LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ― 13 June 2018 12031

OFFICIAL RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS

Wednesday, 13 June 2018

The Council met at Eleven o'clock

MEMBERS PRESENT:

THE PRESIDENT THE HONOURABLE ANDREW LEUNG KWAN-YUEN, G.B.S., J.P.

THE HONOURABLE KUN-SUN

THE HONOURABLE LAI-HIM, G.B.S., J.P.

THE HONOURABLE YU-YAN, G.B.S., J.P.

PROF THE HONOURABLE JOSEPH LEE KOK-LONG, S.B.S., J.P.

THE HONOURABLE KIN-FUNG, G.B.S., J.P.

THE HONOURABLE WONG TING-KWONG, G.B.S., J.P.

THE HONOURABLE WAI-KING, S.B.S., J.P.

THE HONOURABLE CHAN HAK-KAN, B.B.S., J.P.

THE HONOURABLE CHAN KIN-POR, G.B.S., J.P.

DR THE HONOURABLE MEI-FUN, S.B.S., J.P.

THE HONOURABLE MRS LAU SUK-YEE, G.B.S., J.P.

THE HONOURABLE WAI-CHUN, J.P.

12032 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ― 13 June 2018

THE HONOURABLE CLAUDIA MO

THE HONOURABLE PUK-SUN, B.B.S., J.P.

THE HONOURABLE STEVEN HO CHUN-YIN, B.B.S.

THE HONOURABLE CHI-MING, S.B.S., J.P.

THE HONOURABLE WU CHI-WAI, M.H.

THE HONOURABLE YIU SI-WING, B.B.S.

THE HONOURABLE MA FUNG-KWOK, S.B.S., J.P.

THE HONOURABLE CHARLES PETER MOK, J.P.

THE HONOURABLE CHAN CHI-CHUEN

THE HONOURABLE LEUNG CHE-CHEUNG, S.B.S., M.H., J.P.

THE HONOURABLE KENNETH LEUNG

THE HONOURABLE MEI-KUEN, B.B.S., J.P.

DR THE HONOURABLE KWOK KA-KI

THE HONOURABLE KWOK WAI-KEUNG, J.P.

THE HONOURABLE WING-HANG

THE HONOURABLE WAH-FUNG, S.B.S., J.P.

DR THE HONOURABLE FERNANDO CHEUNG CHIU-HUNG

DR THE HONOURABLE HELENA WONG PIK-WAN

THE HONOURABLE IP KIN-YUEN

LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ― 13 June 2018 12033

DR THE HONOURABLE , B.B.S., J.P.

THE HONOURABLE CHEUNG-KONG, S.B.S., J.P.

THE HONOURABLE POON SIU-PING, B.B.S., M.H.

DR THE HONOURABLE CHIANG LAI-WAN, J.P.

IR DR THE HONOURABLE LO WAI-KWOK, S.B.S., M.H., J.P.

THE HONOURABLE CHUNG KWOK-PAN

THE HONOURABLE ALVIN YEUNG

THE HONOURABLE ANDREW WAN SIU-KIN

THE HONOURABLE CHU HOI-DICK

THE HONOURABLE JIMMY NG WING-KA, J.P.

DR THE HONOURABLE KWAN-YIU, J.P.

THE HONOURABLE HO KAI-MING

THE HONOURABLE LAM CHEUK-TING

THE HONOURABLE SHIU KA-FAI

THE HONOURABLE SHIU KA-CHUN

THE HONOURABLE CHONG-SHING, M.H.

THE HONOURABLE YUNG HOI-YAN

DR THE HONOURABLE

THE HONOURABLE CHAN CHUN-YING

12034 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ― 13 June 2018

THE HONOURABLE

THE HONOURABLE CHEUNG KWOK-KWAN, J.P.

THE HONOURABLE HUI CHI-FUNG

THE HONOURABLE LUK CHUNG-HUNG

THE HONOURABLE LAU KWOK-FAN, M.H.

THE HONOURABLE IP-KEUNG, B.B.S., M.H., J.P.

DR THE HONOURABLE CHENG CHUNG-TAI

THE HONOURABLE KWONG CHUN-YU

THE HONOURABLE JEREMY TAM MAN-HO

THE HONOURABLE GARY FAN KWOK-WAI

THE HONOURABLE AU NOK-HIN

THE HONOURABLE VINCENT CHENG WING-SHUN, M.H.

