LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014 843

OFFICIAL RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS

Wednesday, 29 October 2014

The Council met at Eleven o'clock

MEMBERS PRESENT:

THE PRESIDENT YOK-SING, G.B.S., J.P.

THE HONOURABLE CHUN-YAN

THE HONOURABLE LEE CHEUK-YAN

THE HONOURABLE KUN-SUN

THE HONOURABLE CHAN KAM-LAM, S.B.S., J.P.

THE HONOURABLE LEUNG YIU-

DR THE HONOURABLE LAU WONG-FAT, G.B.M., G.B.S., J.P.

THE HONOURABLE WAI-HING, J.P.

THE HONOURABLE TAM YIU-CHUNG, G.B.S., J.P.

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

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

THE HONOURABLE KIN-KEE, S.B.S., J.P.

THE HONOURABLE VINCENT FANG KANG, S.B.S., J.P.

844 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014

THE HONOURABLE WONG KWOK-HING, B.B.S., M.H.

PROF THE HONOURABLE JOSEPH LEE KOK-LONG, S.B.S., J.P., Ph.D., R.N.

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

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

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

THE HONOURABLE KA-WAH, S.C.

THE HONOURABLE SAU-LAN, J.P.

THE HONOURABLE WAI-KING, J.P.

DR THE HONOURABLE LAM TAI-FAI, S.B.S., J.P.

THE HONOURABLE CHAN HAK-KAN, J.P.

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

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

DR THE HONOURABLE LEUNG KA-LAU

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

THE HONOURABLE IP KWOK-HIM, G.B.S., J.P.

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

THE HONOURABLE WAI-CHUN, J.P.

THE HONOURABLE KAH-KIT, S.C.

THE HONOURABLE LEUNG KWOK-HUNG

LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014 845

THE HONOURABLE WAI-YIP

THE HONOURABLE WONG YUK-MAN

THE HONOURABLE

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

THE HONOURABLE PEI-CHUN, G.B.S., J.P.

THE HONOURABLE NG LEUNG-SING, S.B.S., J.P.

THE HONOURABLE STEVEN HO CHUN-YIN

THE HONOURABLE CHI-MING

THE HONOURABLE WU CHI-WAI, M.H.

THE HONOURABLE YIU SI-WING

THE HONOURABLE KWOK-WAI

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

THE HONOURABLE CHARLES PETER MOK, J.P.

THE HONOURABLE CHAN CHI-CHUEN

THE HONOURABLE CHAN HAN-PAN, J.P.

DR THE HONOURABLE KENNETH CHAN KA-LOK

THE HONOURABLE CHAN YUEN-HAN, S.B.S., J.P.

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

THE HONOURABLE

846 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014

THE HONOURABLE MEI-KUEN, J.P.

DR THE HONOURABLE KWOK KA-KI

THE HONOURABLE KWOK WAI-KEUNG

THE HONOURABLE

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

DR THE HONOURABLE CHIU-HUNG

THE HONOURABLE SIN CHUNG-KAI, S.B.S., J.P.

DR THE HONOURABLE PIK-WAN

THE HONOURABLE IP KIN-YUEN

DR THE HONOURABLE , J.P.

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

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

THE HONOURABLE TANG KA-PIU, J.P.

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

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

THE HONOURABLE CHUNG KWOK-PAN

THE HONOURABLE SHU-KUN, B.B.S., M.H., J.P.

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

LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014 847

MEMBER ABSENT:

THE HONOURABLE CHEUNG KWOK-CHE

PUBLIC OFFICERS ATTENDING:

THE HONOURABLE MRS CHENG YUET-NGOR, G.B.S., J.P. THE CHIEF SECRETARY FOR ADMINISTRATION

PROF THE HONOURABLE BING-LEUNG, G.B.S., J.P. SECRETARY FOR TRANSPORT AND HOUSING

THE HONOURABLE KIN-CHUNG, G.B.S., J.P. SECRETARY FOR LABOUR AND WELFARE

THE HONOURABLE KAM-LEUNG, G.B.S., J.P. SECRETARY FOR COMMERCE AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT

THE HONOURABLE LAI TUNG-KWOK, S.B.S., I.D.S.M., J.P.

THE HONOURABLE EDDIE NG HAK-KIM, S.B.S., J.P. SECRETARY FOR

DR THE HONOURABLE KO WING-MAN, B.B.S., J.P. SECRETARY FOR FOOD AND HEALTH

MR JOHN LEE KA-CHIU, P.D.S.M., J.P. UNDER SECRETARY FOR SECURITY

MR GODFREY LEUNG KING-KWOK, J.P. UNDER SECRETARY FOR COMMERCE AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT

848 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014

CLERKS IN ATTENDANCE:

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

MRS JUSTINA LAM CHENG BO-LING, DEPUTY SECRETARY GENERAL

MR ANDY LAU KWOK-CHEONG, ASSISTANT SECRETARY GENERAL

MISS ODELIA LEUNG HING-YEE, ASSISTANT SECRETARY GENERAL

LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014 849

TABLING OF PAPERS

The following papers were laid on the table under Rule 21(2) of the Rules of Procedure:

Subsidiary Legislation/Instruments L.N. No.

Mines (Safety) (Amendment) Regulation 2014 ...... 123/2014

Dangerous Goods (General) (Amendment) (No. 2) Regulation 2014 ...... 124/2014

Dangerous Goods (Government Explosives Depots) (Amendment) Regulation 2014 ...... 125/2014

Waterworks (Amendment) Regulation 2014 ...... 126/2014

Banking (Amendment) Ordinance 2012 (Commencement) Notice 2014 ...... 127/2014

Banking (Capital) (Amendment) Rules 2014 ...... 128/2014

Banking (Liquidity) Rules ...... 129/2014

Antiquities and Monuments (Declaration of Historical Buildings) Notice 2014 ...... 130/2014

Other Papers

No. 16 ─ Environment and Conservation Fund Trustee Report 2013-2014

No. 17 ─ Occupational Safety and Health Council Annual Report 2013-2014

850 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014

No. 18 ─ Traffic Accident Victims Assistance Fund Annual Report for the year from 1 April 2013 to 31 March 2014

No. 19 ─ Customs and Excise Service Children's Education Trust Fund Report by the Trustee for the year 1 April 2013 to 31 March 2014

No. 20 ─ Office of the Trading Fund Report 2013/14

No. 21 ─ Electrical and Mechanical Services Trading Fund Report 2013/14

No. 22 ─ Annual Report 2013/14

ORAL ANSWERS TO QUESTIONS

PRESIDENT (in ): Questions. First question.

Declaration of Interests by Chief Executive and Members of Executive Council

1. MR ALBERT HO (in Cantonese): President, the incumbent Chief Executive announced his resignation from DTZ on 24 November 2011 to stand in the Chief Executive election. It has recently been reported by some Australian media that a few days before his resignation took effect in December of the same year, the Chief Executive signed an agreement with UGL Limited (UGL), which was then planning to acquire DTZ, undertaking not to poach employees from or compete with DTZ as well as to act as referee and adviser to UGL, within two years after the acquisition was completed. Under the said agreement, the Chief Executive received a remuneration of £4 million in two tranches in December 2012 and December 2013 (that is, after had taken office as the Chief Executive LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014 851 on 1 July 2012). In addition, it has been reported that the Chief Executive currently still holds shares in DTZ Japan (the Japanese branch of DTZ), and that the major shareholder of an important client of that company is also the major shareholder of a television company in . As such, some members of the public have queried whether there has been a conflict of interests in the vetting and approval of the applications for domestic free television programme service licences (free TV licences) on the part of the Chief Executive. In this connection, will the Government inform this Council:

(1) whether, under the existing mechanism for declaration of interests for the Chief Executive pursuant to Article 47 of the Basic Law, the Chief Executive is required to declare, upon assumption of office, to the Chief Justice of the Court of Final Appeal such remuneration which is receivable but has not yet been received by him under private agreements; if he is required to do so, of the relevant dates and contents of such declarations made in the past two years; if not, the reasons for that;

(2) whether, under the existing mechanism for declaration of interests for Members of the Executive Council, the Chief Executive as the President of the Executive Council is required to declare at the beginning of his term of office and annually thereafter such remuneration received by him under private agreements; if he is required to do so, of the relevant dates and contents of such declarations made in the past two years; if not, the reasons for that; and

(3) whether any declaration made by the Executive Council Members (including the President of the Executive Council) in the course of vetting the three applications for free TV licences in the past two years involved personal interests in that item under consideration; if so, of the details, and whether the Members concerned had withdrawn from the discussion for this reason?

CHIEF SECRETARY FOR ADMINISTRATION (in Cantonese): President, my reply to Mr Albert HO's question, after consulting the Chief Executive's Office, is as follows.

852 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014

Mr C Y LEUNG was the Asia Pacific Director of DTZ before he stood for the Chief Executive election. He announced his resignation from DTZ on 24 November 2011. In view of his resignation, UGL, which was at that time acquiring DTZ, concluded with Mr LEUNG a resignation agreement on 2 December 2011. Under the agreement, UGL undertook to make payments to Mr LEUNG over a two-year period and to underwrite for DTZ the payment of outstanding agreed bonus to Mr LEUNG, subject to key personnel remaining with DTZ during the two years subsequent to Mr LEUNG's resignation. As pointed out by UGL, the agreement was simply a non-compete arrangement which was to ensure that Mr LEUNG would not move to a competitor, set up or promote any business in competition with DTZ, or poach any people from DTZ, and hence to ensure that the business retained its value after the acquisition by UGL. Such agreement was a confidential arrangement and a standard business practice.

As evident from the above, the agreement and payments concerned arose from Mr LEUNG's resignation from DTZ, not any future service to be provided by him. Under the current system of declaration of interests by Members of the Executive Council, there is no requirement for Mr LEUNG to declare the said resignation agreement. Moreover, both Mr LEUNG's resignation from DTZ and conclusion of the agreement with UGL took place before he was elected as the Chief Executive, and at the material time, he had already resigned from the Executive Council.

As confirmed in UGL's public statement, Mr LEUNG has not provided any service to UGL after signing the resignation agreement.

My reply to the specific parts of the Member's question is as follows.

(1) Article 47 of the Basic Law stipulates that the Chief Executive, on assuming office, shall declare his or her assets to the Chief Justice of the Court of Final Appeal of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region (CJ), and that this declaration shall be put on record. On assuming office, the Chief Executive made such declaration to the CJ in accordance with the Basic Law. The term "assets" is not specifically defined under the Basic Law. The relevant declaration is confidential.

LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014 853

(2) As President of the Executive Council, the Chief Executive observes the system of declaration of interests for the Executive Council Members, including the requirement for regular declarations. The Chief Executive has declared his registrable interests annually for public inspection. He has also made declarations on his financial interests annually on a confidential basis deposited with the Clerk to the Executive Council. As with other Executive Council Members, the Chief Executive would notify the Clerk to the Executive Council of any changes to the interests declared in accordance with the system.

Regarding the payments mentioned in the Member's question, as I have mentioned just now, there is no requirement for Mr LEUNG to declare such payments under the current system of declaration of interests by the Executive Council Members. Moreover, both Mr LEUNG's resignation from DTZ and conclusion of the agreement with UGL took place before he was elected as the Chief Executive, and at the material time, he had already resigned from the Executive Council.

Regarding DTZ shares held by the Chief Executive, the Chief Executive has transferred all his shares of DTZ Holdings Plc and its subsidiaries to a trust. The trustee is a practising accountant. The Chief Executive has declared such interests according to the system of declaration of interests by the Executive Council Members, and the relevant declaration has already been uploaded to the Executive Council website.

(3) In line with the principle of confidentiality of the Executive Council, the Government does not disclose the content of the Executive Council discussion or the related declarations of interests. However, we would like to point out that the Government has put in place an effective system to check potential conflict of interests on the part of the Chief Executive and other Executive Council Members in dealing with the Executive Council business. The system includes the following:

(i) the responsible bureau or department submitting an item to the Executive Council and the Clerk to the Executive Council 854 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014

will, in exercising due diligence, examine whether the Chief Executive or any Executive Council Member may have an interest in the subject matter; and

(ii) where available information shows that the Chief Executive or any Executive Council Member may have an exclusionary or declaratory interest in the matter, the Clerk to the Executive Council will, prior to the relevant Executive Council meeting, draw the Chief Executive's attention to that interest for the Chief Executive to consider whether the interest should be declared at the meeting and how the Executive Council discussion should be handled.

MR ALBERT HO (in Cantonese): President, the Chief Secretary said in the main reply just now that the agreement signed between the Chief Executive and UGL was a resignation agreement; moreover, the agreement was concluded before the Chief Executive took office, and he had not provided any service to UGL subsequently. But regarding this resignation agreement, he had neither made any declaration to the Executive Council nor disclosed it publicly, not to mention that it is actually quite impossible to ascertain whether he has provided any service at all. I think the Chief Secretary must also admit to the hard fact that as far as its terms and conditions are concerned, the agreement is still valid. Leaving aside his obligation of not criticizing or obstructing UGL's acquisition of DTZ, the Chief Executive is still required to provide services to UGL as an adviser or referee under this agreement during its validity. His contractual obligations are still valid.

Chief Secretary, based on your understanding of the spirit behind the relevant guidelines of the Executive Council, should Executive Council Members, particularly the Chief Executive as the President of the Executive Council, "serve two masters at the same time", that is, whether they should sit on the Executive Council while having ongoing contractual obligations? If they should not, should he have the agreement rescinded or terminated long ago so that he could state clearly that he was no longer contractually bound? If he could not rescind the agreement, is it because the sum of £4 million was a payment in arrears subject to his contractual performance? If this is not the case, why could he not terminate the said obligations?

LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014 855

CHIEF SECRETARY FOR ADMINISTRATION (in Cantonese): President, I would like to respond to the two aspects of Mr Albert HO's question. First, as pointed out by Mr HO, under the "Additional Commitments" of the resignation agreement, Mr LEUNG had agreed to ― as the agreement is in English, I will read out the original provision in English ― "provide such assistance in the promotion of the UGL Group and the DTZ Group as UGL may reasonably require, including but not limited to acting as a referee and adviser from time to time". Nonetheless, I would like to draw Members' attention to the following remarks added specifically by Mr LEUNG to this provision when signing the resignation agreement, that is, "provided that such assistance does not create any conflict of interest".

As Mr LEUNG was elected as the Chief Executive in March 2012, he would not and should not provide the said assistance to UGL; and that is exactly the case. As confirmed by UGL in its statement, Mr LEUNG has not provided any service to UGL after signing the above agreement. Hence, given such circumstances, Mr LEUNG did not consider it necessary to rescind the agreement.

Second, regarding Mr HO's question about the declaration of interests by Members of the Executive Council, the Executive Council has a rigorous and effective system in this regard, specifying the registrable interests to be declared by Executive Council Members, including the President of the Executive Council, in relation to their personal interests. At present, registrable interests include items such as remunerated directorships; remunerated employments, offices, trades, profession, and so on; land and property owned. I will not read out the full list. Hence, all Executive Council Members should make declarations in accordance with these express provisions.

MR ALBERT HO (in Cantonese): President, the Chief Secretary has not answered the core of my question, that is, as the President of the Executive Council, should the Chief Executive take up the work of the Chief Executive and the President of the Executive Council while having an ongoing commercial and contractual obligation? The obligation is to act as referee and adviser, which is specified in the contract. Is that what he should do? My focus is not about how he actually performs the said obligations.

856 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): The Chief Secretary has already answered Mr HO's question in the first part of her reply. Chief Secretary, do you have anything to add?

CHIEF SECRETARY FOR ADMINISTRATION (in Cantonese): I only want to reiterate that this special provision is not, as claimed by Mr HO, about services to be provided by the Chief Executive (or Mr LEUNG). As Mr LEUNG has indicated clearly, he would only provide those services provided that there was no conflict of interest. After he was elected as the Chief Executive, he clearly considered that he should not and would not provide any assistance or service to the company concerned. Hence, he did not consider it necessary to rescind the said agreement.

MS CLAUDIA MO (in Cantonese): President, regarding this secret agreement, both the Board of DTZ and the principal bank, that is, the Royal Bank of Scotland, declared that they knew nothing about it. For the public, they have the perception that LEUNG Chun-ying has at least violated commercial integrity.

Here is my supplementary question. LEUNG has actually received as much as £4 million, that is, some HK$50 million, but as stated by the Chief Secretary, the term "assets" is not specifically defined under Article 47 of the Basic Law, hence this additional income amounting to as much as $50 million is not regarded as assets, and no declaration is required. This gives people an impression that the Chief Secretary is holding a double standard in this matter. In our discussion about the constitutional reform, which provision under Article 45 of the Basic Law has mentioned or defined that civil nomination …

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Ms MO, please ask your supplementary question.

MS CLAUDIA MO (in Cantonese): … would not be allowed? No, nothing has been said.

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Please directly state your supplementary question.

LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014 857

MS CLAUDIA MO (in Cantonese): By the Chief Secretary's account, does it mean that she holds a double standard in the interpretation of the Basic Law as regards the constitutional reform and the present scandal of LEUNG Chun-ying?

CHIEF SECRETARY FOR ADMINISTRATION (in Cantonese): President, before answering Ms MO's supplementary question, I must clarify two points.

She described the agreement as a secret agreement. She also said that the principal organizations involved, that is, DTZ and the Royal Bank of Scotland, were not aware of the agreement. I must clarify these two points. This is not a secret agreement, but a private business arrangement. Obviously, there is a difference between the two.

As to whether DTZ and the Royal Bank of Scotland were aware of this resignation agreement, UGL issued a statement on 9 October to clarify the matter. I will read out the relevant contents in English: "The vendor, the Royal Bank of Scotland, and their advisors were fully aware of UGL's intention to enter into an arrangement with Mr LEUNG and DTZ Holdings Plc played a significant role in initiating and negotiating those terms with Mr LEUNG."

Regarding Ms MO's question as to whether certain items of one's possession shall count as assets and hence, declaration is required, there is no such definition under the Basic Law. Notwithstanding the declaration requirements of the Executive Council Members, they are not required to declare their so-called personal assets in cash. As Members will also agree, the entire system is designed to strike a balance between personal privacy and public interests.

MS CLAUDIA MO (in Cantonese): President, she has not answered my supplementary question, that is, which provision in the Basic Law has specifically defined civil nomination and provided that it would not be allowed?

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Ms MO, your question is unrelated to the main question.

858 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014

MS CLAUDIA MO (in Cantonese): President, that is not so. What she said gave people the impression that the entire Government is holding a double standard.

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Ms MO, you have expressed your views.

MR DENNIS KWOK (in Cantonese): President, just now, the Chief Secretary mentioned in the second paragraph of the main reply that LEUNG Chun-ying resigned as Asia Pacific Director of DTZ on 24 November 2011. But there is an important point which the Chief Secretary has not mentioned in the main reply, that is, the notice issued by DTZ in the London Stock Exchange clearly stated that LEUNG Chun-ying formally resigned as Asia Pacific Director of DTZ in January 2012, and I repeat, January 2012. The original text reads as follows: "His resignation as Chairman of DTZ Asia Pacific will take effect at or before the end of January 2012." I have this document with me. If the Chief Secretary does not have a copy, I will gladly give it to her.

President, the crux is that when LEUNG Chun-ying signed this so-called secret agreement, he was still the Asia Pacific Director of DTZ, and it was not until the following year, that is, in January 2012, that he formally left the post. In other words, when LEUNG Chun-ying signed this secret agreement, he was still an employee of DTZ and had to be subjected to the requirements under section 9 of the Prevention of Bribery Ordinance.

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Please ask your supplementary question.

MR DENNIS KWOK (in Cantonese): President, my supplementary question is: Can the Chief Secretary simply tell me whether the Board of DTZ was aware of the situation when Mr LEUNG Chun-ying signed the agreement? I hope the Chief Secretary can give me a concise reply.

CHIEF SECRETARY FOR ADMINISTRATION (in Cantonese): President, I have already given a concise reply when I answered Ms MO's question.

LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014 859

MR DENNIS KWOK (in Cantonese): President, the Chief Secretary has not answered my supplementary question. I asked her whether the Board of DTZ was aware of the secret agreement at the time when it was signed between LEUNG Chun-ying and UGL.

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Chief Secretary, can you answer this follow up question directly?

CHIEF SECRETARY FOR ADMINISTRATION (in Cantonese): As I said, it has been mentioned in the statement issued by UGL that ― I have already read out the original contents just now, and I repeat: "The vendor, the Royal Bank of Scotland, and their advisors were fully aware of UGL's intention to enter into an arrangement with Mr LEUNG and DTZ Holdings Plc played a significant role in initiating and negotiating those terms with Mr LEUNG." It states clearly that DTZ Holdings Plc was aware of the agreement and had played a role in negotiating the resignation agreement.

DR CHIANG LAI-WAN (in Cantonese): President, as I see it, this matter is quite simple. Chief Secretary, as far as you know, or is there any evidence suggesting that LEUNG Chun-ying had obtained any income unlawfully prior to his assuming the post of the Chief Executive? I also hope the Chief Secretary can tell us whether there is any known case or any evidence to suggest that Mr LEUNG Chun-ying has, other than his principal job as the Chief Executive, provided any remunerated consultancy service to other enterprises or organizations over the past two years?

CHIEF SECRETARY FOR ADMINISTRATION (in Cantonese): President, I cannot possibly have any idea about Mr LEUNG's personal finances. I also doubt if Mrs LEUNG has full knowledge about Mr LEUNG's financial situation.(Laughter)

Regarding the second part of the supplementary question, since he assumed office on 1 July 2012, the Chief Executive has been dedicated to his duties and is fully committed to the work of the Chief Executive of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region. This is plain for all to see.

860 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014

MR WU CHI-WAI (in Cantonese): President, according to the agreement signed between LEUNG Chun-ying and UGL, LEUNG Chun-ying would receive a remuneration of £4 million if UGL's acquisition of DTZ was successful. But at that time, DTZ had evidently rejected another company's bid with an offer price £100 million higher than UGL's. Obviously, there was a conflict of interest on LEUNG Chun-ying's part as a then director of DTZ, and he had breached his fiduciary duties as a director. LEUNG Chun-ying not only questioned the ability of a state-owned enterprise in completing the relevant international transaction, but also breached his fiduciary duties as a director to protect the best interest of shareholders.

I would like to ask the Chief Secretary: Under the integrity checking system under the civil service regulations, if a civil servant undergoing vetting is found to have breached certain commercial integrity obligations, and is suspected of putting his personal interests above the overall interest of a company, will the Government consider such offensive act acceptable?

CHIEF SECRETARY FOR ADMINISTRATION (in Cantonese): First of all, the sale of DTZ was decided by the Board of DTZ. Second, public officers or civil servants are of course subject to the regulation of different laws, especially the Prevention of Bribery Ordinance. However, whether a particular legislation or provision can apply to a certain case or situation, the judgment must be made on the basis of facts. Hence, regarding the particular case mentioned by Mr WU, I cannot make any comments in respect of the understanding, interpretation or even application of the relevant regulations.

MR WU CHI-WAI (in Cantonese): President, I only asked the Chief Secretary whether the Government will accept a civil servant if his breach of commercial integrity has been found when undergoing integrity checking as part of the appraisal process?

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Chief Secretary, do you have anything to add?

CHIEF SECRETARY FOR ADMINISTRATION (in Cantonese): I only want to add that we have established a stringent system on integrity checking.

LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014 861

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): This Council has spent nearly 23 minutes on this question. Second question.

Measures to Enhance Food Safety

2. MR STEVEN HO (in Cantonese): President, a few food safety incidents have occurred in Hong Kong recently, including one in which a chain eatery used expired meat products supplied by Shanghai Husi Food Company Limited, and another one in which many eateries and food manufacturers used substandard lard imported from Taiwan. Some members of the public have pointed out that the aforesaid chain eatery disseminated confusing information after the incident had been uncovered, and the food tracing mechanism currently in place also failed to trace the sources and distribution of the substandard lard expeditiously, thereby undermining their confidence in food safety. Such members of the public have also pointed out that while it is stipulated in the existing legislation that the Director of Food and Environmental Hygiene (DFEH) may demand food importers and distributors to submit transaction records which they are required to keep, no time limit for compliance is prescribed in the legislation and the penalty for contravention also lacks deterrent effect. In this connection, will the Government inform this Council:

(1) whether it will amend the existing legislation to require food importers and distributors to submit upon the authorities' request their transaction records within a specified time limit, and to increase the penalty for contravention; if it will, of the details; if not, the reasons for that;

(2) whether it will conduct a comprehensive review of the effectiveness of the food tracing mechanism, in particular the arrangements for information dissemination and the announcement of the list of eateries involved, so as to ensure that the mechanism can effectively help the authorities in handling food safety incidents; and

(3) given that the authorities have proposed to legislate to require importers and exporters of edible oils to provide official certificates issued by the place of origin of edible oils for random inspection by them, how the authorities will verify the authenticity of such certificates?

862 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014

SECRETARY FOR FOOD AND HEALTH (in Cantonese): President, the recent food safety incidents, such as those related to problematic food products from Husi Food Company in Shanghai and the substandard lard from Taiwan, involved a wide spectrum of parties and products. Also, the food products affected are those commonly consumed by the public and widely available in the market. The Government has been very concerned about these incidents and has been taking follow-up actions proactively. The Government has also taken appropriate measures in light of developments of these incidents in order to safeguard food safety.

In the course of investigation, apart from liaising closely with the food safety authorities of the places where the affected food products originated to keep tab on the up-to-date situation, the Centre for Food safety (CFS) also traced the source of these food products and their distribution from importers to distributors and downstream businesses. The CFS invoked the power to request traders which might be affected by the incidents to submit information on the trading and use of the relevant products within the time limits set conferred upon the DFEH under the Food Safety Ordinance (Cap. 612). This allowed the CFS to assess the scale of the incidents and the movement of the food products in question more accurately, as well as to trace, mark and seal the products which might be affected, so as to prevent further sale of problematic food products.

My reply to the various parts of the question is as follows:

(1) Sections 4 and 5 of the Food Safety Ordinance provide that all food importers or distributors must be registered with the DFEH as food importers or distributors. Besides, sections 21 to 24 of the Ordinance require any person who, in the course of business imports, acquires or supplies food by wholesale in Hong Kong, must keep transaction records of the business to which it has supplied the food and the business from which it has acquired the food.

Under section 27 of the Food Safety Ordinance, the DFEH may, for the purpose of exercising powers or performing functions under the Ordinance, require to inspect, make a copy of or take an extract from a record kept by these food traders. Those who fail to keep such information or submit the information to the DFEH within the specified time commit an offence and are liable to a maximum fine of $10,000 and imprisonment up to three months. While the Food LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014 863

Safety Ordinance does not specify a time limit for submission of such information, section 40(1) of the Interpretation and General Clauses Ordinance (Cap. 1) stipulates that "Where any Ordinance confers upon any person power to do or enforce the doing of any act or thing, all such powers shall be deemed to be also conferred as are reasonably necessary to enable the person to do or enforce the doing of the act or thing." As such, the DFEH may, in requiring the relevant person to submit the required information under section 27 of the Food Safety Ordinance, stipulate a reasonable time limit having regard to the urgency of individual cases. Thus, the DFEH is currently vested with sufficient power to require food importers or food distributors to provide transaction records within a reasonable time limit.

To enable effective tracing of the source and distribution of food products, the CFS, by exercising the power vested in it under the Food Safety Ordinance, may require food traders to submit food import or acquisition and distribution records and relevant information within a specified time limit, which may be as short as 24 hours where necessary. This allows the CFS to trace the food products which may be affected by food incidents to safeguard food safety. Take the substandard lard incident in Taiwan as an example. The CFS, under section 27 of the Food Safety Ordinance, issued notices to over 780 importers, distributors and traders who might have imported, distributed or used the lard or lard products from Chang Guann Co. Ltd. (Chang Guann), requiring them to submit transaction records of the lard/lard products concerned within a specified time limit, in order to facilitate tracing, marking and sealing of the relevant products. Traders in general could provide the information required before the deadline. As such, it is not necessary to increase the penalty for contravention for the time being.

(2) In order to help members of the public keep track of the progress of the food incidents, the CFS has provided updates on the investigation of the food incidents in a timely manner through press releases and its own website. With regard to the incident involving substandard lard from Taiwan, as at 22 October 2014, the CFS held a total of eight media sessions to brief the public in a prompt manner on the 864 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014

progress of the investigation and the control measures implemented, so that the public could have a timely and better understanding of the incident and take corresponding preventive measures. The CFS also issued a total of 19 press releases on the incident to keep the public updated on the latest development. It has also set up a dedicated webpage and has been providing updates to the webpage so that the public can learn about the progress of the incident promptly.

On 13 September 2014, the DFEH made an order in accordance with section 30(1) of the Food Safety Ordinance to prohibit the import into and supply within Hong Kong of lard/lard products produced by Chang Guann in Taiwan on or after 1 March 2014 and all food products made with such lard/lard products in Taiwan or Hong Kong, and to direct that all the products concerned must be recalled in the manner specified in the order. To protect consumers' right to know and to ensure that the recall would be conducted in a timely and systematic manner, the CFS released a list of traders who might have distributed or used lard/lard products manufactured by Chang Guann. As the supply chain of the affected products involved different sectors (for example, products might be handled by multiple distributors before reaching the end users), the CFS needed time to verify the information. Moreover, at the time of publication of the list, traders concerned might have no stock of the relevant products, or have returned them to suppliers, or have removed them from the shelves, or have stopped using such products for some time. Therefore, I have to point out that the list may not necessarily reflect the prevailing situation of the recall. We will draw on the experience and explore ways to improve the recall arrangement, so that the CFS can obtain from traders information on the supply chain more efficiently and update the list in a timely manner.

In the early stage of handling the incident of problematic food products from Husi in Shanghai, a chain restaurant which used Husi products failed to provide the CFS with accurate information in a timely manner. As a result, the CFS needed to verify the relevant information with the company and was unable to announce comprehensive and accurate information immediately. In light of the experience of handling recent food incidents, the CFS held LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014 865

briefings on 17, 18 and 24 September this year with the trade to remind them that the DFEH may require the trade to provide transaction records within a specified period under section 27 of the Food Safety Ordinance. As such, members of the trade are required to arrange their transaction records systematically for timely submission of the relevant information whenever necessary. In addition, the CFS has strengthened the communication mechanism with the trade by requesting food importers and distributors to provide particulars of at least one contact person, with whom the CFS can get in touch through a 24-hour contact telephone number and a mobile phone number during office and non-office hours in case of emergency food incidents. This will enable the CFS to make immediate contact with the relevant traders when necessary to obtain the information required for safeguarding food safety.

(3) The is considering making regulations to safeguard safety of edible oil by requiring traders who import, sell or produce edible oil to ensure that the oil complies with the relevant requirements. Any trader who fails to do so commits an offence. The Food and Health Bureau suggests that the legislation should require importers of edible oil to provide an official certificate issued by the place of origin for the inspection by the FEHD as a proof of the oil's compliance with the relevant requirements. Copies of the certificate must also be provided by edible oil importers to their downstream distributors, retailers or food premises supplied with the oil for the FEHD's inspection.

In this regard, we would make reference to the practices adopted in implementing the Imported Game, Meat and Poultry Regulations (Cap. 132AK) under the Public Health and Municipal Services Ordinance (Cap. 132). Under the Regulations, all imported raw meat (including meat and poultry) must be accompanied by an official certificate issued by a competent veterinary authority recognized by the DFEH to prove that the meat or poultry concerned is fit for human consumption. As official health certificates are issued by the competent authorities of the export countries, the CFS could contact the competent authorities concerned to verify the authenticity of the certificates if necessary.

866 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014

The above proposals are preliminary ideas, details of which are to be discussed by the relevant departments. We will also take into account practices of the international community and other countries. We will seek to launch a public consultation on the legislative proposals early next year.

MR STEVEN HO (in Cantonese): President, as parts (1) and (2) of my question are related to the internal affairs of Hong Kong, I believe we can find out the answers in the panels of this Council. Hence, I will focus my supplementary question on part (3) because certain issues are beyond the control of Hong Kong. My question is, since we will require the relevant countries or local governments to provide health certificates, assuming that such certificates are authentic, how will the Hong Kong Government ensure that the health authorities concerned will issue them in a legal, reasonable and justifiable manner so as to safeguard food quality? I hope the Government can answer this point, as well as how long it will take to complete the relevant work and how the Government will check its effectiveness.

SECRETARY FOR FOOD AND HEALTH (in Cantonese): President, I thank Mr HO for the question. Let me discuss from two aspects. First, we will enact legislation to require the official authorities or the authorized inspection centres of the export countries or places to issue health certificates. Since there are official authorities in the export places or places of origin, we can contact them to verify the authenticity of the certificates should any food safety incident occurs in future.

Second, I believe Mr HO may follow the matter up and ask how the Government will ensure that the official authorities or the authorized inspection centres will carry out their duties responsibly. My answer is that this can be achieved in an indirect way. The official authorities of the export places or places of origin are certainly responsible to perform its gate-keeping role properly. They should ensure that the products exported to Hong Kong have been proven to be of good quality after going through certain reasonable and scientific procedures before issuing the certificates. Having said that, I can also tell Honourable Members, in the process of enacting the legislation, we will not act unilaterally and then expect the requirements to be automatically met by the LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014 867 places of origin of our imported products. Very often, we have to hold discussions with the main countries and places of origin and tell them the food quality requirements of Hong Kong, as well as our major requirements regarding procedures of quality assurance. We hope that through communication, the authorities of the places of origin will clearly understand our requirements regarding imported products. We also hope that our communication will help the health authorities of the places of origin or the official authorities of the exporters in issuing the certificates to meet our requirements.

MR TOMMY CHEUNG (in Cantonese): President, the Secretary said in part (2) of the main reply that he made the decision in the Chang Guann incident to protect consumers' right to know. However, as I have told the Secretary many times, when he released the list at the later stage, many food premises on the list had in fact stopped using the problematic lard. As a matter of fact, since an order had already been made at that time, those food premises could no longer purchase or use the lard in question. Nevertheless, in order to protect the department under his purview, the Secretary kept on updating and released the list again once the addresses of the food premises have been verified. However, the Secretary has failed to tell the public the following facts: first, such lard has only been used in very few products; second, such lard has already been recalled. To date, the Secretary is still unwilling to release a list of food premises from which such lard has been recalled and whether all the problematic lard has been recalled. He has not done this work …

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Mr CHEUNG, please raise your supplementary question.

MR TOMMY CHEUNG (in Cantonese): President, may I ask the Secretary whether he would strike a balance between protecting consumers' right to know and safeguarding the interests of the trade? Since the authorities have released a list of food premises which had used such lard, the Secretary should also immediately publish the names of food premises from which such lard had been recalled and those which no longer used the edible oils from suppliers such as Chang Guann.

868 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014

SECRETARY FOR FOOD AND HEALTH (in Cantonese): President, I thank Mr CHEUNG for his supplementary question. Perhaps I have not made myself clear just now. Let me reiterate. We released a list of downstream food premises and retailers mainly to protect consumers' right to know and to ensure that the recall could be completed expeditiously and systematically. Certainly, we understand and has pointed out many times, as the supply chain of the affected products involves different sectors and the products may be handled by multiple distributors before reaching the end users, the CFS needs time to verify the information. We understand that at the time the list was released, the traders concerned might have no stock of the relevant products, have returned the products to suppliers, have removed the products from the shelves, or have stopped using such products for some time. Therefore, in releasing the list, we had also pointed out that it might not fully reflect whether the food premises or the retailers had any stock of the products at the prevailing time. We understand that after releasing the list, members of the public and consumers might be worried and the continual operation of the traders might be affected. We will therefore draw on the experience and explore ways to improve the recall arrangement. We also hope that the CFS can expeditiously obtain from traders information on the supply chain and update the list in a timely manner.

(Mr Tommy CHEUNG stood up)

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Mr CHEUNG, what is your point?

MR TOMMY CHEUNG (in Cantonese): President, the Secretary has not answered my supplementary question which is very simple. After releasing the information of the food premises concerned, if it is confirmed that the relevant food premises no longer used the problematic edible oils, the Secretary should make such information known to the people of Hong Kong; he should not just keep repeating the same crap.

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Secretary, do you have anything to add?

SECRETARY FOR FOOD AND HEALTH (in Cantonese): President, I can provide some additional information. Of course, what I said just now is LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014 869 different from what Mr CHEUNG has alleged. If Members have listened carefully, they would know that I have provided some important information. Before and after releasing the list of food premises, the CFS has to undertake a lot of follow-up work. Take for example the issuance of the Food Safety Order on the last occasion, there is still a lot of follow-up work to be undertaken by the CFS. Such work involves a wide spectrum of parties and products and the constant updating of a lot of information. Therefore, as I said earlier, since some downstream distributors and food premises have been affected by the previous arrangement, we will draw on the experience and explore ways to improve the recall arrangement. We will certainly consider Mr CHEUNG's suggestion as well.

MISS ALICE MAK (in Cantonese): President, may I ask the Secretary whether he has learnt any lesson from the Husi food incident and collect more meat and meat product samples for chemical and microbiological tests? The reason is that according to the Import and Export Ordinance, an import licence issued by the DFEH is required for importing frozen or chilled meat or poultry, but such a requirement is not required for cooked meat. May I ask whether the Government will amend the laws to strengthen the regulation on imported cooked meat?

SECRETARY FOR FOOD AND HEALTH (in Cantonese): President, to put it simply and as I have explained many times before, there are reasons behind the current arrangement. Raw meat contains bacteria, and if such meat is uncooked and not properly handled and stored, including being stored for a prolonged period at room temperature or at a temperature other than what is prescribed, the bacteria on the meat may grow profusely and pose a health hazard to the people who consume it.

Cooked meat is different. At the initial stage of processing, the bacteria on the meat would be greatly reduced or even completely killed by cooking. Unless the cooked meat is contaminated in the subsequent handling procedures, the microbes in it will not grow as profusely as in raw meat.

Therefore, I admit that the current regulations on cooked meat are more lenient. However, in view of the recent incident, we are considering whether there is a need to strengthen the regulations on cooked meat.

870 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014

DR HELENA WONG (in Cantonese): President, the Secretary mentioned in the main reply that on 13 September, the authorities made a Food Safety Order (Order) under the Food Safety Ordinance in relation to Chang Guann. Then on 11 October, the CFS found that apart from Chang Guann, other companies in Taiwan also have problematic lard in stock, including Ting Hsin Oil and Fat Co Ltd (Ting Hsin) and Cheng I Food Co Ltd (Cheng I), but the CFS only published the names of three Hong Kong traders which have imported the problematic lard, including Hop Hing Oil Procurement Limited, Lam Soon Products Supply (Hong Kong) Company Limited and Rich Strong International Limited.

My supplementary question is, as the authorities became aware on 11 October that other problematic lard has been imported into Hong Kong from Taiwan, why to date, on 29 October, they still failed to release the list of the downstream traders after 18 days. Which food premises and shops have purchased the problematic lard from the three traders and why have the authorities not made an Order against them? The Order made by the authorities in September only dealt with the lard produced by Chang Guann after 1 March 2014, but according to the new information, the problem does not only relate to the lard produced after 1 March …

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Dr WONG, you have raised your supplementary question.

DR HELENA WONG (in Cantonese): … but also the lard which was produced in 2013 or even earlier. Why have the authorities not made an Order in this connection after 18 days?

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Dr WONG, please let the Secretary reply. Secretary, please reply.

SECRETARY FOR FOOD AND HEALTH (in Cantonese): President, following the substandard lard incident involving Chang Guann in Taiwan, the Taiwanese authorities further announced early this month that suspected fraudulent fats and oils produced by Cheng I were found to have been produced LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014 871 from substandard ingredients (such as lard for animal feed). The affected products included lard, beef tallow, margarine and shortening. Further investigation by the Taiwanese authorities discovered that lard or lard products from Ting Hsin were also produced from substandard ingredients (such as lard for animal feed). Its substandard fats and oils products were also found to have been produced from beef tallow and coconut oil ingredients from unapproved sources in Vietnam.

Early this month, the second round of substandard lard incidents broke out in Taiwan. In fact, there have been new developments on those incidents. We receive new information every day, including yesterday and today. The CFS has been following the developments diligently and liaising closely with the Taiwanese authorities. Earlier, the CFS has informed the media of the effective measures taken by the Government at different levels to ensure that the affected lard products (including vegetable oils) will be marked and sealed.

The CFS will issue an Order to prohibit, with effect from noon today, importing into and supplying within Hong Kong all edible fats and oils (of animal or plant origin) produced by Cheng I and Ting Hsin in Taiwan and all food products made with the abovementioned fats and oils. Food traders are also ordered to recall within a period of 14 days from noon today the affected food supplied by them and dispose of such food subsequently in the manner set out in the Order, which was gazetted today.

President, as I mentioned just now, before making this Order, since the Taiwanese authorities started to investigate the problematic lard products produced by Cheng I and Ting Hsin early this month, the CFS has been following the incident as well as marking and sealing the products with the traders. By making this Order, the Hong Kong authorities can ensure that such products will be recalled consistently, even though there may only be a small amount of stock in the market.

Regarding the release or otherwise of the list of the traders concerned, as I have explained the relevant principles in my reply to Mr Tommy CHEUNG's supplementary question earlier, I shall not repeat.

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): We have spent nearly 26 minutes on this question, which has far exceeded the allocated time. Third question.

872 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014

Impact of Assemblies Triggered by Occupy Central Movement

3. DR LAM TAI-FAI (in Cantonese): President, the assemblies triggered by the Occupy Central movement have been going on for more than a month now. Certain major trunk roads have been blocked by assembly participants, causing impacts of varied degrees on Hong Kong's society, economy and people's livelihood, and so on. For instance, classes of all kindergartens, primary schools, secondary schools and special schools in the Central and Western district and Wan Chai were once suspended; the public transport services passing the assembly venues en route have been seriously affected; quite a number of shop operators in the vicinity of and Causeway Bay have complained about a drastic decline in business; some overseas authorities have reminded their citizens visiting Hong Kong to stay away from the areas affected by the protests, which has not only dampened tourists' desire to visit Hong Kong but also tarnished the international image of Hong Kong; and there have been scuffles between protesters and police officers from time to time causing injuries. In this connection, will the Government inform this Council:

(1) of the number of schools whose classes were once suspended and the number of students involved, with a breakdown of such numbers by school zone and school type (that is, kindergarten, primary school, secondary school and special school); whether the had approached the principals or the school sponsoring bodies of such schools prior to making the decisions to suspend classes; if it had, of the details and the respective numbers of schools which supported, opposed and had no comment on the arrangements of class suspension and resumption; if not, the reasons for that;

(2) of the number of franchised bus routes and tram routes which have been diverted or suspended so far due to the aforesaid assemblies; whether it has looked into the magnitude of the increase in the highest daily patronages and frequencies of MTR trains since the occurrence of the assemblies as compared with the figures in the past, and whether MTR is able to cope with the additional patronages; if it has, of the details; if not, the reasons for that; and

(3) whether it has assessed the specific impacts of the aforesaid assemblies on the overall economy of Hong Kong, in particular the tourism, catering, retail, transportation and exhibition industries; whether it has so far received any requests for assistance from the LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014 873

affected shop operators and employees in such industries; if it has, of the details and the Government's new measures to provide support to them?

SECRETARY FOR EDUCATION (in Cantonese): President, the assemblies triggered by the Occupy Central movement have been going on for more than a month now. Certain major trunk roads have been blocked by assembly participants, causing impacts of varied degrees on Hong Kong's society, economy and people's livelihood, and so on. Regarding Dr LAM's three-part question on the movement's impact on the school, traffic and economy, our reply is set out separately as follows:

(1) After the outbreak of the movement on 28 September (Sunday), with students' safety as the top priority, the Education Bureau announced that classes of all kindergartens, primary, secondary and special schools in the Wan Chai and Central and Western district be suspended on 29 and 30 September, and 3 and 4 October (with 1 and 2 October being public holidays). A total of 150 schools and some 61 500 students in the two districts were affected. Details are set out below:

Central and Western Wan Chai District

District School Student* School Student* Secondary Schools 14 12 000 17 12 100 Primary Schools 27 11 500 24 13 800 Kindergartens (Including 38 5 500 28 6 500 Kindergarten-cum- Child Care Centres) Special Schools (Excluding Hospital 0 0 2 160 Schools) Total: 79 29 000 71 32 560

Note:

* Provisional figures

874 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014

In addition, a primary school in the decided to suspend class on its own volition on 29 September having regard to the spontaneous road occupation in the district. About 320 students were affected.

Regarding the possible impacts of the movement on schools in the Wan Chai and Central and Western district, the Education Bureau has all along been keeping close contact with the schools and stakeholders to prepare for contingencies. In general, schools in the districts have already put in place contingency measures for class suspension in case of possible emergency. Before the announcement for class resumption was made, the Education Bureau had all along maintained communication with the affected schools, Federations of Parent-Teacher Associations in the districts and relevant departments for the necessary preparatory arrangements for class resumption, including school bus services, provision of lunch boxes and liaison with parents, and so on. After a full appraisal of the prevailing situation, the Education Bureau announced class resumption for secondary, primary and special schools, and kindergartens/kindergarten-cum-child care centres in the Wan Chai and Central and Western district by phases on 6, 7 and 9 October respectively.

