estate.

126. A Member said that libraries were closed to the public temporarily currently. In this regard, he enquired the LCSD about the plan of re-opening. He said that the temporary closure of libraries had serious impact on the Tuen Mun residents. In particular, many students could not go to school and stayed at homes. He suggested that libraries should provide reservation service for library information during the period of epidemic so that members of the public could collect books at the counter. This could avoid people gathering and members of the public could read books at homes.

- 26 - Action 127. A Member said that there were over 20,000 residents in the Tuen Mun Rural constituency but there were various facilities lacking such as library. He had enquired the LCSD whether there could be mobile library van arranged at the rural areas of Tuen Mun. At the time, the department replied that the two library vans in the Tuen Mun District could not have additional parking locations owing to resource constraints. However, the paper showed that the average number of library lending information and the average visits were low at some of the locations. In this connection, he enquired the department whether there would be regular reviews to see why the above data was low. He cited this might be related to the service hours of the mobile library vans. He hoped that the department could consider to provide service at other locations if it found that it was difficult to increase the usage at some areas.

128. A Member said that few people went out owing to the epidemic currently. This was the right opportunity for the promotion of e-books. In this connection, she suggested that the department should organise activities for the promotion of e-books.

129. The Chairman said that this agenda item was on reporting item. If Members wanted to offer views, they should submit a paper to follow up.

130. Ms LAM Fong of the LCSD said that the library vans were medium vehicles which had a capacity of 3,000 books. After they were parked, they needed power connection so it was not easy to change the parking locations and it needed fixed parking for operation. The “Library-on-Wheels” Pilot Project of the LCSD had tried to use small goods vehicles equipped with emergency generators to facilitate parking at different location flexibly. Somehow, use of emergency generators was not allowed in most of the housing estates owing to environmental factors. She continued to say that the LCSD had 12 mobile library vans providing services at 114 service stations throughout Hong Kong. The locations and service hours of the service stations were uploaded onto the website of the Hong Kong Public Libraries. Currently, the itinerary arrangement of the mobile library vans was very packed. If the service stations were increased, the current service stations and resources would need to be reallocated. She welcomed Members to advise on the increase or decrease of the service stations. If new time slots of service could be released and the new locations could also be suitable for the parking of mobile library vans, the department would try to co-operate. Considering the residents’ needs, however, the service points would not be replaced completely in the past. Instead, new slots would be released for the provision of new service points by reducing the service hours of the service points.

- 27 - Action 131. Ms LAM Fong of the LCSD continued to say that the department needed to wait for further news on the re-opening of the libraries. The LCSD understood the needs of members of the public so the libraries had been re-opened gradually once. For example, she said that the book drop service was re-opened at the end of February, including the book drops at the MTR stations and then the self-service library stations. Moreover, the Hong Kong Central Library and six major libraries were re-opened once. In order to ensure low people flow in the libraries, the LCSD implemented restrictions on the number of visitors entering the libraries. If the libraries were re-opened again, announcements would be made through the website of the LCSD and the government press release.

132. Ms LAM Fong of the LCSD further said on proposal for the promotion on e-books that the website of the libraries provided good reads on e-reading and the special collections on the sample materials of HKCEE and HKALE, etc. Recently, there had been an increase of lending book lists in some Chinese and English e-reading collection to facilitate readers reading e-books. Besides, the libraries would continue to enhance the promotion on e-Books when holding activities in future, e.g. recommending e-books related to the stories during the Story-telling for Children.

133. A Member enquired whether the libraries would resume the reservation service so that members of the public could get the books without entering the libraries.

134. Ms LAM Fong of the LCSD said that the reservation service via the Internet had maintained normal operation but members of the public could not enter the libraries to collect the reserved books because the libraries were closed to the public temporarily. When the libraries opened to the public, members of the public could get the books.

135. A Member suggested that the libraries should open some areas for members of the public to collect the reserved books. The Member said electronic readers were not popular in Hong Kong and enquired whether the libraries would promote their use.

136. Ms LAM Fong of the LCSD said that the libraries would resume normal service when the epidemic eased.

137. The Chairman requested the LCSD to consider Members’ views. LCSD

(B) Report on LCSD’s Performing Arts Activities in Tuen Mun District and Usage of Tuen Mun Town Hall (DFMC Paper No. 41/2020) 138. Members noted the content of the captioned paper.

- 28 - Action

(C) Work Report on Management of Recreation, Sports and Passive Facilities in Tuen Mun District by Leisure and Cultural Services Department (DFMC Paper No. 42/2020) 139. A Member said that the report did not mention about the management of the Tuen Mun Park. The Member requested the LCSD to include the matter concerned in the report.