THE HONOURABLE WAI-CHUEN, B.B.S.

MEMBERS ABSENT:

THE HONOURABLE LEUNG YIU-CHUNG

THE HONOURABLE WONG KWOK-KIN, S.B.S., J.P.

THE HONOURABLE CHAN HAN-PAN, J.P.

THE HONOURABLE HO-DING

LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ― 13 June 2018 12035

PUBLIC OFFICERS ATTENDING:

THE HONOURABLE MATTHEW CHEUNG KIN-CHUNG, G.B.M., G.B.S., J.P. CHIEF SECRETARY FOR ADMINISTRATION

THE HONOURABLE PAUL CHAN MO-PO, G.B.M., G.B.S., M.H., J.P. FINANCIAL SECRETARY

MR TSE CHIN-WAN, B.B.S., J.P. UNDER SECRETARY FOR THE ENVIRONMENT, AND SECRETARY FOR THE ENVIRONMENT

THE HONOURABLE NICHOLAS W. YANG, G.B.S., J.P. SECRETARY FOR INNOVATION AND TECHNOLOGY

THE HONOURABLE LAU KONG-WAH, J.P. SECRETARY FOR HOME AFFAIRS

THE HONOURABLE JAMES HENRY LAU JR., J.P. SECRETARY FOR FINANCIAL SERVICES AND THE TREASURY

DR THE HONOURABLE LAW CHI-KWONG, G.B.S., J.P. SECRETARY FOR LABOUR AND WELFARE

THE HONOURABLE JOSHUA LAW CHI-KONG, G.B.S., J.P. SECRETARY FOR THE CIVIL SERVICE

THE HONOURABLE JOHN LEE KA-CHIU, S.B.S., P.D.S.M., J.P. SECRETARY FOR SECURITY

THE HONOURABLE FRANK CHAN FAN, J.P. SECRETARY FOR TRANSPORT AND HOUSING

PROF THE HONOURABLE SOPHIA CHAN SIU-CHEE, J.P. SECRETARY FOR FOOD AND HEALTH

12036 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ― 13 June 2018

THE HONOURABLE EDWARD YAU TANG-WAH, G.B.S., J.P. SECRETARY FOR COMMERCE AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT

THE HONOURABLE KEVIN YEUNG YUN-HUNG, J.P. SECRETARY FOR

THE HONOURABLE PATRICK NIP TAK-KUEN, J.P. SECRETARY FOR CONSTITUTIONAL AND MAINLAND AFFAIRS

MR LIU CHUN-SAN, J.P. UNDER SECRETARY FOR DEVELOPMENT

CLERK IN ATTENDANCE:

MR KENNETH CHEN WEI-ON, S.B.S., SECRETARY GENERAL

THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE TO ATTEND THIS MEETING UNDER RULE 8 OF THE RULES OF PROCEDURE TO ANSWER QUESTIONS PUT BY MEMBERS.

LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ― 13 June 2018 12037

THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE'S QUESTION TIME

(When the Chief Executive entered the Chamber and walked towards the President's dais, a number of Members repeatedly chanted a slogan aloud: "Shame on Andrew LEUNG, abusing powers!)

PRESIDENT (in ): If Members continue to yell, I will consider such conduct grossly disorderly.

(Members stopped yelling)

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Members will please remain standing while the Chief Executive enters the Chamber.

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): The Chief Executive's Question Time.

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Members who wish to ask questions please press the "Request to speak" button.

Each Member will be given 3 minutes to ask questions to and receive replies from the Chief Executive, and the time for a Member to ask a question should not exceed 1.5 minutes. When reaching 3 minutes, the timer will ring as a reminder. In order to allow more Members to ask questions, the Question Time should be conducted in a "short question, short answer" format.

MR JAMES TO (in Cantonese): Chief Executive, having assumed office for one year, you said you feel relaxed and find it enjoyable, and even expressed in high spirits that you "pass a month as if it were one day". But do you know that people, seeing the property prices soaring in frenzy during this year of your term, "pass each day as if it were a year"?

Chief Executive, you once stated that the housing problem is the top priority, and mentioned in your manifesto that it requires immediate tackling. Some people say you are a "good fighter", but you did not tackle this problem 12038 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ― 13 June 2018 immediately after assuming office. You only set up a so-called grand debate task force to waste a year of time. If it does not do a good job, then it is the responsibility of Stanley WONG, but can he bear the responsibility? The task force has presented 18 options in a scattered and spread-out manner, while shelving the proposals of large-scale resumption of farmland and construction of public housing, and then pretended to conduct a study on a vacancy tax on first-hand properties.