(2) Since the beginning of the Occupy Central movement, extensive road transport services in and have been severely affected by road closure and traffic diversion. Despite some roads having been reopened, road public transport services are still being affected and this results in unstable operation and frequencies subject to temporary adjustments. Members of the public usually have to set off early and allow additional time for travelling and hence inconvenience is caused.

Bus services have been severely affected. The highest number of bus routes affected during the past month (that is, 30 September) is 270, accounting for about half of all bus routes in Hong Kong, and these include 77 suspended routes and 193 diverted routes. As at 28 October, despite some roads such as Queensway having been reopened, 225 bus routes are still affected, accounting for about 40% of all bus routes in Hong Kong, and these include eight suspended LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014 875

routes and 217 diverted routes. Regarding the most affected Hong Kong Island area, as at 28 October, about 63% of Hong Kong Island bus routes are still affected. As for another severely affected Mong Kok area, 85 bus routes travelling vide Mong Kok are diverted.

The usage of the railway system has indeed increased in the past month. The highest daily patronage of heavy rail during the past month was recorded on 3 October (Friday) with about 5.8 million. This is 13% higher than a normal relatively busy Friday with daily patronage of about 5.1 million. Train compartments are very crowded and passengers usually have to wait for several trains and spend more time for boarding. The average weekday daily patronage of heavy rail from 28 September to 25 October (except Saturdays, Sundays and Public Holidays) is about 5.34 million, the increase rate is 10%.

Without compromising railway safety and apart from continuing to run at two minutes peak headway from 7.15 am to about 9.15 am (the end time of morning peak hour of individual railway line varies given the difference in patronage). MTR heavy rail network has additionally increased about 70 train trips on average per day during the above period. Ultimately, the carrying capacity of the train system is confined by its signalling system. The risk of service disruption will naturally increase if this situation persists. Having regard to the actual situation, the MTR Corporation Limited (MTRCL) has also implemented further passenger flow management measures at some stations with higher volume of passenger flow in the past month to ensure smooth train operation and passenger safety.

(3) Since the outbreak of the Occupy Central movement, the Government has been closely liaising with the trade to understand the impact of the Occupy Central movement on business operation. We understand from the trade that the sectors directly affected include retail, tourism, catering and transportation, and other sectors may be indirectly affected. The retail sector indicated that during the National Day Golden Week Holidays, the business of the retailers near the protest areas was most adversely affected, and the drop of business of SME retailers in Mong Kok, Causeway Bay and was as high as 80%. As for the tourism sector, the 876 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014

trade representatives indicated that the business of hotels and tourist attractions in individual districts had been affected. They were worried that if the situation continued, it would reduce the desire of visitors to visit Hong Kong, affect the overall development of the tourism industry as well as the livelihood of front-line employees. Affected by the Occupy Central movement, the venue of the annual "Wine and Dine Festival" has to be changed from the New Central Harbourfront to the Former Kai Tak Runway. This would inevitably affect Hong Kong's image as an international tourist city. Regarding the exhibition industry, the operation of the Hong Kong Convention and Exhibition Centre and AsiaWorld-Expo is normal during this period.

So far, the Government has not received requests for assistance from individual affected shop operators or employees. The Government would continue to provide assistance to SMEs through the existing cross-sector schemes, including the SME Loan Guarantee Scheme and the special concessionary measures under the SME Financing Guarantee Scheme. The Secretary for Commerce and Economic Development has also appealed to the lending institutions participating in the above schemes to render assistance to the affected SMEs as far as practicable and to expedite the processing of their loan applications.

The Government will closely monitor the situation and further assess the impact of the Occupy Central movement on various aspects when more data is available. I wish to emphasize again that Hong Kong's society, economy and people's livelihood have all been affected to different extents. The Government has worked with various sectors to minimize the impact, for the well-being of Hong Kong as a whole, I sincerely hope that the obstructed roads will be reopened as soon as possible to allow people to return to normal life.

DR LAM TAI-FAI (in Cantonese): President, taking into account national security, sovereignty integrity and territorial integrity, the country made a decision on the constitutional reform on 31 August. However, some people, being dissatisfied with the decision, took actions to boycott class and initiate the Occupy Central movement. These actions have now persisted for more than a month. Some considered that many Hong Kong people have insufficient knowledge of the country, and they lack understanding of the state of affairs and LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014 877 the history of . Thus, they fail to have profound, comprehensive and correct understanding of the decision made by the Standing Committee of the National People's Congress on 31 August.

President, given the extensive scale of Occupy Central, the large number of participants and the long period the movement has persisted, my supplementary question is: Are these situations related to the Government's failure in launching national education since the reunification? Although the SAR Government stated in 2012 that it would not implement national education within its term of office, owing to the present social situation, does Secretary Eddie NG find it necessary to immediately reintroduce national education and examine if Chinese History will be made a compulsory subject in secondary schools? If so, what are the details? If not, what are the reasons? I hope the Secretary would give an explicit, direct and simple answer.

SECRETARY FOR EDUCATION (in Cantonese): President, concerning the national education incident on 8 October 2012, we had stated very explicitly that the Curriculum Guide would be shelved. School principals and teachers, being professionals, might determine whether they would implement the subject, how they would implement the subject and what approaches would be adopted. According to my understanding, on this premise, many schools find that they can have greater freedom and can, to various extents, continue to implement moral and civic education. I believe they should continue to do so.

Dr LAM talked about the Chinese History subject and I would like to thank him for asking this question, giving me another opportunity to emphasize that Chinese History is a compulsory subject at the junior secondary level (Secondary One to Secondary Three). This is an indisputable fact and has not been changed before and after the reunification. Actually, individual schools have started teaching Chinese History as a subject after the reunification. Chinese History continues to be an elective subject of the secondary school curriculum as in the past and quite a number of students have taken this subject.

I understand that there are worries about the considerable reduction in the number of students taking this subject. The most important reason is an overall decline in student population; this is the first point. The second point is that in the past, students took eight to nine subjects, but now they only take the major subjects plus two to three other subjects. Thus, students do not have to take too 878 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014 many subjects. Let me provide Members with some data though I do not have the actual figures in hand. Before the reunification, over 5 000 students took the A-level examination on the Chinese History subject. At present, about 6 000 to 7 000 students have taken the subject before the university entrance examination. Based on these data, the number has not decreased considerably.

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Has your supplementary question not been answered?

DR LAM TAI-FAI (in Cantonese): President, as you have heard, my supplementary question is …

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Please repeat your supplementary question.

DR LAM TAI-FAI (in Cantonese): I have asked the Secretary if Chinese History would be made a compulsory subject but the Secretary has explained that the Liberal Studies subject at the junior secondary level already covered the relevant contents and Chinese History is an elective subject at the senior secondary level. My supplementary question is ― I do not intend to challenge the Secretary's argument that Chinese History is a compulsory subject at the junior secondary level ― as Chinese History is an elective subject but not a compulsory subject at the senior secondary level, will the Education Bureau make Chinese History a compulsory subject at the senior secondary level? I hope the Secretary will give a clear answer.

SECRETARY FOR EDUCATION (in Cantonese): Regarding the Chinese History subject, I have had discussions with teachers and principals from various sectors. We all have the view that, be it at the junior or senior secondary level, what matters most is not the Chinese History subject itself but the teaching resources, teaching training and support, as well as the enhancement of teaching methods, especially how the application of technology can increase students' interest in learning. Chinese History is not the only subject that enables students to understand the state of affairs; they can also acquire the relevant knowledge through other subjects, including Chinese, Chinese Geography and Liberal LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014 879

Studies, as well as other learning modes. Hence we need not overly rely on the Chinese History subject.

MR VINCENT FANG (in Cantonese): What the Secretary has just said in part (3) of his main reply coincide with the remarks made by the Secretary for Commerce and Economic Development at last week's meeting of the Panel on Commerce and Industry. The Secretary keeps saying that the affected SMEs can make applications under the existing SME Loan Guarantee Scheme or the SME Financing Guarantee Scheme. I would like to ask if the Secretary is aware that small shop operators and traders such as street hawkers or non-staple food wholesalers and retailers, as well as van operators are not eligible to apply under these schemes. The Occupy Central action has lasted for more than one month and its impacts are far beyond our imagination. If it drags on, not knowing when it will come to an end, I think these SMEs and even micro enterprises will successively have financial difficulties and they will probably have to close down …

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Mr FANG, please state your supplementary question.

MR VINCENT FANG (in Cantonese): My supplementary question is: Apart from the above large-scale schemes, can the Government adopt practical inter-departmental measures to assist SMEs in respect of cash flow? For example, can the Government provide SMEs with assistance in terms of rents and wages?

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Which Secretary will reply? Secretary for Commerce and Economic Development, please reply.

SECRETARY FOR COMMERCE AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT (in Cantonese): President, we fully discussed this issue at the meeting of the Panel on Commerce and Industry held last week. I mentioned at the meeting that, as pointed out by Mr FANG a while ago, two schemes are now in place, one being the SME Loan Guarantee Scheme, which is a regular scheme, and the other is the 880 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014 special concessionary measures under the SME Financing Guarantee Scheme. These schemes have been able to help address the financing needs of SMEs.

After the meeting of the Panel on Commerce and Industry held last Tuesday, I wrote to the lending institutions of the two schemes, urging them to provide assistance to SMEs affected by Occupy Central as far as practicable when considering their loan applications so as to reduce their burden, and to expedite the processing of their loan applications. I have also urged the Trade and Industry Department and the Hong Kong Mortgage Corporation Limited to liaise closely with these lending institutions, with a view to handling the loan applications as quickly as possible. In my opinion, the most effective way of meeting the financing needs of SMEs, particularly SMEs in the affected areas, is to handle their applications expeditiously. Concerning the two financing guarantee schemes mentioned by Mr Vincent FANG just now, the maximum amount of guarantee loan is $12 million. As a matter of fact, many SMEs can get a guarantee loan of less than $1 million. Therefore, the affected SMEs, regardless of their size, are welcome to apply under these two schemes for getting the necessary funds.

MR TAM YIU-CHUNG (in Cantonese): The businesses of a number of shops in the vicinity of the occupied areas have been hard hit, and some of the operators have earlier filed claims in court for compensation. However, it was reported that after these operators have filed the claims, they have been harassed continuously. For instance, many people frantically phoned the operators for fun; or someone ordered take-away food from food premises, but no one showed up to collect and pay for the food. The operators thus suffer financial losses. Regarding such intimidation and harassment, what can the Government do to ensure that the shop operators can fearlessly exercise their due legal rights in order to manifest the rule of law?

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Which Secretary will reply? Secretary for Commerce and Economic Development, please reply.

SECRETARY FOR COMMERCE AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT (in Cantonese): President, if there is a criminal element in the harassment faced by the operators, they can certainly report to the Police. If these operators have LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014 881 sufficient information, they can, after obtaining legal advice, initiate civil proceedings in court to protect their rights and interests.

DR PRISCILLA LEUNG (in Cantonese): President, issues such as traffic and business as mentioned by the Secretary are, in our view, external problems. Occupy Central has caused dissensions in many families. Days ago, when I was doing my morning exercise, I met a couple who told me that they refused to attend their son's university graduation ceremony. The reason was that they did not have confidence in the ceremony, fearing that they would be boiling with rage after attending the ceremony. They said that, on the first day of school, their son led his juniors to participate in the occupation. So, they have arguments. I have also observed that, at many graduation ceremonies, the students have no respect for parents and guests, and someone even refused to receive an honorary doctorate …

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Dr LEUNG, please raise your supplementary question.

DR PRISCILLA LEUNG (in Cantonese): My supplementary question is: what should we do so that university education can, once again, value the importance of politeness and self-restraint, so that families' confidence can be restored and they will no longer be torn apart?

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Which Secretary will reply? Secretary for Education, please reply.

SECRETARY FOR EDUCATION (in Cantonese): I thank Dr LEUNG for her supplementary question. In this connection, we are highly concerned and have paid much attention. Such situations have not only arisen in universities but also in secondary schools. During this period, there are a lot of disputes between parents and students and many other situations have also arisen. When students have dinner at home, they avoid the topic so as to have a peaceful meal. We have discussed the matter with some principals, and in their view, the 882 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014

Government should take some actions. First, the law-abiding spirit should be emphasized time and again. Second, as students have learnt and seen a lot in this process, the Government should make effort to enhance the exchanges and discussions with students at the school level. Third, I am also aware of the situation that happened at the graduation ceremony of individual university. This situation does not happen this year; the same also happened last year. I am very much concerned about this situation and I will discuss later with the Heads of Universities Committee to find out how this situation should be handled and what can be done.

I have to reiterate that, in the whole learning process, we not only lay emphasis on the learning of academic knowledge, we also attach importance to moral education, personal conduct, the law-abiding spirit and the spirit of the rule of law, and we would make efforts to do better.

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): We have spent 23 minutes and 30 seconds on this question. A few Members are still waiting to raise their supplementary questions; they are advised to follow up their questions through other channels. Fourth question.

Inspection of Fire Service Installations and Equipment

4. MR LEUNG CHE-CHEUNG (in Cantonese): President, according to the Fire Service (Installations and Equipment) Regulations, the owner of any fire service installation or equipment (FSI) shall have such installation or equipment inspected by a registered fire service installation contractor (contractor) at least once in every 12 months, and the contractor shall within 14 days after completion of the inspection forward a copy of the inspection certificate to the Fire Services Department (FSD), which will conduct random checks on the certificates. It has been reported that in a fire which broke out at a building in Tin Yiu Estate, Tin Shui Wai, the firemen found the water pressure in the fire-fighting system of that building to be inadequate, and they therefore had to lay and connect hoses up to the building from a street hydrant 700 m away before they could battle the blaze. However, the (HD) stated that the fire-fighting system concerned had passed an inspection just a few months ago. In this connection, will the Government inform this Council:

LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014 883

(1) whether it has compiled statistics on the number of cases in the past three years in which FSI malfunctioned during a fire; whether the authorities conducted an investigation into each of these cases and made public the investigation outcome, and whether they have penalized or prosecuted any non-compliant contractor or property owner; whether they will review if the relevant legislation still suits the present circumstances, if the existing regulatory regime is effective and if the methodology for inspecting FSI needs to be improved;

(2) of the methodology currently adopted by the authorities for conducting random checks on FSI inspection certificates and the percentage of such certificates checked; how the authorities will follow up the problems revealed by the random checks; whether they will consider increasing manpower to step up the random checks, and tightening up the demerit point system currently applied to contractors, with a view to strengthening regulatory efforts; and

(3) as it has been reported that in an attempt to boost the chance of success in their bids for FSI maintenance contracts, some contractors have submitted bids with an extremely low price of one dollar for inspection work, and this situation has led to worries that they will carry out the inspection work in a sloppy manner, whether the authorities will review the existing regime of FSI being inspected by contractors, and devise improvement methods; if so, of the details?

SECRETARY FOR SECURITY (in Cantonese): President, under the Fire Service (Installations and Equipment) Regulations (Cap. 95B), the owner of fire service installations and/or equipment (FSI) shall keep such FSI in efficient working order at all times, and shall have such FSI inspected by a registered fire service installation contractor (registered contractor) at least once every 12 months. Upon completion of the maintenance, repair or inspection works, the registered contractor shall issue to the FSI owner or the person commissioning the registered contractor a certificate and forward a copy to the FSD. The inspection results, that is, whether or not the FSI is in efficient working order, shall be stated in the certificate. FSD officers will conduct random checks on FSIs in buildings and premises. If problems are found in the FSIs or if false 884 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014 information is found in the certificate, the FSD will consider, in the light of the circumstances and evidence of the case, taking prosecution action or other follow-up actions against the FSI owner and/or the registered contractor to ensure the fire safety of the buildings and premises concerned.

The Administration's reply to various parts of the question is as follows:

(1) The FSD will investigate into all suspected cases of FSI malfunctioning found during a fire. If the case is confirmed, the FSD will take prosecution against the FSI owner, or issue a Fire Hazard Abatement Notice (FHAN) to require the repair of the FSI concerned within a specified period. On the other hand, if the investigation finds that the fault rests with the registered contractor, the FSD will consider taking prosecution or disciplinary action against the registered contractor concerned.

From January 2012 to end-September 2014, there were a total of 80 cases of suspected FSI malfunctioning in buildings during fire cases. Upon investigation by the FSD, sufficient evidence was found in four cases for taking prosecution action against the owners, for instance the owner concerned failed to engage registered contractors to carry out an annual inspection. In these four cases, the owners concerned were fined $8,000 to $30,000 by the Court. During the same period, the FSD did not take prosecution action against registered contractors for any suspected FSI malfunctioning in a building during a fire.

As regards the standards for inspecting and testing FSIs, the FSD has drawn up the "Code of Practice for Inspection, Testing and Maintenance of Fire Service Installations and Equipment" for compliance by registered contractors. The FSD will from time to time review and revise the Code to ensure that the guidelines are in line with the latest standards required by the department. The FSD also disseminates the latest information on FSIs to registered contractors by means of circular letters and talks. The Administration considers that the existing legislations and mode of monitoring can effectively ensure the fire safety of buildings and monitor the performance of registered contractors.

LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014 885

(2) To effectively monitor the conditions of FSIs in buildings and premises, as well as to ensure that the works conducted by registered contractors comply with FSD's requirements, the Fire Service Installations Task Force (Task Force) of the FSD is the dedicated team for handling FSI issues and complaints. Upon receipt of a certificate of Fire Service Installations and Equipment "with defective items", the Task Force will inspect the building in question in accordance with a risk-based approach. For those certificates of Fire Service Installations and Equipment "with no defective item", the FSD will randomly select some of those for inspection by means of computer balloting, and the sampling rate is around 5%. In case a problem is found in the FSI, the FSD will issue a FHAN, requiring the owner concerned to rectify the problem. In addition to the Task Force, fire station personnel of each operational Fire Command also conduct random checks on other certificates "with no defective item". The FSD considers that the existing manpower is sufficient to cope with the work in this respect.

Fire Services officers will take follow-up action if they find problems with the reports submitted by registered contractors during the inspection. For minor irregularities, the FSD will record "demerit points" against such contractors through the "Demerit Point System for Registered Fire Service Installations Contractors". Officers of the Task Force will also step up inspection on the FSIs handled by contractors recorded with demerit points.

For major irregularities, the FSD may take prosecution action against the registered contractor concerned under section 9 of the Fire Service (Installations and Equipment) Regulations (Cap. 95B). The maximum fine is $50,000 upon conviction. Moreover, the FSD may also consider referring the registered contractor in question to the disciplinary board for disciplinary inquiry under section 10 of the Fire Service (Installation Contractors) Regulations (Cap. 95A). The maximum penalty is the permanent removal of the concerned registered contractor from the register.

From January 2012 to end-September 2014, the FSD recorded demerit points against 14 registered contractors. There were 11 prosecution cases against registered contractors with fines between $1,000 and $15,000. In addition, 13 registered contractors were 886 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014

reprimanded by the disciplinary board, and there were six cases involving the registered contractors being removed from the register for seven to 14 days.

On the whole, the current measures are able to monitor the performance of the registered contractors effectively and punish those responsible for irregularities.

(3) The tender price put up by a registered contractor is a business undertaking between the contractor and the engaging party. The engaging parties should take into account the track records of a contractor in addition to the price before engaging a contractor. The FSD will also refer cases of non-compliance by registered contractors to the disciplinary board for disciplinary inquiry, and the outcome will be published in the Gazette and FSD's website for public information.

In addition, the FSD has regular meetings with the Association of Registered Fire Service Installation Contractors of Hong Kong Ltd and various stakeholders of the fire engineering industry to discuss issues relating to FSI standards, inspection, testing and maintenance. The FSD will also continue to implement the monitoring mechanism mentioned above to ensure that the work of the registered contractors is in compliance with the standards for the purposes of safe and normal functioning of FSIs in buildings.

MR LEUNG CHE-CHEUNG (in Cantonese): President, last month, a fire broke out in a public housing building of more than 30-storey high, and the fire scene was at the 20-odd floor. Upon arriving at the site, the firemen found the water pressure of that building inadequate and had to connect hoses up to the building from 700m away. This did delay the fire-fighting effort and some households have claimed compensation. It is indeed a serious problem if problems related to a fire-fighting system can only be identified after the outbreak of a fire. As advised by the Secretary earlier, the current monitoring system requires a contractor to submit an inspection certificate once every 12 months, to be followed by random checks by the FSD. But is this 12-month period effective in terms of monitoring? Will the authorities further shorten the 12-month period?

LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014 887

SECRETARY FOR SECURITY (in Cantonese): The supplementary question raised by Mr LEUNG Che-cheung is indeed a realistic one, but I believe the 12-month period was set after taking various factors into consideration. If the period is too frequent, this will incur higher costs for owners of premises; if the period is too long, this may result in insufficient inspections. A balance has therefore been struck at that time. Nonetheless, apart from the 12-month period, as I have mentioned in response to Mr LEUNG's main question, registered contractors are, regardless of what they have done, required to fill in a form concerning the conditions of the FSIs. We will conduct inspections regardless of whether the FSIs are in good condition.

Earlier on, Mr LEUNG also mentioned the fire at Tin Yiu Estate. The FSD had conducted an investigation after the fire and found that the problem lied in the malfunctioning of the pump of the building's water storage tank. As to when the malfunctioning occurred, given that an inspection was just conducted months ago, an investigation is now being conducted to find out why the system broke down in such a short period of time. Is the problem caused by FSIs being defective or the sloppy inspection of the contractors? It is still unknown now, but we will continue to follow up. If there is evidence suggesting that a certain party should bear responsibility, we will certainly take action. This is the first point. The second point is, bygones are bygones, and as the saying goes, "past experience, if not forgotten, is a guide for the future", the FSD has therefore requested the HD to inspect again the FSIs of all public housing estates in Yuen Long. The FSD met with the HD on 8 September to discuss the necessary improvement measures, and two initiatives will be rolled out. Firstly, to conduct another round of inspection on FSIs of public housing estates in the surrounding area so as to ensure that they function properly, and secondly, the HD was advised to consider installing a low-water alarm device in the water storage tanks of public housing estates. As evident from this case, the malfunctioning of water pump was caused by the low water level. Hence, with the installation of the alarm device, regardless of whether a fire breaks out, a signal will be activated when there is malfunctioning. So long as there is adequate water in the storage tank, the adequate water pressure would allow firemen to battle the blaze when a fire breaks out. This is of paramount importance. Therefore, the FSD has examined with the HD to see if there can be an alternative consideration to minimize the recurrence of similar incidents.

888 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014

MR CHAN HAN-PAN (in Cantonese): President, while fire safety is definitely important, the costs of repair and maintenance as well as the installation of FSIs have surged in recent years. The market has been completely distorted mainly because after the enactment of the Fire Services Ordinance (Cap. 572), the FSD has issued a large number of Fire Safety Directions (Directions) year after year in order to achieve its objectives. The market has been saturated with newly and previously issued Directions. As noted from the webpage of the FSD, there are less than 1 000 registered fire service companies but they are responsible for the fire safety of all buildings throughout the territory, and there are more Directions to come. We have no idea if the fire service companies are varied in standard, but apparently the market is unable to digest the large amount of Directions. May I ask the Secretary if he can issue fewer Directions given that a lot has already been issued? Can he allow more time for buildings that have received the Directions to deal with them by choosing a better fire service company and enable the market to get back on track? This is what the FSD should do at the moment.

SECRETARY FOR SECURITY (in Cantonese): I thank Mr CHAN for his supplementary question. On this matter, I hope Members would understand that fire safety is concerned with domestic safety as well as the safety of lives and properties. Therefore, in considering the issuance of any new Directions, the FSD have to consider the overall situation. Of course, we appreciate Mr CHAN's concern about the tight manpower supply problem in the market. Thus, in the course of law enforcement, the FSD has, on the premise of not compromising fire safety ― let me reiterate, without compromising fire safety ― adopted a flexible and pragmatic approach in handling each case.

We also hope that owners of premises would understand this and be prepared to discuss, with a view to properly addressing the fire safety risks. After all, no one wants any fire accident or incident resulting in casualties. In dealing with the situation, I believe the FSD, property owners and even registered contractors responsible for repair and maintenance do share a common objective, and we are happy to handle each case in a flexible and pragmatic manner.

MR CHAN HAN-PAN (in Cantonese): The Secretary has not answered my supplementary question. I asked if he would reduce the number of Directions to be issued because the current Directions issued year after year has rendered front-line fire-fighting personnel unable to cope with …

LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014 889

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Mr CHAN, you have raised your follow-up question clearly, please let the Secretary reply. Secretary, do you have anything to add?

SECRETARY FOR SECURITY (in Cantonese): Certainly, the FSD issued Directions in view of the existence of fire hazard in the premises concerned. In this connection, from whatever perspective, I think we are duty-bound to issue Directions to inform owners of properties and premises or responsible contractors of the fire hazard. If we issue fewer Directions, people might think that their premises are safe, which I believe is the last thing that people would want to see.

MR TAM YIU-CHUNG (in Cantonese): President, malfunctioning of FSIs is pretty common and we have received numerous complaints from residents of public housing estates about frequent unwanted fire alarms. While alarms are intended to remind residents to escape, frequent unwanted alarm may make it a "crying wolf" scenario such that people take it too lightly. If they lose their alertness to emergencies, an outbreak of fire may result in heavy casualties. Therefore, apart from requiring buildings to conduct annual checks of FSIs, what other measures have been put in place to ensure the normal and effective operation of FSIs?

SECRETARY FOR SECURITY (in Cantonese): I am very grateful to Mr TAM for raising this supplementary question. I notice that the unwanted alarms have indeed added to the heavy workload of the FSD because once the alarm is triggered, someone will report to the Police regardless of whether there is a fire and firemen will certainly come to the scene.

Concerning the installation of fire alarms and unwanted alarms, as the alarm installation now available for sale in the market may have an electrical short-circuit problem due to internal and external factors of the building, causing unwanted alarms, which is indeed a head-aching problem, the situation will only be improved subject to the availability of new products in the market. But even if there are new products that can improve the situation, property owners have to pay out of their own pocket to replace the alarm installation. This is going to be a very slow process and cannot be achieved overnight.

890 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014

We have nonetheless attached great importance to this problem. The only solution is to conduct frequent fire tests and inspections of FSIs. Although property owners are required by law to engage registered contractors to conduct inspections at least once a year, the job can be done at merely $1, as pointed out by Mr LEUNG just now. As I think all owners are most concerned about the safety of their buildings, can we do more than the minimum statutory requirement? The purpose is to provide a safer living environment, and raising the safety awareness is beneficial to all.

Therefore, I wish to take this opportunity to call on property owners in Hong Kong to pay more attention to fire safety issues, rather than identifying the cause of a fire or wondering if more could have been done in the aftermath. After all, the issue is concerned with everyone's safety. I hope that all property owners in Hong Kong will attach greater importance to this respect because in the end, we are the one who suffer.

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): This Council has spent more than 23 minutes on this question. Apart from the Member putting the main question, only two Members have raised supplementary questions. I therefore remind the Secretary to avoid mentioning anything that is not directly related to the question in response to Members' questions. Although what the Secretary said is sound advice, I do wish to allow more Members to ask supplementary questions. Fifth question.

CSSA for Persons with less than Seven Years' Residence in Hong Kong

5. MR GARY FAN (in Cantonese): On 17 December 2013, the Court of Final Appeal (CFA) ruled that the requirement for seven-year residence in Hong Kong (residence requirement) stipulated by the Government for the Comprehensive Social Security Assistance (CSSA) Scheme is unconstitutional, and the residence requirement was therefore restored from seven years to one year, which was the requirement before 1 January 2004. It has been reported that during the period from the CFA's handing down of its judgment to late June this year, the Government received over 5 000 CSSA applications made by persons with less than seven years' residence in Hong Kong. As such, some members of the public are worried that the CSSA cases concerned will increase the financial pressure on the Government. In this connection, will the Government inform this Council:

LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014 891

(1) of the respective numbers of CSSA applications received and approved by the Government since the CFA's handing down of the aforesaid judgment which were made by persons with less than seven years' residence in Hong Kong, the current number of CSSA recipients with less than seven years' residence in Hong Kong, the percentage of that number in the total number of CSSA cases and a breakdown of that number by type of cases, as well as the age distribution and employment status of such recipients;

(2) of the total expenditure of the CSSA payments made by the authorities to persons with less than seven years' residence in Hong Kong since the CFA's handing down of the aforesaid judgment; and

(3) as the authorities have indicated that the application, approval and issuance of Permits for Proceeding to Hong Kong and Macao (commonly known as One-way Permits (OWPs)) fall within the remit of the Mainland authorities, whether the Government has put in place any mechanism or policies to ensure that persons who come to settle in Hong Kong on OWPs are financially self-sufficient; if it has, of the details; if not, the reasons for that?

SECRETARY FOR LABOUR AND WELFARE (in Cantonese): My reply to Mr Gary FAN's main question is set out below:

(1) The Social Welfare Department (SWD) respects the judgment of the CFA on the judicial review case on the residence requirement of the CSSA Scheme on 17 December 2013, and has already restored the "one-year residence requirement" which was in effect before 1 January 2004 in accordance with the judgment. As in the past, persons under the age of 18 will continue to be exempted from the residence requirement of the CSSA Scheme.

From the date of the CFA judgment to 30 September 2014, the SWD received 7 639 CSSA applications which involved persons aged 18 or above and residing in Hong Kong for less than seven years, and 6 696 of such cases have been granted CSSA.

892 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014

As at 30 September 2014, there were 18 439 CSSA recipients residing in Hong Kong for less than seven years, which was about 4.8% of the total 384 305 CSSA recipients. Amongst them, 2 149 had earnings from employment. The above figure includes those recipients aged under 18 and exempted from the CSSA residence requirement, as well as those granted CSSA by the Director of Social Welfare under the discretionary arrangement before the relevant CFA judgment. As regards the age distribution of the recipients, the number of recipients aged under 18, aged 18 to 59 and aged 60 or above were 6 875, 10 766 and 798 respectively. The number of recipients by case type is at Annex.

(2) It has been less than a year since the CFA judgment. The SWD requires a longer time to observe the trend of the number of new CSSA applications involving persons residing in Hong Kong for less than seven years and their approval status in order to more accurately gauge the impact of the judgment on CSSA expenditure. The actual financial implications would, to a very large extent, depend on the financial status of new-arrivals and their interest in applying for CSSA. As a matter of fact, the number of such applications has fallen sharply from a high of 170 per working day at the end of last year to about 10 per working day recently.

(3) Article 22(4) of the Basic Law stipulates that, for entry into the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region (HKSAR), people from other parts of China must apply for approval. Mainland residents who wish to settle in Hong Kong must apply for One-way Permits (OWPs) from the Exit and Entry Administration Offices of the Public Security Bureau at the places of their household registration on the Mainland. The policy objective of the OWP Scheme is not for the admission of talents or investors. Rather, it allows Mainland residents to come to Hong Kong for family reunion in an orderly manner in accordance with the relevant laws and regulations of the Mainland and through approval by the Mainland authorities. In the OWP approval process, Mainland residents who meet the eligibility criteria laid down by the Mainland authorities may apply to come to settle in Hong Kong. The HKSAR Government does not see any justification or need to change the existing OWP Scheme or to put in place other administrative screening measure.

LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014 893

Annex

The Number of Recipients by Case Type

As at 30 September 2014, the number of CSSA recipients residing in Hong Kong for less than seven years by case type is as follows ―

Case Type Number of Recipients Old Age 3 371 Permanent disability 692 Ill health 2 012 Single parent 7 136 Low-earnings 2 159 Unemployment 2 133 Others 936 Total 18 439

Note:

The SWD classifies CSSA cases according to the established mechanism. However, family members of the same CSSA case may have different status. For instance, some of the 3 371 recipients under the old age cases in the above table may not be elderly persons, but non-elderly family members in the relevant old age cases (including adults and children).

MR GARY FAN (in Cantonese): President, the Secretary has not answered my question directly. He has even evaded my questions posed in parts (2) and (3) in my main question. In part (2) of my main question, I have clearly asked the Secretary about the total expenditure of the CSSA payments made by the authorities to persons with less than seven years' residence in Hong Kong, to which the Secretary has not given an answer. In part (3) of my main question, I am not questioning the major objective of the OWP Scheme, that is allowing entry of Mainland residents for reunion with their families residing in Hong Kong, I just want to point out that the place accepting migrant families bears no internationally recognized obligations to provide comprehensive social welfare benefits to new arrivals immediately or shortly (say in one year) after they have immigrated to that place.

President, the fundamental responsibility of any government is to take good care of its nationals, citizens or permanent residents in the first place. The Government cannot extend indiscriminate love to all people as some religious 894 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014 bodies. It is not possible to treat new arrivals and permanent residents on an equal footing, except for refugees or people belonging to special cases. If you talk about humanitarianism, the Governments of civilized countries in the West will, in granting approval of residency to migrant families, require the applicants to undergo asset tests or require their family members to provide financial security, as well as specifying that they …

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Please state your supplementary question.

MR GARY FAN (in Cantonese): … should not apply for social welfare benefits within a given period …

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Please state your supplementary question.

MR GARY FAN (in Cantonese): President, my question is, has the Government ever considered that the CFA judgment only pointed out that the justification of reducing expenditure, as adopted by the Government in imposing the seven-year residence for the CSSA Scheme in 2004, was not adequate, and that the CFA did not rule that the policy objective of according priority to permanent residents in granting CSSA unconstitutional …

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Please state your supplementary question expeditiously.

MR GARY FAN (in Cantonese): Has the Government considered introducing legislative amendments into this Council with a view to revising the residence requirement for CSSA applicants, or discussing with the Mainland authorities immediately to reduce the daily quota of 150 OWPs under Article 22(4) of the Basic Law?

SECRETARY FOR LABOUR AND WELFARE (in Cantonese): President, I thank Mr FAN for his question. Mr FAN started by asking why I have not LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014 895 answered the part concerning the financial expenditure. I have indicated clearly in my main reply that since the CFA judgment was handed down for less than a year, the relevant statistics are not yet available. Generally speaking, we will conduct a comprehensive review on a one-year cycle. As the current financial year is yet to close, if we only look at the statistics collated from the date of the aforesaid judgment, I can frankly say that they are far from accurate. Some families have been receiving CSSA all along and one more applicant may be added in their cases. We need to find out the overall figures and break down the items before the actual impact can be seen. It is by no means an easy task.

For this reason, we are of the view that it will be prudent to conduct a balanced and objective assessment some time later, hopefully one year after the CFA judgment or at the end of the year when the CFA judgment will have been handed down for just one year. We will surely present a full report to the Panel on Welfare Services by that time.

Mr FAN raised a series of questions just now and in his second question, he asked why the Government abided by the Court decision and did not consider amending the legislation. To begin with, as I have said in my main reply, we respect the judgment of the CFA. This is the first point. Second, we must all take into account the actual situation. The past statistics listed in the Annex have provided a clear analysis. Even though the residence requirement has now been relaxed, Members should bear in mind the following factors. First, as a matter of fact, before the CFA judgment, the Director of Social Welfare had already exercised discretion to help those who had particular difficulties. For instance, for those people who have the desire to work and become self-reliant but their income is so meagre that it is impossible to make ends meet, we will provide them with some kind of subsidy, which is in fact a kind of incentive to encourage them to stay in employment. These families are in need of our help. From 2004 to the time before the CFA delivered its judgment, the SWD had exercised discretion to approve over 14 000 cases. Hence, the approval process has provided certain flexibility. This is the first point.

Secondly, eligible persons aged under 18 do not have any problem at all as their applications will all be approved in any case. Of the CSSA applications made by persons with less than seven years' residence in Hong Kong, only those involving persons aged 18 or above or cases not covered under discretionary approval will have further implications on the expenditure of the CSSA payments.

896 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014

Perhaps Members may refer to my main reply again. It is stated that there are 18 000-odd CSSA recipients residing in Hong Kong for less than seven years. If we take out the persons aged under 18 ― as pointed out in the last paragraph of part (1) in the main reply, the number of such persons is 6 875 ― as well as those whose applications will in any case be approved by the Director of Social Welfare by discretion even without the CFA judgment, the number of persons remaining is in fact not that many.

Please take a look at the case type. More than 7 000 CSSA recipients are single parents, accounting for some 38% of the total CSSA recipients, and over 3 000 belong to the category of old age. In discussing how to alleviate poverty in society as a whole, are these people in need of our help? In this connection, we have to consider the matter in a comprehensive and objective manner. However, I do understand Mr FAN's concerns. Under our stringent vetting procedures, applications failing to meet the eligibility criteria will definitely be rejected. We have strictly performed our gate-keeping role.

MR CHUNG KWOK-PAN (in Cantonese): Just now the Secretary said that there were about 7 000-odd single-parent recipients, accounting for some 38%, or almost 40% of all CSSA recipients. As we all know, most OWPs holders come to Hong Kong for reunion with their families. However, after settling in Hong Kong, some of these families become single-parent families either because of divorce or death of spouse. I would like to know if there is any problem with the vetting and approval mechanism. So many people come to Hong Kong for family reunion, but they become single-parents in the end. Is there anything wrong with the vetting and approval mechanism, thus giving rise to so many single-parent families?

SECRETARY FOR LABOUR AND WELFARE (in Cantonese): President, with regard to the situation of single-parent families, applicants for OWPs should first of all meet the eligibility criteria before their applications can be approved, otherwise their applications will be rejected. Members of these families have marital problems after their arrival in Hong Kong. Many social problems stem from problems such as marital, single-parent families, children's development, and so on. The purpose of the CSSA Scheme is to address the poverty problem of these people in a pragmatic approach, which is also beneficial to society at large. If we do not help them, their children may have to, as described by social LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014 897 workers, live on "Pot Rice" with their single parent, meaning that the CSSA payments received by the children have to be shared with their father or mother. Under this circumstance, these families will definitely be plunged into poverty. We wish to allocate appropriate and reasonable resources to help the needy, and for those single-family members with working capacity, we will encourage them to take up part-time employment. The Government has launched the New Dawn Project under which adult family members have to go out and work if their children are not too young. This is one of the requirements of the Project. We opine that the entire mechanism is operating properly and we have been making all these efforts all along. We will continue to approve the CSSA applications based on this criterion. For this reason, there is no need for Members to worry about the mechanism as we will not casually approve the applications just because the residence requirement has been relaxed.

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Mr CHUNG, has your supplementary question not been answered?

MR CHUNG KWOK-PAN (in Cantonese): I understand that we should render assistance to those in need of help. My supplementary question is: Mainland residents come to Hong Kong for family reunion, but there are problems with the OWP system. Hence, should we require OWP applicants to undergo a means test or should Hong Kong regain its approval authority of OWPs before allowing such applicants to come to settle in Hong Kong?

SECRETARY FOR LABOUR AND WELFARE (in Cantonese): President, there is nothing wrong with the OWP system. Among the new entrants who come to Hong Kong under the OWP scheme, 98% of them involve reunion with their families. These people may be spouses, parents or children of Hong Kong people. Without doubt, their purpose is definitely reunion with families. The OWP system itself has no problem, but the applicants may have marital problems, which is common for marriages between Hong Kong residents and mainlanders. In our view, if we can make use of the CSSA Scheme to help the needy as appropriate, many family disputes can be resolved and a number of tragedies prevented. We need to look at the issue from a positive rather than a negative perspective.

898 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014

MR WU CHI-WAI (in Cantonese): President, in part (3) of his main reply, the Secretary pointed out that it was inappropriate to compare the existing OWP system with the schemes on admission of investors or talents and professionals. In reply to another enquiry earlier, the Secretary pointed out that 98% of OWP holders came to Hong Kong for the purpose of family reunion. I would like to ask if the Secretary has considered adopting a similar approach, whereby Hong Kong residents who wish to apply for their Mainland spouses to join them in Hong Kong should submit their applications to the relevant authorities in Hong Kong; and the authorities will, after examining the applicants' marital status and relevant eligibility, submit the results to the Mainland's Public Security Bureau for approval, so as to hence the transparency of the application and waiting arrangement. We often receive complaints lodged by members of the public in local districts, saying that they fail to learn their position on the waiting list and very often, the problem of corruption in the Mainland is involved. Therefore, we would like to know how the transparency of the existing OWP applications can be enhanced. I wish to ask the Secretary whether …

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Mr WU, you have stated your supplementary question.

MR WU CHI-WAI (in Cantonese): … consideration will be given to adopting an approach similar to that of the existing admission schemes for investors or talents and professionals when dealing with the applications for family reunion?

SECRETARY FOR LABOUR AND WELFARE (in Cantonese): President, as the Secretary for Security is also in attendance today and he has indicated his willingness to answer this supplementary question, I will let him provide additional information later on. In fact, this subject falls under the purview of the Security Bureau; it so happened that the Secretary for Security has not be assigned to give a reply at the outset. But before that, I want to give a brief answer to the Member's question. As we may be aware, the application, approval and issuance of OWPs fall within the remit of the Mainland authorities. In order to achieve the policy objective of family reunion, Mainland authorities have stipulated open and transparent approving criteria for the OWP Scheme. President, I now call upon the Secretary for Security to provide additional information.

LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014 899

SECRETARY FOR SECURITY (in Cantonese): I thank the President for letting me provide additional information. The main purpose of the OWP system is family reunion. Among the applicants who have applied for coming to Hong Kong to reunite with their families, most of them are Mainland spouses and children of Hong Kong residents. For spouses, the Mainland authorities have implemented a Points System for a rather long period of time. Upon receipt of OWP applications for reunion with spouses, the Mainland authorities will award a point to the applicant based on the years of separation, to be multiplied by a factor. Hence, applicants will be informed of the points awarded on the day they submit their applications. In addition, announcement will be made by the relevant Mainland authorities every year on the points needed to be granted OWPs in that year. The waiting time now is around four years. Thus, applicants will know if they have secured enough points and how long they have to wait. There is no question of jumping the queue for OWP applications.

Furthermore, before OWPs are granted, the relevant Mainland authorities are required to display publicly the list of approved applications in their offices. Local residents will therefore know which applications have been approved. People would know if there are incidents where people are granted OWP even though they got married at a later date, and subsequently submitted their applications at a later date. Hence, this system will come under public scrutiny.

MR TANG KA-PIU (in Cantonese): President, I also think that we should respect the spirit of family reunion as well as alleviating poverty and helping the disadvantaged. But there is actually a way out, that is, we can put in place a return mechanism which has all along been recommended by the Hong Kong Federation of Trade Unions. In this September, we paid a visit to the Mainland's Ministry of Public Security and the latter also agreed to give some thought to our recommendation. We have recommended that upon arrival in Hong Kong and before attaining the Hong Kong permanent resident status, the new entrant can decide to return to the Mainland and restore their household registration. The Ministry of Public Security is willing to consider this proposal.

My supplementary question is, while the Ministry of Public Security told us that they would liaise with relevant departments of the Hong Kong Government, did any communication actually take place between the two sides after our visit? 900 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014

If the relevant provisions on the Mainland are to be amended, how will the Hong Kong Government tie in with such amendment and what will be its attitude towards the changes?

SECRETARY FOR SECURITY (in Cantonese): President, the Government has put in place a mechanism to communicate with the Ministry of Public Security. If they put forth the proposal, we will discuss with them and see what corresponding arrangement should be made.

MR TANG KA-PIU (in Cantonese): I would like to ask if the Ministry of Public Security has taken up this issue with the Hong Kong Government?

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Secretary, has the Ministry of Public Security put forth this proposal to the Security Bureau?

SECRETARY FOR SECURITY (in Cantonese): I am not in a position to disclose any detailed information here.

MR NG LEUNG-SING (in Cantonese): President, part (2) of the main reply touches upon the CFA ruling. The recent Occupy Central incident, a very hot issue, has brought out the crisis of rule of law. Based on what I have listened in this Chamber today, all Honourable Members are concerned about the issue of rule of law, some even say that the rule of law is on the brink of collapse. I would like to ask the Government, as the CFA has made a ruling, has the SWD, in handling the relevant applications, received any enquiries on, say, whether the judgment will be executed. In case someone really asks this question, how will the Government respond?

SECRETARY FOR LABOUR AND WELFARE (in Cantonese): President, my answer is crystal clear. We will follow the CFA ruling for sure, and continue to adopt the existing mechanism. While we will be stringent in gate-keeping, we will also put in place certain flexibilities in handling the LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014 901 applications in a pragmatic way. We will not deviate from the principle of acting in accordance with the law.

IR DR LO WAI-KWOK (in Cantonese): President, I would like to ask the Secretary about the percentage of CSSA recipients in the total number of persons who have come to Hong Kong on OWPs. Besides, are there any tracking figures to indicate whether these OWP holders living on CSSA have eventually improved their living, got out of poverty or persistently received CSSA payments? Have the authorities compiled any tracking statistics in this regard?