140. A Member said that he agreed with what the Member had just said. He said that there should also be report on the situations of other parks such as the Butterfly Park apart from the Tuen Mun Park. He said that even if the problem of singing performance had eased slightly currently, the performance of the security guards in the park was not satisfactory. He suggested that the LCSD should step up the monitoring and management of the outsourced security team.

141. Ms Pat TAM of the LCSD said that the department had intended to report on the matter on the Tuen Mun Park at the Working Group on Facilities Management of the LCSD but the meeting of the working group was postponed so there was no report. She said that the LCSD had launched special cleaning operations since the beginning of February. The facilities in the parks would be cordoned off partially for cleansing every afternoon to strengthen cleaning to fight the epidemic. Since the operations, the singers had appeared in the Tuen Mun Park once only so far. Besides, there was a park user who was willing to be a witness on the day in question so the park officers could successfully initiate prosecution. At the Tsing Tin Playground and the Butterfly Park, there was also special cleansing after some facilities were cordoned off. Advice would be given if the venue officers saw the singers gathering. Coupled with the irregular joint operations with the police, the gathering of the singers was under control. On the report that some singers gathered at the green zone next to the cycling track in the Butterfly Park, she clarified that the location was not within the area of the Butterfly Park or under the purview of the LCSD. Having regard to the prohibition of group gathering of no more than four people, the LCSD had asked the security guards to give advice when they saw people gathering. Moreover, to prevent members of the public gathering at the planters, the LCSD had cordoned off the planters in the Butterfly Park with orange nets where people gathered and hung banners on the past Saturday to remind members of the public not to tread or stay on the planters.

142. The Chairman suggested that the LCSD should make a report to the police once it found more than four people gathering.

- 29 - Action 143. A Member said that many vocal artists had come to the Butterfly Park currently and stood at the cycling track which surrounded the Butterfly Park. As the location did not fall within the area of the park, there was a problem of taking enforcement action. In this connection, he enquired the LCSD about the long-term solution.

144. The Chairman called upon Members to join the Working Group on Facilities Management of the LCSD and follow up on the noise problem in the parks at the working group.

145. A Member enquired the LCSD how long the measures of cordoning off the park would last, and whether there was any indicator for deciding when the measures would be lifted, and whether Members would be consulted before the measures were lifted.

146. A Member enquired the LCSD about details of the greening work and opined that not much was mentioned about this matter in the paper.

147. A Member said that the LCSD’s cordoning measures were of little use and he suggested deploying more manpower for inspections. Besides, he said that the water quality at the Butterfly Beach was poor with oil stain and rubbish floating on the sea. As the swimming season was approaching, he enquired the LCSD how to follow up on the water quality.

148. Ms Pat TAM of the LCSD noted Member’s suggestions on greening work and said that she would provide more detailed information on the greening work in the report in future. On the special arrangements of cordoning off the park for cleaning, the department would decide whether to continue according to the development of the epidemic. However, she would consult the district councillor of the constituency concerned before lifting the measures. As far as the water quality of the Butterfly Beach was concerned, she said that the EPD was responsible for water testing. The LCSD would request the cleaning contractor to strengthen the cleaning of the beach to avoid accumulation of rubbish. She further said that cordoning off the planters with orange nets and banners had limited use and there were still some members of the public entering the cordoned area but this was a temporary contingency arrangement. In the long run, the department planned to plant shrubs that would serve as fences along the cycling track at the Butterfly Park to prevent members of the public from entering the planters as audience and to reduce the incentive for the singing artists to gather and sing on the opposite side. After implementing the improvement plan concerned, the LCSD would consult the district councillor of the constituency concerned and apply to the DFMC for funding allocation from the DWM programme.

- 30 - Action

149. The Chairman called upon Members again to join the Working Group on Facilities Management of the LCSD and make in-depth discussion at the working group.

VII. Any Other Business 150. The Chairman said that the Secretariat had received a letter from the LCSD inviting the TMDC to nominate not more than two district councillors to be Sports Ambassadors for the period from 2020 to December 2021 to assist with the district sports promotion work. The Chairman invited Members to nominate not more than two district councillors to be Sports Ambassadors and the proposers, nominated members and seconders were as follows:

Nominated Members Proposers Seconders Mr WONG hung-ming Ms Josephine CHAN Mr MA Kei, Mr Kenneth CHEUNG, Mr TSANG Kam-wing, Mr POON Chi-kin, Mr LO Chun-yu, Ms KONG Fung-yi, Mr CHEUNG Ho-sum, Mr TSANG Chun-hing and Mr YAN Pui-lam Ms KONG Fung-yi Mr YAN Pui-lam Ms Beatrice CHU, Mr LEE Ka-wai, Mr LAM Ming-yan, Mr POON Chi-kin, Mr WONG Tak-yuen, Mr CHEUNG Ho-sum, Mr TSANG Chun-hing and Mr LO Chun-yu Ms Catherine WONG Ms LO Chun-yu Ms KONG Fung-yi and Mr CHEUNG Ho-sum Ms Beatrice CHU Mr Kenneth CHEUNG Mr YAN Siu-nam, Mr LEE Ka-wai, Mr POON Chi-kin, Mr WONG Tan-ching, Mr CHOW Kai-lim, Mr CHEUNG Ho-sum, Mr LEUNG Ho-man, Mr TSANG Chun-hing and Mr WONG Tak-yuen

- 31 - Action

151. As Ms KONG Fung-yi and Ms Beatrice CHU did not accept nomination, the Chairman announced that she and Mr WONG Hung-ming accepted the appointment as the Sports Ambassadors for the 2020-2021. She said that the Sports Ambassadors would report to the DFMC from time to time and the Secretariat would pass the names of the Sports Ambassadors to the LCSD for follow-up action.

(Post-meeting note: The Secretariat replied to the LCSD on 29 April.)

152. The Chairman further said that the Secretariat had received a letter from the LCSD, inviting the TMDC to nominate a district councillor to be a member of the organising committee for the eighth Hong Kong Games (“Organising Committee”), authorising the Organising Committee to display the logo of the TMDC on the publicity activity and articles, and giving consent to the establishment of a hyperlink to the dedicated web page of the eighth Hong Kong Games at the website of the TMDC.

153. There being no objections from Members, the Chairman announced that the DFMC agreed to authorise the Organising Committee to display the logo of the TMDC on the publicity activity and articles and the establishment of a hyperlink to the dedicated web page of the eighth Hong Kong Games at the website of the TMDC. She continued to suggest following the past practice to form a Working Group on the Tuen Mun District Organising Committee for the eighth Hong Kong Games on a non-standing basis, follow up on the organisation work and allow the convenor of the working group to be a member of the Organising Committee too.

154. After discussion, the DFMC agreed to form the Working Group on the Tuen Mun District Organising Committee for the eighth Hong Kong Games for a tenure of office of eight months. The terms of reference and the convenor of the working group were as follows:

Terms of Reference: 1. Work closely with the sports organisations and the Leisure Services Office of the LCSD in the Tuen Mun District to organise district teams to participate in the Hong Kong Games; and 2. Oversee matters related to the Hong Kong Games, e.g. selection of partnering organisations, funding application to the TMDC, organisation of local athletes and delegates and selection of cheerleading team, etc.

- 32 - Action

Nominated Members Proposer Seconders Mr YAN Siu-nam Ms Catherine WONG Mr LAM Kin-cheung, Mr WONG Hung-ming, Mr POON Chi-kin, Mr LO Chun-yu, Mr YAN Pui-lam, Mr TSANG Chun-hing and Mr WONG Tan-ching Mr WONG Tan-ching Ms KONG Fung-yi Ms Josephine CHAN, Ms Beatrice CHU, Mr YAN Siu-nam, Mr LEE Ka-wai, Mr WONG Hung-ming, Mr Kenneth CHEUNG, Mr LO Chun-yu, Mr WONG Tak-yuen, Mr CHEUNG Ho-sum, Mr TSANG Chun-hing, Mr YAN Pui-lam and Mr POON Chi-kin

155. As Mr YAN Siu-nam did not accept nomination. The Chairman announced that Mr WONG Tan-ching became convenor of the Working Group on the Tuen Mun District Organising Committee for the eighth Hong Kong Games and member of the Organising Committee. The Chairman asked the Secretariat to reply to the LCSD and write to invite Members to join the newly-formed working group and inform Members of the date of first meeting of the working group. She hoped that Members would participate in the work of the working groups enthusiastically and attend the meeting concerned on time.

(Post-meeting note: the Secretariat replied to the LCSD on 29 April 2020 and wrote letters on 11 May to invite Members to join the Working Group on the Tuen Mun District Organising Committee for the eighth Hong Kong Game.)

156. There being no other business, the Chairman announced that the meeting closed at 12:59 p.m. The next meeting would be held at 9:30 a.m. on 2 June 2020 (Tuesday).

Tuen Mun District Council Secretariat Date: May 2020 File No: HAD TMDC/13/25/DFMC/20

- 33 - Action

- 34 -