Chief Executive, according to my personal analysis, Beijing is probably more anxious about the housing problem in Hong Kong than you, because the failure to properly handle it will affect the stability of Hong Kong. In fact, are you an "incapable fighter", or engaging in collusion between the Government and the business sector under the table?

CHIEF EXECUTIVE (in Cantonese): President, since I assumed office I have maintained that the housing problem is the biggest livelihood problem we have. Recently, people have also heard me say that, no matter how well the current-term Government has performed in various aspects, such as improving people's livelihood and developing the economy, we can hardly feel satisfied or happy if the housing problem remains unsolved.

Therefore, as always, the housing problem is our top priority. But to solve housing problem at root there must be land, otherwise, as in the criticisms made recently―the person making the most criticisms has just entered the Chamber―the many harsh measures introduced over the last few years may not be able to solve the problem of property prices. Therefore, the permanent cure lies in housing supply and we are endeavouring to this end.

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Mr Paul TSE, please ask your question.

MR JAMES TO (in Cantonese): President, my speaking time is not up yet.

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Mr James TO, please go on.

LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ― 13 June 2018 12039

MR JAMES TO (in Cantonese): I would like to ask: if the Chief Executive considers it the top priority, she would not have assigned such a task to Stanley WONG, who leads a task force to consult the public. Should you not shoulder this political responsibility yourself? If you want to introduce anything, such as public-private partnership, as you are such a "good fighter", should you not take charge of the implementation instead of asking Stanley WONG to do it? If it fails, the blame is on Stanley WONG. If it succeeds, the credit goes to . What kind of political commitment is this?

CHIEF EXECUTIVE (in Cantonese): Sorry, I must say that it is not about any person. I once said Hong Kong does not lack land but rather a consensus on the use of land. Hence, such a consensus takes time to build. I hope Mr TO will not make cynical remarks. I was criticized by you when I did good deeds for Hong Kong without public consultation. Therefore, this time I let society have ample discussions to identify sources of land supply.

MR PAUL TSE (in Cantonese): Chief Executive, earlier Ms TANG Lin-ling was sentenced to seven days in prison and required to pay almost $200,000 in legal costs for taking illicit photos inside a courtroom. But she had completed her term on the day the sentence was passed and was deported to the Mainland on the same day. We could only look on as such costs would not be recovered. As regards the fixed penalty for smoking offences, many visitors to Hong Kong did not pay the penalty, and the proportion of it is a staggering 21.5%, significantly higher than that of local residents, which is 1.3%. Regarding student loans, there are 11 400 cases in which students have failed to make loan repayments after graduation, involving $173 million. In terms of health care, the sum of defaults on payments by ineligible persons, covering obstetrics and gynaecology and non-obstetrics and gynaecology cases, amounts to $50 million in total. As regards the restriction on powdered formula, in 2015, a Magistrate described the problem of defaults on penalty payments arising from violations of the restriction as "unprecedented".

Chief Executive, a common saying goes "small amounts add up to a large sum". To prevent Hong Kong from becoming "the capital of defaults on payments", as if Hong Kong were a "lockless chicken coop", exactly what ways or measures will the Administration take to minimize such defaults on payments? I 12040 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ― 13 June 2018 have not even mentioned that torture claims incur an expense of $1.4 billion per year. Such money has been wasted. I hope to draw the Chief Executive's attention to these problems.

CHIEF EXECUTIVE (in Cantonese): I thank Mr TSE for his question. I will definitely pay attention to the question raised by Mr TSE. On the one hand, we need to protect the public coffers, but on the other, we also need to consider whether the actual recovery of such amounts would present great difficulties to some people, especially the collection of repayments of student loans as Mr TSE suggested. Moreover, the cost of debt collection has to be taken into account as well. In any case, I would be happy to look into the matter myself.

MR PAUL TSE (in Cantonese): President, as a free society, we certainly do not hope to take the harsh step of restricting entry and exit. However, taking the United Kingdom as an example, earlier a case in Manchester involved a default on payment of £530,000, prompting the authorities to consider imposing restrictions on non-European residents that certain services would be rendered only upon advance payment, meaning even the residents of European Union would have to comply.