SECRETARY FOR LABOUR AND WELFARE (in Cantonese): President, regarding the first question, if we look at the past figures ― the number of new arrivals this year will only be available at the end of the year, and only the yearly figure will be meaningful for the analysis ― the CSSA payments granted to new arrivals accounted for some 4% to 5% of the total relevant expenditure, which is not that significant. After the judgment was handed down, quite a number of people worried about the increase in relevant expenditure. I can tell Members that according to our observation, the rate of increase should not be high. Why do I say so? It can be seen from my main reply that the number of such applications has fallen from 170 per working day to about 10 per working day recently, and even eight or nine in the previous week. People who wish to apply for CSSA should have submitted the applications long ago. Hence, Members need not worry too much about the impact on our financial commitment. An increase in expenditure is inevitable, but I think the money is well spent. Why should we not give a helping hand to families of genuine hardship? If no help is offered, will more social problems be created? In this connection, we have to deal with the issue properly.

The second question relates to employment. Among the CSSA recipients, some of them are low-income earners, meaning that they have already taken up employment. Members may take a look at the Annex. There are about 2 000 CSSA recipients who are defined as jobless, and they are required to participate in the Integrated Employment Assistance Programme for Self-reliance. In other words, social-welfare organizations will follow up on these cases and undertake case management. People living on CSSA are encouraged to be self-reliant as 902 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014 soon as possible and return to the labour market. These people will not rely on the CSSA Scheme persistently.

IR DR LO WAI-KWOK (in Cantonese): President, the Secretary gave no answer to the percentage that I requested.

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Which part of your supplementary question has not been answered?

IR DR LO WAI-KWOK (in Cantonese): President, I am not asking the percentage of OWP holders in the total number of CSSA recipients, to which the Secretary has given an answer in his main reply. What I want to ask is the percentage of those who have received CSSA payments in the total number of OWP holders. My other question is whether the Secretary has some tracking figures; if such figures are not available at the moment, can he provide such figures after the meeting?

(A person in the public gallery shouted aloud)

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Ir Dr LO, please hold on. The person in the public gallery, leave the public gallery at once.

(The person kept shouting aloud in the public gallery)

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Leave the public gallery immediately.

(The person kept shouting and left the public gallery with the assistance of the security officers)

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Ir Dr LO, please continue.

LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014 903

IR DR LO WAI-KWOK (in Cantonese): Sorry, let me repeat the question that the Secretary has not answered just now. What I want to know is not the percentage of OWP holders in the total number of CSSA recipients as this has already been mentioned in the Secretary's main reply. What I want to know is the percentage of those who have received CSSA payments in the total number of OWP holders. I want a clear answer on the percentage of OWP holders who are genuinely in need of CSSA. Furthermore, regarding the tracking figures, I would like to have some figures indicating whether these people have eventually left the CSSA net or they have persistently relied on CSSA. I want to get some statistics in this regard. If the Secretary cannot provide us with the relevant statistics now, can he do so after the meeting?

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Secretary, can you provide the figures requested by Ir Dr LO?

SECRETARY FOR LABOUR AND WELFARE (in Cantonese): I will provide a written reply. Thank you. (Appendix I)

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Last question seeking an oral reply.

Handling of Reports of Criminal Offences Allegedly Committed by Police Officers

6. MR KENNETH LEUNG (in Cantonese): President, in the early morning of the 15th of this month when the police were dispersing protesters who were occupying Lung Wo Road in Admiralty, a reporter recorded a video footage about a subdued man being allegedly kicked and punched by police officers for four minutes in a dark corner of the Tamar Park. In the same morning, the police said that the Complaints Against Police Office (CAPO) had received a relevant complaint and would handle it in accordance with the established procedures, and the police officers involved would be removed from their current duties. In the afternoon of the following day, the police said that it had been confirmed that seven police officers were involved in the incident and they had been interdicted from duty. Also, the CAPO had set up a designated special 904 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014 investigation team to conduct a thorough investigation into the incident and was proceeding with the investigation as a criminal matter. In this connection, will the Government inform this Council:

(1) whether reports received by the Police about police officers having allegedly committed criminal offences must be referred to the CAPO for handling in the first place; under what circumstances will the Police directly commence criminal investigation into such reports in place of referral to the CAPO, as well as the number and details of those cases of this category in the past 10 years; of the number of complaints in each of the past five years for which criminal investigation was commenced by the CAPO (regardless of whether prosecutions were eventually instituted), as well as the shortest and the longest time it took from receipt of such complaints to commencement of criminal investigation;

(2) given that the police officers involved in the aforesaid incident were alleged to have committed a criminal offence of assault and the incident was video-recorded by the media, why the Police did not interdict the relevant police officers from duty on the day of the incident; of the respective ranks of the police officers who made the decisions to remove and interdict the police officers from duty, but we have already found out the answer to this part of the question on the Internet; whether the police officers involved in the incident had in their possession equipment such as pepper spray, batons and firearms during the period when they were removed from their current duties; and

(3) of the number of occasions on which the CAPO set up designated special investigation teams in each of the past five years, the types of complaints handled by such teams, and the lowest rank of the police officers who may decide to set up such teams?

SECRETARY FOR SECURITY (in Cantonese): President, with the overall objective of enhancing the quality of their public services, the police have, by means of various forms of training, endeavoured to enhance the professional sensitivity, communication skills and awareness of complaint prevention of LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014 905 officers at all levels, reinforcing the value system of the Force and ensuring a clear understanding among officers of all ranks of their respective professional responsibilities. In addition to complaint prevention, the Police adopt a four-pronged strategy, namely education and integrity culture building, governance and control, enforcement and deterrent, and rehabilitation and support, ensuring that all members of the police maintain a high level of integrity and demonstrate a high degree of professionalism in their discharge of duties.

My reply to Mr Kenneth LEUNG's question is as follows:

(1) According to section 11 of the Independent Police Complaints Council Ordinance (the Ordinance) (Cap. 604), a complaint received by the must be categorized as a reportable complaint if the complaint relates to the conduct of a member of the police force while on duty or in the execution or purported execution of his duties, whether or not he identified himself as such a member, and, at the same time, meets other conditions that make it a reportable complaint under the Ordinance in that, for instance, it is made by a complainant directly affected by the police conduct, irrespective of whether the allegation involves any criminal elements. Such a complaint shall be investigated by the CAPO with the investigation report submitted to the Independent Police Complaints Council (IPCC) for examination in accordance with the statutory requirements under the Ordinance.

The functions of the CAPO include handling and investigating complaints of general and criminal nature. In the course of the investigation of a complaint case, if criminal element is detected, criminal investigation will be instigated. When a criminal investigation is commenced, the CAPO may consider classifying the complaint as "sub-judice". In that case, the complaint investigation will be suspended and the criminal investigation shall proceed first. In the course of criminal investigation, where necessary, advice from the Department of Justice (DoJ) would be sought. Only upon completion of the criminal investigation and the related judicial proceedings, the complaint investigation shall be reopened. With criminal detection training and having been posted to various criminal investigation units, the CAPO staff have profound 906 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014

knowledge, skills and experience in complaint investigation of different nature including general and criminal allegations.

However, in the event that investigation into any criminal allegations requires specialized investigation skills or knowledge, as in cases like complicated frauds and technology crimes, the CAPO shall discuss with other dedicated crime units to determine if the case is to be referred to other crime units for investigation. Having said that, at the conclusion of the criminal procedures, a complaint investigation report together with the recommended disciplinary actions shall be submitted to the IPCC for examination in accordance with the Ordinance.

I have to point out that under the current mechanism, the CAPO, from time to time, handles and investigates complaint cases that involve criminal allegations, such as "perverting the course of justice", "assault" and so forth. There were cases where there was sufficient evidence for criminal prosecutions against the police officers concerned. The police complaints system, which is proved to be effective, is kept under the IPCC's scrutiny for fairness and impartiality.

Referring to the suspected case of unnecessary use of force by police officers mentioned in the question, it was entirely reasonable that the case was referred to the CAPO as this was a requisite procedure under the established mechanism, given that the person concerned, in reporting his case to the Police, had indicated that it was a complaint against police officers, and that the allegations were related to the complainees' conduct in the discharge of duties. The CAPO has, following the established procedures, launched a comprehensive investigation in a fair and impartial manner and would seek the DoJ's advice, where appropriate. An investigation report shall also be submitted to the IPCC for examination in accordance with the statutory requirements under the Ordinance.

I learn that in view of public concern over complaint cases arising from Occupy Central and its related activities as well as the serious nature of the allegations, the IPCC has decided to refer all reportable LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014 907

complaints arising from Occupy Central to the Serious Complaints Committee (SCC) for monitoring. The CAPO shall, in line with SCC's requirement, report the investigation progress of such reportable complaints on a monthly basis.

The CAPO does not classify complaints against Police as "criminal cases" or "non-criminal cases". Therefore, the CAPO does not have the records so requested. As far as the past five years is concerned, the CAPO has conducted criminal investigations of allegations such as "assault", "assault occasioning actual bodily harm" and "perverting the course of justice".

(2) The suspected case of unnecessary use of force by police officers mentioned in the question has been referred to a dedicated special investigation team of the CAPO for investigation. The seven police officers who conducted the arrest of the complainant at the time in question have been removed from front-line operational duties on the afternoon of the day of incident. The Police, upon further investigation, confirmed that there were seven police officers involved in the handling of the complainant at the time in question. On the following day, that is, 16 October, the Police decided to interdict those officers in the public interest according to section 17 of the Police Force Ordinance. As criminal investigation has been commenced, I am not in a position to further comment on the case details.

As far as general procedures are concerned, the Assistant Commissioner of Police (Personnel), having considered the recommendations made by the Chief Superintendent of the Complaints and Internal Investigation Branch (C&IIB), shall make a decision to interdict an officer under the CAPO's investigation, whose police warrant card shall be returned, while no equipment shall be issued.

(3) The CAPO shall, having regard to the urgency, complexity and sensitivity of complaint cases, as well as the availability of resources for investigation, consider the need to form a special investigation team. Such a decision shall be made by the Assistant 908 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014

Commissioner of Police (Service Quality) upon deliberation of C&IIB's recommendations. As far as the past five years is concerned, the CAPO, on one occasion, formed a special investigation team in 2011 to investigate complaints related to the Police's approach in handling the security arrangements of former Premier LI Keqiang's visit to Hong Kong.

(Mr LEUNG Kwok-hung stood up)

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Mr LEUNG Kwok-hung, what is your point?

MR LEUNG KWOK-HUNG (in Cantonese): Why did the Secretary say "the former Premier LI Keqiang"?

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): I believe the Secretary meant the "former Vice-Premier".

MR KENNETH LEUNG (in Cantonese): President, I wish to follow up on part (1) of the Secretary's main reply. It is learnt that the Police have received 87 complaints about assaults by police officers since the began. In his reply to the main question just now, the Secretary said that some of those complaints may be subject to criminal investigation or they may be classified as "sub-judice"; hence the complaint investigation has been suspended.

Secretary, what mechanism is now in place to ensure that the IPCC will immediately commence the complaint investigation once the criminal investigation of those cases is completed? Regarding the cases subject to criminal investigation, will the CAPO report to the IPCC in detail the progress of each case at the beginning of the investigation on a monthly basis or upon the completion of the investigation?

SECRETARY FOR SECURITY (in Cantonese): I beg your pardon. I could not hear Mr LEUNG's supplementary question very clearly.

LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014 909

MR KENNETH LEUNG (in Cantonese): In respect of the complaints subject to criminal investigation, will the CAPO report to the IPCC the progress of its investigation of each case on a regular basis?

SECRETARY FOR SECURITY (in Cantonese): President, as far as I understand, the CAPO regularly submits reports to the IPCC, that is, it reports the investigation progress of the relevant cases to the IPCC at least once a month. The CAPO will certainly report to the IPCC. I believe that the IPCC Secretariat will also communicate with the CAPO and if it needs any additional information from the CAPO, I believe the CAPO is always ready to provide assistance.

MR IP KWOK-HIM (in Cantonese): President, may I ask the Secretary, since the IPCC has to perform very important functions, including observing, monitoring and reviewing the work of the CAPO, the impartiality of IPCC members has a significant impact on how the IPCC handles and investigates its cases. As far as we know, there are 23 complaints related to the Occupy action that should be reportable to the IPCC on a regular basis, including the case of Mr Ken TSANG being assaulted. In his answer, the Secretary mentioned that as those cases are now subject to criminal investigation, he would not go into detail. However, he also mentioned that upon completion of the criminal procedure, a complaint investigation report would be submitted to the IPCC for examination in accordance with the IPCC Ordinance. My supplementary question is: As some IPCC members have openly commented on the relevant complaints and I have also clearly seen some IPCC members wearing yellow ribbons, and these IPCC members have made open comments, strongly querying the Police's handling of the cases, how can the CAPO assure that police officers under investigation and complainants will be treated independently and fairly by the IPCC when it monitors and reviews the relevant complaints?

SECRETARY FOR SECURITY (in Cantonese): President, to answer Mr IP's supplementary question, I must first point out that under the current system, the CAPO must conduct investigation thoroughly, fairly and justly. Secondly, the IPCC also has a system in place to examine the investigation reports submitted by the CAPO. It can also request to meet the relevant people involved or demand for more information when necessary.

910 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014

I understand that the gist of Mr IP's supplementary question is that certain IPCC members may have expressed some views on Occupy Central which may lead to a conflict of interest. I also note that the IPCC Chairman has said that they would conduct an internal discussion on this issue. I wish to point out that the IPCC is an independent statutory body which must operate in accordance with the law. Therefore, I am absolutely confident that when the IPCC receives the reports submitted by the CAPO, it will examine the complaints in a fair and just manner. As regards its specific operation, I believe that the IPCC will make appropriate arrangements.

MR LEE CHEUK-YAN (in Cantonese): In part (2) of his main answer, the Secretary explained why some police officers were first removed and later interdicted from duty. He said, "The Police, upon further investigation, confirmed that there were seven police officers involved in the handling of the complainant at the time in question." I wish to ask the Secretary what he meant by "handling". All people of Hong Kong saw the police officers punching and kicking the complainant, why did the Secretary not plainly admit that the police officers did punch and kick the complainant at the time in question but used the term "handle" instead? Is the Secretary blind? While all people of Hong Kong can see the act, why does the Secretary turn a blind eye? And will the Secretary make an open and aboveboard apology for this "beating someone up in a dark corner" incident?

President, lastly I wish to apologize to the blind people for I might have offended them …

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Mr LEE, you have raised your supplementary question. Please sit down.

MR LEE CHEUK-YAN (in Cantonese): … because very often blind people can see more clearly than the Secretary.

LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014 911

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Please sit down and let the Secretary reply. Secretary, please.

SECRETARY FOR SECURITY (in Cantonese): President, after the incident, I remember I had to attend the Legislative Council meeting. Before entering the Chamber, I made an open statement to the media, and I also clearly stated in my reply to Members' questions in the Chamber on that day that the Police would handle the incident fairly and justly in accordance with the established procedures. For cases involving suspected offences committed by police officers, the Police have a set of established procedures to follow. For instance, the Police will take statements from the complainant, arrange for an injury assessment and have the complainant identify the perpetrators. These are all done in accordance with the established procedures and hence the term handling refers to the whole set of procedures.

In respect of any individual case, we will treat it fairly and justly in accordance with the evidence collected. When necessary, we will seek advice from the Department of Justice and after getting its instructions, we will act accordingly. This is the system of Hong Kong. We act under this system and treat each case carefully and thoroughly. I have said very clearly in my main reply that the criminal investigation has been commenced. Before any conclusion is reached, it is neither appropriate nor fair for us to make any comments.

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Which part of your supplementary question has not been answered?

MR LEE CHEUK-YAN (in Cantonese): President, the Secretary has not answered why he used the term "handling" instead of "punching and kicking". Also, the Secretary said "handling this case" but obviously, he is not talking about handling the case but the complainant. Hence, I think he should clarify why he did not say that "handling" was tantamount to "punching and kicking".

912 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Secretary, do you have anything to add?

SECRETARY FOR SECURITY (in Cantonese): I consider it appropriate to use the term "handle".

DR KWOK KA-KI (in Cantonese): President, a political issue should be resolved by political means, but in respect of this current political issue, the Government resolves the problem by the Police. The incident of seven police officers beating up a subdued person handcuffed with plastic string has infuriated all people of Hong Kong and has also brought disgrace on the Police. Since the outbreak of the incident, the Commissioner of Police seems to have disappeared. In his reply, the Secretary said that the Police did not have statistics on criminal and non-criminal complaint cases against the Police. How can the Police do not have such simple statistics. With such a practice, does the Government intend to shield the seven police officers involved in this incident and bring disgrace on the Police again? Is the Secretary duty-bound to instruct the Commissioner of Police to make an open explanation and apologize to the victim?

SECRETARY FOR SECURITY (in Cantonese): President, a criminal investigation of the incident has been instigated. I believe that under the system as well as the law in Hong Kong, before the investigation of any case is completed and a conclusion drawn, if we make any comments before seeking legal advice, it will be unfair to all parties and all stakeholders involved.

DR KWOK KA-KI (in Cantonese): President, the Secretary has not answered my question. Seven police officers beating up a person was caught on camera, which could be seen by all people of Hong Kong, yet the Secretary insists that the incident still awaits further investigation. I asked the Secretary just now when he would instruct the Commissioner of Police to make an open explanation and apologize to the victim. The Secretary has not answered clearly whether he will do so or not. Is he trying to shield Andy TSANG, the Commissioner of Police?

LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014 913

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Dr KWOK Ka-ki, you are now conducting a debate. The Secretary has already answered your supplementary question.

MR CHAN KAM-LAM (in Cantonese): President, the Secretary for Security said just now that the IPCC has a system in place to ensure that it will act in a fair manner, but some IPCC members in support of Occupy Central have been pounding on the issue about the Police using violence, giving people the impression that they are attacking the Police deliberately in an attempt to erode the authority of the Police to enforce the law. Their intension is malicious and their view biased …

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Mr CHAN, please raise your supplementary question.

MR CHAN KAM-LAM (in Cantonese): … People having such an impression will query the IPCC's independence. When the case is later referred to the IPCC for investigation, how can the IPCC assure the public that it will act independently, fairly and impartially when evaluating or examining the report? The Secretary has said that there is a system in place. What kind of system is it? How will the actions of the IPCC members in support of Occupy Central be handled to manifest the fair and just spirit of the system?

SECRETARY FOR SECURITY (in Cantonese): Regarding Mr CHAN's supplementary question, the IPCC is an independent body with a high degree of transparency. Its investigation result of each case will be published when necessary. I also notice that the problem mentioned by Mr CHAN and Mr IP has emerged in the past two days. I believe that the IPCC will make appropriate actions to address such issues. The decisions and actions of a statutory body are made and taken in the public eye. The general public can learn how it handles the cases through various channels. I believe and trust that the IPCC will, as always, handle this case fairly and justly in accordance with the law.

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): This Council has spent 23 minutes on this question. Oral questions end here.

914 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014

WRITTEN ANSWERS TO QUESTIONS

Earn-and-Learn Pilot Schemes

7. MR KWOK WAI-KEUNG (in Chinese): President, regarding the various types of programmes implemented under the Earn-and-Learn Pilot Schemes (Pilot Schemes) by the Vocational Training Council (VTC), that is, (i) Diploma of Vocational Education (DVE) programmes for people with education level of Secondary Three or above, (ii) DVE programmes for people with education level of Secondary Six or above, (iii) Higher Diploma programmes for people with education level of Secondary Six or above, and (iv) Foundation Diploma (FD) (Level 3) programmes for people with education level of Secondary Six or above, will the Government inform this Council whether it knows the following statistics:

(1) the intakes of students under the Pilot Schemes in the 2014-2015 school year (set out in Table 1);

Table 1 Electrical Electrical and Watch and mechanical Programme Printing and Retail mechanical services type industry clock industry services industry and industry industry construction industry (i) (ii) (iii) (iv)

(2) the names and numbers of institutions providing on-the-job training for the student-workers of the Pilot Schemes in the 2014-2015 school year (set out in Table 2); and

LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014 915

Table 2 Electrical Electrical Electrical and and Watch and and mechanical mechanical Printing Retail Industry clock mechanical services services industry industry industry services industry and industry and industry construction construction industry industry Programme (i) (i) (i) (ii) (iii) (iv) type Name of institution

Number of institutions

(3) the numbers of on-the-job training places for the industries covered by the various programmes under the Pilot Schemes in the 2014-2015 school year (set out in Tables 3 to 8)?

Table 3: Printing industry ― Programme type (i) Area of industry Number of places Production planning/control Digital printing Desktop publishing Offset printing Operation of computerized prepress and output system Cylinder printing CTP production Operation of finishing system and equipment Others

916 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014

Table 4: Watch and clock industry ― Programme type (i) Area of industry Number of places Watch calibration and testing Disassembling, assembling and maintenance of exterior parts of watches Disassembling, assembling and maintenance of movements of clocks and watches After-sale maintenance services for clocks and watches Others

Table 5: Electrical and mechanical services industry ― Programme type (i) Area of industry Number of places Building services engineering Lift and escalator engineering Electrical engineering Mechanical engineering Air-conditioning and refrigeration engineering Fire services engineering Welding technology and inspection Gas engineering Others

Table 6: Electrical and mechanical services industry and construction industry ― Programme type (ii) Area of industry Number of places Building services engineering Construction Electrical engineering Mechanical engineering Others

LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014 917

Table 7: Electrical and mechanical services industry and construction industry ― Programme type (iii) Area of industry Number of places Building services engineering Construction Electrical engineering Mechanical engineering Others

Table 8: Retail industry ― Programme type (iv) Area of industry Number of places Cosmetics Clocks and watches and jewellery Fashion and accessories General merchandise Electronic and electrical appliances/telecommunications products Furniture and household wares Food Fitness and beauty chain stores Supermarkets Convenience shops Others

SECRETARY FOR EDUCATION (in Chinese): President, the Chief Executive announced in the 2014 Policy Address that the Government would implement measures to strengthen vocational education, inter alia, the implementation of the Pilot Training and Support Scheme by the VTC to attract and retain talent for industries with a keen demand for labour by integrating structured apprenticeship training programmes with clear career progression pathways. The relevant trades covered under the industries concerned are very specialized and with a high level of technology contents. In addition, the Financial Secretary announced in the 2014-2015 Budget Speech that the Government had accepted the recommendations of the Task Force on Manpower Development of the Retail Industry and earmarked $130 million to implement measures which aimed at alleviating the manpower tightening problems of the retail industry, including a pilot training and support scheme under the VTC for the retail industry. The two pilot schemes mentioned above are collectively known as the Earn & Learn Pilot Scheme (the Pilot Scheme). 918 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014

(1) In regard to the printing, clock and watch industries as well as the electrical and mechanical services trades under the construction industry, the Pilot Scheme targets Secondary Three to Secondary Six school leavers and eligible adult learners. Upon the completion of apprenticeship training under the Pilot Scheme, students can normally attain a Diploma in Vocational Education (DVE) (Level 3 of Qualifications Framework (QF)). As companies interested in participating in the Pilot Scheme will conduct interviews for prospective students in November and December 2014, the VTC is unable to provide the number of students admitted to the Pilot Scheme in the 2014-2015 academic year at this stage.

As to the retail industry, the Pilot Scheme targets Secondary Six school leavers and a total of 226 student-workers are participating under the Pilot Scheme in the 2014-2015 academic year. Student-workers who have successfully completed the 18-month programme will be awarded a FD (Level 3).

(2) Under the Pilot Scheme, trade associations will liaise and consolidate the requirements of individual companies in respective industries in order to facilitate its implementation. The names of trade associations concerned are shown in the following table:

Electrical and Mechanical Printing Clock and Services Trades Retail Industry Industry Watch Industry under the Industry Construction Industry Type of DVE DVE DVE FD (Level 3) Programme Name of Member Member Member Member Institution companies companies companies companies under the under the under the Hong under the Hong Kong Federation of Kong Hong Kong Printers Hong Kong Federation of Retail Association Watch Traders Electrical and Management and Industries Mechanical Association Contractors Ltd.

LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014 919

(3) Regarding the printing, clock and watch industries as well as the electrical and mechanical services trades under the construction industry, students under the Pilot Scheme are enrolled in a DVE programme (QF level 3). Core programme components at the basic level consist of professional skill training and all-round development for enhancing students' comprehensive competence necessary for adapting to social changes. Hence the training components cover much more than a particular specialized skill area. Other than the professional skill training, students will also receive training in problem-solving and communication skills. Since the programme is delivered in multi-modules, no breakdown of the enrolment figure by particular specialized skill is available.

As to the retail industry, student-workers are enrolled in a FD programme (Level 3). In the 2014-2015 academic year, the numbers of student-workers receiving on-the-job training in the following categories are set out as follows:

Category Number of Student-workers Cosmetics 11 Watch and jewellery 35 Fashion and accessories 70 Department stores 2 Electronic and electrical 20 appliances/telecommunications Furniture and home accessories 10 Health and beauty chain stores 39 Supermarkets 21 Convenience stores 18

Prevention of a Local Outbreak of Ebola Virus Disease

8. DR ELIZABETH QUAT (in Chinese): President, it has been reported that the outbreak of Ebola virus disease (EVD) has not yet been brought under control since it erupted in West African countries in March this year, and there is a crisis of the outbreak spreading to other regions. The World Health Organization (WHO) declared on 8 August this year the EVD outbreak a Public Health Emergency of International Concern. Meanwhile, Hong Kong, being an 920 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014 international aviation hub, is frequented by travellers from all around the world. In addition, contacts between the nationals of China and those of African countries are increasingly frequent in recent years as a result of the robust trade development between the two places, while quite a number of people of African descent are residing in the nearby province. Thus, the risk of EVD being imported into Hong Kong should not be overlooked. In this connection, will the Government inform this Council whether:

(1) it has assessed the current risk of EVD being imported into Hong Kong; if it has assessed, of the outcome; if not, the reasons for that;

(2) it has taken appropriate measures to prevent EVD from being imported into Hong Kong in light of the latest development of the outbreak abroad; if it has, of the details, including the contingency measures to be taken by the authorities when the first confirmed case of EVD is found in Hong Kong; if not, the reasons for that;

(3) the Government has currently put in place a reciprocal notification mechanism with Guangdong authorities on the developments of EVD; if it has, of the details; if not, the reasons for that;

(4) it has assessed if Hong Kong's healthcare system is capable of coping with a local outbreak of EVD; if it has assessed, of the outcome; if not, the reasons for that; and

(5) it has conducted any inter-departmental drill to counter a local outbreak of EVD; if it has, of the details; if not, the reasons for that?

SECRETARY FOR FOOD AND HEALTH (in Chinese): President, the EVD is caused by infection with Ebola virus. It is a severe acute viral illness, often characterized by the sudden onset of fever, intense weakness, muscle pain, headache and sore throat. This is followed by vomiting, diarrhoea, rash, impaired kidney and liver function, and in some cases, both internal and external bleeding.

Ebola virus is introduced into the human population through close contact with the blood, secretions, organs or other body fluids of infected animals. It then spreads in the community through human-to-human transmission, with LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014 921 infection resulting from direct contact (through broken skin or mucous membranes) with the blood, secretions, organs or other body fluids of infected people, and indirect contact with environments contaminated with such fluids.

We have been closely monitoring the latest current EVD outbreak in West Africa. The WHO announced on 25 October 2014 that there have been 10 141 cases, including 4 922 deaths, in Guinea, Liberia, Sierra Leone, Nigeria, Senegal, Mali, Spain and the . The latest case fatality rate is about 48.5%. As at 27 October 2014, the EVD affected countries include Guinea, Liberia, Sierra Leone and the Equateur province of the Democratic Republic of the Congo.

The WHO convened two Emergency Committee meetings on EVD under the International Health Regulations (2005) in August and September 2014. The WHO declared on 8 August 2014 the EVD outbreak in West Africa a Public Health Emergency of International Concern, and a series of preventive and control measures are recommended for the states with Ebola transmission and other member states. In this regard, Hong Kong has established an effective and comprehensive disease prevention and response system which can identify cases of EVD, and has already adopted the preventive strategies which are in line with those recommended by the WHO.

Against the above background, my reply to the five parts of the question is as follows:

(1) The Scientific Committee on Emerging and Zoonotic Diseases (SCEZD) under the Centre for Health Protection (CHP) of the Department of Health (DH) has convened two meetings to assess the risks that the Ebola outbreak in West Africa has posed to Hong Kong, and the corresponding local response measures. The second meeting was held on 8 October 2014. The SCEZD is of the view that there is a risk of importation of EVD cases into Hong Kong due to extensive international travel. However, the SCEZD has confidence in the well-developed public health and hospital infrastructure in Hong Kong. With heightened vigilance on the part of the public and healthcare professionals, the risk of EVD spreading across the community can be reduced.

922 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014

(2) The Administration has adopted the following measures to prevent the importation of EVD into Hong Kong, as well as to strengthen the local response capacity when a confirmed case of EVD is found in Hong Kong:

Enhanced Surveillance

(i) Since July 2008, viral haemorrhagic fever, including EVD, has been made a statutorily notifiable disease and the virus a scheduled infectious agent under the Prevention and Control of Disease Ordinance (Cap. 599) in Hong Kong. Any suspected or confirmed cases are required to be notified to the CHP.

(ii) The CHP has issued letters to doctors and private hospitals in Hong Kong a number of times to provide them with information of outbreak development, affected areas, reporting criteria as well as recommendations on applicable infection control measures and remind them to notify the CHP of any suspected cases (that is, patients who resided in or had travel history to the EVD affected countries within 21 days before the development of fever and onset of illness) promptly. In view of latest situation in the United States where EVD patients had low-grade fever at the early stage of infection, the CHP has revised the reporting criteria of EVD cases, lowering the body temperature of fever patients suspected of having EVD from 38 degrees Celsius to 37.5 degrees Celsius, with a view to enhancing surveillance.

(iii) The CHP will initiate immediate epidemiological investigation and follow-up actions upon notification of a suspected case. Patients will be referred to the (HA) Infectious Disease Centre (HAIDC) in Princess Margaret Hospital for isolation, diagnosis and treatment; and specimens will be collected from patients for laboratory testing to confirm or refute the diagnosis of EVD.

LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014 923

Keep in View the WHO's Recommendations

(iv) The CHP has been paying close attention to the latest information released by the WHO and monitoring the development overseas, and will adjust local preventive and control measures according to the WHO's recommendations.

Enhanced Risk Communication

(v) Apart from convening two meetings of the SCEZD to assess the risk of and local response to EVD, the DH has also chaired two interdepartmental meetings to gear up other government departments with necessary preparation.

(vi) The DH advises, via the issue of press releases/public announcements, travellers returning from EVD affected countries and presenting with compatible symptoms to call 999 and inform the staff about their condition so that arrangement for consultation in the Accident and Emergency (A&E) Department can be made. The dissemination of information on EVD will be prompt and transparent. Whenever there is a suspected case, the CHP will release information to the public as soon as possible.

Publicity and Public Education

(vii) The DH has been closely working with its partners to provide regular updates on the latest disease situation and solicit their collaboration in disseminating health information. The partners include government bureaux/departments such as the , the Transport Department and the Housing Department; District Councils; Healthy Cities projects at the district level; and non-governmental organizations.

(viii) Targeting specific groups, including the local African community, the CHP has earlier visited guesthouses in relevant buildings to deliver pamphlets, posters and health 924 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014

advice, followed by health talks and briefings for representatives of guesthouses in Yau Tsim Mong District as well as management companies and owners' corporations of relevant buildings.

(ix) The CHP has held briefings for private hospitals, relevant government departments as well as the hotel and guesthouse industry to provide updates on the latest epidemiology of, infection control for and preparedness against EVD. Health talks have also been delivered to community organizations, hotel and guesthouse operators, public and private property management bodies and the transport sector.

(x) Health educational materials, including leaflets, pamphlets and posters, have been produced and widely distributed in the community. A dedicated webpage on EVD has been produced under the CHP website with information including disease updates, travel advice, Frequently Asked Questions and guidelines for various sectors. Information on preventive measures has also been delivered via television and radio Announcements in the Public Interest and the 24-hour health education hotline (2833 0111).

(xi) Travellers have been advised to avoid unnecessary travel to the affected countries. Travel advice has been uploaded to the front page of the CHP and DH's Travel Health Service websites, as well as the Outbound Travel Alert website of the Security Bureau.

Port Health Measures

(xii) Targeted port health measures to prevent the importation of EVD into Hong Kong have been put in place. To enhance dissemination of relevant information to travellers, the DH has been delivering updated EVD related health promotion message to travellers through health leaflets and broadcasting at the Hong Kong International Airport (the Airport) and other boundary control points (BCPs), as well as the travel health website. Although currently there is no direct flights from LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014 925

the EVD affected countries to Hong Kong, people from these countries may arrive Hong Kong through flights originated from other places. Hence, the DH has been requesting airlines through Airline Operators Committee to conduct in-flight broadcast of health message at all incoming passenger flights to alert travellers about the disease. In addition, regular updates to the airlines, the tourism industry and relevant stakeholders at BCPs are provided through meetings, briefings and correspondences.

(xiii) Immigration officers at all BCPs also assist in identifying arrival passengers holding travel documents issued by the EVD affected countries and provide them with information sheets on EVD (with versions in English and in French). The information sheets remind travellers presented with the symptoms to approach port health personnel immediately upon arrival. If these travellers develop symptoms during their visit to Hong Kong, they should call 999 for arrangement of consultation in A&E Department. To address the continued spread of the epidemic overseas, the DH has also implemented a new BCP measure on 20 October 2014 requiring travellers from the EVD affected countries arriving at the Airport to complete a "health surveillance questionnaire" voluntarily. The new measure enables healthcare staff to understand the health condition and contact history of individual incoming travellers, hence increasing the chance of identifying EVD cases.

(xiv) The DH has set up thermal imaging systems at BCPs to check the body temperature of all inbound travellers, and those with fever will be examined. All suspected cases identified at the Airport and other BCPs would be referred to HAIDC for further examination.

To enhance the effectiveness of response to possible risks of EVD as well as to strengthen the handling capacity when a confirmed case of EVD is found in Hong Kong, the Government announced the "Preparedness and Response Plan for Ebola Virus Disease" (the EVD Plan) on 20 August 2014 which sets out in detail the 926 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014

Government's preparedness and response plan for the disease (including the corresponding surveillance and prevention measures at different response levels, clear command structures, and the activation and standing down mechanism of each response level). The EVD Plan continues to uphold the established principles of reducing the risk of human infection, early detection, prompt treatment and control, and responsive risk communication. Having considered the relevant factors, the Government activated the Alert Response Level accordingly on the same day. The DH, HA and the relevant departments have put in place the response strategies and prevention measures under the Alert Response Level in the EVD Plan.

(3) The CHP has been exchanging information with the National and Guangdong health authorities on EVD and its latest preventive and control measures. A point-to-point notification mechanism has also been set up with related health authorities. Should there be any EVD cases reported in the Mainland or Hong Kong, there will be a prompt exchange of information so that preventive measures are taken as early as possible.

(4) The HA has already made preparation in response to possible outbreak of EVD in Hong Kong. Having regard to the recommendations of the WHO and the outbreak updates, the HA has considered the risk of the disease and the responsiveness of public hospitals, as well as adopted the strategy of "early notification, early isolation and early testing", in order to reduce the risk of spread of the disease in Hong Kong.

The HA has procured personal protective equipment (PPE), including hoods, face shields, N95 masks, water-resistant protective gowns, gloves and shoe covers, that are compatible with the WHO standard for use by front-line staff to reduce their risk of contracting the disease. The HA has stock up PPE including hoods and water-resistant protective gowns sufficient for three months' use. The HA's infection control teams have also provided infection control training to healthcare workers, including the proper procedures for gowning and de-gowning PPE, disposal of clinical LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014 927

waste, environmental disinfection, handling of vomits and needle stick injuries, and disposal of dead bodies. Moreover, the HA will offer targeted infection control training to the attending healthcare workers and supporting staff of the HAIDC. The training requires the staff to correctly demonstrate the recommended procedures for gowning and de-gowning of PPE, and they are required to be trained every week to get familiarized.

(5) The CHP has been maintaining communication with various government departments and conducting ground-movement drills to test the departments' preparedness and response to implementing public health actions. The CHP will soon conduct another drill on the isolation and handling of EVD patients and relevant persons, disinfection and cleansing of contaminated household, and use of PPE.

On the other hand, the HA has conducted an inter-departmental drill on 2 September 2014 with the Fire Services Department to simulate the overall procedures and measures for the conveyance and handling of suspected EVD patient. The aim of the drill was to enhance the responsiveness of front-line healthcare workers in handling cases and strengthen the notification and communication of different departments. The drill also examined the steps for doctors in A&E Department to conduct assessment of patients on ambulance, the arrangements for conveyance of a suspected case to HAIDC in Princess Margaret Hospital, and some clinical procedures in handling patients including collection of samples, environmental disinfection and disposal of dead bodies, and so on.

Furthermore, the 14 A&E Departments of the HA have since August 2014 conducted several small-scale drills with the objective of familiarizing the healthcare workers about channelling of patients, isolation and procedures for gowning and de-gowning PPE.

The CHP and HA will continue to conduct drills in this regard to ensure and enhance the responsiveness of healthcare and other front-line workers in handling EVD cases.

928 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014

Grant of a Site for Use by People's Liberation Army

9. DR KENNETH CHAN (in Chinese): President, according to the 1994 Exchange of Notes between the Chinese Government and the British Government on the arrangements for the future use of the military sites in Hong Kong, there are at present 19 military sites set aside in Hong Kong for use by the People's Liberation Army Hong Kong Garrison (HK Garrison) for defence purposes after the reunification. Earlier on, some media discovered that a new radar station and related facilities (the radar station facilities) had been established at the hilltop of Tai Mo Shan for use by the HK Garrison, but the land on which such facilities are located (the radar station site) is not included in the aforesaid military sites. In this connection, will the Government inform this Council:

(1) of the details of the entire process through which the radar station site was granted by the government departments concerned, including the procedures for granting the site, the date on and the justifications for which the HK Garrison made the request, the studies and consultation exercises conducted by such departments during the vetting and approval process, as well as the date on and the justifications for which they decided to grant the site;

(2) whether the government departments concerned had sought legal advice from the Department of Justice on the related legal issues before granting the radar station site; if they had, of the details of the legal advice obtained; if not, the reasons for that; and

(3) whether it knows the specific uses of the radar station facilities and whether such facilities include certain equipment capable of monitoring the situation and people's activities in Hong Kong; if it knows, of the details?

SECRETARY FOR SECURITY (in Chinese): President, a consolidated reply of the Administration to the various parts of the question is as follows:

The People's Liberation Army Hong Kong Garrison (the Hong Kong Garrison) has a total of 19 military sites in Hong Kong, of which six are located on Hong Kong Island (namely the Central Barracks and Military Dock, Chek Chue Barracks, Headquarters House, Ching Yi To Barracks and Western Barracks), four in Kowloon (namely the Gun Club Hill Barracks, Kowloon East LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014 929

Barracks, Cornwall Street and Ngong Shuen Chau Barracks) and nine in the (namely Shek Kong Barracks, Shek Kong Village, San Tin Barracks, Tam Mei Barracks, San Wai Barracks, San Wai/Tai Ling Firing Range, Tsing Shan Firing Range, Tai O Barracks and the Military Transportation Centre at Chek Lap Kok). These sites were established in accordance with the Exchange of Notes between the Government of the People's Republic of China and the Government of the United Kingdom in 1994 on the arrangements for the future use of the military sites in Hong Kong. The relevant area on Tai Mo Shan hilltop is not one of these military sites. It has all along been Government land used for setting up various communication installations.

Article 14 of the Basic Law provides that the Central People's Government shall be responsible for the defence of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region (HKSAR). According to the Law of the People's Republic of China on the Garrisoning of the HKSAR (the Garrison Law), the defence functions and responsibilities of the Hong Kong Garrison include preparing against and resisting aggression and safeguarding the security of the HKSAR, carrying out defence duties, controlling military facilities and handling foreign-related military affairs. The Government has the responsibility of supporting the Hong Kong Garrison in its performance of defence functions and responsibilities.

Since the Reunification, the Hong Kong Garrison has been performing defence functions and responsibilities in Hong Kong in strict accordance with the Basic Law and the Garrison Law. Details of the defence operations are military secret and cannot be disclosed.

Temporary Traffic Arrangements in Response to Road Blockages

10. MR CHARLES PETER MOK (in Chinese): President, since the 28th of last month, the assemblies triggered by the Occupy Central movement have blocked certain major trunk roads and other roads, causing the suspension of services or diversion of a number of bus and green minibus routes. Some members of the public noticed that the contingency arrangements for some bus routes had been changed for a number of times. As a number of bus routes shared the same temporary terminal stations, quite a number of buses waiting to pick up passengers were illegally parked by the roadsides near the terminal stations, resulting in traffic congestion. In this connection, will the Government inform this Council:

930 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014

(1) as the authorities indicated, in reply to a question of a Member of this Council a few months ago, that the Police would formulate contingency measures in response to the Occupy Central movement, so as to minimize the impact on road users, of the details of such measures, and whether the authorities have taken such measures after the occurrence of the aforesaid assemblies; if they have, when they started to take such measures;

(2) during the three weeks after the occurrence of the aforesaid assemblies, of the number of bus routes the services of which were suspended or which were diverted as well as their geographical distribution, the number of bus routes in respect of which the contingency routes were changed more than once, and the justifications for making such changes;

(3) during the three weeks after the occurrence of the aforesaid assemblies, of the traffic flows of the various major trunk roads and tunnels/road harbour crossings on Hong Kong Island and in Kowloon during peak hours, how such figures compare with those in the same period last year, and the names of the five major trunk roads with the highest numbers of bus/green minibus routes passing en route;

(4) of the factors based on which the authorities determined the daily routing arrangements for the affected bus and green minibus routes during the period when the aforesaid assemblies were being held; and

(5) as some members of the public have pointed out that, during the period when the aforesaid assemblies were being held, the flows of traffic on some roads at peak hours were smoother than before while some other roads were unusually congested, whether the authorities took into account the capacities of individual roads when formulating bus routes diversion arrangements; of the justifications for deciding to bunch a number of bus routes en route certain major trunk roads?

LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014 931

SECRETARY FOR TRANSPORT AND HOUSING (in Chinese): President, since the start of the Occupy Central movement (the movement), road-based public transport services have been seriously affected by extensive road closure as well as traffic diversion and congestion. This has resulted in the suspension of services or route diversion for some routes. As the affected areas are constantly changing, the Transport Department (TD) and public transport operators have to make service changes promptly in light of the latest road conditions, so as to maintain road-based public transport services and alleviate traffic congestion as far as possible.

The reply to the various parts of Mr Charles Peter MOK's question is as follows:

(1) According to the Security Bureau, the Police appeal to any person, who plans to organize public order events with the number of participants exceeding the limit prescribed in the law (that is, public meetings of more than 50 persons and public processions of more than 30 persons), for approaching the Police as early as possible for discussion of the specific arrangements so that corresponding measures can be formulated and adopted, whereby facilitating the activities concerned to be conducted in a peaceful manner, minimizing the impact on other members of the community and ensuing public order and public safety. The Security Bureau added that in the past month, major trunk roads on Hong Kong Island and in Kowloon were illegally occupied by a number of assembly participants and their obstacles. The illegal occupation has resulted in serious road blockage and traffic congestion, severely affecting the lives of the general public and delivery of emergency services. The Police urge protesters to remove their obstacles as soon as possible and to leave in an orderly manner, so that road traffic can resume normal.

Meanwhile, the Police have been working closely with the TD in relation to traffic and public transport service arrangements. Since 28 September, the Emergency Transport Co-ordination Centre (the ETCC) of the TD, in collaboration with departments including the Police and public transport operators, has been closely monitoring the traffic and public transport situations round-the-clock every day. The ETCC has also been co-ordinating public transport services 932 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014

based on the prevailing traffic conditions, and making prompt adjustment on traffic arrangements having regard to the actual situation.

To minimize traffic disruption caused by road blockage, officers from the Transport Division of Police have conducted real-time traffic control and direction along the affected areas so as to divert and ease the traffic. Moreover, to ensure that police vehicles, fire appliances and ambulances can reach the scene promptly for emergency services, departments concerned have been working closely to provide emergency vehicles with information on the fastest route to the scene in a timely manner. The Police have also conducted operations to remove illegal obstacles at some roads, so as to clear an emergency vehicular access and minimize the impact brought by the obstacles on the public.

(2) and (3)

The operation and journey time of road-based public transport services have been severely affected by the closure of major trunk roads and traffic congestion of alternative roads. Service frequencies have thus become unstable. Also, service frequencies and routings have to be revised from time to time in light of unforeseen incidents (such as blockage of reopened roads).

For bus services, as many as 270 bus routes were affected (on 30 September) during the past four weeks, accounting for about 48% of all bus routes in Hong Kong. There were 77 suspended routes and 193 diverted routes. About two thirds of the affected routes have been diverted more than once due to changes in road conditions. As at 27 October, 225 bus routes were still affected (including eight suspended routes and 217 diverted routes), notwithstanding that some roads (such as Queensway) have been reopened. They account for about 40% of all bus routes in Hong Kong. These routes mainly serve or pass through the affected areas in Admiralty, Causeway Bay and Mong Kok.

Since the start of the movement, a number of major trunk roads on Hong Kong Island and in Kowloon (currently including parts of Connaught Road Central, Gloucester Road, Yee Wo Street and LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014 933

Nathan Road as well as Harcourt Road) have been blocked. Alternative roads on Hong Kong Island (in Central, Admiralty and Wan Chai) as well as in Kowloon, such as Lung Wo Road, Hennessy Road, Kennedy Road, Queen's Road East, Tai Hang Road, Bonham Road, Stubbs Road and Waterloo Road, and so on, have become more congested than usual during peak hours. The tailbacks of various roads on Hong Kong Island are obviously longer than usual with slower traffic flow, resulting in longer travelling time. For example, according to the TD's observation, the tailback of Lung Wo Road in Central was once extended to Western Harbour Crossing; the tailback of Gloucester Road in Wan Chai was once extended to Eastern Harbour Crossing; and the tailback of Aberdeen Tunnel exit in Wan Chai was once extended to Tin Wan.

In addition, traffic of the five major trunk roads (that is, Connaught Road Central, Queensway, Hennessy Road, Nathan Road and Argyle Street) plied by the highest number of bus and green minibus routes has been severely affected by the movement. Journey time, frequencies and routings of bus and green minibus services are thus affected. Bus and minibus operators indicated that the travelling time has in general increased by some 30 to 40 minutes, and the frequency of some routes has been reduced by half. The travelling time of some routes was once increased to 1.5 hours (a green minibus route from Tsim Sha Tsui to en route Mong Kok) to three hours (a cross-harbour bus route from to Lai Chi Kok during morning peak).

According to the information provided by various tunnel companies, traffic flow of Aberdeen Tunnel and the three cross-harbour tunnels during peak hours on weekdays had registered a year-on-year drop of as much as 10% during 28 September to 16 October.

(4) and (5)

When considering service resumption or road diversion arrangements, the TD and public transport operators would take into account passenger demand, whether there is alternative services, the capacity of roads passing en route and other factors (such as whether the routing would be too close to the areas blocked by protesters). The TD and various operators will continue to closely monitor the 934 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014

traffic conditions of various roads and allow buses and minibuses to follow the original routing as far as possible to minimize the impacts on passengers. When affected roads are reopened, the TD will allow the use of the original routing as early as possible or extend the service area to meet passenger demand.

In order to divert traffic and minimize the impact on passengers, the TD and Police will continue to implement temporary traffic management measures having regard to traffic condition. These measures include the control of traffic flow, adjustment of traffic signals and manual direction of traffic at major road junctions. To ease traffic congestion in the vicinity of Wan Chai (particularly Gloucester Road westbound to Central), only franchised buses are allowed to make a left turn from Gloucester Road (Central bound) onto Gloucester Road service road via the temporary access outside former Wan Chai Police Station from 7 am to 10 pm daily with effect from 19 October. Bus companies have also designated the temporary bus stops at the pavement on Gloucester Road service road between O'Brien Road and Stewart Road for the boarding and alighting of passengers.

When formulating temporary traffic management measures, less congested roads would be utilized as far as possible. However, when considering route diversion, the convenience of passengers has to be carefully balanced. Detour from the original routing should also be as little as possible. Moreover, although traffic on some road sections appears to be smoother than usual, they may not be suitable for route diversion. For example, Gloucester Road eastbound to Wan Chai is less congested than usual. Yet, the smooth traffic is in fact caused by the blockage of Harcourt Road which feeds traffic to Gloucester Road eastbound by the movement.

The TD will continue to disseminate latest traffic news to the public through the media and other channels to help passengers choose the most appropriate public transport mode(s) or adjust their journeys. Meanwhile, the TD will remind transport operators to avoid causing traffic obstruction when waiting for passengers to board, with due regard to the actual situation.

LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014 935

Measures to Enhance Building Management

11. MR WU CHI-WAI (in Chinese): President, according to section 40B of the Building Management Ordinance (BMO) (Cap. 344), where it appears to the Secretary for Home Affairs that there is a danger or risk of danger to the occupiers or owners of a building, the Secretary for Home Affairs may order the management committee (MC) of the building to appoint a building management agent. It has been reported that a property developer has acquired around 30% of the flats in a building but has long been defaulting payment of management fees payable for the flats concerned, causing operational difficulties to the owners' corporation (OC) of the building. The developer has also been trying to acquire other flats by means of harassment. However, the Secretary for Home Affairs has not invoked the aforesaid provision to order the MC of that building to appoint a building management agent. It has also been reported that the MC of a building has refused to appoint a new MC chairman after the resignation of the incumbent chairman, resulting in the owners of the building being unable to convene general meetings. The Lands Tribunal subsequently ruled that the owners had the right to convene general meetings, and ordered that the MC be dissolved and a general meeting be held for electing new MC members. In this connection, will the Government inform this Council:

(1) whether the authorities received in the past three years any request for an order to be made under the aforesaid provision for the appointment of a building management agent; if they did, of the number of such cases and details of each case;

(2) whether it has reviewed, in the light of the aforesaid ruling of the Lands Tribunal, the relevant internal guidelines and the procedures for instituting prosecutions against those who have contravened Cap. 344; if it has, of the details; if not, the reasons for that;

(3) whether it knows the number of cases currently handled by the Lands Tribunal in which dissolution of an MC was requested on account of the office of the MC chairman being vacant; of the number of requests for assistance received by the Home Affairs Department (HAD) in the past five years involving dissolution of MCs, the number of MCs involved in such cases and the assistance provided by the HAD;

936 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014

(4) as the Secretary for Home Affairs stated in reply to a question raised by a Member of this Council on 2 July this year that the authorities would, in the process of reviewing Cap. 344, study in detail the problem that no general meeting could be convened as a result of the office of the MC chairman being vacant, of the progress of the study;

(5) as the Government has set up a committee a few months ago to review Cap. 344, of the work progress of the committee, including the time for conducting consultations with stakeholders and the public, the time for proposing legislative amendments, as well as the legislative timetable; and

(6) whether, before Cap. 344 is amended, the authorities will revise the Code of Practice on Building Management and Maintenance issued by the HAD, in order to help property owners solve the problem that no general meeting can be convened as a result of the office of the MC chairman being vacant; if they will not, of other means available for the authorities to help property owners solve the aforesaid problem?

SECRETARY FOR HOME AFFAIRS (in Chinese): President, as management of private buildings is the responsibility of the owners, the Government's policy is to assist building owners to discharge their building management responsibilities through multi-pronged measures, including the provision of a legal framework and appropriate support services. The BMO provides a legal framework for building management, formation and operation of OCs and other related matters. The BMO empowers the OCs, which are independent body corporates, to act on behalf of the owners to deal with matters relating to building management and at the same time, empowers owners to monitor the operation of the OCs and their MCs. The BMO also empowers the Authority, that is, the Secretary for Home Affairs, to exercise certain powers in specified circumstances. In accordance with section 45 of the BMO, the Lands Tribunal shall have jurisdiction in relation to building management and shall hear and determine any proceedings relating to the interpretation of the provisions of the BMO, provisions of deed of mutual covenant, powers and duties of OCs and MCs, building management expenses and other related matters.

LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014 937

My reply to the six parts of the question is as follows:

(1) In accordance with section 40B of the BMO, where it appears to the Authority in the case of any building having an MC that no person is, for the time being, managing that building; the MC has failed substantially to perform the duties of an OC under section 18 of the BMO; and by reason of the circumstances mentioned above, there is a danger or risk of danger to the occupiers or owners of the building, the Authority may order that the MC must, within a specified period, appoint a building management agent for the purposes of managing that building. The purpose of this provision is to protect the safety of residents and members of the public by allowing the Authority to make a timely intervention in case of emergencies arising from the lack of effective management of a building. Should there be requests from the owners, the Authority will consider carefully the individual circumstances and justifications put forth by the owners according to the established procedures before making a decision.

In the past three years, there was only one case in which the Authority was requested to invoke section 40B of the BMO for the appointment of a building management agent. In the above case, an owner requested the Authority to issue an order to the MC to appoint a building management agent to manage the building as all MC members had resigned. However, after investigation by the HAD, we came to know that a property management company (PMC) had been appointed by the OC to assist in its building management. After the PMC had sought legal advice on the issue, one of the corporate owners appointed another authorized representative as an MC member, who subsequently convened an OC general meeting under the relevant provisions of the BMO to fill the remaining MC vacancies. In the light of the fact that the MC was functioning normally, the PMC was discharging daily building management duties continuously and no imminent danger was observed, the Authority considered it unnecessary to invoke its powers under section 40B of the BMO to appoint a building management agent for the building concerned.

(2) In accordance with paragraph 1(2) of Schedule 3 to the BMO, an MC chairman shall, upon receipt of requests from not less than 5% 938 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014

of the owners, convene and hold a general meeting within the designated period. This is a duty assigned by the BMO to the MC chairman. The Authority is not empowered by the BMO to institute prosecution against any MC chairman who fails to comply with this provision.

If an MC chairman refuses to convene an OC general meeting, or fails to convene one as prescribed by the BMO on account of his resignation, the owners may, in accordance with section 45 of the BMO, make an application to the Lands Tribunal for an order to the MC chairman for convening an OC general meeting, or to the MC for filling the vacant office of the chairman as soon as possible with a view to following up owners' requests.

In August this year, the Lands Tribunal heard a case where an MC chairman resigned after receiving a request for an OC general meeting from not less than 5% of the owners. The MC was alleged for failing to conduct a by-election of the chairman within a reasonable period of time to handle owners' request. Taking into account the facts of the case, the Lands Tribunal determined to dissolve the MC and appoint an administrator to convene an OC general meeting. In the light of this judgment, the HAD has advised its front-line staff in District Offices (DOs) to inform MC chairmen and members of the above judgment when there are similar cases. Details of this judgment have also been uploaded onto the HAD's dedicated webpage on Building Management for owners' and public reference.

(3) For the number of cases being handled by the Lands Tribunal in which dissolution of an MC was requested on account of the office of the MC chairman being vacant, the Lands Tribunal responded that it has not kept the statistics of cases broken down by their nature. However, a master case record or the notice of application of individual case is available for public inspection at the Lands Tribunal upon payment of the prescribed fee.

Any MC chairman vacancy may be filled in accordance with the mechanism stipulated in paragraph 6(4) of Schedule 2 to the BMO, under which two possible ways are provided for. First, the OC may, LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014 939

by a resolution passed at an OC general meeting, appoint a person among its MC members to fill the vacancy till the next OC annual general meeting at which the MC members retire under paragraph 5(1) of the BMO; and second, if no OC general meeting is so convened or no appointment is made to fill the vacancy at a general meeting, MC members may appoint a person among themselves to fill the vacancy till the next OC general meeting.

The HAD does not keep any statistics on the number of cases of request for assistance involving the dissolution of MCs. Nevertheless, such cases are not common and the HAD are following up on six cases only. Upon receipt of such a request, DO staff will immediately contact the MC concerned and advise the MC to fill the vacant office as soon as possible in accordance with the mechanism stipulated in paragraph 6(4) of Schedule 2 to the BMO to ensure OC's normal operation. In the event that the OC fails to make timely arrangements for a by-election, we will advise the owners to seek legal advice and consider whether they will apply for a determination by the Lands Tribunal pursuant to the BMO.

(4) and (5)

The Government has established the Review Committee on the Building Management Ordinance earlier to study how to resolve or handle common building management problems through amending the BMO. After considering the recommendations of the Review Committee, we will consult the stakeholders and the public later this year. A consultation paper to this effect will include amendment proposals for paragraph 1(2) of Schedule 3 to the BMO. On the basis of views collated through public consultation, we will start drafting amendments to the BMO after working out the proposed legislative amendments.

(6) The Code of Practice on Building Management and Maintenance is issued by the Secretary for Home Affairs under section 44(1)(b) of the BMO to provide guidance and advice on standards and practices in relation to building management, building safety, fire safety, slope safety and electrical, gas, lift and escalator installations for OCs' compliance and adherence.

940 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014

According to the legal advice of the Department of Justice, given that the composition and procedures of an MC and the meetings and procedures of an OC have been set out in Schedule 2 and Schedule 3 to the BMO respectively, the Secretary for Home Affairs cannot stipulate any other arrangements by revising the Code of Practice under section 44(1)(b) of the BMO to override the requirements that have been provided for in Schedule 2 and Schedule 3 to the BMO. As such, revising the aforesaid Code of Practice cannot resolve the problem of not being able to convene an OC meeting in accordance with paragraph 1(2) of Schedule 3 to the BMO as a result of the failure to fill the vacant office of an MC chairman in accordance with the mechanism stipulated in paragraph 6(4) of Schedule 2 to the BMO. Any amendments to the requirements for MC procedures and OC meetings and procedures, which have been stipulated in Schedule 2 and Schedule 3 to the BMO respectively, shall be made by means of legislative amendment to the BMO.

As mentioned in parts (2) and (3) above, DO will, upon receipt of an enquiry or a request for assistance, contact immediately the MC concerned and advise it to fill the vacant office of the MC chairman as soon as possible in accordance with the mechanism stipulated in paragraph 6(4) of Schedule 2 to the BMO. The MC chairman and members shall also be informed of the Lands Tribunal's latest judgment. Details of the judgment have also been uploaded onto the HAD's dedicated webpage on Building Management for owners' and public reference.

Development of Agriculture Industry

12. MISS CHAN YUEN-HAN (in Chinese): President, the Chief Executive indicated in the 2014 Policy Address that the Government would review its agricultural policy to enhance productivity and promote sustainable development, and would carry out consultation within this year. Regarding the development of the agriculture industry in Hong Kong, will the Government inform this Council:

(1) of the progress and details of the aforesaid review; when the authorities will commence the consultation exercise and of the details of the exercise; LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014 941

(2) of (i) the total area of agricultural land, (ii) the area of active agricultural land, (iii) the area of agricultural land left derelict, and (iv) the respective areas of agricultural land used for producing vegetables, flowers, field crops and orchards in Hong Kong each year from 2010 to the end of September this year (set out in the table below);

(iv) Year (i) (ii) (iii) Field Vegetables Flowers Orchards crops 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 (as at the end of September)

(3) whether many pieces of agricultural land are left derelict at present; if so, whether it has studied if the situation is attributable to the hoarding of agricultural land by developers for future development, and whether there are measures in place to address the problem of agricultural land being left derelict;

(4) of (i) the output and (ii) the total value (thousand dollars) of crops produced each year from 2010 to the end of September this year, together with a breakdown by kind of crops (flower, fruit, vegetable and field crop) set out in the table below;

2014 (as at 2010 2011 2012 2013 the end of Crop September) (i) (ii) (i) (ii) (i) (ii) (i) (ii) (i) (ii) Flower Fruit Vegetable Field crop Total

942 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014

(5) of (i) the number of farms engaged in farming activities, (ii) the number of organic farms among them, and (iii) the number of farmers involved each year from 2012 to the end of September this year (set out in the table below);

Year (i) (ii) (iii) 2012 2013 2014 (as at the end of September)

(6) of the respective market shares of locally produced vegetables and fruits each year from 2012 to the end of September this year (set out in the table below); whether the authorities have put in place measures to increase the production of local vegetables and fruits and to set self-sufficiency targets for such crops; if there are such measures, of the details, and whether they have assessed the effectiveness of such measures; if there are no such measures, the reasons for that; and

Year Vegetables Fruits 2012 2013 2014 (as at the end of September)

(7) of the respective numbers of applications for leasing agricultural land under the Agricultural Land Rehabilitation Scheme (the Scheme) received and approved by the Agriculture, Fisheries and Conservation Department (AFCD) from January to September this year, the area of agricultural land leased out through the Scheme and the average waiting time for such applicants, as well as the current number of applications for leasing agricultural land on the waiting list; whether the authorities will implement any measures to shorten the average waiting time; if they will, of the details; if not, the reasons for that?

LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014 943

SECRETARY FOR FOOD AND HEALTH (in Chinese): President,

(1) The Government is reviewing the existing agricultural policy with a view to enhancing productivity and promoting sustainable development. This will include introducing modern and environment-friendly agricultural technologies that help conserve our natural resources and the agricultural ecology, so as to supply good quality local agricultural products to members of the public whilst at the same time promoting the diversified development of the rural areas. The Government plans to consult the public on the revised policy by the end of this year.

(2) The AFCD conducts on-site surveys at local farms regularly to collect information about the area of agricultural land under active farming and crop varieties. At the beginning of each year, the AFCD compiles statistics for the preceding year after it has consolidated and analysed the information collected. Statistics for the period from January to September 2014 are therefore not yet available (the same applies to parts (4) to (6) of the reply below). Details about (i) the total area of agricultural land; (ii) the area of agricultural land under active farming; (iii) the area of fallow agricultural land; and (iv) the area of agricultural land used for growing vegetables, flowers, field crops and orchards in Hong Kong from 2010 to 2013 are set out in the table below:

Area (hectare) (iv) Year (i) (ii) (iii) Field Vegetables Flowers Orchards Crops 2010 4 653 746 3 907 297 153 20 276 2011 4 618 734 3 884 292 152 20 270 2012 4 575 732 3 843 294 147 19 272 2013 4 523 729 3 794 298 137 18 276

(3) According to the information provided by the Planning Department, nearly 70% of the land zoned as "Agriculture" is privately owned. In most cases, private agricultural land in Hong Kong was granted under Block Government Leases in early years. Generally speaking, these leases do not impose any requirement to the effect that the owners have to put the land to use and should not leave the 944 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014

land idle. It is for the landowners to decide whether or not to use their land for agricultural production. The also notices that there have all along been rental activities involving private agricultural land. Whether a piece of private agricultural land will be used for farming is dependent on whether the landowner prefers to rent out the land for non-agricultural purposes. Relevant considerations include farming demand, geographical environment, and rental level, and so on. There is currently no evidence to show that reserving the agricultural land for development is a main consideration of the landlords in deciding to leave the agricultural land fallow.

(4) Based on the data collected by the AFCD from 2010 to 2013, we set out in the table below (i) the output; and (ii) the total value of crops produced, broken down by kind of crops (flower, fruit, vegetable and field crop):

Year 2010 2011 2012 2013 Crop (i) (ii) (i) (ii) (i) (ii) (i) (ii) tonne $'000 tonne $'000 tonne $'000 tonne $'000 Flower N.A. 145,175 N.A. 145,060 N.A. 145,480 N.A. 137,479 Fruit 864 8,692 1 009 12,960 1 020 13,539 1 355 18,292 Vegetable 16 000 77,502 16 300 82,856 16 300 86,544 16 300 100,055 Field crop 220 530 130 427 180 520 152 541 Total 17 084 231,899 17 439 241,303 17 500 246,083 17 807 256,367

(5) Based on the data collected by the AFCD in 2012 and 2013, we set out in the table below (i) the number of farms engaged in farming activities; (ii) the number of organic farms among them; and (iii) the number of farmers involved:

Number of organic Year Number of farms Number of farmers farms* 2012 approx. 2 400 204 approx. 4 100 2013 approx. 2 400 225 approx. 4 000

Note:

* Organic farms refer to farms participating in the Organic Farming Support Service of the AFCD.

LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014 945

(6) According to the statistics collected by the AFCD in 2012 and 2013, the respective market share of locally produced vegetables and fruits is set out in the table below:

Year Vegetables Fruits 2012 1.9% 0.2% 2013 2.0% 0.2%

Through the provision of basic infrastructure, technical support and low-interest loans to farmers, the AFCD has been facilitating the further development of local agriculture, enhancing the productivity and business viability of the industry, thereby helping the farmers to produce good quality and high-value agricultural products that are safe for consumption. For example, the AFCD actively encourages and supports local farmers to develop organic farming. Through the Organic Farming Support Service, the AFCD provides technical advice and support for those farmers who wish to switch to organic farming from traditional farming. It also promotes the production and sale of local organic agricultural products jointly with the Vegetable Marketing Organization (VMO) and the Federation of Vegetable Marketing Co-operative Societies, Ltd. Currently, 244 farms participate in the Organic Farming Support Service, producing about 5.5 tonnes of organic agricultural products each day for the local market. At present, there are more than 37 organic vegetable retail outlets under the VMO marketing network, including large supermarkets, shops in MTR stations, health food stores and the Lions Nature Education Centre outlet at Tsiu Hang, Sai Kung. Besides, the AFCD supports the Hong Kong Organic Resource Centre in its endeavours to educate the public on organic farming and promote the certification of organic products.

The AFCD also organizes from time to time talks and on-farm demonstrations for farmers, briefing them on improved varieties of agricultural products and new farming techniques. Quality produce developed in recent years includes red flesh rock melon, seedless water melon, yellow flesh water melon, long horn pepper, round eggplant, potato and organic strawberry.

946 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014

The Government has also been actively assisting the industry in developing quality brand names. At present, 263 vegetable farms in the territory have participated in the Accredited Farm Scheme. The AFCD helps the industry set up weekend farmers' markets and organizes large-scale carnivals, such as the annual FarmFest which attracts over 100 participating local farmers and fishermen and more than 100 000 visitors every year. These events have helped showcase local agricultural and fishery products to the wider public and promote local brand names.

In keeping with the free-market principle, the Government does not set any targets for local agricultural production. Nor does it provide any direct financial subsidy to the industry or protect the price level of local agricultural products. The Government will continue to support the sustainable development of local agriculture through the provision of technical support and low-interest loans.

(7) The AFCD has implemented the Land Rehabilitation Scheme to assist farmers and those who wish to engage in farming to identify suitable agricultural land for cultivation. Under this scheme, the AFCD plays a bridging role by matching landowners with prospective tenants who intend to rent agricultural land and facilitates their entering into tenancy agreements. The AFCD also provides services such as technical support and low-interest loans when rehabilitation begins, with a view to encouraging gainful utilization of fallow agricultural land. From January to September this year, the AFCD received 24 applications for renting agricultural land under the Land Rehabilitation Scheme. During the same period, five applications were successfully matched, involving approximately 0.6 hectare of agricultural land. Since only a limited number of landowners are willing to rent out their agricultural land for agricultural activities, applicants usually have to wait quite a long time before they are successfully matched with landowners. At present, the average waiting time for each case is about five years. There are 272 cases on the waiting list.

LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014 947

Teaching Chinese History in Secondary Schools

13. MRS REGINA IP (in Chinese): President, at the meeting of the Panel on Education of this Council on 30 May 2013, an official from the Education Bureau said that about 85% of secondary schools taught Chinese History as an independent and compulsory subject at the junior secondary level. Moreover, among the day school first attempters in the Hong Kong Diploma of Secondary Education Examination (HKDSEE), both the number and percentage of candidates taking the examination on the Chinese History subject have been declining continuously since 2012. In this connection, will the Government inform this Council:

(1) of the number of secondary schools currently teaching Chinese History as an independent subject throughout the junior secondary level (that is, Secondary One to Three), and the percentage of such number in the total number of secondary schools;

(2) whether there is any requirement on secondary schools regarding the number of hours and sessions to be allocated for the Chinese History subject per week at junior secondary level; if there is, of the details; and

(3) given that among the day school first attempters in the HKDSEE, the number and percentage of candidates taking the examination on the Chinese History subject have been declining continuously since 2012, whether the authorities will consider requiring secondary schools to teach Chinese History as an independent subject at the junior secondary level so as to foster students' knowledge and interest in Chinese history, thereby encouraging more students to elect the Chinese History subject at the senior secondary level?

SECRETARY FOR EDUCATION (in Chinese): President,

(1) The Education Bureau attaches great importance to Chinese history education. In the curriculum guide Learning to learn: The Way Forward in Curriculum Development promulgated by the Curriculum Development Council in 2001, it is stated clearly that 948 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014

Chinese history and culture is the essential learning content in primary and secondary basic education. At present, Chinese history is taught in all secondary schools in Hong Kong at junior secondary level, though schools may adopt different curriculum modes. At the meeting of the Panel on Education of this Council on May 30, 2013, the Education Bureau stated that about 85% (in the 2013-2014 school year(1), it was 87.63%) of secondary schools taught Chinese History as an independent subject at the junior secondary level, and by the 2013-2014 school year, 390 secondary schools representing 87.63% of all the secondary schools(2) offered Chinese History as an independent subject in junior secondary level. This includes:

(i) 350 secondary schools teaching Chinese History as an independent subject throughout the junior secondary level (that is, Secondary One to Three), representing 78.65% of all the secondary schools, and

(ii) 40 secondary schools teaching Chinese History as an independent subject in any one or two years of the junior secondary level, representing 8.98% of all the secondary schools, for example,

- Schools that offered Chinese History in Secondary Three as an independent subject, but linked world history with Chinese history in Secondary One and Secondary Two, and

- Schools, for improving teaching effectiveness, that offered Chinese History in either Secondary One or Secondary Two with double lesson time to meet the minimum lesson time requirement set by the Education Bureau.

(1) In October every year, all schools are required to submit to the Education Bureau information on the subjects offered at each year of secondary education. The latest data on hand is that of the 2013-2014 school year. Such statistics has remained steady for years.

(2) In the 2013-2014 school year, there were 445 secondary schools (including Direct Subsidy Scheme Schools, but not including special schools, private independent schools, private independent schools [non-local curriculum], private schools, international schools, senior secondary schools) offering mainstream school curriculum. LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014 949

In the 2013-2014 school year, 55 schools adopted other curriculum modes to offer Chinese history in lower secondary level, amounting to 12.36% of all secondary schools. Among them,

(i) 22 schools (4.94%) offered Chinese History and Culture (linking world history with Chinese history) throughout Secondary One to Secondary Three. The development of Chinese history served as the backbone, making cross references to world history;

(ii) Another 33 school (7.41%) offered Integrated Humanities throughout Secondary One to Secondary Three. They adopted a topical approach to organize the contents of Chinese history and culture.

(2) Currently, the Education Bureau requests that secondary schools should, in the junior secondary level, devote one quarter of the total curriculum time spent on Personal, Social and Humanities Education to the learning and teaching of Chinese history. On average, the time spent amounts to two periods per week.

(3) Chinese History will remain as independent subjects in both junior and senior secondary levels. This arrangement will not be changed. Since the curriculum reform in 2002, the Education Bureau has stipulated that all students will study Chinese history in junior secondary level, and has listed essential learning contents in curriculum documents to ensure that students studying in all types of schools will enjoy their learning entitlements. Some schools have attempted to adopt different curriculum modes to organize the contents of Chinese history in accordance with the whole-school curriculum arrangement, the different learning needs of their students and the expertise of their teachers, for example integrating or making reference to topics in world history in the development of Chinese history, with an aim to broaden students' perspective and enhance their learning interest. Different curriculum modes have different merits, and schools can choose flexibly.

At the same time, since the curriculum reform started in 2002, General Studies for Primary Schools has systematically incorporated 950 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014

learning contents of Chinese history in the two key stages of lower primary and upper primary education, helping students understand Chinese history and culture progressively. Among the six strands in General Studies for Primary Schools, "National Identity and Chinese Culture", which includes historical figures, dynasties and stories, aims at cultivating students' interest in Chinese history and building up their foundation so as to facilitate and consolidate their learning in junior secondary level.

In the new senior secondary academic structure, since students usually take only two to three electives, and the fact that the whole student population keeps declining, the numbers of students enrolled in each elective subject reduce proportionally, including those enrolled in Chinese History. To enhance students' interest in learning Chinese history, and to encourage more students to choose Chinese History as their elective in senior secondary level, on the one hand the Curriculum Development Council has set up an ad hoc Committee in May this year to review the junior secondary curricula of Chinese History and History. Its members include academics in the tertiary sector, practicing teachers and professionals of relevant subjects, and personnel from the Hong Kong Examinations and Assessment Authority and the Education Bureau. It is expected that the committee will come up with short, medium and long term reform proposals in the middle of next year, to be followed by public consultations. At the same time, the Education Bureau is collaborating with different stakeholders to organize more teacher training programmes to enliven the learning and teaching strategies in the Chinese history classrooms, and to provide more teaching resources to improve the learning and teaching of Chinese history. These aim to enhance students' knowledge and interest in Chinese history, so as to encourage more to choose Chinese History in the senior secondary level.

Measures to Attract More People to Visit Hong Kong Geopark

14. DR ELIZABETH QUAT (in Chinese): President, Hong Kong Geopark was added to the Global Geoparks Network (GGN) in 2011 by the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) and was then LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014 951 named Hong Kong Global Geopark of China (the Geopark). It has been reported that the Geopark will undergo an interim assessment for the first time next year and the assessment criteria include the three aspects of conservation, publicity and education as well as tourism. Yet, relevant information indicates that the number of visitors to the Geopark has decreased from 1.5 million in 2011-2012 to 1.4 million in 2012-2013. There have been comments that if the situation does not improve, the Geopark may lose its "world-class" status. In this connection, will the Government inform this Council:

(1) as it has been reported that the number of overseas tourists joining guided tours to the Geopark currently accounts for only 1% to 2% of the total number of tourists to Hong Kong, whether it knows if the Hong Kong Tourism Board (HKTB) will consider enhancing its efforts in promoting the Geopark to overseas tourists, such as classifying the Geopark as a "highlight attraction" on the website of HKTB, or strengthening publicity work at the Hong Kong International Airport and various immigration control points; if HKTB will consider doing so, of the details; if not, the reasons for that;

(2) as it has been reported that some tourist guides aspiring to become Geopark guides have abandoned their plans to enrol in the relevant approved courses due to worries about underemployment, whether the authorities will provide funding to subsidize the training of Geopark guides so as to enhance their professional standard; if they will, of the details; if not, the reasons for that; and

(3) whether the authorities will provide funding to improve the ancillary facilities in the vicinity of the Geopark (such as upgrading the pier near the Geopark and expediting the works to widen the Hiram's Highway, and so on), so as to attract more people to visit the Geopark; if they will, of the details; if not, the reasons for that?

SECRETARY FOR THE ENVIRONMENT (in Chinese): President, Geopark is a natural scenic area with special geological heritage and landscapes, and it may also include precious archaeological finds, and important ecological, historical and cultural resources. According to the requirement of the GGN which is supported by the UNESCO, a geopark which is accepted to its network 952 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014 should have not only special geological features and landforms, but should also bring economic benefits to the local community through the promotion of sustainable geo-tourism. GGN emphasizes the sustainability of development projects within the geopark. The reply to the question raised by Member on the Geopark is as follows:

(1) The Geopark is one of the Government's major focuses of promotion for green tourism. In promoting the Geopark, we also take into account the importance of conservation. The Tourism Commission (TC) is partnering with relevant government departments (including the Agriculture, Fisheries and Conservation Department (AFCD) which is responsible for managing the Geopark), the travel trade, other event organizers and the HKTB to promote the Geopark and other green attractions of Hong Kong to overseas nature lovers and the overseas travel trade through the HKTB's "Great Outdoors Hong Kong" marketing platform. The promotion work of the HKTB for the Geopark includes the following:

- to encourage free and independent visitors to explore the Geopark through guide books, HKTB's official website, visitor centres at the major ports of entry and visitor hotline;

- to introduce the Geopark to overseas trade partners during travel fairs and promotion activities and encourage them to include elements of green tourism in the itineraries of visitors;

- to arrange overseas trade partners specializing in green tourism products to visit the Geopark and encourage them to include the Geopark in the itineraries for their customers; and

- to arrange international media and celebrities to explore the natural landscape in the Geopark and to promote the Geopark to overseas consumers through media coverage and social media.

Meanwhile, the TC, in collaboration with the travel trade and relevant departments, has implemented a scheme since June 2012 to allow coaches to transport inbound visitors to the East Dam of the High Island Reservoir on a limited scale to further facilitate visitors LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014 953

to go to the Geopark, with a view to promoting nature-based tourists' activities. There is no common mandatory requirement on the number of visitors. The number of visitors was high in the early days of the establishment of the Hong Kong Geopark and the number of visitors remains stable in the recent years.

(2) To enhance the travel trade's understanding of eco-tourism and nature appreciation, the Employee Retraining Board (ERB) launched a series of "Eco-Tour" courses under the "Skills Upgrading Scheme Plus" starting from 2013-2014 for enrolment of eligible persons(1). The series include courses specifically designed under the themes of the geo-areas in the Geopark. In 2014-2015, the ERB reserved 360 training quotas for the "Eco-Tour" courses, including 140 quotas for Geopark-related courses.

In order to maintain the quality of geopark guides and geo-tours, the Geopark and the Association for Geoconservation, Hong Kong have jointly established the "Recommended Geopark Guide (R2Gs) System". The R2G system encourages serving guides to enhance their knowledge on geology, culture and history and skills to be in line with international standards. To become eligible to the system, participants are required to pass the assessment in the aspects of education level, experience, conservation ideas, knowledge, language skills, professional ethics, crisis consciousness and handling, skill, physique, and personality. The assessment system and its goal have been affirmed by the GGN.

In addition, to maintain of geopark guides, the Travel Industry Council of Hong Kong has established a "Geopark Guide Accreditation System" to accreditate the qualifications for "Accredited Geopark Guides".

Through the arrangement of free local courses, seminars, field trips and other forms of continuing training, as well as arrangement of visits to geoparks in the Mainland, the AFCD endeavors to improve the standard of Hong Kong Geopark Guides.

(1) ERB's service targets are persons aged 15 or above with education attainment at sub-degree level or below. 954 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014

(3) The purpose of establishing the Geopark is to provide a place for high-quality outdoor education for promotion of geoconservation, rather than simply to attract visitors. Therefore, the AFCD will keep a careful balance between the needs of the visitors and protection of natural landscape. The AFCD set up interpretative panels, visitor centres and other appropriate tourist facilities in the Geopark to providing information to the public and tourists. Meanwhile, the Department has deigned two boat tour routes and nine land tour routes to enhance geopark tourism activities. To further promote the Geopark, in July 2014 AFCD established a Volcano Discovery Centre (the Centre) at the Sai Kung Town, which is the gateway of visiting Hong Kong Geopark. The Centre introduces the volcano in over hundred million years in Hong Kong and its landscape formation.

Further, the North District Council decided earlier to spend part of the funds under the Signature Project Scheme to improve hiking trails and construct new ancillary facilities in the Sha Tau Kok area. The aforementioned North District Signature Project (the Project) falls within the Sedimentary Rock Region of the Geopark and is in the vicinity of the Yan Chau Tong Marine Park. The Project comprises, amongst other items, improvement of existing hiking trails, construction of a new geo-path in the southern part of Kat O, conversion of the premises of an old rural school into a geological-cum-ecological education centre, as well as installation of ecology-themed education panels. The Project is expected to attract more visitors to the Geopark, encourage ecotourism and promote the message of conservation; it will also stand the Geopark in good stead when the revalidation of its status as recognized by the GGN under UNESCO is due. The detailed design of the Project is in progress. It is expected that the Project will be submitted to the Finance Committee of this Council for consideration in mid-2015. Subject to the Committee's approval, the construction works of the Project is expected to commence in late 2015 for completion in late 2017.

The AFCD also promotes the Geopark through different platforms including website, school activities, publications, public lectures, exhibitions and international conferences to attract visitors.

LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014 955

Additional Demand for Railway Services Brought About by Occupy Central Movement

15. MR TANG KA-PIU (in Chinese): President, it has been learnt that the assemblies triggered by the Occupy Central movement since the 28th of last month have caused traffic congestion on several major trunk roads and affected the operation of many bus routes, and quite a number of members of the public have therefore switched to travelling by the railway. On 7 October (that is, the day when classes of secondary schools in Wan Chai as well as Central and Western Districts resumed after the occurrence of the Occupy Central movement), passengers in the MTR Admiralty Station had to wait for several trains before they could board a -bound train. Furthermore, in reply to an urgent question raised at the Legislative Council meeting of 15 October this year, the Secretary for Transport and Housing advised that the two minutes peak headway for various railway lines at present had already reached the limit of the existing signalling system, and that train services being provided in other hours of the day-time were quite close to that limit as well. The risk of service disruption would naturally increase if the situation persisted. In this connection, will the Government inform this Council whether it knows:

(1) the statistics concerning each railway line except the Disneyland Resort Line (the same exception applies below) during the two periods from 1 to 27 September 2014 and from 28 September 2014 to the present in respect of: (i) the daily average patronage, (ii) the average patronage during morning peak hours, and (iii) the average patronage during afternoon peak hours (set out in Table 1);

Table 1 From 1 to From 28 September Railway Line 27 September 2014 2014 to the present (i) (ii) (iii) (i) (ii) (iii) Kwun Tong Line Tsuen Wan Line Island Line Tseung Kwan O Line Ma On Shan Line Tung Chung Line Airport Express

956 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014

(2) the following information in respect of each of the railway lines set out in Table 2: (i) the design capacity (calculated on the basis of accommodating up to six persons (standing) per square metre (ppsm)), and for the period from 1 to 27 September 2014, (ii) the respective patronage, loading at six ppsm and loading at four ppsm per hour per direction during morning peak hours for critical links, (iii) the respective patronage, loading at six ppsm and loading at four ppsm per hour per direction during afternoon peak hours for critical links, and (iv) the number of times when the capacity was reached during the said period; and for the period from 28 September 2014 to the present, (v) the respective patronage, loading at six ppsm and loading at four ppsm per hour per direction during morning peak hours for critical links, (vi) the respective patronage, loading at six ppsm and loading at four ppsm per hour per direction during afternoon peak hours for critical links, and (vii) the number of times when the capacity was reached during the said period;

Table 2 From From 1 to 28 September 27 September Railway Line 2014 to the 2014 present (i) (ii) (iii) (iv) (v) (vi) (vii) Kwun Tong Line Tsuen Wan Line Island Line Tseung Kwan O Line East Rail Line West Rail Line Ma On Shan Line Tung Chung Line Airport Express

(3) if there were occasions when the MTR signalling system was unstable during the period from 28 September 2014 to the present; if there were such occasions, whether wear and tear of the mechanical parts caused by a drastic increase in patronage was one of the causes; and

LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014 957

(4) the concrete measures adopted by the MTR Corporation Limited (MTRCL) at present to cope with the additional passenger throughput, including the number of extra trains running during the peak hours, the implementation criteria for and content of crowd control measures, as well as the detailed working arrangements for the newly added staff?

SECRETARY FOR TRANSPORT AND HOUSING (in Chinese): President, since the beginning of the Occupy Central movement, extensive road transport services in Hong Kong Island and Kowloon have been severely affected by road closure and traffic diversion. With regard to railway services, the highest daily patronage of heavy rail during the past month was recorded on 3 October (Friday) with about 5.8 million. This is 13% higher than a normal relatively busy Friday with daily patronage of about 5.1 million. Train compartments are very crowded and passengers usually have to wait for several trains and spend more time for boarding. The average weekday daily patronage of heavy rail from 28 September to 25 October (except Saturdays, Sundays and Public Holidays) is about 5.34 million. This is 10% higher than that from 1 to 27 September of about 4.85 million.

My reply to the various parts of Mr TANG Ka-piu's question is as follows:

(1) The weekday patronage of MTR heavy rail network from 1 to 27 September and 28 September to 25 October 2014 is at Annex 1.

(2) The weekday carrying capacity and loading of MTR heavy rail network from 1 to 27 September and 28 September to 25 October 2014 is at Annex 2.

(3) There were five cases of service disruption of eight minutes or above related to signalling system within the MTR heavy rail network during the past four weeks from 28 September to 25 October. The MTRCL made announcements in stations and train compartments during the incidents. MTRCL also informed passengers of service arrangements and urged passengers to allow sufficient time for travelling through channels such as mobile phone apps and MTR website.

958 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014

Indeed, the increase in patronage in MTR heavy rail network recorded since 28 September has placed additional burden on the facilities, machines and components of the railway system. Despite MTRCL having deployed additional staff to enhance railway inspection and maintenance to ensure safe and smooth system operation during the period, the risk of service disruption will naturally increase if the current situation persists.

(4) Without compromising railway safety and apart from continuing to run at two minutes peak headway from 7.15 am to about 9.15 am (the end time of morning peak hour of individual railway line varies given the difference in patronage), MTRCL has also enhanced train services during other hours as necessary. MTR heavy rail network has added about 70 train trips on average per day from 28 September to 25 October.

Given that the two minutes peak headway for Kwun Tong Line, Tsuen Wan Line and Island Line has already reached the limit of the existing signalling system and that train services being provided in other hours of the day-time are close to the system limit as well, the risk of service disruption will naturally increase if this situation persists.

Regarding staff deployment, on top of the 2 800 front-line operations staff rostered on duty each day, MTRCL has deployed about 400 additional staff, including temporary staff and staff from other departments, to strengthen passenger service and handle disruption due to unforeseen circumstances. Most of them are at stations with higher volume of passenger flow to assist passengers and maintain station order. Having regard to the actual situation, MTRCL has also implemented further passenger flow management measures including maintaining single direction passenger flow at station exits and concourses, limiting number of passengers waiting at platforms, and diverting passengers to less crowded areas of platforms and concourses to ensure smooth train operation and passenger safety.

In addition, MTRCL's Rolling Stock Rapid Response Unit and Infrastructure Maintenance Rapid Response Unit have deployed additional manpower to station in different positions of the railway network strategically. They can be the first on the scene of any equipment failure to start recovery work with a view to minimizing impact of any disruption.

LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014 959

Annex 1

Weekday Patronage of MTR Heavy Rail Network from 1 to 27 September and 28 September to 25 October 2014

28 September to 25 October 2014 1 September to 27 September 2014 (4 weeks) (except 10 Saturdays, (except 8 Saturdays, Sundays and

Sundays and Public Holidays Public Holidays and 3 special during this period) days(1) during this period) Number of Number of Number of Number of passenger passenger passenger passenger trips trips trips trips Average admitted at admitted at Average admitted at admitted at weekday gates of all gates of all weekday gates of all gates of all Heavy rail network daily stations of stations of daily stations of stations of patronage a railway a railway patronage a railway a railway line during line during line during line during morning evening morning evening peak(2) peak(2) peak(2) peak(2) Island Line 1 226 200 91 500 168 200 947 100 70 100 150 100 Tsuen Wan Line 1 172 200 110 100 133 300 1 058 300 100 500 123 200 Kwun Tong Line 633 600 78 400 70 000 604 600 74 600 67 900 Tseung Kwan O Line 337 000 54 400 21 500 333 300 54 700 20 900 West Rail Line 453 200 58 400 51 800 432 000 56 100 47 800 East Rail Line 1 062 700 94 000 108 200 1 044 800 92 800 106 100 Ma On Shan Line 155 600 19 600 11 800 150 600 19 500 11 200 Tung Chung Line 253 800 31 800 30 300 236 900 30 300 28 000 Airport Express 46 500 2 900 3 600 44 000 2 900 3 600 Total 5 340 800 541 100 598 700 4 851 600 501 500 558 800

Notes:

(1) The three special days include 8 September 2014 (overnight service for Mid-Autumn Festival) and 15 to 16 September 2014 (the Observatory issued No. 8 Tropical Cyclone Warning Signal).

(2) Calculated based on the busiest one hour during the respective periods. Depending on the travelling pattern of passengers of individual railway line, the morning peak is from about 8 am to 9 am and the evening peak is from about 6 pm to 7 pm.