In this regard, will we consider adopting such overseas practices? Osaka Prefecture of Japan has commissioned a research organization to conduct a study on exploring ways to minimize defaults on payments. Will the authorities follow up on this matter so that, given the significant increase in the number of civil service posts this year, people would not still find the situation of defaults on payments just as serious.

CHIEF EXECUTIVE (in Cantonese): I thank Mr TSE very much for doing some overseas research. I hope Mr TSE can share with us the results of his research and we will take them seriously.

MR DENNIS KWOK (in Cantonese): Chief Executive, I have repeatedly raised questions about the existing problem of vacant properties. As you are also aware, currently there are over 9 000 vacant residential units left idle every day, while people are in deep water because of the housing problem. These vacant units are not commodities. Each one of them is very important and we cannot LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ― 13 June 2018 12041 afford losing any single one. In fact, I have discussed for a number of times with the Financial Secretary and other public officers the topic of vacancy tax. And the has repeatedly made the proposal. We have conducted a study on the implementation of a vacancy tax. Recently, we have heard that the vacancy tax may be collected through rates. However, regardless of the means of collection, the vacancy tax must be "steep" so as to make developers really launch these units onto the market as soon as possible. The collection of the vacancy tax through rates is not unfeasible but we have conducted a study on this and found that it requires making amendments to the Rating Ordinance and the Inland Revenue Ordinance by the Legislative Council so that developers cannot deduct rates from profits tax or other taxes. Only in this way will the vacancy tax, upon introduction, be not regarded as "decorative" or useless. It must be "steep".

I wish to know the progress of the study on vacancy tax by the Government. Two weeks ago, the Secretary said the study was nearing completion. But as the problem has prevailed for a long time, people are yearning for the introduction of a vacancy tax so that more residential units can be launched onto the market. Chief Executive, may I ask when we can expect a final decision by the Government on this problem?

CHIEF EXECUTIVE (in Cantonese): Thank you, Mr KWOK. He has great concern for this issue. The study on this measure, which Mr James TO referred to as "window dressing", is now at the final stage. Here, I can say that within this month, i.e. June, the Government will make an announcement.

MR DENNIS KWOK (in Cantonese): President, I have always respected the views of Mr James TO, but on this matter, I cannot agree that the vacancy tax is "window dressing" because it can at least force real estate developers to launch the existing 9 000 vacant units as soon as possible so that people can have more choices. In the long run, developers cannot be allowed to hoard units. Therefore, I hope the Chief Executive can hear the voices of the people and introduce the vacancy tax as soon as possible. Of course, other measures, such as allocating more land sites for public housing construction by the , are very important as well. But right now, in my view, the action that can be taken immediately is the implementation of the vacancy tax.

12042 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ― 13 June 2018

CHIEF EXECUTIVE (in Cantonese): It looks like even Members of the same political platform in the Legislative Council hold different opinions on this topic. I leave this topic to Members' discussion in the future because the imposition of any tax, be it rates or other taxes, in Hong Kong requires the approval of the Legislative Council.

MR CHEUNG KWOK-KWAN (in Cantonese): Chief Executive, I will get straight to the point rather than raising a window-dressing question. The day before yesterday, several rioters were finally subjected to legal sanction after sentences were imposed on them by the Court in connection with their involvement in the Mong Kok riots. In recent years, some politicos often carry on their lips seditious slogans such as "militant resistance", "achieving justice by violating the law", "people driven to revolt by the Government", and so on, turning many acts of violence into heroic and sensible acts and consequently stirring up such troubles as the riots in Mong Kok. During the riots, rioters set fires everywhere and hurled bricks at police officers in defiance of law. It is even more lamentable that not only did some "conscientious" people fail to offer assistance in providing ultimate solutions and setting the record straight, but they also advanced sophistry one after another. For instance, a Member who was also a barrister encouraged young people, saying having a criminal record would spice up their lives; another Member said that he should have advised people taking part in the riots in Mong Kok a long time ago to stay in the United States and not to return to Hong Kong; some politicos in Britain indiscriminately criticized the Special Administrative Region Government for abusing the law in prosecuting rioters, deliberately turning a blind eye to the fact that Hong Kong's judicial trials are independent and free from administrative interference. May I ask what message will be issued by the Chief Executive to refute such sophistry so as to prevent our young people from being misled or going astray, such that their future will not be ruined completely, and make overseas countries or places not to mistake that Hong Kong's judicial system is being intervened by the executive?

CHIEF EXECUTIVE (in Cantonese): Thank you, Mr CHEUNG. Before the Executive Council meeting yesterday morning, I issued this message and raised three points therein: Firstly, it is fine that everyone holds different opinions on the severity of sentencing by the Court. However, it is utterly undesirable for people to vilify the Judge or show contempt for Hong Kong's judicial LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ― 13 June 2018 12043 independence because of their dissatisfaction with the Court's judgment and their entrenched position or political inclination. The message thus sent is unacceptable. Nor will it do any good to Hong Kong as a place where the rule of law is practicised. Second, I encourage and welcome young people with a sense of justice and concern for society to make their voices heard when they see injustices. However, they must not break the law, or else they can only face legal sanctions. Third, I do hope―as Mr CHEUNG said just now―we are responsible for our words and refrain from inducing these young people at will to embellish and idealize unlawful acts, so that they still have no idea what wrong they have done, which is even more harmful to them long term.

This evening I will make a trip to Europe and visit European Union member states on the way to precisely do such explanation work.

MR CHARLES PETER MOK (in Cantonese): President, in the several forums on "smart city" that I have attended this week, participants were all concerned that Hong Kong was lagging behind others in such development and must catch up without delay. In the Hong Kong Smart City Summit yesterday, some 200 representatives in the telecommunication field came together for a discussion with particular focuses on the lag in telecommunication infrastructure and spectrum planning. How can Hong Kong's infrastructure prove adequate for the development of a "smart city", if we fail to do a good job now in the spectrum planning for telecommunication services? The delayed launch of the fifth generation ("5G") mobile services is particularly worrying. A few years ago, we requested the Government to address the issue of relocation of satellite earth stations, but the latter has procrastinated so far. If Hong Kong launches 5G services in 2021, I am afraid the area highlighted in red on this map in my hand―an area that covers, among others, the Science Park, The Chinese University of Hong Kong and the Estate in the entire Tai Po―will go without 5G services in the subsequent years.

Being slow in its response, the Government has begun to tackle the issue only now, conferring with the industry only a few days ago with representatives of the Office of the Communications Authority ("OFCA") alone in attendance. In the meeting, OFCA only said that the problem was difficult to address, without offering any effective solution or proposal.

12044 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ― 13 June 2018

May I ask the Chief Executive what should be done so that the Government will attach greater importance to the issue and address it as an inter-departmental effort? In the aforementioned meeting, for instance, only the representatives of OFCA were present. There are in fact many problems which need to be solved by other departments and over which OFCA can offer no assistance.

CHIEF EXECUTIVE (in Cantonese): Since an effective network of communication is the most basic prerequisite for a "smart city", the Steering Committee on Innovation and Technology―led personally by myself―is also studying the subject and has, as a matter of fact, discussed the introduction of 5G services in Hong Kong earlier this week. Judging from the fact that members of the industry around the world generally expect the launch of 5G services between 2019 and 2020, Hong Kong's pace in the commercial launch of 5G services, far from suffering a serious lag as Mr MOK claimed just now or as a telecommunication company has recently criticized, is in fact on par with that of other advanced economies.

I have seen a table comparing the situation of Hong Kong with that of other advanced countries. It showed that we are among the forerunners in the world in terms of timing for the launch of 5G services even in the so-called "high-frequency spectrum" of 26 GHz and 28 GHz bands. Hence, I hope Mr MOK, being a representative of the information and technology industry in particular, can see clearly our strategies. And we are very happy to come here and brief the Council.

Allow me to talk about an issue in the remaining 30 seconds. Three major measures recently put forward by the Government have aroused fierce opposition among certain stakeholders in the industries. First, the proposal for abolishing the off-setting mechanism of the Mandatory Provident Fund System found itself the target of opposition, followed by the imposition of vacancy tax and now the launch of 5G services. Members should seriously look at the opponents and see whether they are the parties with vested interests whom Members often talk about. If the answer is "yes", Members must act in public interest.