960 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014

Annex 2

Weekday Carrying Capacity and Loading of MTR Heavy Rail network from 1 to 27 September and 28 September to 25 October 2014

28 September to 25 October 2014 1 September to 27 September 2014 (4 weeks) (except 10 Saturdays, (except 8 Saturdays, Sundays and

Sundays and Public Holidays during Public Holidays and 3 special days(1) Heavy rail this period) during this period) network Per hour per Per hour per Per hour per Per hour per Existing carrying (critical link) direction morning direction evening direction morning direction evening capacity peak loading for peak loading for peak loading for peak loading for (6 ppsm)(2) the critical link the critical link the critical link the critical link Morning Evening 4 ppsm(3) 6 ppsm 4 ppsm(3) 6 ppsm 4 ppsm(3) 6 ppsm 4 ppsm(3) 6 ppsm Island Line (Morning: Tin Hau to Causeway Bay) 80 000 72 500 108% 77% 102% 73% 94% 67% 95% 67% (Evening: Wan Chai to Causeway Bay) Tsuen Wan Line (Morning: Tsim Sha Tsui to Admiralty) 75 000 75 000 109% 77% 105% 75% 98% 70% 98% 70% (Evening: Admiralty to Tsim Sha Tsui) Kwun Tong Line (Morning: Shek Kip Mei to Prince 71 400 64 250 98% 70% 99% 70% 95% 67% 95% 67% Edward) (Evening: Prince Edward to Shek Kip Mei) LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014 961

28 September to 25 October 2014 1 September to 27 September 2014 (4 weeks) (except 10 Saturdays, (except 8 Saturdays, Sundays and

Sundays and Public Holidays during Public Holidays and 3 special days(1) Heavy rail this period) during this period) network Per hour per Per hour per Per hour per Per hour per Existing carrying (critical link) direction morning direction evening direction morning direction evening capacity peak loading for peak loading for peak loading for peak loading for (6 ppsm)(2) the critical link the critical link the critical link the critical link Morning Evening 4 ppsm(3) 6 ppsm 4 ppsm(3) 6 ppsm 4 ppsm(3) 6 ppsm 4 ppsm(3) 6 ppsm Tseung Kwan O Line (Morning: Yau Tong to 62 500 60 000 102% 73% 91% 65% 98% 70% 86% 61% Quarry Bay) (Evening: Quarry Bay to Yau Tong)

West Rail Line (Morning: Kam Sheung Road to Tsuen 49 200 40 100 110% 78% 93% 66% 104% 74% 87% 62% Wan West) (Evening: Tsuen Wan West to Kam Sheung Road) East Rail Line (Morning: Tai Wai to Kowloon Tong) 82 500 67 500 102% 73% 87% 62% 100% 71% 86% 61% (Evening: Kowloon Tong to Tai Wai) 962 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014

28 September to 25 October 2014 1 September to 27 September 2014 (4 weeks) (except 10 Saturdays, (except 8 Saturdays, Sundays and

Sundays and Public Holidays during Public Holidays and 3 special days(1) Heavy rail this period) during this period) network Per hour per Per hour per Per hour per Per hour per Existing carrying (critical link) direction morning direction evening direction morning direction evening capacity peak loading for peak loading for peak loading for peak loading for (6 ppsm)(2) the critical link the critical link the critical link the critical link Morning Evening 4 ppsm(3) 6 ppsm 4 ppsm(3) 6 ppsm 4 ppsm(3) 6 ppsm 4 ppsm(3) 6 ppsm Ma On Shan Line (Morning: Che Kung Temple to Tai 26 800 20 100 84% 60% 68% 49% 80% 57% 61% 43% Wai) (Evening: Tai Wai to Che Kung Temple) Tung Chung Line (Morning: Olympic to 37 500 37 500 83% 59% 69% 49% 80% 57% 63% 45% Kowloon) (Evening: Hong Kong to Kowloon) Airport Express (Morning: Tsing Yi to 4 800 4 800 60% 51% 51% 44% 62% 53% 54% 46% Airport) (Evening: Airport to Tsing Yi)

Notes:

(1) The three special days include 8 September 2014 (overnight service for Mid-Autumn Festival) and 15 to 16 September 2014 (the Observatory issued No. 8 Tropical Cyclone Warning Signal).

LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014 963

(2) Calculated based on the average existing carrying capacity from 1 to 27 September 2014 (except eight Saturdays, Sundays and Public Holidays and three special days during this period). Depending on actual train operations, the existing carrying capacity of each railway line may vary in the morning and evening.

(3) 71.2% of the carrying capacity of six persons per square metre (the respective percentage for Airport Express is 85%).

Major Infrastructure Projects

16. DR KWOK KA-KI (in Chinese): President, the Government has completed a number of major infrastructure projects in recent years, and several public works projects are forthcoming or underway. In this connection, will the Government inform this Council:

(1) of the following information on the completed projects listed in Table 1: (i) the initial cost estimate, (ii) the actual cost, (iii) the initial anticipated completion date, (iv) the actual completion date, (v) the initial anticipated usage in respect of the past five years, and (vi) the actual usage in the past five years;

Table 1 Name of Project (i) (ii) (iii) (iv) (v) (vi) Hong Kong- Western Corridor Stage One of Tsing Sha Highway (the section between Cheung Sha Wan and Sha Tin) Stage Two of Tsing Sha Highway (the section between Tsing Yi and Cheung Sha Wan) Kai Tak Cruise Terminal

(2) of the up-to-date information on the infrastructure projects under planning/underway listed in Table 2: (i) the cost estimate, (ii) the anticipated completion date, and (iii) the anticipated usage or economic benefits to be achieved in respect of the first five years;

964 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014

Table 2 Name of Project (i) (ii) (iii) South Island Link of MTR Shatin to Central Link of MTR Hong Kong-Zhuhai-Macao Bridge Tuen Mun-Chek Lap Kok Link and Tuen Mun Western Bypass Hong Kong Section of -Shenzhen-Hong Kong Express Rail Link Hong Kong-Shenzhen Western Express Line Lok Ma Chau Loop Cultural District Kai Tak Development New Development Areas in the North East New Territories and Hung Shui Kiu

(3) of the up-to-date information on the land development projects under planning/underway listed in Table 3: (i) the cost estimate, (ii) the anticipated completion date, and (iii) the anticipated usage or economic benefits to be achieved in the first five years;

Table 3 Name of Project (i) (ii) (iii) Liantang/Heung Yuen Wai Boundary Control Point Seven new railway proposals:

Northern Link and Kwu Tung Station Tuen Mun South Extension East Kowloon Line Tung Chung West Extension Hung Shui Kiu Station South Island Line (West) North Island Line Ex-Lamma Quarry Area at Sok Kwu Wan of Lamma Island Artificial islands in the central waters Three-Runway System Project at the Hong Kong International Airport Central-Wan Chai Bypass and Island Eastern Corridor Link

LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014 965

(4) given that a number of major infrastructure projects will be carried out in parallel in the next few years, whether the authorities have assessed if there will be a shortage of skilled personnel and engineers in the construction industry of Hong Kong; if they have, of the details; whether the authorities have taken into account the demand and supply of manpower when making estimations on the costs and completion dates for various projects; and

(5) how the authorities will ensure the quality of various major infrastructure projects so as to guard against shoddy construction standard?

SECRETARY FOR DEVELOPMENT (in Chinese): President, my reply to the five parts of Dr KWOK Ka-ki's question is as follows:

(1) The following information on the completed works projects: (i) the initial estimates; (ii) the actual costs; (iii) the initial anticipated completed dates; (iv) the actual completion dates; (v) the initial anticipated usage in respect of the past five years; and (vi) the actual usage in the past five years are set out at Table 1.

Table 1 (i) (ii) (iii) (iv) (v) (vi) Initial Initial Initial Actual Costs Actual Anticipated Actual Usage Name of Project Estimates Anticipated (in MOD Completion Usage in in the past (in MOD Completion prices) Dates the past five five years prices) Dates years Hong Kong- $3.2 billion The actual December December Daily In 2011, the Shenzhen expenditure 2005 2005 two-way Transport Western Corridor up to traffic flow: Department September -46 100 set up a 2014 is vehicles traffic flow $2.6 billion. (2011) counting station at the road concerned. The daily two-way traffic flow in the following 966 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014

(i) (ii) (iii) (iv) (v) (vi) Initial Initial Initial Actual Costs Actual Anticipated Actual Usage Name of Project Estimates Anticipated (in MOD Completion Usage in in the past (in MOD Completion prices) Dates the past five five years prices) Dates years three years is as follows: -17 680 vehicles (2011) -17 660 vehicles (2012) -18 410 vehicles (2013) Stage One of $6.8 billion The actual April 2007 December Hourly In 2010, the Tsing Sha expenditure 2007 one-way Transport Highway (the up to traffic flow Department section between September at peak set up a Cheung Sha Wan 2014 is hour: traffic flow and Sha Tin) $6.1 billion. -2 620 counting vehicles station at the (2011) road section concerned. The hourly one-way traffic flow at peak hour in the following four years is as follows: -2 150 vehicles (2010) -2 450 vehicles (2011) -2 690 vehicles (2012) -2 940 vehicles (2013) LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014 967

(i) (ii) (iii) (iv) (v) (vi) Initial Initial Initial Actual Costs Actual Anticipated Actual Usage Name of Project Estimates Anticipated (in MOD Completion Usage in in the past (in MOD Completion prices) Dates the past five five years prices) Dates years Stage Two of Tsing Sha Highway (the section between Tsing Yi and Cheung Sha Wan)

(i) $3.7 billion The actual December August 2007 Hourly As the Route 8 between expenditure 2006 one-way Transport Tsing Yi and up to traffic flow Department Cheung Sha September at peak has not set up Wan ― Ngong 2014 is hour: any traffic Shuen Chau $2.0 billion. -3 060 flow counting Viaduct and the vehicles station at the associated works (2011) road section concerned, no relevant traffic data is available.

(ii) $8.1 billion The actual August 2009 November Hourly In 2010, the Route 8 between expenditure 2009 one-way Transport Tsing Yi and up to traffic flow Department Cheung Sha September at peak set up a Wan ― 2014 is hour: traffic flow remaining works $7.7 billion. -3 060 counting (including vehicles station at the Stonecutters (2011) road section Bridge) concerned. The hourly one-way traffic flow at peak hour in the following four years is as follows: -1 620 vehicles 968 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014

(i) (ii) (iii) (iv) (v) (vi) Initial Initial Initial Actual Costs Actual Anticipated Actual Usage Name of Project Estimates Anticipated (in MOD Completion Usage in in the past (in MOD Completion prices) Dates the past five five years prices) Dates years (2010) -1 780 vehicles (2011) -1 930 vehicles (2012) -1 950 vehicles (2013) Kai Tak Cruise The costs for The actual The Terminal The Terminal The Terminal commenced Terminal the cost can only building and building and operation in mid-2013. It construction be determined the first berth the first berth has received a total of nine works and upon to be were cruises in the second half site settlement of commissioned commissioned of 2013. It is estimated formation the final by mid-2013. in June 2013 that the Terminal will works of the accounts, as scheduled. receive a total of 28 cruise Cruise though the The second ship calls in 2014. The Terminal project is berth number of berthings will totalled expected to commenced nearly double to 55 in about complete operation in 2015 and is expected to $8.2 billion. within budget September increase in the future. (that is, about 2014. The The Terminal can also host $8.2 billion). remaining various functions on those dredging days when there is no works for the cruise ship berthing second berth therein. will be completed between the end of 2015 and early 2016.

(2) The following up-to-date information on the infrastructure projects under planning/underway: (i) the cost estimates; (ii) the anticipated completion dates; and (iii) the anticipated usage or economic LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014 969 benefits to be achieved in respect of the first five years are set out at Table 2.

Table 2 (i) (ii) (iii) Anticipated Anticipated Usage or Name of Project Cost Estimates Completion Economic Dates Benefits in the first five years South Island Line (East) $12.4 billion The MTR About 170 000 (in December Corporation trips daily (2016) 2009 prices) Limited (MTRCL) informed the Government in June 2014 that the project could not be commissioned by end 2015. The MTRCL will update the target commissioning timing at the end of this year when it is more certain on the progress of the works. Hong Kong Section of The In mid-April About 99 000 Guangzhou-Shenzhen-Hon Government this year, the (Estimated daily g Kong Express Rail Link received a letter Government patronage in the from the was informed first year of MTRCL on by MTRCL commissioning) 24 July 2014, that the informing the opening of the Government Hong Kong 970 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014

(i) (ii) (iii) Anticipated Anticipated Usage or Name of Project Cost Estimates Completion Economic Dates Benefits in the first five years that MTRCL's section of the latest estimate XRL for of the Cost to service will be Complete by end 2017. (CTC) for the MTRCL XRL Hong provided the Kong Section is Government in $71.5 billion May this year (including the with Project preliminary Management information of Cost). The its revised Highways Programme to Department Complete (HyD) and its (PTC) for monitoring and commissioning verification of the Hong (M&V) Kong Section consultant are of the XRL by reviewing in the end of detail the latest October 2017. CTC and have Thereafter, requested the HyD and its MTRCL to M&V provide further consultant information. requested the MTRCL to provide more detailed information for further examination. The HyD, with LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014 971

(i) (ii) (iii) Anticipated Anticipated Usage or Name of Project Cost Estimates Completion Economic Dates Benefits in the first five years the assistance of its M&V consultant, has completed its review on the MTRCL's proposed revised PTC based on the information provided by the MTRCL. The HyD considers that the revised PTC could be attained provided that the target progress is met for the critical contracts and various major conditions are satisfied. The HyD notified the MTRCL of its assessment in writing on October 23. Hong Kong-Zhuhai-Macao HKLR ― Works of the For HKLR and Bridge (HZMB) Hong about HKLR and HKBCF, Kong Related Projects (that $25.0 billion HKBCF are according to the is, Hong Kong Link Road (in MOD progressing feasibility study 972 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014

(i) (ii) (iii) Anticipated Anticipated Usage or Name of Project Cost Estimates Completion Economic Dates Benefits in the first five years (HKLR), Hong Kong prices) actively to for the HZMB, Boundary Crossing match the the anticipated Facilities (HKBCF) and The Approved commissioning traffic flow in the Tuen Mun-Chek Lap Kok Project target of the initial period Link (TM-CLKL)) Estimate (APE) HZMB Main after of the HKBCF Bridge. The commissioning in 2011 was construction of could be up to about TM-CLKL is about 14 000 $30.4 billion also in full vehicles per day. (in MOD swing. It is prices). As expected that Upon the the latest the Southern commissioning estimated Connection of the project cost is will be TM-CLKL, the higher than the substantially journey time and estimate at that completed by road capacity time, the end 2016 while between Transport and the Northern Northwest New Housing Connection Territories Bureau will will be (NWNT) and seek the completed by Lantau will be approval of the end 2018. improved. The Finance TM-CLKL will Committee on also serve as an the increase in alternative route APE to meet to the Airport. the latest It will improve estimated the regional project transport expenditure. network and help meet the traffic TM-CLKL ― demand between about Lantau and the LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014 973

(i) (ii) (iii) Anticipated Anticipated Usage or Name of Project Cost Estimates Completion Economic Dates Benefits in the first five years $46.7 billion NWNT. (in MOD prices)^ Kai Tak Development From 2009 to To date, all the KTD, covering (KTD) date, the total works projects an area of over APEs of the 25 that have been 320 hectares, works projects upgraded to involves the that have been Category A transformation of upgraded to were the ex-airport Category A is completed or site for the about are proceeding growth of Hong $40.0 billion in on schedule. Kong, and at the MOD prices. The remaining same time As for the public works providing an remaining projects are impetus for public works under planning stimulating projects under or design. regeneration of planning or The overall the adjoining design, their target is that all older districts. cost estimates works projects It also forms part can only be will be of the Energizing determined completed in Kowloon East upon phases by end initiative of completion of 2021. transforming the the necessary industrial areas procedures or at Kowloon Bay detailed design. and Kwun Tong together with KTD into an alternative Central Business District (CBD). 974 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014

(i) (ii) (iii) Anticipated Anticipated Usage or Name of Project Cost Estimates Completion Economic Dates Benefits in the first five years West Kowloon Cultural The According to The WKCD District (WKCD) Government is the latest project will help responsible for implementation foster vibrant the provision of timetable of the cultural activities public WKCDA, and, hence, infrastructures batch 1 enhance the and integrated facilities are quality of life for basement to expected to be the general support the completed by public. By whole WKCD 2018 while supporting the project batch 2 development of a (including facilities will creative hotel/office/ be completed economy, residential in stages from nurturing local developments). 2020 onwards. talents, attracting Given that the The public and retaining facilities of the infrastructures investors and West Kowloon and integrated talents, the Cultural basement to be WKCD will help District developed by promote Hong Authority the Kong's (WKCDA) are Government development as a scheduled for will also be knowledge-based completion in completed on economy and a three batches, schedule to tie world-class city. the above in with the public completion of infrastructures these facilities. and integrated basement will also be LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014 975

(i) (ii) (iii) Anticipated Anticipated Usage or Name of Project Cost Estimates Completion Economic Dates Benefits in the first five years completed in phases. According to rough estimates, the amount of funding to be sought from the Legislative Council in the coming years for the integrated basement and the public infrastructures both within and without it are about $7.0 billion, $3.0 billion and $4.0 billion (in MOD prices) respectively. A more accurate estimate will only be available in the detailed design stage. 976 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014

(i) (ii) (iii) Anticipated Anticipated Usage or Name of Project Cost Estimates Completion Economic Dates Benefits in the first five years Shatin to Central Link of $79.8 billion 2020/2021* About 1 100 000 MTR (in MOD trips daily (2021) prices) Hung Shui Kiu New The cost for 2034 (The It is anticipated Development Area HSKNDA can anticipated that the Area can (HSKNDA) only be completion accommodate a estimated upon date will be new population completion of reviewed in the of about 175 000 the HSKNDA HSKNDA and will provide Recommended Planning and about 60 000 Outline Engineering residential units, Development Study currently of which about Plan. underway.) 50% will be public housing unit and HOS flats, and will offer about 100 000 jobs in the Area. (The number of new population and new jobs will be reviewed in the HSKNDA Planning and Engineering Study currently undertaken by the relevant department.) New Development Areas The cost The completion Kwu Tung North (NDAs) in the North East estimate for date for NDAs (KTN) and New Territories NDAs can only can only be Fanling North LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014 977

(i) (ii) (iii) Anticipated Anticipated Usage or Name of Project Cost Estimates Completion Economic Dates Benefits in the first five years be determined estimated upon (FLN) NDAs upon completion of will be a major completion of the necessary source of land the necessary procedures and and housing procedures and detailed design. supply for Hong detailed design. Kong in medium to long term. Together, it is anticipated that the KTN and FLN NDAs will accommodate a new population of about 177 000 and will provide about 60 000 residential units, of which about 60% will be public housing units and HOS flats, and the NDAs will offer about 37 700 employment opportunities. Lok Ma Chau Loop The project cost The HKSARG The discussion depends on the and SZMG will on the models of mode of continue to development and development discuss the collaboration as and specific well as collaboration arrangements development adopted, which for the timetable are currently development between under schedule. HKSARG and 978 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014

(i) (ii) (iii) Anticipated Anticipated Usage or Name of Project Cost Estimates Completion Economic Dates Benefits in the first five years discussion SZMG is still between the ongoing. As Hong Kong such, their usage SAR and economic Government benefits cannot (HKSARG) be estimated at and the the present stage. Shenzhen Municipal Government (SZMG). Tuen Mun Western Bypass The Transport and Housing Bureau is now (TMWB) examining if there would be any room for changes to the proposed alignment of the TMWB so as to achieve the anticipated benefits of the project, as well as reviewing the implementation schedule of the project. Hong Kong-Shenzhen This item is not included in the "Railway Western Express Line Development Strategy 2014" as announced by the Transport and Housing Bureau in September 2014.

Notes:

^ This comprises the APE of PWP Item 6846TH TM-CLKL ― detailed design, site investigation and advance works of $1.9 billion (in MOD prices), and PWP Item 6857TH TM-CLKL construction works of $44.8 billion (in MOD prices).

* There are risks of delay in the construction of the Tai Wai to section and the Hung Hom to Admiralty section due to the archaeological work at To Kwa Wan Station and the late possession of the newly reclaimed land at Wan Chai North respectively. The Government and MTRCL are considering measures to mitigate the delay.

(3) The following up-to-date information on the land development projects under planning/underway: (i) the cost estimates; (ii) the anticipated completion dates; and (iii) the anticipated usage or economic benefits to be achieved in the first five years are set out in Table 3.

LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014 979

Table 3 (i) (ii) (iii) Anticipated Name of Anticipated Usage or Project Cost Estimates Completion Economic Dates Benefits in the first five years Liantang/Heung The cost End of 2018. It is projected Yuen Wai estimate (in that there will Boundary MOD prices) be about 17 500 Control covers passenger trips Point ― Site transport and 7 700 Formation and infrastructures vehicle trips in Infrastructure and the 2018; and Works Passenger 30 000 Terminal passenger trips Building, and 17 850 totalling about vehicle trips in $35.0 billion. 2030. Ex-Lamma The cost can The completion The planned Quarry Area at only be date can only be population is Sok Kwu Wan, estimated estimated proposed to be Lamma Island pending the pending the 5 000. The completion of completion of total number of the the residential flats Recommended Recommended is proposed to Outline Outline be 1 900, Development Development among which Plan. Plan. 700 would be subsidized housing flats. Relevant Government, Institution or Community facilities will also be provided. At the same time, in view of the unique 980 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014

(i) (ii) (iii) Anticipated Name of Anticipated Usage or Project Cost Estimates Completion Economic Dates Benefits in the first five years environment of the ex-Lamma quarry, it is proposed to provide diverse and affordable tourism and recreational facilities for visitors and public enjoyment. Artificial The cost of the The completion There is islands in the project can date can only be potential for central waters only be estimated upon sizable estimated upon the completion reclaimed land, the completion of the strategic which can of the strategic studies for provide studies for artificial islands opportunities artificial in the central for significant islands in the water in early supply of new central water in 2018. land and early 2018. comprehensive land use planning and design. Below are non-land development projects Central-Wan $36.0 billion 2017 This works Chai Bypass (in MOD project provides and Island prices) an expressway Eastern for the Corridor Link east-west traffic in Central and Wan Chai to divert the LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014 981

(i) (ii) (iii) Anticipated Name of Anticipated Usage or Project Cost Estimates Completion Economic Dates Benefits in the first five years traffic from the commercial centre and alleviate the existing traffic congestion. Upon commissioning of the expressway, it will only take about five minutes to travel from Central to Island Eastern Corridor in . Seven new $110.0 billion Between 2022 According to railway (preliminary and 2026 the "Railway proposals: cost estimate in (Indicative Development 2013 prices)# implementation Strategy 2014", Northern Link window for the travelling and Kwu Tung planning time of public Station purpose). transport users Tuen Mun will be saved South and is expected Extension to bring direct East Kowloon economic Line benefits of Tung Chung $3.0 billion to West Extension $4.0 billion per Hung Shui Kiu annum upon the Station operation of all South Island the projects. Line (West) As to 982 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014

(i) (ii) (iii) Anticipated Name of Anticipated Usage or Project Cost Estimates Completion Economic Dates Benefits in the first five years North Island environmental Line benefits, it is expected to reduce about 2% to 4% of the roadside air pollutants and greenhouse gases per year. Most importantly, the new railway projects would also bring strategic social and economic benefits, such as integrating land planning (such as housing development), releasing the development potential of peripheral areas, strengthening connectivity among districts, creating job opportunities and relieving road traffic congestion, and so on. LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014 983

(i) (ii) (iii) Anticipated Name of Anticipated Usage or Project Cost Estimates Completion Economic Dates Benefits in the first five years Three-Runway According to 2023 If the 3RS is System Project the Airport implemented, it at the Hong Authority's is expected that Kong (AA) HKIA the annual International Master Plan passenger Airport 2030 throughput, (MP2030), the cargo cost of 3RS throughput and was estimated Air Traffic to be around Movements $136.0 billion (ATMs) of in MOD prices. HKIA will AA is carrying reach around out the relevant 100 million planning work passengers, for the project, 8.9 million including a tonnes and review of the 607 000 ATMs project cost. respectively by Work in this 2030. respect is According to ongoing. the estimate in MP2030, 3RS is expected to generate an annual economic contribution of $167.0 billion in 2030.

Note:

# The figure will need to be revised based on in-depth studies to be carried out at the detailed planning stage for the individual railway schemes.

984 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014

(4) According to the forecast of the Construction Industry Council (CIC), the commencement of a number of large infrastructure projects (including private sector projects and others) will keep the total projected construction output of Hong Kong at a high level in the coming few years. The growing volume of construction works will also generate a rising demand for construction workers. The CIC is conducting a manpower forecast study on projecting the local supply and demand of construction professionals, site supervisory staff and technicians over the coming few years with reference to the estimated construction output and other factors in Hong Kong. The first report is expected to be completed and published by the end of this year. The Government has taken into the account the manpower situation when working out cost estimates and completion dates of these projects.

(5) The relevant bureaux and works departments have put in place comprehensive guidelines and stringent requirements on the procurement, delivery and quality control of infrastructure projects. To guarantee the quality of works in large infrastructure projects, the relevant works departments will strictly enforce these guidelines and requirements in respect of the selection of consultants and contractors, appointment of site supervisory staff, material testings, supervision of works, regulatory control and performance appraisal of consultants and contractors, and acceptance procedures.

Statistics Related to Police's Handling of Assemblies Triggered by Occupy Central Movement

17. MR KENNETH LEUNG (in Chinese): President, since the 28th of last month, the Occupy Central movement has triggered a large number of people occupying roads in Admiralty, Causeway Bay and Mong Kok for holding assemblies (OC assemblies). It was reported that some participants of the OC assemblies in Mong Kok said that they had been harassed and assaulted by people who opposed the OC assemblies but the police officers had failed to stop such people's acts effectively, thereby giving rise to an allegation that the police officers had enforced the law unfairly. Furthermore, some participants of the OC assemblies said that police officers had used excessive force in dispersing the participants of the assemblies and they had even allegedly assaulted a man who LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014 985 had already been subdued. The Police have openly called for the participants of the OC assemblies to lodge complaints with the Complaints Against Police Office (CAPO) if they are dissatisfied with the way the Police have handled the matter. In this connection, will the Government inform this Council:

(1) of the number of requests for assistance in relation to the OC assemblies received by the Police since the 28th of last month, with a breakdown by nature of the cases as well as by the date and location of such cases; and the number of persons arrested at the locations of the assemblies, with a breakdown by the offence allegedly committed by such persons;

(2) of the number of complaints received by CAPO about the OC assemblies since the 28th of last month, with a breakdown by nature of the cases as well as by the date and location of such cases; and

(3) in each of the past five years, of the number of civil actions in tort instituted by members of the public in respect of the acts of police officers and, among such cases, the respective numbers of those cases in which (i) judgments ruled in favour of the plaintiff and (ii) out-of-court settlements were reached by both parties to proceedings, as well as the respective amounts of compensations paid by the Government each year to the plaintiffs of these two types of cases?

SECRETARY FOR SECURITY (in Chinese): President, following a spate of unlawful acts by radical protesters, the public meeting on the pavement outside the Central Government Offices since 26 September has developed into an unlawful assembly. A large number of protesters of the Occupy Central have unlawfully gathered in the areas of Admiralty, Causeway Bay and Mong Kok in recent days, blocking major trunk roads in an illegal manner as well as causing grave impact on the traffic and the daily life of the community. The nuisances they created have caused intense dissatisfaction among the public and people of certain trades, triggering the recent series of verbal disputes and even violent confrontations among people with opposing views in the areas of such unlawful assemblies.

986 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014

The Police have been handling the concerned unlawful assemblies in a professional and impartial manner with a high level of restraint, taking resolute enforcement measures in the light of the circumstances on the scene. In respect of the complaints regarding Police's handling of the concerned unlawful assemblies, CAPO shall seriously handle them in a fair and impartial manner under the established procedures, and submit investigation reports on all reportable complaints to the Independent Police Complaints Council for examination in accordance with the Independent Police Complaints Council Ordinance (Cap. 604).

The Administration's reply to the Member's question is as follows:

(1) The Police neither have any statistical figures of requests for assistance in relation to the Occupy Central, nor maintain any breakdown of arrests by location of assembly.

As at 27 October, a total of 332 persons were arrested for the concerned unlawful assemblies or the illegal acts stemming from such assemblies. Such suspected offences include unlawful assembly, forcible entry, possession of offensive weapon, obstructing a police officer in the execution of his duty, assaulting on a police officer, resisting arrest, common assault, criminal damage, fighting in a public place, disorder in a public place, indecent assault, causing nuisance in a public place, possession of imitation firearms, failing to produce proof of identity on demand, furious driving, criminal intimidation, attempted theft, assault occasioning actual bodily harm, arson, allowing objects to fall from height, theft, access to computer with dishonest intent, impersonating a police officer, possession of prohibited weapons, possession of Part I poisons and wounding, and so on.

(2) As at 27 October, a total of 1 303 complaints from members of the public were received by the CAPO in relation to the Police's handling of the Occupy Central. The major allegations involved in the complaints and a breakdown of such figures are at Annex.

The Police do not have any breakdown of the dates that were involved in the complaints. By location, as at 27 October, a total of 1 004 and 284 complaints were lodged by members of the public LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014 987

against the Police's operations on Hong Kong Island and in Mong Kok separately, whereas the remaining 15 complaints were about the information or views disseminated by police officers on the media or social media.

(3) Civil claims against the Police generally involve a number of different situations, such as claims for compensation arising from damage to others' property by police officers in the discharge of duties. Members of the public or organizations may file such claims to the Court, the Police or police officers.

The Police do not have any comprehensive statistical figures of cases relating to civil proceedings in tort by members of the public in respect of police officers' acts.

Annex

Complaints received by the CAPO in relation to the Police's handling of the "Occupy Central" (as at 27 October)

Major allegations involved in the complaints Number of complainants Neglect of duty 373 Unnecessary use of authority 806 Assault 85 Misconduct 25 Impoliteness 11 Fabrication of evidence 2 Rudeness 1

Impact of Occupy Central Movement on Financial Sector

18. MR NG LEUNG-SING (in Chinese): President, it has been reported that the impact of the Occupy Central movement on commercial activities is gradually surfacing. For instance, the Westpac Banking Corporation of Australia has cancelled its Board meeting originally scheduled to be held in Hong Kong. In this connection, will the Government inform this Council:

988 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014

(1) whether it has assessed the medium and long term impact of the Occupy Central movement on the financial sector of Hong Kong; if it has, of the results; if not, the reasons for that; and

(2) whether it has taken measures to mitigate the impact of the Occupy Central movement on the status of Hong Kong as an international financial centre?

SECRETARY FOR FINANCIAL SERVICES AND THE TREASURY (in Chinese): President, the consolidated reply to parts 1 and 2 of the question is as follows.

The impact of the protests on the operation of Hong Kong's financial industry has so far been limited. Except for individual banks at the affected areas which have to be closed temporarily, thus causing some inconvenience to the general public, Hong Kong's financial system, including the banking system, stock market and foreign exchange market, and so on, have been functioning in a normal and orderly manner. The linked exchange rate system is robust, interest rates remain steady, and there is no evidence of abnormal fund outflow.

Indeed, the HKSAR Government, financial regulators and major financial institutions have earlier conducted risk assessments and devised contingency measures with regard to the protests, with an aim to maintaining the continued operation of, and minimizing the impact on, the core businesses.

As for the medium and long term impact on Hong Kong's financial industry, we do not have sufficient data yet to make an accurate assessment. However, any prolonged protests would inevitably affect the confidence of local and overseas investors, which would in turn increase the potential risk to our financial market. Together with the financial regulators, we will continue to monitor closely the financial system and market situation, and take appropriate measures as and when necessary to ensure that important financial infrastructure, the monetary system, the settlement system, as well as the securities and futures trading markets will continue to function in an orderly manner, so as to minimize the impact on Hong Kong's financial industry.

LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014 989

Colorectal Cancer Screening Pilot Programme

19. MR PAUL TSE (in Chinese): President, in reply to a question raised by a Member of this Council in July this year, the Government said that the Department of Health had embarked on preparatory work for the colorectal cancer screening pilot programme (pilot programme), which was announced in this year's Policy Address. It has been reported that due to the concern about a drastic increase in the burden on medical services, the authorities have set the target group of the pilot programme to be persons between the age of 61 to 70. In addition, the authorities have plans to grant special allowances to doctors so as to attract doctors to work overtime during weekends to perform colorectal cancer screening, but they have received a lukewarm response from doctors. In this connection, will the Government inform this Council:

(1) of the current progress of the preparatory work for the pilot programme, and when the programme can be implemented; how the authorities will provide more incentives to attract doctors to perform colorectal cancer screening;

(2) as it has recently been reported that several celebrities from the film and television industries who are aged around 50 have suffered from colorectal cancer, which has aroused public concern about the risk of people in that age group of developing colorectal cancer, and given that some gastroenterology specialists have pointed out that 50 is the age with the peak incidence rate of colorectal cancer, and that 50 is the starting age for their colorectal cancer screening programmes in the United States and some European countries, whether the authorities will consider afresh setting the age of 50 as the starting age of the target group for the pilot programme; and

(3) given that it has been reported that consumption of substandard cooking oil will increase the risk of developing colorectal cancer, and that recently several hundreds of eateries have been found to have used substandard lard imported from Taiwan which was produced from raw materials from Hong Kong, whether the authorities have studied if the entry of substandard cooking oil into the food chain has increased the incidence rate of colorectal cancer in Hong Kong; if they have studied and the outcome is in the affirmative, whether they will expedite the implementation of the 990 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014

pilot programme; if they have not, whether they can forthwith conduct such studies?

SECRETARY FOR FOOD AND HEALTH (in Chinese): President, cancer is a major public health issue. In 2001, the Government established the high-level Cancer Coordinating Committee (CCC), which is chaired by the Secretary for Food and Health and comprises members including cancer experts, academics, doctors in public and private sectors, as well as public health professionals, for effective prevention and control of cancer. The Cancer Expert Working Group on Cancer Prevention and Screening (CEWG) was set up under the CCC to regularly review and discuss latest scientific evidence, local and worldwide, with a view to providing recommendations on suitable cancer prevention and screening measures for the local population.

In 2011, colorectal cancer overtook lung cancer for the first time and became the most common cancer in Hong Kong. There were 4 450 newly diagnosed colorectal cancer cases in that year, accounting for 16.5% of all new cancer cases. In 2012, colorectal cancer was the second most common cause of cancer death, resulting in a total of 1 903 registered deaths and accounting for 14.3% of all cancer deaths. The risk of colorectal cancer increases significantly from age 50 onwards, and the CEWG recommends persons aged 50 to 75 should discuss with doctors and consider screening for colorectal cancer. In view of a growing and ageing population, the number of new colorectal cancer cases and related healthcare burden are expected to continue to increase in future.

In the light of the above, the Government announced in the 2014 Policy Address and the 2014-2015 Budget that it would allocate funding of around $420 million in the five years starting from 2014-2015 for the study and implementation of a pilot programme to subsidize colorectal cancer screening for specific age groups. The pilot programme aims to gather relevant local experience in colorectal cancer screening and collect relevant data with a view to drawing conclusions and making recommendations based on evidence. These will form the basis for the deliberation of whether and how best colorectal cancer screening service may be provided to the wider population.

On the other hand, risk factors for colorectal cancer are closely related to lifestyles. The CEWG has pointed out that the risk of colorectal cancer can be LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014 991 effectively reduced through the adoption of healthy lifestyles, such as increasing the intake of dietary fibre from vegetables, fruits and whole grains, reducing the consumption of red and processed meat, having regular physical activities, maintaining a healthy body weight and waist circumference, avoiding tobacco and alcohol, and so on. Members of the public should also take note of their health conditions and seek early medical attention if symptoms such as presence of blood in stool, abdominal pain or changes in bowel habit occur. On this front, the Department of Health (DH) has all along been actively promoting healthy lifestyles as a major preventive strategy in reducing the burden caused by non-communicable diseases such as cancers to the public and the society.

Against the above background, my reply to the three parts of the question is as follows:

(1) and (2)

The DH established a multi-disciplinary taskforce (the taskforce) in January this year with a number of representatives from the medical sector to embark upon the study and planning of the pilot programme. The taskforce comprises representatives from the Hospital Authority, relevant Academy Colleges, medical associations, primary care doctors, academia and non-governmental organization. The taskforce is responsible for tasks pertaining to the planning, implementation, publicity and evaluation of the pilot programme, including determination of inclusion criteria for participation in the pilot programme, method of screening, funding model, and operational logistics, and so on.

Four working groups have been established under the taskforce to provide input on different aspects of the pilot programme, namely (1) use of the faecal immunochemical test; (2) colonoscopy and assessment; (3) screening registry and computer information system; and (4) promotion and publicity. The taskforce and the working groups have been holding meetings regularly and making good progress. The taskforce has preliminarily identified the safer faecal immunochemical test as the screening method for the pilot programme, and participants whose stool samples are found to contain blood will be referred to receive colonoscopy. Moreover, the taskforce is examining the rolling out of the pilot programme in 992 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014

phases and the use of public-private partnership approach to provide subsidized screening services, in order to minimize the impact of the pilot programme on the public healthcare service. In the planning process, the DH has been maintaining a close dialogue with various stakeholders in the medical sector to encourage them to actively support and participate in driving the pilot programme. Furthermore, the taskforce has developed a publicity strategy to promote the pilot programme with a view to increasing participation among the public and doctors. The pilot programme is expected to be introduced by end 2015 the earliest if relevant planning and preparation work goes ahead as scheduled.

We consider that adopting a pilot programme approach in providing colorectal cancer screening services targeting selected groups will help not only collect data on effectiveness but also review the actual operation of the screening services as well as assess and deploy more accurately the medical and manpower resources required, thus facilitating the Administration to consider whether and how best colorectal cancer screening may be provided to the wider population in the future. Therefore, the pilot programme will target specific age groups rather than all persons aged 50 to 75.

As regards persons aged 50 to 75 who are not covered by the pilot programme, they are advised to consult their doctors for consideration of colorectal cancer screening for the sake of their own health. As all screening tests have limitations and are not 100% accurate, individuals considering a screening test should seek advice from doctors for assessment and obtain full information on benefits and potential risks of screening before making an informed choice. Doctors should also offer comprehensive explanation to their clients regarding pros and cons of receiving colorectal cancer screening, so that their clients can make the best choice for their personal health.

(3) Substandard edible oil may be subject to contamination by harmful substances, such as benzo[a]pyrene (BaP), aflatoxins and metal contaminants. These harmful substances may be carcinogenic and may pose adverse health effects to consumers and hence endangering the health of the public.

LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014 993

The Centre for Food Safety (CFS) has all along been monitoring the quality of local edible oil to ensure that the edible oil meets legal requirements and is fit for human consumption. In 2013, the CFS took, under the regular Food Surveillance Programme, some 450 edible oil samples from different levels for chemical testing including BaP, aflatoxins, peroxide value and metal contaminants. All samples were found to be satisfactory. Considering public concern over the safety of edible oil, the CFS will step up the inspection of edible oil from other places in the coming year. It is expected that the number of samples will increase by not less than 20% over last year.

In response to the "substandard lard" incident in Taiwan, the CFS took some 180 samples of high risk and possibly contaminated food products and lard for testing. Besides the peroxide value of one lard sample exceeded the standard, all other samples passed the tests. Based on the test results, the risk assessment conducted by the CFS showed that whilst consumption of the food concerned may increase food safety risk, the risk is not of a high level and there is no cause for undue concern.

As mentioned above, risk factors for colorectal cancer are closely related to lifestyles. The DH will continue to promote healthy lifestyles, including healthy diet, for prevention of colorectal cancer.

MOTIONS

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Motions. This Council will now continue to deal with the proposed resolution under section 54A of the Interpretation and General Clauses Ordinance moved by the Secretary for Commerce and Economic Development, and to proceed with the joint debate on the motion and a total of 32 amendments proposed by Mr CHAN Chi-chuen and Mr Albert CHAN.

(Mr Albert CHAN stood up)

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Mr CHAN, what is your point?

994 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014

MR ALBERT CHAN (in Cantonese): President, as we are going to discuss more serious matters during the motion debate, please do a headcount. A quorum is not present in the Chamber.

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Will the Clerk please ring the bell to summon Members back to the Chamber.

(While the summoning bell was ringing, THE PRESIDENT'S DEPUTY, MR ANDREW LEUNG, took the Chair)

(After the summoning bell had been rung, a number of Members returned to the Chamber)

DEPUTY PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Mr LEUNG Kwok-hung, please speak.

PROPOSED RESOLUTION UNDER SECTION 54A OF THE INTERPRETATION AND GENERAL CLAUSES ORDINANCE

MR LEUNG KWOK-HUNG (in Cantonese): Deputy President, I oppose the establishment of the "Innovation and Traumatology Bureau". The reasons are very simple. First, there is no need to establish this Bureau at all, because it is only going to co-ordinate two existing departments. So what is the point of establishing this Bureau?

(Mr Albert CHAN stood up)

DEPUTY PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Mr Albert CHAN, what is your point?

MR ALBERT CHAN (in Cantonese): Deputy President, can Mr LEUNG Kwok-hung clarify whether we are now discussing the Innovation and Technology Bureau, or the "Innovation and Traumatology Bureau"? He seems to have misunderstood the subject.

LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014 995

DEPUTY PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): This is not the time for you to speak.

MR ALBERT CHAN (in Cantonese): Deputy President, I am asking him to clarify.

DEPUTY PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Mr LEUNG Kwok-hung, please continue with your speech.

MR LEUNG KWOK-HUNG (in Cantonese): It should be the Innovation and Technology Bureau. I misread it as "Traumatology" just now.

My opposition is based on several reasons. The first reason is rather general. Since the reunification, LEUNG Chun-ying's mentor, TUNG Chee-hwa, had done similar things by concocting various pretexts. A case in point is the Cyberport Project, which has brought enormous wealth to LI Ka-shing or the LI family. Its operating loss before financial costs, tax and depreciation was $17 million in 2005-2006, compared with a loss of $77 million in 2004-2005 and a loss of $54 million in 2003-2004. This gigantic project, comprising luxury residential developments such as Bel-Air, had enabled the relevant persons to reap huge profits. Still, what was described as an unrivalled project had proved to be a failure. Another example is the Science Park, the construction of which was, again, proposed by TUNG Chee-hwa. This project was better in that it turned a loss into a profit in 2005-2006, but it had recorded a loss amounting to $100 million from 2001 to 2004. The Applied Science and Technology Research Institute, however, is a total loss. All these recounted by me just now should fall within the purview of the so-called Innovation and Technology Bureau, meaning that this new Bureau will have to deal with such rubbish upon its establishment.

Actually, there is only one cause for the issue at hand, and that is, the mentee is bound to follow the example of the mentor. TUNG Chee-hwa had concocted various pretexts and tried every means to benefit consortia. Is there a chance that LEUNG Chun-ying will do the same? I think there is. Deputy President, their mentor-mentee relationship is very clear. Let me advance my argument. Mr James TIEN of this Council asked LEUNG Chun-ying to consider resigning. Seeing that his mentee was criticized, TUNG Chee-hwa, in 996 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014 his capacity as a Vice Chairman of the Chinese People's Political Consultative Conference (CPPCC), immediately demanded the dismissal of Mr James TIEN from the CPPCC. This is very obvious, and is also unprecedented.

Given this mentorship, Mr LEUNG will definitely do what Mr TUNG had done. Yet, we can hardly find fault with what Mr TUNG had done. We only know that LI Ka-shing once held nearly 10% of the shares of Orient Overseas, thus turning this trashy stock into a favoured stock. Originally, LI Ka-shing was not required to declare his 9.8% stake, but after the relevant legislation was amended, any shareholding of 5% or more must be declared. Only then was the problem brought to light. Why am I taking this line of argument? Brothers act in a similar way, as in the story of LIU Bei, GUAN Yu and ZHANG Fei swearing brotherhood in the Peach Garden. As far as this issue is concerned, LEUNG Chun-ying is even more audacious than Mr TUNG. He has indeed surpassed his mentor.

Secretary Gregory SO once suggested to LEUNG Chun-ying that a licence be issued to Hong Kong Television Network Limited (HKTVN), but LEUNG Chun-ying did not take heed. Initially the Secretary did not know why, but now he probably does. It transpires that there are intricate connections between LEUNG Chun-ying and Mr Payson CHA, the tycoon who owns the entire Discovery Bay ― everyone who has been to Discovery Bay should know this. Their clandestine relationship has been exposed by the media. LEUNG Chun-ying is a shareholder of DTZ Japan, which is connected with Payson CHA's HKR International Limited in terms of property business and cross-holdings, and Payson CHA is a shareholder of Limited. The decision of not issuing a licence to HKTVN was made by LEUNG Chun-ying alone. He treated Secretary Gregory SO like garbage, as if the Secretary had said nothing at all. If there had not been a judicial review of the decision, we would not have known all these. I really thank LEUNG Chun-ying for disclosing in the judicial review proceedings that the Secretary was his close aide. On the licensing issue, although the Secretary was his close aide, he took no heed of the Secretary's suggestion. Buddy, at that time, the Secretary did not know why. As it turned out, there was this person surnamed CHA. The Secretary, whose surname is SO, simply had no say. LEUNG Chun-ying will not come to this Council to give an explanation. Instead, he asked Secretary Gregory SO to persuade us. Back then, he treated the Secretary like garbage, but now, he regards the Secretary as a jewel. In fact, LEUNG Chun-ying has only made the Secretary a target of our censure. LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014 997

Deputy President, to put it simply, this Bureau that LEUNG Chun-ying intends to establish is going to be useless. Let me cite an example. Hong Kong models itself on London, Singapore and Taiwan, but they do not have any bureau or ministry similar to the one currently proposed to deal with such matters. I would like Secretary Gregory SO to enlighten me. Is London not successful? Is Singapore not successful? Is Taipei not successful? Why should we be different by establishing a ministerial structure to deal with matters originally handled by two departments? The underlying reason is that after the establishment of this Bureau, Gregory SO can be kicked out. Secretary Gregory SO, will you double up as the head of this Bureau? The answer is no, right? The Secretary said something truthful about issuing a licence to HKTVN, and thus LEUNG Chun-ying dislikes him. Now that the truth has been exposed, LEUNG Chun-ying wants to kick the Secretary out, and hence he sets up the "Innovation and Traumatology Bureau" to traumatize Hong Kong people. For this reason, I will not approve the funding.