MR WILSON OR (in Cantonese): Chief Executive, my question relates to public interest. Chief Executive, Hong Kong's housing problem is our top priority. Not only is the living area of Hong Kong people getting increasingly small and property prices becoming increasingly high, but Hong Kong has been ranked, for LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ― 13 June 2018 12045 eight years in a row, the most "intolerable" places in the world in terms of property prices. A household has to refrain from eating and spending for more than 19 years before it can own a home. Home Ownership Scheme ("HOS") flats have now become the only hope for home ownership of the general public. But unfortunately, the supply of HOS flats falls short of the target year after year. Moreover, the prices of HOS flats, which are on a par with those of private properties, hit new highs year after year.

In this connection, I am eager to tell the Chief Executive that the Democratic Alliance for the Betterment and Progress of Hong Kong and all people in Hong Kong would like to see the Chief Executive do something about it. Insofar as supply is concerned, can the Government consider building subsidized housing on certain sites for private housing, or at least maintaining the supply of 8 000 subsidized sale flats per annum? Furthermore, will the Government study the feasibility of delinking the pricing of subsidized sale flats from market prices without clinging to the "30% discount" restriction and reverting to the previous arrangement of "flexible discounts" to accommodate the level of affordability of the applicants in general?

CHIEF EXECUTIVE (in Cantonese): Members should still remember the housing policy mentioned by me in my manifesto and the Policy Address that it tends to be led by home ownership. In other words, if land can be identified for housing construction, and the public also have aspirations for home ownership, the Government should facilitate the public in home ownership. Following this direction, the HOS flats suggested by Mr OR will become a crucial element. Therefore, allocating additional land for the construction of subsidized sale flats, be they HOS flats, Green Form Subsidised Home Ownership Scheme flats, or "Starter Homes" to be launched shortly, is the direction of government work.

Nevertheless, even if land is available for the construction of HOS flats, if the prices of the flats are hardly affordable to the public, we will just be engaging in empty talk. As such, in the previous two Question and Answer sessions or so, I undertook to examine the pricing of HOS flats personally. Although the previous pricing of HOS flats was generally accepted by members of the community, the pricing of these 4 000-odd HOS flats launched in 2018 has indeed induced many repercussions in society. Members of the public are doubtful whether the pricing of HOS flats at up to $10,000 per square foot is detached from their affordability. This explains why the Government is studying this issue.

12046 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ― 13 June 2018

MR WILSON OR (in Cantonese): Chief Executive, I would like to raise a follow-up question. I have actually heard this reply of yours many times already. Can the Government undertake to the people of Hong Kong when the timetable you mentioned will be implemented? Can the Chief Executive properly deal with the pricing problem when the new phase of HOS flats is launched to achieve the purpose of delinking?

CHIEF EXECUTIVE (in Cantonese): In all fairness, Mr OR, Members should not have heard the reply given by me just now many times before. I said I had to take a look when striving to answer the question raised by Mr KWOK Wai-keung in the last Question Time. If I did not say that, the reply given to Honourable Members should be either "proven" or "this mechanism is proven and, to a certain extent, flexible". I undertake that I will take a look personally in the hope of giving Honourable Members confidence.

MR ABRAHAM SHEK (in Cantonese): Chief Executive, I am glad to hear you say that the introduction of vacant property tax will be guided by the interests of the public. I believe there is no need for any consultation. All the 7 million people in Hong Kong will support it. If a consultation is needed, it can be conducted in the form of a referendum.

Talking about public interests, I would like to ask the Chief Executive if she is aware that the current litigation costs are so high to such an extent that only wealthy people can afford to institute proceedings in courts. Despite the claim made by some legal professionals that they represent the people, it is not the case when it involves their personal interests. This is particularly the case for barristers. Since other lawyers are not allowed to appear in court proceedings on behalf of their clients under the existing law, some cases must be handled by barristers. May I ask the Chief Executive, for the sake of public interest, will more barristers from other common law jurisdictions be allowed to work in Hong Kong?

CHIEF EXECUTIVE (in Cantonese): As Hong Kong is an open economy, I certainly hope all sectors will be open, especially the professional services sector. Recently, some small progress has been made in regard to another profession, doctors, after heated debates in the Legislative Council in the past couple of years. I consider it a small progress only, but at least there has been some LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ― 13 June 2018 12047 change. Therefore, the Government is willing to examine whether there is any room for market liberalization in various professional services, in particular those in shortage or charging high fees. However, I believe Mr SHEK will understand that, as I said just now, whether it can be achieved involves many issues pertaining to interests. But we definitely make public interest our prime consideration.