As long as LEUNG Chun-ying does not come clean about his relationship with Payson CHA, I can tell Hong Kong people that he, suspected of corruption, does not dare to come to this Council. He hides in his own office and bedroom every day, making video recordings like what Osama bin LADEN did. When he appears in public, he has himself surrounded by hordes of plain-clothes police officers, security guards and G4 officers, and he hastens to say "thank you" after having a brief exchange with the media. Why can't he answer a few more questions? Dr Elizabeth QUAT, can you possibly meet with him? Much as Dr Elizabeth QUAT cares about him, she cannot meet with him. Though she is also an expert in this regard, has he ever approached her? He will not do so.

This devious Chief Executive is suspected of corruption … As regards the UGL incident, I have to commend myself. By my count, I had openly asked this corrupt Chief Executive, LEUNG Chun-ying, four times about his Wintrack Worldwide Ltd, a company incorporated in the British Virgin Islands. "Wintrack", made up of "win" and "track", has the meaning of staying on track to keep winning as much as possible. Paired with "Worldwide", it signifies the road to corruption around the world.

One day, I asked the Chief Executive if he had evaded taxes, and whether he had any secrets that could not be made public. He said, "Mr LEUNG, some people have poor financial knowledge. This is a common practice of Hong Kong people." What was LEUNG Chun-ying talking about? We all knew that the Chief Executive was called LEUNG Chun-ying, but no one knew about his 998 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014

Wintrack Worldwide Ltd. He only disclosed that the company had been put in trust after being repeatedly pressed for an answer. However, no one knows whether he will regain control of the company after his resignation ― if he resigns. Rafael HUI has divulged his secrets during his trial. So before we can figure out the circumstances surrounding the UGL deal and the things mentioned by me just now, I cannot help wondering how my Honourable colleagues can have the face to support LEUNG Chun-ying. This is part of his manifesto. I must say that he has departed from established practice and taken a different path from that of London, Taipei and Singapore. While these places have only set up commissions or other bodies to deal with such matters, why does he have to establish a standing Policy Bureau? Today, the portfolio of this Policy Bureau covers only the responsibilities of two existing departments, but tomorrow it may include other things, such as positions for Payson CHA's son or some Australians, as well as their interests. Buddy, how can I approve the funding?

We have to monitor the Government, but when the manifesto of this Chief Executive, who has no integrity at all, is unclear and ambiguous, and he is trying to do something so stupid that no one in the rest of the world will do, why do we have to approve the relevant funding? TUNG Chee-hwa had done something similar before, resulting in great losses and serious distortions. Deputy President, I hereby call on LEUNG Chun-ying to come to his Council for the sake of Secretary Gregory SO, or for allaying our misgivings. On the last occasion, he declined to come on the pretext of security concerns.

Deputy President, you have the opportunities to meet him at cocktail parties and on other occasions. He is the "cocktail Chief Executive". There was at one time a person known as the "funeral star", who would appear at every funeral to assist in carrying the coffin. LEUNG Chun-ying will attend funerals, cocktail parties, meal gatherings and other social functions, but he is not coming to the Legislative Council to be monitored by us. I now make a public appeal to LEUNG Chun-ying: if you come to this Council, I will be your bodyguard and I will stand beside you, so no one will hit you. Do you dare to come? Stop putting on airs!

Deputy President, the Chief Executive is constitutionally obliged to be accountable to the Legislative Council, rather than to other people. If the Chief Executive does not have the guts to come to this Council, I will have to ask him to resign. Why do I dare to say this? It is because I am not Mr James TIEN, and it would be very difficult to sack me.

LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014 999

I wish to make one more point, Deputy President. Some people have made the following comments: "Accepting black money; Being bankrupt of integrity; Concerns about LEUNG Kwok-hung's integrity". Just now I ran into some elderly people; they shook hands with me and gave me this piece of paper. I asked them where they went for meal and what kind of coaches they took to come here, and they just smiled at me. I am accused of accepting $500,000 without making a declaration. I have no power. The Chief Executive is more powerful than me. If I utter swear words here, Deputy President, you can evict me. LEUNG Chun-ying has only one (the Beijing authorities) above him but millions under him.

Mr TAM Yiu-chung and the Hong Kong Federation of Trade Unions have sent people here to accuse me, LEUNG Kwok-hung, of corruption and demand that I should be investigated. At a meeting of this Council's Committee on Members' Interests, they claimed that I had a problem. Buddy, do they dare to investigate LEUNG Chun-ying? What a waste of time! How come they do not invoke the P&P Ordinance to investigate him? I am willing to be questioned, but does LEUNG Chun-ying dare to come here to be questioned by me? I was photographed with those elderly people, and tomorrow, , Ta Kung Pao and Hong Kong Daily News will carry reports of people protesting against "Long Hair" for corruption. Given all such acts of LEUNG Chun-ying, I certainly will not cast a vote in his favour. This being the case, and because of my lack of confidence in Members, I had better let Members think things over first.

Deputy President, I invoke Rule 40(1) of the Rules of Procedure, which reads (and I quote), "A Member who has risen to speak on a question in the Council may move without notice that the debate be now adjourned. Thereupon the President shall propose the question on that motion." As Members have yet to think things through, and there may be other people exposing scandals about LEUNG Chun-ying tomorrow, we cannot proceed with this question unless LEUNG Chun-ying comes forth to turn himself in.

DEPUTY PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Mr LEUNG Kwok-hung, as you have invoked Rule 40(1) of the Rules of Procedure to move a motion that the debate be now adjourned, I must deal with this motion first.

1000 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014

MR LEUNG KWOK-HUNG (in Cantonese): Deputy President, you are brilliant.

DEPUTY PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Please sit down. I now propose the question to you and that is: That the motion moved by Mr LEUNG Kwok-hung to now adjourn the debate on the proposed resolution under section 54A of the Interpretation and General Clauses Ordinance be passed. According to Rule 40(5) of the Rules of Procedure, this motion shall not be subject to amendment.

Secretary for Commerce and Economic Development, do you wish to speak?

(The Secretary for Commerce and Economic Development indicated that he did not wish to speak)

DEPUTY PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Does any other Member wish to speak?

(Mr LEUNG Kwok-hung indicated his wish to speak)

DEPUTY PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): As you have just spoken and moved the motion, you may not speak again.

MR ALBERT CHAN (in Cantonese): Deputy President, please clarify the relevant procedure. Deputy President, as far as I understand, after a Member has moved a motion to adjourn the discussion, the Member who moved the adjournment motion can speak again for another 15 minutes.

DEPUTY PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): The Member who moved this motion can speak later in reply, but he cannot speak again.

Does any other Member wish to speak?

(Mr LEUNG Kwok-hung stood up)

LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014 1001

MR LEUNG KWOK-HUNG (in Cantonese): Deputy President, I have issues with "Hulk" standing up so soon. I request a headcount in accordance with Rule 17(2) of the Rules of Procedure.

DEPUTY PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Will the Clerk please ring the bell to summon Members back to the Chamber.

(After the summoning bell had been rung, a number of Members returned to the Chamber)

DEPUTY PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Mr Albert CHAN, do you wish to speak?

MR ALBERT CHAN (in Cantonese): Thank you, Deputy President, I do wish to speak. You are such a mind-reader.

Deputy President, why do I support the adjournment motion moved by "Long Hair"? I think many Members do not have a thorough understanding of the present situation. All along, the Government has refused to give us an explanation or tell us why it suddenly ditched its proposal to set up a Technology and Communications Bureau in 2012 and sought to set up the Innovation and Technology Bureau under the present proposal. The Government has never given us a clear account or explanation of its rationale.

I would like to highlight the problem concerning the entire reorganization proposal. In my earlier speech, I have covered issues such as the historical background and the relevant problems. I will not repeat those points. I only want to point out clearly that there are many different areas of work under the current portfolio of the Commerce and Economic Development Bureau, including commerce and industry, tourism, telecommunications, information technology, broadcasting, innovation and technology, as well as creative industries.

In 2012, the Government proposed to restructure the Commerce and Economic Development Bureau into two new bureaux. One bureau, namely the Commerce and Industries Bureau, would be responsible for policies in relation to 1002 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014 commerce and industry, as well as maritime, air and logistics industries. In other words, apart from reorganization …

(Mr IP Kwok-him stood up)

DEPUTY PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Mr IP Kwok-him, what is your point?

MR IP KWOK-HIM (in Cantonese): I would like to know how those umbrellas are related to the present debate.

DEPUTY PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): The three umbrellas have nothing to do with the subject under discussion. Will the three Honourable colleagues please put them away.

MR LEUNG KWOK-HUNG (in Cantonese): They are of course related.

DEPUTY PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): It is not your speaking time now. How can the two be related? Please put the umbrellas away.

MR ALBERT CHAN (in Cantonese): Deputy President, there is a relation between me speaking with an opened umbrella and the subject.

DEPUTY PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Please explain the relation.

MR ALBERT CHAN (in Cantonese): That is because the incumbent Government is acting wilfully and it has altered its policies arbitrarily without undergoing any consultation or democratic process. The objective of the Umbrella Movement is to hold the Government accountable and return power to the people. Hence …

LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014 1003

DEPUTY PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): The present motion is about adjourning the debate, which is unrelated to umbrellas.

MR ALBERT CHAN (in Cantonese): Deputy President, you have to let me explain.

DEPUTY PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Mr Albert CHAN, I have heard your explanation, and I do not accept it.

MR ALBERT CHAN (in Cantonese): You made a ruling before I have finished with my explanation.

DEPUTY PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Yes, I have made a ruling.

MR ALBERT CHAN (in Cantonese): Why do we seek to adjourn the debate? It is because the present system is undemocratic; and we must adjourn the debate to start afresh the relevant consultation and discussion. If we have a democratic system, we need not seek any adjournment, right? Hence, Deputy President, there is a reason why I am holding an umbrella.

DEPUTY PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Mr Albert CHAN, I have already ruled that your umbrella is unrelated to the motion. Please put it away.

MR ALBERT CHAN (in Cantonese): Deputy President, can you explain why the Umbrella Movement is unrelated to the development of a democratic system?

DEPUTY PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Mr Albert CHAN, I have already made a ruling. If you continue to defy my ruling, I will ask you to leave the Chamber.

1004 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014

MR ALBERT CHAN (in Cantonese): Deputy President, I want …

(Mr CHAN Chi-chuen stood up)

MR CHAN CHI-CHUEN (in Cantonese): Deputy President, point of order. I request a headcount.

DEPUTY PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Mr CHAN Chi-chuen, is the umbrella on the desk behind your seat yours?

MR CHAN CHI-CHUEN (in Cantonese): No, it is not mine.

DEPUTY PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Whose umbrella is that? If nobody claims to be the owner, will the staff please put it away.

DEPUTY PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Will the Clerk please ring the bell to summon Members back to the Chamber.

(When the summoning bell was ringing, Mr LEUNG Kwok-hung stood up and talked loudly)

DEPUTY PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Mr LEUNG Kwok-hung, it is not your speaking time now. Please sit down.

(After the summoning bell had been rung, a number of Members returned to the Chamber)

DEPUTY PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Mr Albert CHAN, please continue.

MR ALBERT CHAN (in Cantonese): Deputy President, just now, I was about to point out that the Government did not have justification to support its LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014 1005 reorganization proposals in 2012 and 2014. According to the initial proposal in 2012, the Commerce and Economic Development Bureau would be reorganized into two new bureaux. Apart from its original portfolio, the new bureau would take up extra duties in relation to policies on maritime, air and logistics industries. I can understand the rationale perfectly. If housing and transport matters were lumped together, the workload for the Transport and Housing Bureau would be too heavy. Hence, the Administration proposed to take out certain duties under the Transport and Housing Bureau and transferred them to the Commerce and Industries Bureau. The relevant arrangement was not entirely groundless.

Nonetheless, owing to our filibustering at that time, the "five Secretaries of Departments and 14 Directors of Bureaux" proposal could not be passed. This year, the Administration submitted the 2014 proposal which was based on the then proposal of transferring certain functions relating to maritime and civil aviation from the Transport and Housing Bureau to the Commerce and Industries Bureau. Under the new proposal, the Commerce and Economic Development Bureau will retain its policy responsibilities relating to industry and business support, as well as tourism, while policy responsibilities relating to telecommunications and broadcasting, originally proposed to be handled by the Technology and Communications Bureau, would also fall under the Commerce and Economic Development Bureau. In my view, this is obviously a political move. I also doubt if the Government proposed to set up a Technology and Communications Bureau at that time because major issues relating to telecommunications and broadcasting policies were pending, while the then Director of Bureau might not be trusted. Major political considerations were involved in such issues, and it took a lot of political skills to handle them. Nonetheless, as Secretary Gregory SO has killed the licence application of Hong Kong Television Network Limited so competently, the Government has put him in charge of the policy responsibilities of telecommunications and broadcasting under the new reorganization proposal submitted recently as a reward for his excellent work …

Deputy President, a quorum is not present. I request a headcount.

DEPUTY PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Will the Clerk please ring the bell to summon Members back to the Chamber.

(After the summoning bell had been rung, a number of Members returned to the Chamber)

1006 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014

DEPUTY PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Mr Albert CHAN, please continue.

MR ALBERT CHAN (in Cantonese): Deputy President, I hope Members can listen to my analysis carefully because I have prepared a lot of information. Very often, they just cast their votes by simply following the instruction given by the Liaison Office of the Central People's Government in the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, without any understanding of the issues involved. They just have no idea what they are doing.

Deputy President, two policy areas, namely, telecommunications and broadcasting, are absent from the purview of the new Innovation and Technology Bureau under the present proposal when compared with the then proposal. After examining the functions of the existing Innovation and Technology Commission (ITC), I note that some proposed policy responsibilities of the new bureau are more or less the same as those undertaken by the ITC. At present, the ITC's major responsibilities include promoting and supporting applied research and development, and technology transfer; fostering an innovation and technology culture in the community; promoting technological entrepreneurship; as well as facilitating the provision of infrastructure and development of human resources to support innovation and technology. I will not read out the entire list. We note that of the proposed functions of the new Innovation and Technology Bureau, most of them overlap or are similar to those undertaken by the existing ITC. Separately, over the years, I think nobody has any complaint about the incumbent Commissioner for Innovation and Technology Miss Janet WONG. When I discussed the ITC with some Honourable Members as well as members of the industry, they highly commended the ITC's work. As the ITC has won the praises of Honourable Members and members of the industry over the years, and the Government has neither asked the ITC to undertake special tasks, nor pointed out which functions cannot be performed by the ITC, why does it not make use of the existing ITC but propose to set up a new Innovation and Technology Bureau? As I see it, the entire planning in respect of division of responsibilities is unjustified.

Deputy President, in reorganizing a bureau to redistribute the policy responsibilities, the Administration should not only focus on one single bureau. Instead, consideration should be given to the entire structure of the Government, such as the actual situation of the three Secretaries of Departments and 12 Directors of Bureaux. During the headcount just now, we had some discussion. LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014 1007

Some Members pointed out that the size of some bureaux is so large that the Secretary cannot possibly well grasp and handle all the relevant issues. The bureau drawing the most comments is the Transport and Housing Bureau. When Anthony CHEUNG assumed office, I had already said that this "exploiter" Secretary knew nothing about transport because it involved complicated matters in the areas of sea, land and air transport. If the Government proposes to reorganize its bureaux and subject to the availability of adequate funding, why not split the Transport and Housing Bureau into two bureaux handling transport and housing affairs separately? This will bring more benefits to the people and society as a whole. Separately, the Development Bureau is responsible for most planning and public works projects. Given such hefty duty, why not set up two different bureaux accordingly? Moreover, the purview of the Development Bureau is definitely as heavy as that of the incumbent Commerce and Economic Development Bureau because the former involves more livelihood and complicated political issues.

Overall speaking, when it comes to reorganizing an existing bureau or setting up a new bureau, Secretary Gregory SO's Bureau would have a very low priority. The public can blame Gregory SO for his incompetency and his lack of knowledge in the areas of innovation and technology, as well as in the areas industrial and commercial. As he is such a lousy Secretary, the Government should have him replaced. There is no reason why the work of a bureau should be split up just because its Secretary is incompetent. Instead, he should be replaced by someone with more knowledge in the relevant areas. Why has the world become so ridiculous? It should not be the case even though he is the former vice-chairman of the Democratic Alliance for the Betterment and Progress of Hong Kong. This obviously involves recompense for political services and transfer of interests. The relevant appointment was made completely on the basis of his political background, rather than his ability. In fact, this mode of operation is somewhat different from the management mode in the Mainland. If the Central Authorities want to have a reform, they must first reform the existing regime of "689" which is primarily based on recompense.

As far as social problems are concerned, Deputy President, given the need of society, we have recently … Last Wednesday, the Council meeting was aborted due to a lack of quorum. I would like to thank Honourable Members for not attending the meeting and supporting our filibustering strategy. Deputy President, a quorum is not present, please do a headcount.

1008 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014

DEPUTY PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Will the Clerk please ring the bell to summon Members back to the Chamber.

(After the summoning bell had been rung, a number of Members returned to the Chamber)

DEPUTY PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Mr Albert CHAN, please continue.

MR ALBERT CHAN (in Cantonese): Deputy President, I was just saying that function-wise, the new Innovation and Technology Bureau is basically the same as the existing ITC. Of course, the new bureau would be responsible for policy formulation. But basically, all problems could be resolved within the same bureau by strengthening the functions of the ITC if an Under Secretary conversant with the relevant work can be identified to provide the necessary assistance.

Moreover, regarding the financial provision of this Policy Bureau, Deputy President, according to the 2014 proposal, the annual expenditure of the newly established Innovation and Technology Bureau would be $37 million. For ordinary members of the public, a sum amounting to tens of millions of dollars is colossal, but in terms of the annual expenditure of various Policy Bureaux under the three Secretaries of Departments and 12 Directors of Bureaux, the Innovation and Technology Bureau would be a "tiny" bureau. Is this a disabled, retarded or incompetent Bureau? How much work can this Bureau undertake with just an annual provision of $30-odd million?

The annual expenditure of the is $500 million; the Constitutional and Mainland Affairs Bureau $580 million; the Development Bureau $940 million; the Education Bureau $47.3 billion; the Financial Services and the Treasury Bureau $2.2 billion; the Food and Health Bureau $48.5 billion; the $1.5 billion; the Labour and Welfare Bureau $750 million; the Security Bureau $325 million; the Transport and Housing Bureau $200 million, and the $80 million, which is the least among all bureaux, but that amount is still more than doubled that of the Innovation and Technology Bureau.

LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014 1009

In my view, there is actually no need to set up a dedicated bureau to handle the Civil Service. Basically, an executive department would suffice as no new policy is involved. A bureau is tasked to handle policy matters, while its executive department would handle the management issues. For a dormant bureau without any new policy initiative, its responsibilities can in fact be shared out by other bureaux.

Regarding the Constitutional and Mainland Affairs Bureau, Members should know that the Bureau has in fact no special tasks in the past. Notwithstanding the sudden inclusion of the words "Mainland Affairs" in its name, the Bureau's work in that area is minimal. Actually, the entire Bureau could be combined with the Home Affairs Bureau. Regarding the Development Bureau, Members should know that its schedule is particularly heavy. Regarding the Education Bureau, its portfolio is quite straight forward, and Members should have no strong views about it, and there is no need for any expansion.

Regarding the Environment Bureau, Deputy President, policy matters in relation to environmental protection had been handled by the Housing, Planning and Lands Bureau over a long time in the past. When Sarah LIAO became the Secretary, transport matters also came under the purview of the Environment Bureau. Hence, problems occurred when the Environment Bureau became responsible for a single policy area. The Environment Bureau was given several years to completely overhaul the policies on the environment and the handling of waste. This is barely understandable. But basically, the Environment Bureau should never be responsible for a single policy area.

Regarding the Food and Health Bureau, Members are of the view that the Bureau has been over-burdened. As we all know, when the two municipal councils were still in operation, their major areas of responsibility involved the two areas of health and food safety. Regarding the Home Affairs Bureau, its portfolio covers an extensive range of matters, including women affairs, international human rights, youth development and home affairs. The Home Affairs Bureau is also like a quasi-secret agent service responsible for controlling and monitoring political activities in the community, as well as liaison work and building up local political network. In fact, the Home Affairs Bureau is responsible for handling many areas of work.

1010 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014

The Labour and Welfare Bureau's portfolio is even more astounding, which includes the policy areas of labour and welfare. There are many areas of work under the welfare side of its purview. There are other bureaux such as the Security Bureau, the Transport and Housing Bureau, and so on. I will not repeat what I have just said.

Deputy President, if there is a need to reorganize the Government's structure, the Commerce and Economic Development Bureau would have a very low priority. From an overall perspective, I hold that the Government should furnish us with the necessary explanation and conduct further reviews, while there is a lack of comprehensive consideration on Members' part. The greatest problem is that rumours, which are supported by reasonable grounds, are now flying around that the present Innovation and Technology Bureau is basically a political reward. As a particular person has provided much assistance to LEUNG Chun-ying during his election campaign, but no vacancy in other Policy Bureaux is available, a new bureau would be set up so that the said person can become the "bandit king". This is a political recompense or a political reward. There is absolutely no reason why we should pay the bill of $37 million. Of course, LEUNG Chun-ying could receive $50 million from signing just one contract, which is much higher that the Bureau's expenditure of $37 million. Perhaps he should set up some companies and sign one or two contracts with the persons he needs to pay back politically. This would be much better than using public funds.

Hence, overall speaking, this is hardly acceptable … Deputy President, it seems that a quorum is lacking. Please do a headcount.

DEPUTY PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Will the Clerk please ring the bell to summon Members back to the Chamber.

(After the summoning bell had been rung, a number of Members returned to the Chamber)

DEPUTY PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Mr Albert CHAN, please continue.

LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014 1011

MR ALBERT CHAN (in Cantonese): Deputy President, how much speaking time do I still have?

DEPUTY PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Your speaking time is almost up.

MR ALBERT CHAN (in Cantonese): Deputy President, last but not least, I would like to point out that under the 2012 proposal about the Innovation and Technology Bureau, there was a unique suggestion about promoting emerging industries in the Mainland. But this suggestion is absent from the new proposal. Perhaps the Government is also aware of the intense anti-Mainland sentiment in Hong Kong and hence, the point about promoting emerging industries in the Mainland has been deleted. Instead, the relevant area of responsibility now reads, "identifying measures to strengthen policy research and collaboration with different places to promote bilateral scientific and technology exchanges". Is there a difference between this point and the then suggestion about promoting emerging industries in the Mainland? The Government has not given us any explanation. In the past, the emphasis was put on the role of Hong Kong, while the new Policy Bureau is only concentrating on promoting emerging industries in the Mainland, without giving due regard to Hong Kong's situation. Hence, the entire design and setup is a complete mess and utterly confusing (The buzzer sounded) … Hence, the proposal should be postponed.

DEPUTY PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Mr CHAN, your speaking time is up.

DEPUTY PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Does any other Member wish to speak?

MR CHAN CHI-CHUEN (in Cantonese): I speak in support of the adjournment motion proposed by Mr LEUNG Kwok-hung in the course of our discussion today. Actually, I think the majority of Members support this motion deep inside. If this adjournment motion is voted down, I will expect to see more support votes than opposition votes when the motion is put to vote later on. However, to be honest, Members have not attached much importance to or cared much about this topic, and this is best illustrated by the abortion of the meeting held last Thursday. If Members did care about this motion, they should sit tight 1012 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014 and would not have enabled Mr Albert CHAN to request headcount for five times within 15 minutes.

Nowadays, Members have refused to listen, whatever the reason is. Once they have formed an opinion, they know which button to press when the issue is put to vote. Take last Thursday as an example. If Members support this resolution on the Innovation and Technology Bureau, they should have come to the meeting promptly so that this Council can proceed to vote when no other Member speaks. If Members support the establishment of the Bureau, should they not sit tight and be prepared to support the Government with their votes? This is what the pro-establishment and royalist camps should do, or else they cannot defend the Government. From this, we can see that although colleagues have vowed to support the establishment of the Innovation and Technology Bureau, they couldn't care less deep inside. They don't care if the motion is passed or not, so long as they are not the ones to be blamed.

The President was infuriated by the abortion of the meeting held last Thursday and Members could see his face changing colour. While Members were busy giving explanations, Secretary Gregory SO stayed very calm. As we all know, regardless of whether or not the resolution under discussion is passed today, the date of the establishment of the Innovation and Technology Bureau will not be affected. What matters is when the relevant provision is available. It is uncertain when the Government will receive the $30 million given that, as we all know, the Finance Committee still has dozens of outstanding agenda items. Therefore, the Secretary has made it very clear that the process would not be affected at all.

Has the Secretary given wholehearted support to the Innovation and Technology Bureau? Since I cannot read Secretary Gregory SO's mind, I cannot tell if he supports the new Bureau or the reorganization of the Policy Bureau concerned. While a Member queried Secretary Gregory SO's knowledge about innovation and technology when he spoke earlier, I dare not follow suit because very often, having the knowledge in a particular field is one thing, whether a person is willing to spend time on it is another. For example, if a person is asked to cook 10 dishes, he will naturally put more effort on dishes that he favours more, and but less on others. As a result, there are areas that he is less involved. I am not saying that Secretary Gregory SO is a case in point; I just want to say that this is reality.

LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014 1013

Mr Albert CHAN then attempted to argue if the structure of the Commerce and Economic Development Bureau is so large that many things cannot be properly dealt with, and comparisons have been made with other Policy Bureaux. We have yet to find out the reasons for the reorganization as the Government has never explained. Although we have raised a lot of questions, no answers have been given so far. Is this a problem with the structure? Is it because the house or the company is so big that no single house-keeper can handle and thus warrants reorganization, that is, to buy another house and hire one more house-keeper, and then move certain things to the new house? Is that the case? The Government has not clearly explained if this is a problem with the structure.

I have highlighted the issue of workload ― workload but not structure ― during a Panel meeting, that is, the capacity to take on additional workload. Referring to the case of Secretary Gregory SO, does this mean that he is overburdened and is on the verge of collapse? But Secretary Gregory SO has never said that he cannot cope with or managed the various duties. Nor has he failed to cook several dishes at the same time and let the food get burnt. Secretary Gregory SO has never said so. I therefore opine that if an assessment has to be conducted on the matter, the boss of Secretary Gregory SO, that is, Financial Secretary , should be consulted.

Oddly enough, the Financial Secretary in fact also does not care much about whether or when the Innovation and Technology Bureau will be established. Of course, he has not said so, but his blog has been silent on the issue. The Bureau has been left to take its own course, and no one cares if it can be established. I do wish to speak frankly with Secretary Gregory SO: Does he enjoy being "severed"? Does he like to be "severed" in this way? When a colleague spoke earlier, he asked why broadcasting matters have not been transferred to the new Bureau; the answer was that such matters are troublesome and filthy. For example, television licensing and the Broadcasting Ordinance review are complicated matters, but they have not been transferred to the new Bureau. I also wonder if Secretary Gregory SO would like to see these matters being transferred. Is he happy to continue overseeing the Commerce and Economic Development Bureau and supervising Permanent Secretary Andrew WONG and his Commerce, Industry and Tourism Branch as before, or does he prefer reorganizing the Policy Bureau as proposed, which is neither fish nor fowl, by moving something to the new house while keeping the rest in the old house?

1014 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014

Therefore, in the course of discussing the reorganization, I have asked one question time and again. I do support the construction or the purchase of a new house, and it would be better for the Government to move the Communications and Technology Branch overseen by Miss Susie HO to the new house, so that another Permanent Secretary needs not be employed. Yet, the Government …

(Mr LEUNG Kwok-hung stood up)

DEPUTY PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Mr LEUNG Kwok-hung, what is your point?

MR LEUNG KWOK-HUNG (in Cantonese): Deputy President, a point of order. Pursuant to Rule 17(2) of the Rules of Procedure, I wish to draw your attention that there is a lack of quorum.

DEPUTY PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Will the Clerk please ring the bell to summon Members back to the Chamber.

(While the summoning bell was ringing, THE PRESIDENT resumed the Chair)

(After the summoning bell had been rung, a number of Members returned to the Chamber)

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Mr CHAN Chi-chuen, please continue with your speech.

MR CHAN CHI-CHUEN (in Cantonese): President, as I have just said, I was eager to know how Secretary Gregory SO perceives the present reorganization. I must stress again that the present motion is not purely concerned with the creation of the Innovation and Technology Bureau, but also involves the reorganization of the entire government structure and division of work. Some people only indicated their support of the new Bureau, but have not responded to LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014 1015 our "why" questions, such as: Why there is a need to do so? Why is it necessary to build a new house? Why should we move stuff to the new house? Why should we move this stuff but not the others? Or why should a certain house-keeper and maid be deployed to the new house? No one has seriously discussed these matters with us. This is why I said that even Secretary Gregory SO is not very concerned about the fate of the Innovation and Technology Bureau. The best proof is that he has not lobbied us despite our declared opposition to the establishment of the Innovation and Technology Bureau long ago. Contrarily, Mrs has, through WhatsApp, reminded us time and again to think twice and not to veto the Innovation and Technology Bureau. I am therefore pretty sure that besides LEUNG Chun-ying, Fanny LAW is the one who is most concerned about the Innovation and Technology Bureau.

Concerning my support for this adjournment motion, there are some practical reasons that I would like to highlight in the first place, fearing that I may not have enough time. As a matter of fact, the resolution to be discussed later today is more important than the present discussion on the Innovation and Technology Bureau as the passage of the resolution today will not have any implication on the establishment date of the Innovation and Technology Bureau, as I have mentioned earlier. The resolution concerning the Pharmacy and Poisons Ordinance to be discussed later, though not of great concern to Members, will definitely get through and no division is needed. But since this resolution has been placed after the motion on the Innovation and Technology Bureau, it has been seriously delayed. What is the importance of that resolution? While cancer patients wish to have better drugs, they can only be prescribed with poorer drugs at the moment. In order to prescribe better drugs, the doctors concerned would have to write lengthy reports on the patient's condition. Once that resolution is passed, the drugs prescribed to patients will be upgraded, thereby relieving the administrative workload of doctors. Therefore, my friends who are doctors have all indicated their wish to have that resolution passed as early as possible. Not only cancer patients can be prescribed with better drugs, but will also relieve doctors' administrative workload.

I have therefore repeatedly called on the Government to postpone items that are controversial but not urgent on their own initiative, so that urgent matters that are concerned with people's livelihood or lives can be discussed first. However, the Government has been adamant, the style of the LEUNG Chun-ying Government which is known to all. Knowing that the motion does not have the slightest chance of getting passed, as in the case of last week's Marriage 1016 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014

(Amendment) Bill 2014, the Government still tried to get it through, without making any amendment or acceding to the formation of a bills committee for deliberation. This is a sheer waste of Members' time. As a result, Members could only find a way out by resorting to the Rules of Procedure. Therefore, once again, I wish to thank Mr LEUNG Kwok-hung for proposing this adjournment motion to remove this resolution on the Innovation and Technology Bureau.

Although the present proposal involves the reorganization of government structure, there is little room for discussion under this existing mechanism. This is because by requiring the approval of this Council by resolution, the Government disallows us to propose any amendment on the structure. I cannot propose to incorporate the broadcasting matters or creative industries into the Innovation and Technology Bureau's portfolio. No such amendment is allowed, and this is the "cunning" part of this proposal. Mr Albert CHAN and I have drafted 32 amendments, mainly frivolous amendments like changing the date or the name of the Innovation and Technology Bureau …

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Mr CHAN, I will not approve frivolous amendments.

MR CHAN CHI-CHUEN (in Cantonese): Sure, President, I am sorry.

What I want to say is, Members may think that we oppose whatever the Government does, good or bad alike, so as to launch the non-co-operation movement. But I wish to tell Members, before launching the non-co-operation movement, we have already indicated our opposition to the establishment of the Innovation and Technology Bureau and expressed our grave concern about this topic. Members might have a wrong impression that we oppose the establishment of the Bureau for no reason; they should refer to the 15-minute speech delivered by me last week. It is a pity that other Members did not have a chance to speak due to the abortion of the meeting. The video footage of my speech delivered last week has attracted viewers who do not care about the Innovation and Technology Bureau, and the hit-rate has already reached 13 000. I hope Members will spend some time watching the video footage. But if they choose not to watch it, I would like to invite them to read the lengthy article written by Joseph WONG, former Secretary for the Civil Service, who was also LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014 1017 the Secretary for Commerce, Industry and Technology during the TUNG Chee-hwa's era. In his article, he provided a number of justifications and I have referred to three major ones when I spoke last week. And yet, I notice that Members who have indicated their support to the motion have not responded to the relevant questions when they spoke. Is it because they agree with us so that they have nothing to respond? Or, have they not listened to our speeches at all but merely rendered support because of the term "innovation and technology"? In case the adjournment motion proposed by Mr LEUNG Kwok-hung is passed, I hope Members will again read Mr Joseph WONG's article or watch the video footage of my 15-minute speech delivered last week. Some people from the information technology sector also share my views after watching the footage, and agree that the Government has been unable to answer those questions. Although they support the establishment of the Innovation and Technology Bureau, they admit that right now, it is not the time for the reorganization.

The three major reasons, inter alia, are: firstly, there is no need to create a new Policy Bureau, and secondly ― I am not going to go through all three of them ― Why are creative industries and information technology matters (including the abovementioned review of the Broadcasting Ordinance and television licensing) not being transferred to the Innovation and Technology Bureau? The question on why creative industries, like the Create Hong Kong and sponsorships for Hong Kong films, animation, comics or fashion, will remain in the original Policy Bureau but not being transferred to the new Bureau has yet to be answered. Some people consider such problems insignificant. Although they share my views, they prefer to "create it first", just like the trendy phrase "pocket it first". There is no need to ask so many questions right now but create the relevant Policy Bureau first. Views can be provided at a later stage and then gradually transfer all information technology matters to the new Bureau. The most important of all is the third reason. If Members do not have much time to watch the video footage of my speech delivered last week, simply watch the last three minutes would be enough. I do not think LEUNG Chun-ying is sincere to develop creative industries and promote creativity in Hong Kong, which is evident from his opposition to the licensing of the Hong Kong Television Network Limited (HKTVN).

President, just now the Deputy President ruled that the opening of an umbrella is irrelevant to this topic, I nonetheless consider that they are related. While the immediate cause of the Umbrella Movement is political reform, there are two remote causes instigating mass movements involving more than 100 000 1018 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014 people, they are opposition against national education and the licensing of the HKTVN. These incidents had prompted Hong Kong people to disagree with the LEUNG Chun-ying Government, thinking that he is not genuine in helping Hong Kong. Since Mr Albert CHAN has failed to state his point clearly due to time constraint when he spoke earlier on, the Deputy President ruled against the opening of an umbrella (The buzzer sounded) … I hope the President can make a ruling.

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Mr CHAN, just now the Deputy President has already ruled that the umbrella put up and displayed by you is irrelevant to the adjournment motion under discussion, so please put it down.

Does any other Member wish to speak?

MR CHAN CHI-CHUEN (in Cantonese): President, I request a headcount.

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Will the Clerk please ring the bell to summon Members back to the Chamber.

(After the summoning bell had been rung, a number of Members returned to the Chamber)

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Does any other Member wish to speak?

(Mr LEUNG Kwok-hing stood up)

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Mr LEUNG Kwok-hung, what is your point?

MR LEUNG KWOK-HUNG (in Cantonese): Since this motion was proposed by me, I will reply if no one speaks … Is there no one speaking …

LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014 1019

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Mr LEUNG, if no other Member wishes to speak, I will ask you to reply after the public officer has spoken.

Does any other Member wish to speak?

MR WU CHI-WAI (in Cantonese): President, I speak in support of Mr LEUNG Kwok-hung's motion to adjourn the debate now.

I recall that many colleagues talked about the importance of the Innovation and Technology Bureau last week but no one seemed to have considered seriously what strategy the Government had shown to the community on how to promote innovation and technology in future through such an important Policy Bureau, for without a comprehensive strategy to promote innovation and technology, it is doubtful what this Policy Bureau would ultimately become and whether it will achieve the goals that everyone expects, that is, to promote the industries involving innovation, technology and creativity.

When we talk about innovation and technology, we always make reference to the creative industries in Singapore or South Korea. We can see how robust these industries in the two places are and how they have become the locomotive of their economy, thereby bringing about the diversification of the economy. However, will our new Innovation and Technology Bureau formulate such strategies? The Government has no answer.

From the information papers submitted by the Government to the Panels or other government papers, we learn that the new Innovation and Technology Bureau is to lead two departments currently under the leadership of Secretary Gregory SO, namely the Innovation and Technology Commission (ITC) and the Office of the Government Chief Information Officer (OGCIO), and this Policy Bureau will be headed by a Secretary of Department of the same ranking as Secretary Gregory SO to provide the so-called high level dedicated leadership. Is such a high level dedicated leadership really necessary? Can the business be adequately taken care of under the leadership of Secretary Gregory SO? The Government has never answered this question. Hence, I consider the motion to adjourn the debate can buy us some time to allow the Secretary to seriously think about the answer to this question.

1020 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014

As a matter of fact, it is stated in the papers on the establishment of the Innovation and Technology Bureau that the most important function of the new Policy Bureau is to provide high level dedicated leadership to strengthen, both in depth and in breadth, policy support for the development of innovation and technology. During our discussion at meetings of the Panel, the Government said that this new Policy Bureau will provide full support to the promotion of creative industries.

As we all know, creativity and innovative technology are two sides of a coin and one cannot exist without the other. If the Innovation and Technology Bureau is created purely because there are insufficient dedicated talents under the Secretary to support the implementation of policies in this respect, the problem can be easily solved by creating a new Permanent Secretary post to assist the Secretary in overseeing and managing the ITC and the OGCIO. Besides, it can also facilitate the co-ordination of the work concerning creativity and innovation within the policy ambit of the Secretary.

However, since the Secretary had not made such a choice, he should explain to the people of Hong Kong what he has in mind regarding the functions and objectives of the Innovation and Technology Bureau; and what new ideas and concepts can be promoted through the establishment of the new Policy Bureau, thereby setting the trend of advancing innovation and technology. He has not answered these questions but only proposed to establish the Policy Bureau first and then the new Secretary in charge of the Policy Bureau will give his dedicated and exclusive attention to formulate new strategies afterwards. In so doing, how can the Secretary evade public queries concerning the unnecessary duplication of functions of this new Policy Bureau and the Commerce and Economic Development Bureau? With this problem of duplication of roles remain outstanding, how can we support the establishment of the Innovation and Technology Bureau?

I believe that Hong Kong society has high expectations of the Innovation and Technology Bureau but such aspirations can only be achieved with high level policy support. After the establishment of the Bureau, its objectives can only be achieved through the support of various bureaux and the co-ordination of their policies; otherwise, the Innovation and Technology Bureau may only become another "clawless crab". President, if the work of the Innovation and Technology Bureau is merely to enhance the depth and breadth of policy support, LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014 1021 we are convinced that the existing Commerce and Economic Development Bureau is adequate to address all the relevant problems.

Let us look back in history. Before the establishment of the Innovation and Technology Bureau, there was the Information Technology and Broadcast Bureau. It was reconstituted into the Commerce, Industry and Technology Bureau in 2002 and then reconstituted in 2007 again into a bureau dealing with commerce and economic matters but not technology. In the reorganization process, the Government told the public time and again that the new Commerce and Economic Development Bureau would facilitate mutual support and co-ordination with other bureaux while incorporating innovation, technology and creativity in the implementation of the commercial and economic policies, giving full play to the locomotive of a diversified economy.

The Government suddenly changed from requiring technology to not requiring it and now embracing it again. This implies that the whole Government has new ideas and thoughts but what are these new thoughts? It is a shame that after going through all the documents, I am still clueless. All I find is the vague wording of "to strengthen, specifically both in depth and breadth, policy support for the development of innovation and technology" through "a dedicated high level leadership". What exactly does that mean? Why are there no concrete answers?

President, by submitting such an important proposal in the form of a resolution, the Government disallows us to discuss the proposal thoroughly at Panel meetings. We can only decide hurriedly whether or not to support the establishment of the Innovation and Technology Bureau. Seeing there is a lack of information and reasonable justifications, we oppose the establishment of the Bureau, and it seems that we have to bear the responsibility for being unsupportive of the development of innovation and technology. The fact is not so. We strongly support the further promotion and application of innovation and technology to help create a diversified economy in Hong Kong. But the development of a diversified economy needs a consensus in society as well as the support from various Policy Bureaux. For example, the Education Bureau can promote the idea through education and the Secretary can safeguard Hong Kong's creative industries in respect of work concerning broadcasting creativity, such as the setting up of the Hong Kong Television Network Limited and the use of new electronic media. In this way, our freedoms of expression and information will not be adversely affected. Only when platforms for people to exercise their 1022 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014 freedom of expression are fully safeguarded by the Policy Bureaux can we effectively take advantage of the development of innovation and technology.

If the Innovation and Technology Bureau is established when there are such divergent views and it does not get the backing from other Policy Bureaux, the Innovation and Technology Bureau will only become a technical department, as its name suggests. In that case, is it worthwhile to establish it as a Policy Bureau?

All Policy Bureaux need to co-operate with one another to carry out their functions. In terms of the complexity of work, I believe that the Labour and Welfare Bureau, the Transport and Housing Bureau or the Food and Health Bureau should top the list. Let us take a look. Even though the policy areas managed by these Bureaux are way more complex, we have not thought of restructuring or re-division of work, but now we are to establish the Innovation and Technology Bureau. Comparatively speaking, the function of this new Bureau is limited to giving dedicated support to creative industries, and hence we do not see any justifications for its establishment, especially when it will incur unnecessary public expenditure.

Of course, if the Government already has a candidate in mind for the post of the Secretary for Innovation and Technology, it should tell us so that we can examine his ideas. This may be a better way to deal with the issue, but the Government has not done so. Under the present system, we cannot first examine the candidate for the post and after learning his ideas and concepts, decide whether or not to support the establishment of the Bureau. Hence, the Government must first set the general direction and then inform the public whether the Innovation and Technology Bureau can facilitate the development of a diversified economy in Hong Kong.

President, I very much hope that through this motion to adjourn the debate, society can gain a better understanding of the work of the Innovation and Technology Bureau. I also hope that the Government can provide more information in this respect to help society understand that the Bureau is not merely a signboard but has real purpose and functions. We are convinced that a signboard cannot address the prevailing problems of the public criticizing and questioning the vision of this Policy Bureau. Also, we do not see that the Government has formulated any supporting policies and incentives, apart from presenting this idea. Are we going to ask Chief Secretary Carrie LAM to lead LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014 1023 another inter-departmental working group to assist the Innovation and Technology Bureau in co-ordinating or integrating the work of various Policy Bureaux in order to meet the requirements for the development of innovation and technology? Therefore, I think the first point is very important, which is to allow society to discuss in detail the functions of the Innovation and Technology Bureau.

Secondly, as Mr CHAN Chi-chuen has said, there are other important issues to tackle after we finish debating on this motion. If the debate can be adjourned now, there is no need to handle the amendments that follow. Then we can expeditiously deal with the Pharmacy and Poisons Ordinance, which is more important, to make available more cancer drugs for the public to choose for health improvement. Is this task more important in addressing the pressing needs of the public? If we do not address people's pressing needs but remain tangled in this controversial subject, blindly supporting the establishment of the Innovation and Technology Bureau, the purpose and objectives of which are still very vague, we will only cast a shadow over this Council's work of scrutinizing government policies.

Hence, President, I speak in support of Mr LEUNG Kwok-hung's motion to adjourn this debate and I hope that our colleagues will support it. Thank you, President.

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Does any other Member wish to speak?

(No Member indicated a wish to speak)

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Secretary for Commerce and Economic Development, do you wish to speak?

(The Secretary for Commerce and Economic Development indicated that he did not wish to speak)

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Mr LEUNG Kwok-hung, do you wish to give a reply?

1024 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014

MR LEUNG KWOK-HUNG (in Cantonese): President, the adjournment motion only adjourns the debate; it does not mean the debate is cancelled once for all. It means that today we do not discuss the issue but leave it for some other day.

Why do we not discuss the issue today but leave it for some other day? I have cited a few reasons just now. First, the Innovation and Technology Bureau is one of LEUNG Chun-ying's best plays which he promised during his campaign for the Chief Executive. It does not come from nowhere. LEUNG Chun-ying must have his reasons. LEUNG Chun-ying keeps saying … Everyone, including those pro-establishment Members or government officials who came to lobby me … Secretary Gregory SO has never lobbied me though we talk about a wide range of issues when we sometimes meet. Actually, what he keeps saying is nothing new, that is, if we do not establish a body of the setup of a Policy Bureau, nothing can be achieved. That is to say, at present we do not have a platform and hence it is necessary to establish the Innovation and Technology Bureau. If a certain government official attends a meeting overseas and when people ask him about his title, if he says that he is the Commissioner of a certain department, nobody pays attention to him. It is a waste of time listening to such an argument.