MR ABRAHAM SHEK (in Cantonese): President, the real estate sector will support the vacant property tax that I have just mentioned if it can be handled fairly by the Government. However, I would like to tell the Chief Executive that, although according to some people there are 9 000 vacant units presently, which sounds a lot, only 18 000 to 19 000 private units are actually launched onto the market annually. And among these 9 000 units, 6 000 were completed and granted occupation permits in 2017, while many others have not yet been issued the occupation permit and some others are on sale. Therefore, the number of vacant units at present is not 9 000 but 3 000 only. I hope those who claim that there are 9 000 vacant units presently can gain some better understanding of the actual situation first. Moreover, even if these 9 000 units are launched onto the market, it is still up to the people to decide whether or not to purchase them. Our right to make the decision on whether to rent or sell is protected by Article 105 of the Basic Law. Completed properties are not bound to be sold, some can be for lease, too.

MR JIMMY NG (in Cantonese): President, one of the key points of the planning of the Guangdong-Hong Kong-Macao Greater Bay Area ("the Bay Area") is realizing a "one-hour living circle". According to the results of a public opinion survey on the planning of the Bay Area conducted by the Hong Kong Institute of Asia-Pacific Studies of The Chinese University of Hong Kong, 40% of the respondents questioned the feasibility of a "one-hour living circle", mainly because of insufficient freedom of information in the Mainland and inconvenient transportation between the two places. May I ask the Chief Executive how help can be provided to Hong Kong people in this regard? For example, can a more efficient and less expensive ticketing arrangement be introduced for the upcoming Guangzhou-Shenzhen-Hong Kong Express Rail Link, so as to increase its appeal and actually realize a "one-hour living circle" for Hong Kong people? Meanwhile, can the Communications Authority examine the possibility of full exemption of roaming charges for all telecommunication networks in the Bay Area? 12048 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ― 13 June 2018

CHIEF EXECUTIVE (in Cantonese): Thank you, Mr NG.

Mr NG should have heard from us that one of the most important prerequisites for the Bay Area is the flow of people, goods, capital and information. Therefore, ensuring the free flow in these aspects is essential to the success of the Bay Area. For instance, we encourage enterprises to provide quality services in the Bay Area, but it will be a big problem if funds cannot be conveniently transferred back to Hong Kong. The flow of people is also an important element because even with the infrastructure, hindrances will arise if there are often long queues at immigration and customs clearance. Hence, the governments of the three places will hold discussions on this series of issues and promulgate the Development Plan for the Guangdong-Hong Kong-Macao Bay Area later on. If the consensus of the three governments requires complementary policies from the Central Authorities, I will make the best endeavour to strive for them together with the Governor of Guangdong Province and the Chief Executive of Macao.

MR JIMMY NG (in Cantonese): President, the question I raised just now is: Is it possible to exempt the roaming charges for Hong Kong people in the "9+2" cities in the Bay Area?

CHIEF EXECUTIVE (in Cantonese): This can be discussed. However, to my understanding, there is already a plan that offers that, but I cannot do any commercial for it.

MR SHIU KA-CHUN (in Cantonese): President, for the disturbance in Mong Kok on the second day of the Lunar New Year the year before last, LO Kin-man, Edward LEUNG and WONG Ka-kui were heavily sentenced to imprisonment of seven years, six years and three and a half years respectively. Chief Executive, I would like to tell you that the deep-rooted conflicts in society are not resolved because of the heavy sentences. I noticed that Governor Alexander GRANTHAM initiated an investigation immediately after the 1956 riots; Governor David TRENCH established an independent Commission of Inquiry after the 1966 Kowloon riots. The Commission had interviewed Brian RAGGENSACK and LO Kei before compiling the 167-page "Kowloon Disturbances 1966: Report of Commission of Inquiry" which indicated that public anger was triggered as people were unable to get across their grievances due to the centralization of powers. LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ― 13 June 2018 12049

May I ask the Chief Executive whether an independent Commission of Inquiry will be established in regard to the Mong Kong disturbance so as to conduct an independent inquiry into the incident?

CHIEF EXECUTIVE (in Cantonese): Mr SHIU, the answer is "no". As I already pointed out yesterday, there is always room for improvement for any government at any time. There will be grievances and anxieties in society no matter how perfect our work is, but that does not mean people can break the law. I do not think the current situation in Hong Kong is as bad as you described. If an independent Commission of Inquiry is to be established, it should inquire into who have been instilling the messages of achieving justice by violating the law and civil disobedience over the years.

MR SHIU KA-CHUN (in Cantonese): President, if the Chief Executive responds to the Mong Kok disturbance with such kind of an attitude, what is the difference between her and former Chief Executive LEUNG Chun-ying? Both of them passed a judgment before trial and drew a conclusion before conducting any studies. Why does she not face up to the deep-rooted problems in society? What she said just now may be one way of seeing it, but why do we not make a more comprehensive and accurate analysis so that society can learn from it and thus make further development?

CHIEF EXECUTIVE (in Cantonese): I do not understand why Mr SHIU would call that passing a judgment before trial. More than 20 people have been sentenced by the Court in regard to the Mong Kok riots that happened two years ago, and the Court has clearly explained its judgment and the justifications thereof each time. I invite Mr SHIU to take a careful look at the Judge's judgment.

MR KWOK WAI-KEUNG (in Cantonese): President, first, I thank the Chief Executive for remembering the question that I asked on the last occasion. Today, I am again asking a question on housing.

Despite the manoeuvres of the Government, the relentless march of the property market continues with property prices scaling new heights. While the Long Term Housing Strategy Steering Committee ("the Steering Committee") has 12050 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ― 13 June 2018 set a target for housing construction, it is an empty target with no hope of attainment, meaning the 60:40 of public-private split in terms of housing supply set by the Steering Committee can never materialize in reality. As public housing construction continues to fall behind in its slow pace and the supply shortage set to persist in the next five years, the waiting time for public housing will only get longer. Does the Government have any measures to catch up lost ground in public housing construction? While building public housing above MTR stations is an option, how long will it take before residents can move in, and how many of such projects are on stream? Also, can sites acquired by the Urban Renewal Authority be used to build public housing, as part of the drive to increase public housing supply?

CHIEF EXECUTIVE (in Cantonese): President, I am fully aware that Members, irrespective of their political affiliation, are anxious about the housing problem, which is a sentiment I share. What I can tell Members is that, even though we have yet to unveil any substantive measure, the Government itself has done quite a bit of work in the course of examining the issue.

However, the problem can truly be resolved only with the availability of land. No matter how I redeploy land resources, allocating sites earmarked for private housing to the construction of public housing is still no more than a redeployment of sites with no actual increase in land supply, making it impossible for the construction of more housing to meet society's demands.

What I can say, however, is that while considering long-term plans that take time, we are also striving for some measures that can enhance land supply for housing construction in the short and medium terms. I hope Mr KWOK and other Members can give us a bit more time. We will give an account to the community once we have finished collating our present work.

MR KWOK WAI-KEUNG (in Cantonese): President, even though, as I said just now, we have yet to reach the target of the 60:40 split, I very much hope that the Chief Executive can raise the target to a 70:30 split, for if we wish to catch up lost ground in supply, there must be some bold moves in redeployment of sites in the future to convince the public of the Government's resolve in the construction of additional public and subsidized housing.

LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ― 13 June 2018 12051

CHIEF EXECUTIVE (in Cantonese): Mr KWOK, this proposal may be worth considering. But there exists another group who fails to qualify for buying Government-subsidized housing because of higher income. If such a proposal leads to a disruption in the supply of private properties and in turn a surge in prices of those properties, this other group will likewise resent the Government. That is why we must strike a fine balance between the two. The name of the game is to increase land supply to a level sufficient for the construction of both public and private housing to meet society's needs.

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): The Chief Executive's Question Time ends here. After the Chief Executive …

(Mr LAM Cheuk-ting chanted aloud in his seat: "Shame on Andrew LEUNG, abusing powers!")

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Mr LAM Cheuk-ting, this is my first warning to you. If you keep yelling, I will order you to withdraw immediately.

(As the Chief Executive walked away from the Chamber, Mr Andrew WAN and a number of Members kept chanting aloud: "Shame on Andrew LEUNG, abusing powers!")

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Mr Andrew WAN, this is my last warning to you.

(Members stopped yelling)

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): After the Chief Executive has left the Chamber, Council will hold its regular meeting immediately.

ADJOURNMENT OF MEETING

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): The Chief Executive's Question Time is now ended.

Adjourned accordingly at 11:31 am.