This argument is totally self-deceptive. Why do I say so? The places that we model ourselves on, such as Singapore, London, Taipei and South Korea, do not have such kinds of duplicative and fictitious ministries, or Policy Bureaux in our term. As a matter of fact, Secretary Gregory SO knows very well that putting the two departments within the ambit of the new Policy Bureau is a kind of . In high-sounding words, we will have "a dedicated department to handle special matters". But in reality, if two departments under this Bureau can handle the relevant tasks, why is it necessary to create a new Policy Bureau? London adopts a different approach. Contrary to what LEUNG Chun-ying has said, in London, the Government can only interfere when the market fails to function; and when the Government interferes, it cannot provide direct assistance only to a particular trade or industry or a certain project. This is what we mean by "with universality but not particularity".

Singapore adopts a different approach. It is now actively promoting three emerging industries. The first one is water technology industry which involves waste water recycling and seawater desalination. At present we do not have this industry. They turn 5% to 10% of total water consumption into fresh water. The second is biotechnology industry. We do not have this industry either. LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014 1025

The third is new interactive media industry. This is the strategy of handling innovation and technology in Singapore. Besides, in the five years starting from 2007, Singapore has injected and will inject 5 billion Singaporean dollars in that area. How much is 5 billion Singaporean dollars? Do we have this kind of budget? While the Government wants to establish a Policy Bureau, it does not have the money. LEUNG Chun-ying is … I do not know what he is talking about. Most people do not know what he is talking about, and he even has the guts to say that, "If people earning less than $14,000 a month can vote, it will lead to favouritism towards certain social groups". Hence, from this perspective, we do not know if LEUNG Chun-ying would assign more functions to the new Policy Bureau after putting the two departments under its ambit. He has not made things clear.

Just now Mr Albert CHAN said that the authorities want to promote the new emerging industries in the Mainland. What has it got to do with us? Why would we set up a Policy Bureau to promote emerging industries for other people?

President, he spoke to the Mainlanders during his campaign for the Chief Executive. He pledged to the 1 200-strong Election Committee that, "I will provide dedicated funds, appoint dedicated officials, and set up dedicated departments and dedicated Policy Bureaux to promote your new emerging industries." Buddy, one should not go too far. Although he is called LEUNG Chun-ying, he should not be too LEUNG Chun-ying. Now he changes his words and talks about "promoting bilateral scientific and technology exchanges". What does it mean by bilateral? In his own words, that is to "identify measures to strengthen policy research and collaboration with different places to promote bilateral scientific and technology exchanges," which is to say, to promote the bilateral scientific and technology exchanges with a different jurisdiction.

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Mr LEUNG, you should not discuss the Secretary's resolution in your speech. Instead, you should state your reasons for proposing a motion to adjourn the debate.

MR LEUNG KWOK-HUNG (in Cantonese): OK, I will put it this way … I just want to point out that LEUNG Chun-ying makes self-contradictory remarks. At first, he targeted at Mainlanders and now he targets at all people. I know why he 1026 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014 aimed at the Mainland in the first place. He always talks about leveraging on the Mainland because we have a market there. And now it does not have any kind of establishment. Isn't this making a start but not carrying it through, coming to naught in the end?

By citing this simple example, I wish to illustrate that Members who support LEUNG Chun-ying have no idea what they support. As I want to raise objection, I spent 30 minutes in my office upstairs to prepare for my speech in this Chamber. I now ask fellow Members, what makes you support LEUNG Chun-ying? Do they know what he has said? Of course not. It is only that LEUNG Chun-ying talks to the Mainland and so they talk to LEUNG Chun-ying. That is all. This should not be the practice in this Council.

Secondly, concerning the question of integrity, President, we have to spend a large sum of money to implement LEUNG Chun-ying's policy objective, but Chief Executive C Y LEUNG is not a person of integrity. First, after he proposed the establishment of the Innovation and Technology Bureau, a complete new scene set in. At the time when he proposed the establishment of the Innovation and Technology Bureau, the underground den at his residence had not been exposed. As the underground den issue only concerned his personal conduct, we might as well let him off the hook. But in the case about DTZ Company (DTZ), President, you were also a witness because under your leadership, at the question and answer session chaired by you, I loudly asked LEUNG Chun-ying about the business of his company registered in the British Virgin Islands (BVI) and I was driven out of the Chamber by you. I bet you can recall his answer …

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Mr LEUNG, your speech has nothing to do with this adjournment motion.

MR LEUNG KWOK-HUNG (in Cantonese): Of course it is related. The fact is simple enough, as his DTZ colluded with Payson CHA and Payson CHA held the shares of Asia Television Limited (ATV), they secretly made a deal through a Japanese company. Hence, when LEUNG Chun-ying was to decide whether or not to grant a licence to the Hong Kong Television Network Limited (HKTVN) …

LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014 1027

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Mr LEUNG, how is your speech related to this adjournment motion?

MR LEUNG KWOK-HUNG (in Cantonese): They are related as I wish to ask Members to consider carefully LEUNG Chun-ying's motive. I propose this adjournment motion simply to give two more hours to Members to think. LEUNG Chun-ying may hold a press conference tomorrow to clarify the case concerning DTZ and Wintrack Worldwide; and if he did so, I will immediately shut up and vote in favour of him. But since LEUNG Chun-ying last came to the Legislative Council to attend the question and answer session in July, he has disappeared. He worried about his personal safety and hence would not attend the question and answer session again.

I hope Members of this Council, be they members of the pro-establishment camp or other camps, would give him some more time. It does not really matter. The Secretary has also told us not to worry because there is a long queue ahead of this resolution waiting to be processed by the Finance Committee. Therefore, the result of today's debate will not affect the future. As such, we should give him more time and do not vote now, for if we vote on the resolution but do not approve the funding afterwards, we will make a fool of this Council. If we endorse the resolution to establish a Policy Bureau but refuse to grant funding when dealing with the amendments, it will truly be embarrassing.

Therefore, as regards this issue, please listen to me. In the DTZ incident, LEUNG Chun-ying was alleged of seeking private gains through his power. If Payson CHA did not divulge it, no one would know. But if both of them were willing to come clean about it, the allegation did not stand, for people would find that Chief Executive C Y LEUNG was actually fair and just; and no matter how much interest was involved between Payson CHA and him, the conflict would never constitute a transfer of benefits. Even when LEUNG Chun-ying was considering the granting of a licence to ATV and kicking HKTVN out of the market, the person surnamed CHA never crossed his mind, just that Secretary Gregory SO was nosy at that time, and it was Secretary Gregory SO who decided not to grant a licence to HKTVN while LEUNG Chun-ying handled the matter in a fair and just manner. The problem lied in Secretary Gregory SO who was incompetent. LEUNG Chun-ying vetoed the decision made by Secretary Gregory SO and all Executive Council Members. If LEUNG Chun-ying could provide proof, there would not be any problems, right? However, as the saying 1028 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014 goes, "One does not put on his shoes in a melon patch or adjust his hat under a plum tree" to avoid being found in a suspicious position. Did he think that as long as he could hide the plum tree or melon patch, he could put on his shoes and adjust his hat? It is really a waste of time. The whole case has now come to light. Therefore, I wish to do justice to Secretary Gregory SO. This is my first point.

My second point is about the UGL case. The nature was the same and the case was also extremely filthy. The President asked me how this case was related to my motion. The President drove me out of the Chamber at the time when I asked LEUNG Chun-ying details of the company registered in BVI. But he still refused to disclose the facts up till now. Today, his secret is brought to light, just like when QIN Hui and his wife conspired in the room with a window facing east to get YUE Fei killed, they were seen by others …

(Mr IP Kwok-him stood up)

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Mr LEUNG, please hold on. Mr IP, what is your point?

MR IP KWOK-HIM (in Cantonese): President, a point of order. Having listened to Mr LEUNG Kwok-hung's speech for so long, I still cannot make out how it relates to the adjournment motion. Please make a ruling.

MR LEUNG KWOK-HUNG (in Cantonese): It is related to the integrity of the Chief Executive.

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Mr LEUNG Kwok-hung, please speak on your proposed motion.

MR LEUNG KWOK-HUNG (in Cantonese): My arguments are very clear, only that Mr IP Kwok-him does not understand. My reason for proposing this adjournment motion is to buy time. Last time, as LEUNG Chun-ying did not have the guts to come, we did not have the chance to find out the truth about what I am now accusing him of. When he attends the question and answer session LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014 1029 next time, we can hold a vote. If I propose to kick him out once and for all, my argument would really be irrelevant. But as we do not know whether the Chief Executive is guilty or not, if he comes clean and can prove that he is innocent, we can vote in his favour.

I now accuse the Chief Executive of having a conflict of interest and I even suspect him of transferring benefits; hence his proposal of establishing this Policy Bureau in his manifesto is questionable. Since there is no justification for establishing the Policy Bureau, I have reasons to suspect that the Chief Executive has transferred benefits to Payson CHA or companies engaging in similar businesses as that of UGL. So long as LEUNG Chun-ying can come and explain to this Council clearly, the matter can be settled. But he is nowhere to be found. Mr IP Kwok-him needs not be frightened. When he wants to kiss LEUNG Chun-ying's ass, he will certainly kiss it. He will not make a mistake this time.

Mr IP Kwok-him, this is my argument. Can he answer me on behalf of the Chief Executive that all my accusations against him are unfounded? If he has the guts to answer me, he can say my speech is irrelevant. Otherwise, I will ask him to shut up.

No one can answer me. Second …

(Mr Albert CHAN stood up)

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Mr Albert CHAN, what is your point?

MR ALBERT CHAN (in Cantonese): I wish to give Mr LEUNG Kwok-hung a break. Please do a headcount.

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Will the Clerk please ring the bell to summon Members back to the Chamber.

(After the summoning bell had been rung, a number of Members returned to the Chamber)

1030 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Mr LEUNG Kwok-hung, please continue.

MR LEUNG KWOK-HUNG (in Cantonese): President, I was calling into question the integrity of LEUNG Chun-ying, the Chief Executive. President, today I was surrounded by a group of people downstairs. They questioned my integrity, accusing me of taking $500,000 from "Fatty LAI", and said they would investigate me. Buddy, they said I had taken $500,000, but the amount taken by LEUNG Chun-ying was $50 million, and he refused to admit this fact and did not give an account of the case. Those people solicited by you to accuse me of taking $500,000 …

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Mr LEUNG, I have to remind you not to stray from the question.

MR LEUNG KWOK-HUNG (in Cantonese): President, I do not have any power and, at your mercy, I have not been driven out of the Chamber. However, the Chief Executive has the full power to determine who can do business and who cannot. Before we get to the bottom of the case, we certainly cannot endorse his motion, can we? He received $50 million in one go without the knowledge of the directors. There was another deal, an offer providing half of the amount was accepted, should this case be investigated by the ICAC? His unique manifesto … The Secretary whom he treated as dirt came to this Council, why did he treat that Secretary as dirt? Gregory SO said, "Let us grant a licence to HKTVN." But he said no. His secret book was read out by Gregory SO, a "monk with a lopsided mouth". The Government, pack it in! May I ask the royalists to stop voting; take a look at LEUNG Chun-ying first to see if he has "favus on his scalp". Will they do so?

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): I now put the question to you and that is: That the motion on the adjournment of debate moved by Mr LEUNG Kwok-hung, in accordance with Rule 40(1) of the Rules of Procedure, be passed. Will those in favour please raise their hands?

(Members raised their hands)

LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014 1031

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Those against please raise their hands.

(Members raised their hands)

Mr LEUNG Kwok-hung rose to claim a division.

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Mr LEUNG Kwok-hung has claimed a division. The division bell will ring for five minutes.

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Will Members please proceed to vote.

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Will Members please check their votes. If there are no queries, voting shall now stop and the result will be displayed.

Functional Constituencies:

Mr Albert HO, Mr James TO and Mr Frederick FUNG voted for the motion.

Dr LAU Wong-fat, Mr Tommy CHEUNG, Prof Joseph LEE, Mr Jeffrey LAM, Mr Andrew LEUNG, Mr WONG Ting-kwong, Ms Starry LEE, Mr CHAN Kin-por, Dr LEUNG Ka-lau, Mr IP Kwok-him, Mr NG Leung-sing, Mr Steven HO, Mr Frankie YICK, Mr YIU Si-wing, Mr MA Fung-kwok, Mr Charles Peter MOK, Mr KWOK Wai-keung, Mr Christopher CHEUNG, Mr POON Siu-ping, Mr TANG Ka-piu, Ir Dr LO Wai-kwok, Mr CHUNG Kwok-pan and Mr Tony TSE voted against the motion.

Geographical Constituencies:

Ms Emily LAU, Mr LEUNG Kwok-hung, Mr Albert CHAN, Mr WU Chi-wai, Mr CHAN Chi-chuen, Dr Kenneth CHAN and Mr SIN Chung-kai voted for the motion.

1032 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014

Mr CHAN Kam-lam, Mr TAM Yiu-chung, Mr WONG Kwok-hing, Mr CHAN Hak-kan, Mr WONG Kwok-kin, Mrs Regina IP, Mr Paul TSE, Mr Michael TIEN, Mr CHAN Han-pan, Miss Alice MAK, Dr Elizabeth QUAT and Dr CHIANG Lai-wan voted against the motion.

THE PRESIDENT, Mr Jasper TSANG, did not cast any vote.

THE PRESIDENT announced that among the Members returned by functional constituencies, 26 were present, three were in favour of the motion and 23 against it; while among the Members returned by geographical constituencies through direct elections, 20 were present, seven were in favour of the motion and 12 against it. Since the question was not agreed by a majority of each of the two groups of Members present, he therefore declared that the motion was negatived.

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): This Council will now continue with the joint debate on the proposed resolution moved by the Secretary for Commerce and Economic Development and the amendments thereto.

MRS REGINA IP (in Cantonese): President, I speak in support of the establishment of the new Innovation and Technology Bureau by the Commerce and Economic Development Bureau. I always support the Government in doing more for innovation and technology. Just now in his speech, Mr WU Chi-wai, who is not in the Chamber right now, talked briefly about the woeful history of innovation and technology in the SAR Government. He has never worked for the Government, but I think he certainly has done some research, and what he said is quite accurate.

After the reunification, the SAR Government established the Information Technology and Broadcasting Bureau, and placed information technology and some sciences associated with it under the purview of this Policy Bureau. Later, in 2002, this Policy Bureau was changed into the Commerce, Industry and Technology Bureau. In 2007, when Mr took office as the Chief Executive, he restructured the Commerce, Industry and Technology Bureau for no reason by removing its functions related to technology, and established the Commerce and Economic Development Bureau.

LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014 1033

In 2007, I was already back in Hong Kong. I recall that in front of the old Legislative Council building, I staged a protest against the SAR Government's "de-technologization", because the Government had no ground and was unable to give any reason for trampling on technology like that. At that time, together with a group of members of the technology sector, including Dr Elizabeth QUAT and Samson TAM, we stood in protest out there under the scorching sun. We also approached Mr Joseph WONG, the then Secretary for Commerce, Industry and Technology, but he was helpless to do anything and was unable to give any reason either. In my opinion, one of the reasons was that most of the principal and senior officials of the SAR Government were civil officials and they were accustomed to adopting the practice of "positive non-interventionism" towards the economy. They took the view that given Hong Kong's favourable geographical location as the southern gateway to China, with so many vessels and flights coming and going, as long as Hong Kong maintained its status as a free port, the economy would thrive of its own accord and they did not need to do anything at all. Therefore, after the emergence of digital technology in the wake of a technological revolution that swept across the world, they simply did not know how to cope with the new digital economy. In the SAR Government, only one official had a better understanding of information technology, and he was KWONG Ki-chi. However, since his departure from office, no other Director of Bureau can really get to grips with this area. That is why the SAR Government has been at a loss how to promote technology and innovation to create new bright spots for our economy.

Take a look around the world. Not very far away, just nearby in Asia, our neighbouring regions and countries are much more advanced than us. They saw the importance of technology long ago, and have made achievements. Taiwan, for example, is the world's largest chip manufacturing region. Silicon Valley no longer has any silicon. A few big firms in Taiwan have become the world's largest contract manufacturers of chips.

Singapore is determined to develop innovation and technology. If you arrive in Singapore by plane, you will see Biopolis, a magnificent biotechnology centre, as soon as you disembark. They have, by offering high salaries, hired and poached many famous biotechnology professors from the United States to assist them in developing biotechnology and the pharmaceutical industry. In addition, Singapore is also committed to the development of hardware in the electronics industry. While the state-owned semiconductor company, Chartered Semiconductor, is operating at a loss and performing unsatisfactorily, Singapore 1034 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014 has attracted multinationals such as Seagate Technology to come and produce hard disk drives, and they have achieved pretty good results. It is learnt that the Singapore Government has put in place an industry policy requiring that about 25% of the GDP must come from the development of the manufacturing industry, so that their labour force will have more choices and not everyone will go into the retail, catering or hotel business.

South Korea has also done a very good job in its creative industries, which have yielded brilliant results. We all know that as far as mobile phones are concerned, Samsung can actually challenge Apple and Google. The cultural industries in South Korea use a lot of technology. Everyone who has watched the "horse-riding dance" of PSY agrees that the production of his MTV is really fantastic with a substantial input of the latest digital technology. By contrast, Hong Kong is completely lagging behind. An example is PMQ ― I have been there, but unlike the Secretary, I did not buy a pair of shoes there. I find that although PMQ purports to be a creative industries landmark, it is just a typical Hong Kong creativity centre with new-style catering units, a famous boutique on the ground floor, and some brand stores; what I think is more creative there is fashion design, and this is perhaps due to the cultural constraints in Hong Kong. Compared with its counterparts in Beijing or Shanghai, PMQ is really lacking in some other genuine creative and cultural activities, such as painting, sculpture, pottery, and so on. This is probably because Hong Kong people are rather used to "making quick money" and "taking the easy way out", whereas artists may need to make painstaking efforts, travel high and low for dozens of years and blend the essence of the Chinese and Western cultures before they can create new artworks. This is something we have yet to see in Hong Kong so far.

In any event, having wasted so much time, we really should have an independent Innovation and Technology Bureau. Just now, some Honourable colleagues said that they did not understand why it was named the Innovation and Technology Bureau. Since I have heard Chief Executive C Y LEUNG's explanation, which I find quite reasonable, I would like to parrot what he said and repeat his understanding. Why was the Bureau not named the Technology and Innovation Bureau? According to him, if it was named the Technology and Innovation Bureau, it would sound as if innovation purely relied on technology. It is called the Innovation and Technology Bureau because innovation is possible with or without the use of technology. For example, in Italy, there are a lot of brands, and ladies will buy leather bags, leather shoes and the like there. Those famous traditional industries in Europe do not rely on technology; it is LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014 1035 craftsmanship that their high value-added brand products are relying on. The same goes for Japan, where the brocades used in certain Japanese kimonos rely on craftsmanship. So, innovation can rely on craftsmanship, as well as on technology. If it was named the Technology and Innovation Bureau, it would sound as if innovation wholly relied on technology. As a matter of fact, innovation and technology are two different things, although in the modern age, many money-making innovative industries capitalize on technology.

Therefore, I fully support the establishment of this Policy Bureau. Yet, Under Secretary, I do have some criticisms, not of you but of this Bureau. As I have said previously at the relevant panel, the purview of this Bureau is rather too narrow, as it only includes the Innovation and Technology Commission and the Office of the Government Chief Information Officer. If this Bureau is truly to promote innovation and technology, it should also include the Creative Industry Office and the Intellectual Property Department. It is really perplexing that the Intellectual Property Department is left out. Just think, if people are to pursue innovation by means of technology, they naturally have to apply for patents, and the Intellectual Property Department is exactly responsible for dealing with intellectual property, which covers patents, copyrights and designs. These are all very important. So why is this Department not included in the Innovation and Technology Bureau? I have heard an unofficial explanation to the effect that the new Secretary for Innovation and Technology, as a novice, may not be able to cope with so many duties. This is understandable. If this Bureau was also tasked with handling matters relating to broadcasting, as in the case of the Information Technology and Broadcasting Bureau headed by KWONG Ki-chi in the past, then it might be a bit too demanding for the new Secretary. This is particularly true when it comes to broadcasting, which, as we all know, actually involves many political issues, which are not simply related to purely technical matters. There are a lot of political bombs embedded in it. If the new Secretary was to deal with broadcasting and technology at the same time, it might be too arduous a task for him or her. In any case, I think that it would be more desirable to have the Creative Industry Office, Create Hong Kong and the Intellectual Property Department included in the Innovation and Technology Bureau. I hope that the Government will put my views on record. Although my ideas cannot be realized at present, as the relevant terms of reference have been drawn up, I hope that the Government can group together these departments associated with innovation and technology in a gradual and orderly manner as and when it finds the right person to be the Secretary for Innovation and Technology in the future. 1036 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014

The other reason why I support the establishment of a new, independent Innovation and Technology Bureau is that the scope of duties of Secretary Gregory SO is indeed too broad. If Hong Kong really needs an industry policy, the Government should classify our industries into two categories. Simply put, one of the categories should cover the traditional and established industries, that is, the pillar industries often referred to by the former Chief Executives, including tourism, logistics, shipping, and so on. Assuming that we only need to promote these areas, such as the convention and exhibition industry, if we really go for it, Secretary Gregory SO really needs to listen to the views of the trade, so that when they ask for land, the Government finds land for them; when they complain of manpower shortage, the Government gets workers for them; and when they want to solicit business, the Government brings in business for them. In that case, I think Secretary Gregory SO will not even have the time to buy shoes.

Generally speaking, the Innovation and Technology Bureau is to promote the new economy. According to many accepted opinions in foreign countries, the new economy refers to the digital economy, which is represented by the most profitable leading companies in the United States. Their business is booming in North California and the areas around Silicon Valley. I visited these places in September, at which time there was already a general rise in land prices. These places constitute the strongest economic driving force in the United States, and what they rely on is precisely this new digital economy. South Korea, Taiwan and Singapore have all been making great efforts in this field. The SAR Government should entrust this new economy to the new Secretary for Innovation and Technology, while Secretary Gregory SO should only deal with those economic areas with traditional advantages, such as examining whether we have enough logistics sites, and looking into ways to promote the shipping, tourism, and convention and exhibition industries, or the testing and certification industry, which is one of the priority industries suggested by the previous Government. We all know where the bottleneck of the testing and certification industry lies: we want more laboratories, but we do not have enough land; if we want to obtain the Mainland's accreditation on top of international accreditation, we have to discuss with the Mainland; we want greater development, but we do not have a sufficient supply of talent, and thus we have to train up a critical mass of talent. Secretary Gregory SO will already be fully stretched in doing these tasks. So there is nothing wrong to have a new Policy Bureau and a new Secretary to help out.

Lastly, I would like to say a few words on the candidate to take up the post of the new Secretary. While I know that the Government is not required to LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014 1037 disclose any name at this stage, I do have some expectations. I hope that the future Secretary for Innovation and Technology will be someone who truly understands technology, rather than someone who "suddenly cares about technology". He or she should better be an engineer with industry experience who has worked in the technology sector before, and knows how to achieve convergence with technology companies both overseas and on the Mainland. He or she should be able to assist industry participants, especially small and medium enterprises (SMEs), in promoting and building up their technology businesses. As far as I am concerned, the greatest benefit of promoting information technology lies in the fact that many industry participants are SMEs. Nowadays, one of the deep-seated problems of Hong Kong is the disparity between the rich and the poor. The rich get richer and the poor get poorer; big corporations are extremely robust, but SMEs are struggling to stay afloat. By promoting information technology and, in particular, working with the Mainland, such as working with Guangdong Province, to look into ways to develop cross-boundary e-commerce, big data and electronic authentication, we can help many SMEs and create more new job opportunities for our young people, thereby giving them a ladder for upward mobility. Therefore, for the Innovation and Technology Bureau to be a success, the Government must find the right talent. It is not enough to only have a framework; we also need the right people.

We often lay stress on frameworks and objective management in keeping with Western management philosophies. But apart from these, we also need to find the right talent, as rightly pointed out by some words of wisdom of Chinese people. As a Chinese saying goes, "When people are right, the government flourishes; when the ground is right, plants flourish."1 The Government must appoint a Secretary who truly understands technology, as well as an Under Secretary who truly understands technology, can communicate with the trade, is willing to listen to the views of the sector, and will do real work. They will be leading a group of professional and diligent administrative officers, and other experts in the Government. Only through their concerted efforts can a whole new world of innovation and technology be opened up in Hong Kong. I believe that Hong Kong has sufficient talent. As long as this dedicated Innovation and Technology Bureau is established and put in the hands of capable leaders, we will soon be able to turn the tide, and compete with South Korea, Singapore and Taiwan.

1 1038 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014

With these remarks, President, I hope that this Policy Bureau can be established as soon as possible.

MS CLAUDIA MO (in Cantonese): To outsiders, the political situation in Hong Kong seems to be precarious and surprising. For example, what Mr James TIEN has recently experienced can be described as shocking. Shouldn't the Legislative Council monitor the Government? We are now discussing the Government's proposal to establish the Innovation and Technology Bureau. How is this related to the most pressing matter at the moment and how should the Legislative Council play a monitoring role? Since such a system is now in place, we have to hold a discussion.

President, I am very concerned and worried that this Innovation and Technology Bureau will soon ― I am not talking about tomorrow or the day after tomorrow but in a few years' time ― become the cyber supervisory or cyber censorship authority. Some people say that this would not happen as the scope of work of the Bureau is very narrow; yet other people think its scope of work is too extensive. The Bureau should only be responsible for matters related to the new development in information technology, and nothing else. My concern is certainly related to politics. Before 1997, and even during the Sino-British negotiation, it had frequently been reported that high-ranking officials in Beijing came to Hong Kong and warned people not to turn Hong Kong into a politicized city. We noted that some academics have already made criticisms. If I remember correctly, it should be … no problem; if in doubt, leave it out.

In reviewing the colonial history of Hong Kong in the past 150 years, the colonial government had successfully turned Hong Kong into a world-famous apolitical city. However, under the so-called "one country, two systems" devised by the Communist regime, Hong Kong has become the most politicized city in less than 15 years. Does the establishment of the Innovation and Technology Bureau also involve political considerations? The problem is that Hong Kong has been politicized under the existing government structure. The most obvious example is the Police. Secretary LAI Tung-kwok is in charge of security affairs and he should speak for the Police, but every word he said politicized the Police, which is absolutely unfair to the Police who are professional and well-trained. The increase in the price of Dongjiang water discussed by us yesterday has also become a political issue. According to the Beijing authorities, foreign forces have certainly intervened in our protest LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014 1039 movement, which is a movement. If it is a Hong Kong independence movement, it is certainly related to politics. What should be done if there is a call for Hong Kong independence? Hong Kong does not even have sufficient water supply and we have to rely on Dongjiang water; is this not a political issue?

According to the Government, the scope of work of the Innovation and Technology Bureau is very narrow, which basically only involves promoting the development of innovation and technology. As the workload is rather light, not much funding is required. Hence, we need not show too much concern. However, we have a reason to show concern. At the meeting of the Panel on Information Technology and Broadcasting held not long ago, members asked the government officials if it was necessary to establish this Bureau given its narrow scope of work and the exclusion of telecommunications and broadcasting. The officials suddenly had a Freudian slip and mentioned that they would review on a regular basis (once every one or two years) whether the scope of work should be expanded. As we can see, even Secretary Dr KO Wing-man who is responsible for public health has also expressed his political views, saying that we must always toe the Government's line and the Party's line. Thus, this issue is definitely related to politics.

The retired former Chief Justice, Andrew LI, said recently that the spirit of the rule of law should be depoliticized ― not non-politicized but depoliticized. He used a middle-of-the-road term "depoliticized" instead of politicized and non-politicized. Even Andrew LI had to voice his views. The Government has made use of court injunction orders to clear the scenes. If some members of the public are just passers-by, will they also be given a copy of the injunction order? While other pressing issues in Hong Kong, such as public housing issue, have not been urgently handled, the authorities stressed on the urgency of the establishment of the Innovation and Technology Bureau. We have a lot of technology talents; if the Government wishes to advance technological development; all it needs to do is to make incessant efforts. However, the Government creates an additional layer of administration, which will obviously give rise to a whole lot of stuff. In future, the work in the area of commerce will be split up. The Government is working on ideology and certainly, it will deny as such duties have not been explicitly stated. The crux lies in trust, but when the whole Government has lost its credibility, I can hardly believe in its words. A lot of people say that we might as well let the Bureau set up first and see what it can achieve. Yet, once the Bureau is established, it will last forever and it will 1040 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014 be very difficult to dissolve it. The Government is creating an additional layer of administration. As for some Policy Bureaux that warrant a restructuring, such as the Transport and Housing Bureau … the Transport and Housing Bureau is responsible for a wide range of work, and I absolutely have no idea how the responsible Secretary (he is an academic and formerly the President of a tertiary institution) can cope with the tasks. The Transport and Housing Bureau has an extensive scope of work but the Government has not considered restructuring the Bureau and hiving off some of its functions; yet, it has chosen to restructure the bureau in charge of these functions.

In a civilized society, there is a separation of executive, legislative and judicial powers. In addition to the traditional media, it is well-known to all that we have the new online media. The House News, an online media, had been stifled and no longer existed. This is the Fifth Estate of the community and it seems that it has reached a state of being "lawless". The Police sometimes arrest some people for disseminating some inappropriate comments online. Does the Government have such an idea? The Government stated that it is my political concern and such situations have not yet happened.

I had asked at least three veteran commentators on current issues and China affairs whether they believed that the Innovation and Technology Bureau would work wholeheartedly for the development of technology. All of them, without exception, said that they did not believe so. How can one have such belief? Indeed, we should have trust. LEUNG Chun-ying often mentions external forces and says that he will inform us what these forces are at the appropriate time. This is all bullshit!

Of course, foreign places are not perfect but there is trust between the people and the government. Has the United States Government trampled on human rights or civil rights? It definitely has. After the 911 incident, the USA Patriot Act widely trampled on civil rights. The Government has extensive power; it can intercept phone calls and emails, and can install detectaphones and so on in civilians' homes. These measures, though controversial, are acceptable to the people in the United States. We do not need to worry for them because they presume that the Government dares not go too far under the relevant system. They presume and believe that the Government basically wants to help the people; it will not overly trample on civil rights and it adopts such measures for the sake of their safety. However, the situation in Hong Kong is exactly the LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014 1041 opposite. The Government has come up with some arrangements that seems acceptable and almost risk-free, and it asks people to "pocket it first". It wants us to accept it first and only realize later that we have been thoroughly cheated.

President, some people said, "Claudia concerns herself with individuals but not with facts. Since she is against LEUNG Chun-ying, she definitely opposes the establishment of the Innovation and Technology Bureau". I am not only against LEUNG Chun-ying; he is just a person after all, as opposed to the entire system … in Hong Kong, the so-called "one country, two systems" and "a high degree of autonomy" have completely broken down, and no one believes in them anymore. I am against this system; I am concerned with individuals as well as with facts. I definitely oppose the establishment of this Bureau.

President, some say that the establishment of this Bureau is a kind of political reward. When LEUNG Chun-ying stood for election in the Chief Executive election, some people from certain sectors had made a lot of contributions and they should now be rewarded. We cannot instantly comment on this claim, but we are familiar with the way LEUNG Chun-ying handled personnel issues after he served as the Chief Executive. The establishment of the Innovation and Technology Bureau would only bring harm but not benefits to Hong Kong. So, what should be done to our development, research and technology talents? Of course, development may continue and talents can be recruited if necessary, but it is not necessary to deliberately hived off the functions relating to technology and commerce. Is there anything to be afraid of? Even transportation and housing affairs can be put together … If the Government is determined to go ahead with the restructuring, I will certainly say that it intently wants this new Policy Bureau to become a Policy Bureau for ideological control.

Thank you.

MR WONG YUK-MAN (in Cantonese): President, the LEUNG Chun-ying administration claims that in order to promote the development of Hong Kong's innovation and technology industry, it needs to restructure the existing Commerce and Economic Development Bureau and create the Innovation and Technology Bureau. Since LEUNG Chun-ying's assumption of office, the existing 12 Policy Bureaux have frequently made policy blunders during their two years' operation; the recent delay of the construction of the Express Rail Link, the controversies 1042 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014 over the "three landfills and one incinerator", as well as the Northeast New Territories development plan have all reflected the incompetence and impotence of government officials. With the establishment of the Innovation and Technology Bureau, the consequence will be evident.

When TUNG Chee-hwa proposed the implementation of an accountability system for principal officials in his 2000 Chief Executive's policy address, I wrote an article entitled "Where is the element of accountability in an accountability system?". I pointed out in the article that "without elections by universal and equal suffrage as its basis, the accountability system will surely be riddled with obstacles and difficult to proceed". The various changes made to the accountability system over the past 10 years or so have only been superficial in nature, and the SAR Government is still an autocracy with all power concentrated on the Chief Executive, diametrically opposed to the principles of democracy.

After LEUNG Chun-ying took office, the deficiencies of the executive-led autocracy have been clearly evident. While opening up the free television market is the common consensus and reasonable expectation of all Hong Kong people, LEUNG Chun-ying obstinately antagonized members of the public, ignored the views of the Office of the Communications Authority and the members of the Executive Council, and rejected the licence application of the Hong Kong Television Network Limited. In reply to media enquiries, Executive Council members and Gregory SO, the Secretary for Commerce and Economic Development, could only equivocate as they found it difficult to defend themselves. This incident has fully underlined the authoritarian and headstrong personality of LEUNG Chun-ying. The Chief Executive election has long been a farce underpinning the direct appointment by the Communist Party of China, and, being not elected by universal and equal suffrage, the Chief Executive is not held accountable to the 7 million Hong Kong people. Furthermore, since black-box operation that disregards procedural justice has emerged and the operation of the entire Government hinges upon the likes and dislikes of the Chief Executive himself, people inside and outside the establishment are perplexed. Under such an operation mode, the boundary between policy formulation and policy implementation is blurred, and senior officials playing ambiguous roles can only act according to the subjective will of the autocratic Chief Executive, thus giving rise to the phenomenon of "talents being treated as lackeys, and lackeys treated as talents". In the case of Paul CHAN, the Secretary for Development, for example, the former accountant is totally ignorant about land policies, but he was appointed a Bureau Director for the reason that he supported LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014 1043

LEUNG Chun-ying in contending for the office of Chief Executive. And, since he followed LEUNG Chun-ying's strategy and forcefully implemented the Northeast New Territories development plan, people seethed with anger, leading to the charging of the Legislative Council Complex in June.

The establishment of the Innovation and Technology Bureau for the promotion of the relevant industry has superficially responded to the aspirations of public opinion representatives, such as Mr Charles Peter MOK, Mr SIN Chung-kai and Dr Elizabeth QUAT as well as that of the industry, but the formulation and implementation of policies must be based on the subjective will of LEUNG Chun-ying, and the public can in no way monitor and participate in the formulation of the relevant policies.

Before taking office, LEUNG Chun-ying put forward the proposal on restructuring the organization of the Government into five Secretaries of Departments and 14 Directors of Bureaux in May 2012, including the addition of two Deputy Secretaries of Departments to share the work of the Chief Secretary for Administration and the Financial Secretary, and the setting up of the Culture Bureau and the Innovation and Technology Bureau to oversee the relevant policies. At that time, I pointed out that the restructuring was gratuitous, and I participated in the filibustering exercise at meetings of the Finance Committee to stop the passage of the funding proposal. Today the SAR Government again proposes the establishment of the Innovation and Technology Bureau, and the proposal is similar with the one put forward two years ago in terms of the contents. It is believed that the relevant resolution will be passed at the Legislative Council meeting, but the funding application will not get passed so easily at the Finance Committee meeting.

The SAR Government disregards public opinions in its governance, and it upholds rationalism in its policy formulation in many cases. As such, inhumane measures, such as adjusting the Comprehensive Social Security Assistance rates on the basis of the Consumer Price Index, and increasing the tobacco tax rates to force people to quit smoking, have been implemented. Wan CHAN, a cultural critic who used to oversee cultural affairs at the Home Affairs Bureau, talks about rationalism in his book titled《香港城邦論》 (Hong Kong City-State Theory). "Rampant rationalism in politics is the belief that the Government can use its professional know-how and comprehensive planning to enable its people to live a reasonable and happy life; the disbelief in people's individual efforts, attempts and experiments, and the view that under an institutional framework that is 1044 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014 meticulously designed and thoroughly orchestrated, members of the public can fully be content with their respective position and be fulfilled towards premeditated development objectives … Bureaucratic rationalism upheld by the Hong Kong communists is extremely mesmerizing for the reason that it is covered with a veneer of the rule of law inherited from the previous governments, and ordinary Hong Kong people are thus kept in the dark …".

Bureaucratic rationalism fits in perfectly with autocracy, and officials only believe in their own professional know-how and comprehensive planning, denying public participation and formulating policies having no regard to external circumstances. The composition of modern society is so complicated that officials who keep themselves aloof from public opinions actually find it difficult to balance the rights and interests of various different groups in society. If the delicate balance is broken, public resistance will be aroused. As the SAR Government endeavours to silence the people and treats public opinions as great scourges, no wonder it has made a series of mistakes in its governance.

Having long been dominated by finance and real estate, the Hong Kong economy lacks real productive activities such as industry and agriculture, and since income increases lag far behind consumer prices, students with excellent academic performance will either follow the trend to enrol in business programmes, or go all the way to Europe or America to pursue their career development in local innovation and technology industries. They dare not venture into the innovation and technology industry in Hong Kong.

The median monthly income of young people in Hong Kong in 2011 was $8,000, same as that of 10 years ago in 2001. If Hong Kong graduates aspire to starting up a business in the innovation and technology industry, they will first need a large amount of start-up money to cope with exorbitant rents; they then have to face up to the pressure from conservative family members and friends, and in case they fail, they are unable to make ends meet. Naturally, they are hesitant about venturing on innovation and technology.

In year 2011-2012, among the students admitted to research postgraduate programmes funded by the University Grants Committee, only 27% were local students, while 65% came from China and 7% from other places. Many Chinese research postgraduate students only regard Hong Kong as a springboard for better employment opportunities and foreign citizenship. As social environment does not allow Hong Kong students to embrace a venturesome spirit, and there is a LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014 1045 continuous outflow of relevant talents and technologies, if the SAR Government refuses to change the political system and economic structure in the belief that the mere establishment of a new Policy Bureau can promote the development of innovation and technology, it is no different from fishing in the air.

The proposed Innovation and Technology Bureau will take over from the Communications and Technology Branch of the Commerce and Economic Development Bureau the Innovation and Technology Commission and the Office of the Government Chief Information Officer, and form the Innovation and Technology Branch. The original Communications and Technology Branch of the Commerce and Economic Development Bureau will be restructured as the Communications and Creative Industries Branch to be primarily responsible for policies on communications, broadcasting and creative industries. Originally, the Communications and Technology Branch of the Commerce and Economic Development Bureau oversees the Innovation and Technology Commission, the Office of the Government Chief Information Officer and the Create Hong Kong, but the Government now intends to run the three divisions through two Policy Bureaux. This is obviously a superfluous move.

When the Panel on Information Technology and Broadcasting of the Legislative Council discussed the Innovation and Technology Bureau, the pro-establishment camp and Members with business background generally expressed their support. Mr Christopher CHUNG and Mr MA Fung-Kwok, who both belong to the business sector, point out that film production requires a lot of technologies, so Create Hong Kong should be placed under the Innovation and Technology Bureau. In that case, does that mean that the purview of the Innovation and Technology Bureau will be almost the same as that of the original Communications and Technology Branch of the Commerce and Economic Development Bureau? Since creative industries are closely connected with innovation and technology, why must the original department be divided into two that will incur an additional expenditure of some $29 million?

The document of the Government in 2012 was loaded with phrases such as "formulate a comprehensive policy", "support the development of infrastructure", "encourage synergy" and "integrate the development". The document this year adds such expressions as "dedicated high level leadership" and "devise further measures". We have endured three years of empty talk without the provision of any concrete support, infrastructure, training and research proposal. Even regarding the existing Research and Development Cash Rebate Scheme, the 1046 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014

University-Industry Collaboration Programme, the Small Entrepreneur Research Assistance Programme as well as the five research and development centres of the Innovation and Technology Commission, the Government has failed to state clearly what measures the Innovation and Technology Bureau will roll out to enhance the relevant work. The Government only repeats empty words such as "strengthening the linkages among stakeholders", "creating synergy" and "a more focused purview". All these nonsense are the forte of the Government. The phrases I referred to just now are applicable to any Policy Bureau and any policy. The Government is used to using abstract words, which are perceptual and impractical. Empty talk is the forte of LEUNG Chun-ying.

Take for example the duty of "co-ordinating inter-bureau policy efforts of areas such as working with the Environment Bureau and Environmental Protection Department on renewable energy and waste management technologies" as set out in the document. The difficulties faced by the waste recycling industry include difficulties in recycling, high transport costs, insufficient capital, remote locations of environmental parks and no outlet for finished products. Even in the absence of the Innovation and Technology Bureau, the Commerce and Economic Development Bureau will co-ordinate the relevant work with the Environment Bureau and the Development Bureau. Is that right, Secretary? In connection with the purview of the Innovation and Technology Bureau, as the Government cannot change the daily habits of businesses and residents in the handling of wastes to facilitate recycling, and it does not help local agricultural and industrial development for developing a market that can absorb recycled products, the Innovation and Technology Bureau will be rendered totally useless, and the public expenditure of some $29 million newly incurred each year will naturally be wasted.

The entire document only summarizes the policy responsibilities of the Innovation and Technology Bureau, with no clear description of any new policy measures, no clear delineation of work and tasks, and no clear description of the functions and powers of the posts newly created. I can say for sure that during the operation of the Innovation and Technology Bureau, the situation in which Policy Bureaux shirk their respective responsibilities and clash and contradict with one another in terms of policy implementation will surely emerge, plunging the governance of the SAR Government into chaos.

The responsibility of the Legislative Council is to monitor government governance on behalf of the people. Public opinion representatives are LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014 1047 duty-bound to stop any superfluous move by the SAR Government under false pretenses and ensure the proper use of public money. The speeches made by many Members who support the establishment of the Innovation and Technology Bureau are full of platitudes, that is, it will promote technological development of Hong Kong. Can they alone make such accomplishment? Can the establishment of such a bureau alone make such accomplishment? Mrs Regina IP talked about Singapore and Taiwan just now, but these places do not merely rely upon a government department for developing technology industries. In the case of Taiwan, for example, in early 1970s, LI Kwoh-ting already established a science park in Hsinchu for facilitating economic transformation. An economy of this kind must develop high technology, rather than focusing on export processing and foreign trade. In Hsinchu today, the Hsinchu Science Park continues to co-operate with National Tsing Hua University in terms of development and education. Taiwan started to do so decades ago, and many graduates of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology in the United States also return to Taiwan for brand development. Taiwan has already invented technological products, but our development of innovation and technology nowadays still stays at the stage of application. Even Shenzhen is as different from us as chalk is from cheese, let alone Taiwan.

Can the mere establishment of a bureau help promote innovation and technology and assist the industry? A better approach is the allocation of more funding by the Government for training talents. Where are the talents? I have offered an explanation just now. Where are the talents? The outflow of talents is ongoing, and university students in Hong Kong will not study the relevant academic subjects given the difficulties in getting employed. What is the point of establishing a bureau when the Government is unable to resolve the structural problem? I will not proceed from a political perspective and unlike Ms Claudia MO and other Members, I will not oppose a proposal merely for the reason that it is put forward by LEUNG Chun-ying. Even from a practical perspective, the establishment of an Innovation and Technology Bureau will be undesirable.

The pan-democratic camp speaks with menace and champions non-co-operation movement recently, but I fail to understand why some pan-democratic Members support the establishment of the Innovation and Technology Bureau and continuously persuade others to be supportive. This is a kind of schizophrenia.

1048 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014

I will vote against this resolution, and at the same time, I urge pan-democratic Members to initiate confrontation in the Finance Committee regarding the relevant funding application, and prevent the relevant funding proposal from being passed.

President, I so submit and oppose the resolution.

(Mr CHAN Chi-chuen stood up)

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Mr CHAN Chi-chuen, what is your question?

MR CHAN CHI-CHUEN (in Cantonese): I request a headcount.

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Will the Clerk please ring the bell to summon Members back to the Chamber.

(After the summoning bell had been rung, a number of Members returned to the Chamber)

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Mr CHUNG Kwok-pan, please speak.

MR CHUNG KWOK-PAN (in Cantonese): President, just now many Members have asked why creativity and patent are not included in the scope of work of the Innovation and Technology Bureau. It would surely be nice to have them included, yet it does not matter if they are not. If the Bureau focuses on innovation and technology and does a good work, it would be fine. President, I went to three European countries with other Members for duty visit in September and found that Finland is a good example of success. If this Council approves the establishment of the Innovation and Technology Bureau, it may draw on the Finnish experience. Just now, we held a press conference at 3 pm to specifically present the successful case of the Finnish Funding Agency for Innovation (Tekes).

LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014 1049

President, the resources that Finland put into innovation and technology in 2012 accounted for 3.6% of the country's GDP; while in Hong Kong, the percentage was only 0.7%. With a population of merely 5 million, Finland is not as rich as Hong Kong, and does not have a fiscal reserve of $3,000 billion, yet it has attained great success. The major reason lies in the efforts made by Tekes. Tekes has sponsored two well-known successful enterprises. The first one is Nokia, which was once the world's largest manufacturer of mobile phones; and the second one is the enterprise that creates the game Angry Birds with a market value of more than $10 billion. Actually, if you are willing to put in more resources, the success of one or two enterprises or projects is enough to recover the cost, however huge the amount is.

In Finland, Tekes put in $20 billion for technological research in 2014. Let us look at the Innovation and Technology Fund (ITF) of Hong Kong. Since 1990, only $5 billion had been used, meaning that only several hundred million dollars were granted each year; what can be done with that amount of money is obvious. Tekes pays attention to the market situation and keeps looking for areas worthy of investment. It then plays a proactive role in investment, targeting mainly at small and medium enterprises (SMEs). If SMEs have any ideas, they can propose to Tekes, and experts from Tekes will discuss with the SME concerned to see if there are any feasible or potential proposals, and the SME will then be invited to submit an application. However, in the context of Hong Kong, such practice will be regarded as collusion between the Government and the business sector. Nonetheless, in a country with a population of only 5 million, people will go ahead to do what they consider practicable and desirable, and they certainly will not consider such practice collusion between the Government and business.

Moreover, similar to the case of Hong Kong, the funds of Tekes are in the forms of loans and subsidies. For loans, Tekes lends money to enterprises for research and development. Yet as we know, the failure rate with technological research is fairly high. For most enterprises or SMEs, failure may mean a total loss. However, it turns out that they may not have to repay the loans. Even if the technological research resulted in failure, the enterprises or SMEs concerned need not repay the loans provided that reasonable explanations are given. This practice encourages many enterprises to take risks. Hence, if enterprises have new ideas, they are willing to try them out. The abovementioned practice has provided great incentive to enterprises with innovative ideas. For some 1050 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014 successful cases, Tekes will even provide additional funds to the enterprises to venture into the international market. That is why for a country with a population of merely 5 million, there are companies such as Nokia, which was once the world's largest manufacturer of mobile phones. This is indeed a remarkable feat. It is exactly due to the Government's all-out funding support that Finland can develop its technological research industry.

In Hong Kong, although we have ITF as well as the Innovation and Technology Commission, the biggest problem lies in the fact that the ITF only grants several hundred million dollars a year. Moreover, if SMEs wish to apply for funding, the voluminous application forms will scare off most of them. As it is indeed too complicated to fill in the forms, most SMEs simply drop the idea. Surely, we also know that there are some successful cases. I guess we still recall that The Hong Kong Polytechnic University had once developed the electric vehicle MyCar, and all the research funds came from the ITF. However, the most embarrassing fact is that the Hong Kong Government did not acquire MyCar; instead, the GreenTech Automotive, a automobile manufacturer in the United States, made the acquisition. The Government then changed its stance and said that it supported Hong Kong products. I opine that if this Council approves the establishment of the Innovation and Technology Bureau, the SAR Government should draw on the good example of Finland and change its mindset on innovation and technology.

Thank you, President.

DR LAM TAI-FAI (in Cantonese): President, "Good medicine tastes bitter but cure diseases; sincere advice offends the ears but helps improve conduct". This saying is, however, not applicable in Hong Kong nowadays, particularly in the political arena. The truth is, if a politician makes a remark which offends the ears, albeit a sincere one, he has to pay a price. On the other hand, although some people have made impertinent remarks, they do not have to take the blame.

President, the Chief Executive has all along been regarded as an eloquent speaker and he has been commended by many people for his rhetorical skills. However, when he spoke recently, his mind was in turmoil, making frequent slips and gaffes. After he spoke, he had to make clarifications to set things right. His supporters, feeling jumpy, can only shake their heads and sigh.

LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014 1051

President, the Central Authorities do not accept civil nomination, and the reason is simple enough, for the proposal does not comply with the Basic Law, but the Chief Executive said that the reason was related to 1 million grass-roots people earning $14,000 a month. He really speaks to attain a shocking effect.

We know that in an advanced and civilized society, sports is regarded as an industry. However, the Chief Executive said that sports had no contribution to the economy of Hong Kong. His comment infuriated the sports sector and we are really at a loss …

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Dr LAM Tai-fai, how is your remarks related to the question?

DR LAM TAI-FAI (in Cantonese): President, wisdom and patience are prerequisites for listening to my speech (Laughter). You are certainly a wise man, if you can be more patient and bear with me for 15 seconds more, you will know that what I said is actually relevant.

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Are you a member of the Chinese People's Political Consultative Conference?

DR LAM TAI-FAI (in Cantonese): President, I guess Occupy Central must have given the Chief Executive many sleepless nights and that is why he made wrong comments. As such, we can only brace up, be tolerant with him and forgive him. Nevertheless, the Chief Executive must understand that even if all of us support him, he has to perform well in dealing with people and handling matters. He should not speak carelessly any more, otherwise both he and Hong Kong will have no future. Although he does not kill Hong Kong, Hong Kong dies because of him, so to speak.

President, I will now get to the main theme. When the Chief Executive took office in 2012, he made a big fanfare, declaring to set up a Cultural Bureau and an Innovation and Technology Bureau. Although he put forward his ambitious plans in an imposing manner, the timing was not right. As the 1052 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014 proposals were inherently deficient and inadequately planned, they failed completely and miserably and nothing had been achieved.

President, honestly speaking, the incumbent Chief Executive is more hard-nosed than his two predecessors. He is persevering and indomitable, and has an unyielding spirit as that of a cockroach. Besides, his capable assistant Mrs Fanny LAW, who is as good "a fighter" as Carrie LAM, has racked her brains, paved the way and liaised with all sides to set up the Innovation and Technology Bureau. All in all, she will not stop until the goal is achieved.

Strangely, however, when the Government puts forward its proposal to establish a new Policy Bureau this time around, it has discarded the initial idea of setting up the Cultural Bureau. Of course, I do not know why the Government has not proposed to establish the Cultural Bureau and it has not explained to the public as well. Such an approach will certainly attract criticisms that the Government has attached importance to technology but ignored culture.

President, supporters of the Innovation and Technology Bureau and the Government often say that technology development will enhance Hong Kong's competitiveness and contribute significantly to our economic development and GDP. President, although there is certain truth in this argument, rapid economic development is not the only thing that Hong Kong needs. The most important things for us now are: national prosperity and peace for the people, social harmony and stability, solidarity of the people, and support of the SAR Government to rule in accordance with the law.

The truth is, even if a society or country is financially strong, if it suffers from dissension, deep-rooted conflicts, confrontations between the government and the people and poor relationship between the executive and the legislature, no matter what Policy Bureau is to be established, the government and the people will not be happy and certainly, the society or country will not be good place to live and work in. That is also true for Hong Kong.

President, why do I insist on establishing a Cultural Bureau? The reason is that if a society can attain good cultural development, the quality of the government and its people will naturally be enhanced. People will have a greater sense of social responsibility, and they will be more law-abiding, reasonable, honest, sincere, tolerant, understanding and caring. Therefore, I LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014 1053 really cannot understand why the Government has abandoned the idea of establishing a Cultural Bureau and merely proposed to set up an Innovation and Technology Bureau. It owes Hong Kong people an explanation.

In fact, the integrated powers of a country or a society are assessed not only in terms of its economic, military and technology strengths, but also its soft cultural strength which is also very important. Therefore, if we were to choose to set up one Policy Bureau between these two, I support setting up a Cultural Bureau first and leave the establishment of an Innovation and Technology Bureau for further discussion.

President, recently, I have heard some views supporting the establishment of the Innovation and Technology Bureau which offends my ears. Such views are shallow, superficial and illogical. People in support of the establishment of the Innovation and Technology Bureau say that innovation and technology development are very important and if we intend to support innovation and technology, we must set up the relevant Bureau; otherwise, development of innovation and technology can hardly have good progress. In their words, refusing to support the establishment of the Innovation and Technology Bureau is tantamount to refusing to support innovation and technology development. President, I totally fail to understand and do not accept such an illogical and distorted argument. There is really no logical relationship between setting up the Innovation and Technology Bureau and supporting innovation and technology development.

President, the Government has, it its second attempt, proposed to establish the Innovation and Technology Bureau but dropped the idea of establishing a Cultural Bureau. In analysing the mentality and reasoning of these people, we can conclude that the Government only attaches importance to technology development and ignores cultural development. As a matter of fact, to support innovation and technology development, we do not necessarily have to establish the Innovation and Technology Bureau. As in the case that the Government has said time and again that it supports sports development, it has never considered setting up a Sports Bureau. If supporting a certain industry necessitates the establishment of a corresponding Policy Bureau, then the Government should concurrently or firstly establish a Sports Bureau or a Cultural Bureau.

1054 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014

President, innovation and technology development can be promoted in various ways and by different means. Who can guarantee that the establishment of an Innovation and Technology Bureau will bring rapid development and big progress in innovation and technology in Hong Kong?

President, I hope that people who support the establishment of the Innovation and Technology Bureau will not arbitrarily put labels on those who do not and denounce them of not supporting innovation and technology development. People may have important reasons for not supporting the Government's proposal to set up the said Bureau, for example, they do not have confidence in the ability of the Government.

As a matter of fact, the performances of many existing Policy Bureaux, particularly the Education Bureau and the Development Bureau, are disappointing. Therefore, many believe that establishing a new Policy Bureau by such a weak government will probably result in failure. Furthermore, people have no idea who will be the Director of Bureau and his competence is still uncertain. President, no task can be accomplished without a good leader. Many people wonder if there are valiant generals or five-star generals available for deployment by the Chief Executive to take up the task. Therefore, giving our support blindly is very risky.

President, the current situation in Hong Kong is chaotic and we do not know when Occupy Central will end. As the promotion of constitutional reform is riddled with many obstacles and difficulties, the Government should focus on the task without being distracted. It should first make all-out effort to focus on the promotion of constitution reform and implement the election of the Chief Executive by universal suffrage in 2017. That is why when Mrs Fanny LAW approached me earlier, I asked her to postpone the discussion on establishing the Innovation and Technology Bureau until the completion of the work on constitutional reform. I advised her to be tolerant and wait for a better timing. Unfortunately, she had not treated my words seriously.

President, today the Government proposes to establish a new bureau at the wrong time, and without the favourable conditions and public support. Should problems arise in connection with this Bureau, who is going to resolve them and who can render support? Carrie LAM is surely a "good fighter", but she is neither a superwoman nor an iron woman. The work on constitutional reform LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014 1055 has already given her enough headaches, how can she spare the time to handle additional problems? Besides, other Policy Bureaux, namely the Education Bureau, the Transport and Housing Bureau and the Development Bureau may also have problems at any time. Thus, the Government should reserve its time and energy to oversee these three Policy Bureaux. The Financial Secretary John TSANG has to closely monitor our economy and financial market, assess the impact of Occupy Central, plan for remedial actions and pay overseas visits to explain the current situation of Hong Kong. Therefore, I believe he will not have the time to monitor this new Policy Bureau.

President, why can't we wait but insist on taking such a big risk at this time? If a new Policy Bureau is established at a later time, will this cause irrecoverable damage to the technology development of Hong Kong?

President, the other saying is that the Government worries that Mr Gregory SO cannot cope with so much work, and hence it has deliberately taken away the work on technology from his portfolio. I think this argument does not hold water. As pointed out by a Member earlier, the Transport and Housing Bureau has to handle a lot of work too, why does the Government not split that Bureau into two? Another example is the Constitutional and Mainland Affairs Bureau. Although it has to handle a substantial amount of work, the Government has not set up two bureaux to separately take up the work on constitutional affairs and Mainland affairs.

Hence, the Government proposes to establish a new bureau to fulfil a pledge or a promise made by Chief Executive in his manifesto, or to "foot the bill" so to speak. The intention is not right. I believe the new bureau may not be able to sustain because the next Chief Executive may disapprove LEUNG Chun-ying's approach, abolish the Innovation and Technology Bureau and transfer the policy responsibilities to the Commerce and Economic Development Bureau again. Members of the public will then be baffled by the ever-changing Government policies.

President, if we do not establish the Innovation and Technology Bureau now, will innovation and technology development in Hong Kong fail to make any progress? Or if innovation and technology development remain under the purview of the Commerce and Economic Development Bureau headed by Secretary Gregory SO, will the result be necessarily poor? Has the Government 1056 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014 ever tried to give full support to Secretary Gregory SO to undertake the work, or has the Government asked Gregory SO to undertake the work but he was incompetent and failed to deliver? Soon after the Chief Executive took office, he wanted to split up the Commerce and Economic Development Bureau by hiving off the programme areas on communication and technology. Perhaps Secretary Gregory SO, thinking that innovation and technology would sooner or later be taken away from his purview, has not made the best effort, but that does not mean that he fails to perform, just that he has not tried hard enough.

I remember Mr CHAN Chi-chuen said in his speech last week that Secretary Gregory SO had not lobbied his support for the proposal; in fact, Secretary Gregory SO had not lobbied my support as well. I do not blame the Secretary because I understand the reasons for it. Secretary Gregory SO does not want to surrender the powers related to the programme areas which he has not strived to undertake to another person; hence, he has adopted a relaxed attitude and has not lobbied for Members' support to establish the Innovation and Technology Bureau. I understand that as a proactive Director of Bureau, he will probably consider the Government's decision unfair. If Members do not believe me, they can listen carefully to the Secretary's speech to be made on behalf of the Government later. I expect that he will only make a mundane speech lacking in strong justifications or supportive data and simply ask us to support the establishment of the Innovation and Technology Bureau.

Since there is a lack of support for the proposal even within the Government, why do I have to support the proposal indiscriminately? President, do you agree with me? You do, don't you? The Government may say that Secretary Gregory SO does not know technology well, but Eddie NG is not familiar with education as well, am I right? And Mr NG still assumes the responsibilities. Although Paul CHAN is an accountant by profession, he can still handle the big project of the development of Northeast New Territories. Therefore, why does the Government not give Secretary Gregory SO a chance to promote innovation and technology development? I think the decision is very unfair to him and is belittling him and I strongly object to it.

Actually, the Government cannot be sure that the new Director of Bureau will definitely be more capable than Secretary Gregory SO. Therefore, I hope Secretary Gregory SO can reveal to us directly or indirectly when he speaks later the name of the prospective Director of Bureau, so that I can judge whether he is LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014 1057 competent for the job. This piece of information will also affect my support or otherwise of the Innovation and Technology Bureau at this stage or later on. In fact, at this chaotic stage before the passage of the constitutional reform, I support postponing the discussion on establishing the Innovation and Technology Bureau so that the entire Government can make good use of this period of time to promote, with concerted efforts, the constitutional reform and implement universal suffrage for the Chief Executive election in 2017. This approach will also give Secretary Gregory SO another chance to lead his department and staff to exert themselves in promoting innovation and technology development. This approach can save public expenditures on setting up a new Policy Bureau and recruiting new staff, and can also remove the risks of failure. Therefore, I give my support to Secretary Gregory SO to continue to lead Hong Kong in innovation and technology development.

President, I so submit.

MR GARY FAN (in Cantonese): President, I speak to oppose the establishment of the Innovation and Technology Bureau.

When a company, an organization or a government makes a decision to establish a department, it must clearly specify the objectives of that department. It must put forward arguments and keep the stakeholders informed of the progress of the implementation of the relevant projects, as well as provide convincing reasons to prove that making the decision to establish the department will achieve the objectives. A responsible proponent should also carefully assess the costs and the risks involved in making that decision and find out if it will be cost-effective to establish the department.

Regarding the Government's strong desire to establish the Innovation and Technology Bureau, has it gone through the aforesaid decision making process, so as to be accountable to Legislative Council Members or the public? President, I am sorry that I do not think such work has been done.

(THE PRESIDENT'S DEPUTY, MR ANDREW LEUNG, took the Chair)

1058 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014

To put it simply, in establishing the Innovation and Technology Bureau, the Government aims to enhance our productivity through innovation and technology research and development. It sounds that the Government has a vision, but what should be done practically and specifically? According to the government paper tabled in the Council, "the new Innovation and Technology Bureau is to strengthen, both in depth and breadth, policy support for the development of innovation and technology. The Secretary for Innovation and Technology will provide the devoted strategic leadership of this new bureau and lead the Innovation and Technology Bureau in the formulation of holistic policies, oversee execution, and monitor the outcome."

Deputy President, I think the official who drafted this paper has done a lot of metaphysics research. He has used words such as "depth", "breadth", "devoted" and "holistic". The paper contains all the conditions for the accomplishment of a magnificent task. What is the present situation of the development of the innovation and technology industry in Hong Kong? What are the advantages and disadvantages or deficiencies? Upon the establishment of the Innovation and Technology Bureau, how will it lead Hong Kong towards the gradual achievement of these great objectives? Deputy President and Honourable colleagues, this point is missing in the government paper. Why has the Government failed to provide such important information and background? A very simple reason is that the Government has not conducted an in-depth study. Why should the Innovation and Technology Bureau be established to achieve these objectives? At least, the Government should put forward arguments along two paths and give Members of this Council an explanation.

About the first path, the great objectives for the establishment of the Innovation and Technology Bureau were actually the responsibilities undertaken by the Commerce and Economic Development Bureau and government officials in the past. Why is it that these responsibilities cannot be taken up by the present Commerce and Economic Development Bureau and that a new bureau has to be established for such responsibilities? Is it because of the lack of insight and poor leadership of the Secretary for Commerce and Economic Development Gregory SO, or because the officials of the former regimes were too busy and could not focus on the work? Is it because the Commerce and Economic Development Bureau has inadequate resources as the saying goes, "one cannot make bricks without straw" or is it because there are problems with the existing education system, industrial structure and scientific research standards LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014 1059 such that they fail to support innovation and technology development in Hong Kong? Deputy President, if the problems lie in our education system, industrial structure and scientific research standards, such problems cannot be easily solved by establishing the Innovation and Technology Bureau.

Nevertheless, the Government has turned a blind eye to the series of questions I just raised. Deputy President, at the meeting of the Information Technology and Broadcasting Panel earlier, a number of Members asked Secretary Gregory SO the following questions: What specific policies have been devised by the Bureau which has been under his leadership for two years? What vision does it have? Have the relevant policies been implemented and how effective are they? What are the restrictions or limitations? Are these restrictions related to personnel matters or the structure, or are there other factors? The Secretary had either failed to answer the questions or given irrelevant answers. He grinned cheekily as usual and he had not seriously responded to the questions raised by Members.

Deputy President, I have just mentioned that the Government should at least put forward arguments along two paths to convince us and members of the public to support the establishment of the Innovation and Technology Bureau. I will now discuss the second path. In the past, the Government did not make much contribution to innovation and technology development and no great achievements have been attained. Therefore, the Government does not have much understanding of the present situation of scientific research development in Hong Kong, and the supporting policies that should be implemented. Nonetheless, the Government can at least learn from the experiences of other countries. In addition to relying on the establishment of a high-ranking special department for scientific development, it should consider other objective conditions or processes that can serve as reference. It should also examine if Hong Kong currently has these conditions; if not, how can the Innovation and Technology Bureau lead Hong Kong's development step by step? Yet, the Commerce and Economic Development Bureau has done little work. Many people in support of the establishment of the Innovation and Technology Bureau have cited the success examples of Taiwan, Singapore or South Korea, three of the Four Asian Dragons, in scientific research development, so as to reflect that the technology industry in Hong Kong is lagging behind and it must catch up rapidly.

1060 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014

These observations are correct but if we expect the Innovation and Technology Bureau to solve all these problems, I would have much reservation. The sloppy preparation made by the Government for the preliminary research of the Innovation and Technology Bureau is worrying indeed. In a nutshell, the Government under the administration of LEUNG Chun-ying simply cannot win the trust of the public. Deputy President, since the Commerce and Economic Development Bureau has failed to compare other countries and Hong Kong in terms of scientific research processes and outcomes, I would try to do so and make some comparisons.

The Governments of the Four Asian Dragons established special departments to formulate scientific research policies long ago. Taiwan set up the National Science Council back in 1959 to specifically deal with scientific and technology research and development policies. In addition to the establishment of national policy ministries, a more important point is that these countries have a full set of supporting policies for talent cultivation and investment in support of the scientific research industry. In Singapore, a comprehensive talent cultivation policy has been formulated and there are training and internship programmes for senior secondary, college, university and post-graduate students. There are also scholarship programmes to ensure an adequate supply of research and development talents. In respect of support for the scientific research industry, South Korea started to make investment in 2009 and a total of US$20 billion has been put within five years to assist the development of key industries in the country.

In Hong Kong, although the Innovation and Technology Commission, the Applied Science and Technology Research Institute, the Cyberport and five research and development centres have been set up since 2000, what achievements can Hong Kong people see in these 10 years or so? Hong Kong people can only see sporadic projects without attaining concrete and specific results. In respect of talent cultivation, when Prof Lap-Chee TSUI, Vice-Chancellor of the , was about to leave office after serving at the university for 12 years, he attended a radio programme to share his experience as Vice-Chancellor. He clearly stated that the SAR Government did not provide sufficient scientific research funding to universities in Hong Kong, even Mainland universities had more funding. The Government's belated awareness in supporting the scientific research industry is another issue. The green bricks invented by Avantage Ventures which started operating in Hong LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014 1061

Kong in 2005 won a gold medal and a special prize in the China International Exhibition of Inventions. However, the Government had not played a leading role in promoting the bricks and had still imported large quantities of expensive foreign clay bricks each year. The Environment Bureau only started promoting the use of green bricks in October 2011, that is, seven years later.

Deputy President, the experiences of South Korea, Taiwan and Singapore told us that the establishment of a new bureau would not guarantee successful scientific research as we also need a responsible, proactive and aggressive government with development awareness. Such a government should have a range of policies on industrial development and education, complemented by government investment. Only then would we be able to achieve results and attain success.

Let us look at the SAR Government. LEUNG Chun-ying was only concerned about how he should respond to the earlier disclosure of his receiving of a rebate of $50 million. He racked his brain on how to obstruct the democratic development in Hong Kong and what to say on the equal suffrage of 70% of Hong Kong people earning less than $14,000 a month. He was just making efforts to deal with these issues. The Government claims to promote scientific research development, but it merely talks about its vision without formulating concrete measures or ideas. If Legislative Council Members still support the establishment of this new bureau today, I do not think we are being responsible.

I also believe that a lot of people who support the establishment of the Innovation and Technology Bureau have the idea that the establishment of the Bureau is better than nothing. Just give it a try. Even if the new bureau cannot make significant contribution, a little improvement may be made. However, Deputy President, sometimes not making an advancement is better than making the wrong advancement. While the objectives of establishing the Innovation and Technology Bureau are unclear and its specific functions not known, the establishment of a new bureau involves costs and risks. The total annual expenditure on staff salaries of the new bureau reaches $34 million to $35 million, excluding other regular operating expenses, as well as a range of funds for infrastructure, research and sponsorship. If these public funds are indiscriminately allocated with every party getting a share, wastage will be resulted, as in the case of the Mega Events Fund. Moreover, Hong Kong 1062 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014 people's support for the LEUNG Chun-ying Government hits new low, the lowest since he became the Chief Executive. Since Hong Kong people do not trust the continued governance of LEUNG Chun-ying, we should not support the establishment of the new bureau, so as to stop LEUNG Chun-ying from abusing power for personal gains and giving out political rewards.

Deputy President, what worries me more is that after the establishment of the new Innovation and Technology Bureau and the Secretary has taken up the post, we cannot remove him from office even if he is incompetent, as in the case of LEUNG Chun-ying who clings on to power. If the Secretary makes a bad start and leads the Bureau to a wrong direction, the scientific research development in Hong Kong will stick in the mire.

Since the Innovation and Technology Bureau will only operate as a research committee after its establishment, it would be better for the Government to adopt a simple, practical and pragmatic approach by setting up a research committee to study the scientific research dilemma confronting Hong Kong. It should also make reference to the successful cases in other countries and make preparations for the specific functions to be undertaken by the Innovation and Technology Bureau in the future. The research committee should then give a clear account to the Legislative Council and the general public. This may be a better way out.

Therefore, Deputy President, the answer is clear enough. I oppose the motion of the Secretary for Commerce and Economic Development and I ask the Government to conduct policy studies on the establishment of the Innovation and Technology Bureau before submitting the motion to the Legislative Council again.

Deputy President, I so submit.

MS CYD HO (in Cantonese): On behalf of the , I speak to oppose this resolution on the establishment of the Innovation and Technology Bureau. As a matter of fact, the issue has already been discussed in the previous term and Members agreed that Hong Kong's economy should have diversified development, especially when there is not much land for manufacturing purpose. Thus, the development of information technology (IT) could create more job LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014 1063 opportunities and bring benefits to the next generation. What is more, the IT industry is a high value-added industry, thus even though the ageing population has reduced the size of the working population, its higher economic value can make up for the shrinking population.

We visited Finland in September, as Mr CHUNG Kwok-pan has just mentioned. Finland has a fund called "Techie", with an annual provision of as high as $60 billion. This $60 billion is not arbitrarily set aside for yielding interest, but is allocated on a yearly basis. It is amazing for this tiny country to make such huge investment. It adheres to the principle of not fearing to invest in unyielding projects, knowing that the nurturing of creativity and new entrants is risky. Being well aware that creativity may not necessarily be turned into large-scale industries in the end, Finland is ready to take the risk. Nonetheless, there is much to be worried about the situation in Hong Kong, which dares not follow the same path. Why is that so? While one of the functions of this new Policy Bureau is to allocate provisions, funds (including the Mega Events Fund) previously examined by the Audit Commission had messy accounts and persons responsible had to testify before the Public Accounts Committee. What was the result? No one should be held responsible because only procedural problems were involved and the matter could be solved by making certain improvements.

Concerning the Film Development Fund, the Government is also reluctant to take any risk. The entire funding system only welcomes applications from members of the trade, while depriving new entrants of any chance. Therefore, Deputy President, systems that have worked well in other places may not be feasible in Hong Kong. As the saying goes, "things cannot be removed from the environment of origin". Why do good policies copied from other countries fail to work in Hong Kong? This is because our system allows corruption and wrongdoings, and people can get away with them easily. Given that similar cases have occurred in the past, how can we trust that a new Policy Bureau can be established under the LEUNG Chun-ying Government comprising mostly of political appointees linked to scandals of corruption?

Deputy President, the second example is Korea. Creative industries in Korea have taken off in the past decade, currently accounting for 5% of its Gross National Product. The cultural centre in Gwangju does not only oversee performing arts, but also engages in policy researches. Furthermore, supporting facilities are also found in Gwangju. Apart from an IT centre, an IT workshop 1064 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014 will be established in the future to enable young people to give play to their creativity. A full range of supporting facilities has been put in place. But what kind of support is most important? Last week, the Daily News conducted an exclusive interview with the leading female character of the Korean television series Jewel in the Palace. She highlighted one point, and that is, the development of creative industries must go hand in hand with a democratic and open society in order to achieve comprehensive development. She cited an example. In the past, female artists were prohibited by the South Korean Government to wear sleeveless tops in front of the camera. Under such stringent rules, what freedom and creativity could there be? If an artist is not allowed to dress revealing clothing to reflect a character, what is the point to talk about creativity? Regarding freedom, in Hong Kong, the Umbrella Square outside enjoys great freedom. As we can see, it is indeed a vivid exhibition zone. One may hang up or display their exhibits anywhere they like, and there is no need to abide by the rigid rules laid down by the Hong Kong Arts Development Council or the Leisure and Cultural Services Department. This is why the Umbrella Square is flooded with creativity. In fact, young people in Hong Kong are very creative, but unfortunately, they are stifled by our system.

Deputy President, today, we have to apologize to the industry because we have no choice but oppose the relevant amendment and the establishment of the new Policy Bureau. The reason is that, besides corruption, we are also gravely concerned that this Policy Bureau may become the tool of the LEUNG Chun-ying Government to suppress freedom of speech and the free flow of information on the Internet. As a matter of fact, more than a decade ago, we were already told by Internet service providers that public officers approached them from time to time, exerting intangible pressure on them to screen online information on their own initiatives.

If that is the situation in the absence of dedicated laws or designated public officers, we are really worried that with designated public officers and additional manpower, such kind of suppression will naturally escalate.

While Internet is intended to facilitate information flow so as to give full play to the freedom of speech, such freedom will be perceived by an undemocratic government as dangerous and threatening. We are very worried that this Policy Bureau will become the tool of suppression of the LEUNG Chun-ying Government. We also have an example at hand. When the RTHK LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014 1065

Programme Staff Union discussed with the Management (Administrative Officers deployed by the Government) about the details of the Producers' Guideline, the former's request to include missions such as safeguarding into the Guideline was rejected. If the Government is so afraid of the freedom of speech and the free flow of information, the establishment of the new Policy Bureau will not serve this purpose either.

We note that in the paper recently submitted by the Commission on Strategic Development to the Legislative Council, there are discussions on how Hong Kong should complement the National 13th Five-Year Plan and what roles Hong Kong should play. The paper also mentioned that the outcome of the relevant discussions will subsequently be submitted to the State Council. The purpose is to inform the Central Authorities of the role to be played by Hong Kong, so that a special chapter on Hong Kong will also be included in the National 13th Five-Year Plan. The chapter on financial affairs is particularly alarming, highlighting that Hong Kong and the Mainland should have a similar level of cyber security, which is really frightening. As Members may be aware, cyber security in the Mainland is used to suppress freedom of speech, or even monitor the uploading of speeches to the Internet, followed by arrests. With regard to the Mainland's cyber security, the meaning of the word "security" overlaps to a large extent with the term "national security" used by the Central Authorities, but differs greatly from the meaning of the word "security" used in Hong Kong, which prohibits cyber frauds. We are therefore extremely worried.

During our previous discussions, we asked if safeguarding of freedom of speech and free flow of information can be written into the law. This request was denied as the approach adopted by the Government in initiating legislative amendments is simply to add the relevant names to the Interpretation and General Clauses Ordinance, without mentioning the functions, policy objectives and missions. In the paper submitted by the Government, only positive information is presented, but those words are empty because the new bureau is nothing like the West Kowloon Cultural District Authority (WKCDA). The WKCDA is a statutory body with specific legislation and it has at least laid down certain missions, more than 10 of them. If in future anyone considers that the WKCDA has failed to comply with the missions, he can apply for a judicial review. However, in this case, the Government has simply added the name of the Policy Bureau to the Ordinance, which is as simple as having an extra seat or getting an additional pair of chopsticks in a meal. We feel so helpless. In case this Policy 1066 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014

Bureau suppresses freedom of speech in the future, there is nothing we can do to stop it.

Certainly, despite the various provisions in the legislation, we still cannot hold the Government responsible. For example, the Chief Executive and the politically appointed officials are all required to sign an Affirmation, specifying that they must be a person of integrity, dedicated to his or her duties. When people cast doubt on LEUNG Chun-ying, he chose to remain silent and we can do nothing about him. Though LEUNG Chun-ying has, during his tenure, received an outstanding sum of money from UGL and is bound by a commercial contract, which is tantamount to undertaking unauthorized outside job, and he still holds 30% of DTZ Japan's shares, he still refuses to admit that he has violated the provisions of a person of integrity, dedicated to his or her duties. Therefore, we do not feel at ease to rest this Policy Bureau in the hands of the LEUNG Chun-ying Government, incurring an additional expenditure of $35 million per year. We are gravely concerned that this Innovation and Technology Bureau may go astray and exercise its power to act as cyber police.

Here, I wish to apologize to the industry again, especially members of the trade who have been working very hard to promote the IT industry and dedicated to the sector for many years. Today, we have to oppose this resolution because we no confidence in LEUNG Chun-ying, whose previous performance does not deserve any trust from Hong Kong people. Therefore, the Labour Party opposes the establishment of this Policy Bureau under LEUNG Chun-ying's administration. In case LEUNG Chun-ying resigns and steps down and the next Chief Executive would like to relaunch the discussion about the establishment of the Innovation and Technology Bureau, we will be happy to start the discussion afresh.

Thank you, Deputy President.

DEPUTY PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Does any other Member wish to speak?

(No Member indicated a wish to speak)

LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014 1067

MR CHAN CHI-CHUEN (in Cantonese): Deputy President, I request a headcount.

DEPUTY PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Will the Clerk please ring the bell to summon Members back to the Chamber.

(After the summoning bell had been rung, a number of Members returned to the Chamber)

DEPUTY PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Does any other Member wish to speak?

(No Member indicated a wish to speak)

DEPUTY PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Secretary for Commerce and Economic Development, you may now speak on the amendments.

SECRETARY FOR COMMERCE AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT (in Cantonese): Deputy President, the amendments proposed by Mr Albert CHAN and Mr CHAN Chi-chuen may be classified into two major categories, namely postponing the establishment date of the Innovation and Technology Bureau, and changing the name of the new Policy Bureau.

On postponing the establishment date of the new Policy Bureau, there is a very strong and clear request among various sectors of the community, especially the innovation and technology sector, for the early establishment of a new Policy Bureau to focus on leading the development of Hong Kong's innovation and technology development. As I have said in my opening speech, the Panel of Information Technology and Broadcasting and the Panel on Commerce and Industry of the Legislative Council had both passed motions to support the early establishment of the new Policy Bureau.

The Government has been preparing in full steam for the relevant work over the last few months to facilitate the early establishment of the Innovation and Technology Bureau, so that Hong Kong can capitalize on the opportunities 1068 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014 brought about by technology development, and our economy can have a diversified and continuous growth. The preparation work concerned is now underway in full swing. We do not see there is any need to postpone the establishment date of the Innovation and Technology Bureau. Therefore, we object to any proposal on postponing the establishment date of the Innovation and Technology Bureau.

On the name of the new Policy Bureau, the new bureau will take over the policy responsibilities in innovation and technology from the existing Commerce and Economic Development Bureau, and be responsible for formulating policies and promoting the development of innovation and technology in Hong Kong, as well as co-ordinating relevant efforts within the Government. The two government departments that are responsible for innovation and technology matters, namely the Innovation and Technology Commission and the Office of the Government Chief Information Officer, will report to the Innovation and Technology upon its establishment.

Given the scope of policy responsibilities of the new Policy Bureau, we consider that the name Innovation and Technology Bureau can most accurately and clearly reflect the work of the new bureau. Thus, I hope Members would support the original motion and negative all the amendments.

Thank you, Deputy President.

DEPUTY PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): This Council will now begin to put to vote the amendments one by one. The order in which the amendments are put to vote and their wordings are set out in Appendix II to the Script.

DEPUTY PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): This Council will now proceed to deal with Amendment No 1 as set out in Appendix II to the Script.

Mr CHAN Chi-chuen, you may now move the amendment to the Secretary for Commerce and Economic Development's motion.

LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014 1069

MR CHAN CHI-CHUEN (in Cantonese): Deputy President, I move that Amendment No 1, as set out in Appendix II to the Script, be passed.

Mr CHAN Chi-chuen moved the following amendment:

"RESOLVED that the motion to be moved by the Secretary for Commerce and Economic Development under section 54A of the Interpretation and General Clauses Ordinance (Cap. 1) at the Legislative Council meeting of 2 July 2014 be amended, in paragraph (1), by deleting everything after "commencement date ( 生效日期)" and substituting "means 1 September 2015;"."

DEPUTY PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): I now propose the question to you and that is: That the amendment, moved by Mr CHAN Chi-chuen to the Secretary for Commerce and Economic Development's motion, be passed.

DEPUTY PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): I now put the question to you as stated. Will those in favour please raise their hands?

(Members raised their hands)

DEPUTY PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Those against please raise their hands.

(Members raised their hands)

Mr CHAN Chi-chuen rose to claim a division.

DEPUTY PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Mr CHAN Chi-chuen has claimed a division. The division bell will ring for five minutes.

(While the division bell was ringing, THE PRESIDENT resumed the Chair)

1070 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Will Members please proceed to vote.

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Will Members please check their votes. If there are no queries, voting shall now stop and the result will be displayed.

Functional Constituencies:

Dr LAU Wong-fat, Mr Abraham SHEK, Mr Tommy CHEUNG, Mr Vincent FANG, Prof Joseph LEE, Mr Jeffrey LAM, Mr Andrew LEUNG, Mr WONG Ting-kwong, Ms Starry LEE, Dr LAM Tai-fai, Mr CHAN Kin-por, Mr IP Kwok-him, Mr NG Leung-sing, Mr Steven HO, Mr YIU Si-wing, Mr MA Fung-kwok, Mr Charles Peter MOK, Miss CHAN Yuen-han, Mr Kenneth LEUNG, Mr KWOK Wai-keung, Mr Christopher CHEUNG, Mr POON Siu-ping, Mr TANG Ka-piu, Ir Dr LO Wai-kwok and Mr Tony TSE voted against the amendment.

Mr Albert HO, Mr James TO, Mr Frederick FUNG and Mr IP Kin-yuen abstained.

Geographical Constituencies:

Mr Ronny TONG, Mr LEUNG Kwok-hung, Mr Albert CHAN, Ms Claudia MO, Mr Gary FAN, Mr CHAN Chi-chuen, Dr Kenneth CHAN and Dr KWOK Ka-ki voted for the amendment.

Mr CHAN Kam-lam, Mr TAM Yiu-chung, Mr WONG Kwok-hing, Mr CHAN Hak-kan, Mr WONG Kwok-kin, Mrs Regina IP, Mr Michael TIEN, Mr CHAN Han-pan, Miss Alice MAK, Dr Elizabeth QUAT, Dr CHIANG Lai-wan and Mr Christopher CHUNG voted against the amendment.

Mr LEE Cheuk-yan, Ms Emily LAU, Ms Cyd HO and Mr SIN Chung-kai abstained.

THE PRESIDENT, Mr Jasper TSANG, did not cast any vote.

LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014 1071

THE PRESIDENT announced that among the Members returned by functional constituencies, 29 were present, 25 were against the amendment and four abstained; while among the Members returned by geographical constituencies through direct elections, 25 were present, eight were in favour of the amendment, 12 against it and four abstained. Since the question was not agreed by a majority of each of the two groups of Members present, he therefore declared that the amendment was negatived.

MR ANDREW LEUNG (in Cantonese): President, I move that in the event of further divisions being claimed in respect of the motion on the "proposed resolution under section 54A of the Interpretation and General Clauses Ordinance" or any amendments thereto, this Council do proceed to each of such divisions immediately after the division bell has been rung for one minute.

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): I now propose the question to you and that is: That the motion moved by Mr Andrew LEUNG be passed.

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Does any Member wish to speak?

MR ALBERT CHAN (in Cantonese): President, I oppose this motion. Last time when this Council voted on dozens of motions successively, the division bell also rang for only one minute each time, and some Members who needed to go to the toilet to answer the call of nature suffered immense physical and psychological problems, and they almost fell and got hurt. Thus, as far as the following 32 amendments are concerned, if the division bell will ring for only one minute during the successive voting, this may cause health problems to some Members. President, I hope that you can show sympathy for us by giving us a five-minute break after the vote on Amendment No 15, so that Members can relieve themselves during the break. Otherwise, the situation in which Members almost fell, as on the last occasion, may occur again. This is inhumane. President, I hope that you can attend to this humanitarian issue.

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): If any Member requests that the meeting be suspended, I will consider the reason given and deal with the request accordingly.

Does any other Member wish to speak?

1072 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014

MR LEUNG KWOK-HUNG (in Cantonese): President, I now request that the meeting be suspended.

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): On what grounds?

MR LEUNG KWOK-HUNG (in Cantonese): I need to go to the washroom.

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): This is not a reason for suspending the meeting. You may go to the washroom now, but it is not necessary for the meeting to be suspended.

Does any other Member wish to speak?

(No Member indicated a wish to speak)

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): If not, I now put the question to you and that is: That the motion moved by Mr Andrew LEUNG be passed. Will those in favour please raise their hands?

(Members raised their hands)

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Those against please raise their hands.

(Members raised their hands)

Mr Albert CHAN rose to claim a division.

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Mr Albert CHAN has claimed a division. The division bell will ring for five minutes.

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Will Members please proceed to vote.

(Some Members talked loudly in their seats)

LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014 1073

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Will Members please keep quiet.

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): The meeting is now suspended.

6.51 pm

Meeting suspended.

6.52 pm

Council then resumed.

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): This Council will now proceed to a division on the motion moved by Mr Andrew LEUNG. The division bell will ring for five minutes.

(The division bell stopped ringing after five minutes)

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Will the Clerk please ring the bell to summon Members back to the Chamber.

(After the summoning bell had been rung, a number of Members returned to the Chamber)

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Will Members please proceed to vote.

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Will Members please check their votes. If there are no queries, voting shall now stop and the result will be displayed.

1074 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014

Functional Constituencies:

Dr LAU Wong-fat, Mr Abraham SHEK, Mr Tommy CHEUNG, Mr Jeffrey LAM, Mr Andrew LEUNG, Mr WONG Ting-kwong, Ms Starry LEE, Dr LAM Tai-fai, Mr CHAN Kin-por, Mr IP Kwok-him, Mr NG Leung-sing, Mr Steven HO, Mr YIU Si-wing, Mr Charles Peter MOK, Miss CHAN Yuen-han, Mr KWOK Wai-keung, Mr Christopher CHEUNG, Mr POON Siu-ping, Mr TANG Ka-piu, Ir Dr LO Wai-kwok and Mr Tony TSE voted for the motion.

Geographical Constituencies:

Mr CHAN Kam-lam, Mr TAM Yiu-chung, Mr WONG Kwok-hing, Ms Cyd HO, Mr CHAN Hak-kan, Mrs Regina IP, Mr Michael TIEN, Mr CHAN Han-pan, Dr Elizabeth QUAT and Mr Christopher CHUNG voted for the motion.

Mr Albert CHAN and Mr CHAN Chi-chuen voted against the motion.

Ms Claudia MO abstained.

THE PRESIDENT, Mr Jasper TSANG, did not cast any vote.

THE PRESIDENT announced that among the Members returned by functional constituencies, 21 were present and 21 were in favour of the motion; while among the Members returned by geographical constituencies through direct elections, 14 were present, 10 were in favour of the motion, two against it and one abstained. Since the question was agreed by a majority of each of the two groups of Members present, he therefore declared that the motion was passed.

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): I order that in the event of further divisions being claimed in respect of the motion on the "proposed resolution under section 54A of the Interpretation and General Clauses Ordinance" or any amendments thereto, this Council do proceed to each of such divisions immediately after the division bell has been rung for one minute.

LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014 1075

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): This Council will now proceed to deal with Amendment No 2 as set out in Appendix II to the Script.

Mr CHAN Chi-chuen, you may now move the amendment to the Secretary for Commerce and Economic Development's motion.

MR CHAN CHI-CHUEN (in Cantonese): President, I move that Amendment No 2, as set out in Appendix II to the Script, be passed.

Mr CHAN Chi-chuen moved the following amendment:

"RESOLVED that the motion to be moved by the Secretary for Commerce and Economic Development under section 54A of the Interpretation and General Clauses Ordinance (Cap. 1) at the Legislative Council meeting of 2 July 2014 be amended, in paragraph (1), by deleting everything after "commencement date ( 生效日期)" and substituting "means 31 December 2015;"."

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): I now propose the question to you and that is: That the amendment moved by Mr CHAN Chi-chuen be passed.

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): I now put the question to you as stated. Will those in favour please raise their hands?

(Members raised their hands)

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Those against please raise their hands.

(Members raised their hands)

Mr LEUNG Kwok-hung rose to claim a division.

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Mr LEUNG Kwok-hung has claimed a division. The division bell will ring for one minute.

1076 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Will Members please proceed to vote.

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Will Members please check their votes. If there are no queries, voting shall now stop and the result will be displayed.

Functional Constituencies:

Mr Albert HO, Dr LAU Wong-fat, Mr Abraham SHEK, Mr Tommy CHEUNG, Mr Jeffrey LAM, Mr Andrew LEUNG, Mr WONG Ting-kwong, Ms Starry LEE, Dr LAM Tai-fai, Mr CHAN Kin-por, Mr IP Kwok-him, Mr NG Leung-sing, Mr Steven HO, Mr YIU Si-wing, Mr MA Fung-kwok, Mr Charles Peter MOK, Miss CHAN Yuen-han, Mr Kenneth LEUNG, Mr KWOK Wai-keung, Mr Christopher CHEUNG, Mr POON Siu-ping, Mr TANG Ka-piu, Ir Dr LO Wai-kwok and Mr Tony TSE voted against the amendment.

Geographical Constituencies:

Mr LEUNG Kwok-hung, Mr Albert CHAN, Ms Claudia MO and Mr CHAN Chi-chuen voted for the amendment.

Mr CHAN Kam-lam, Mr TAM Yiu-chung, Mr WONG Kwok-hing, Mr CHAN Hak-kan, Mrs Regina IP, Mr Michael TIEN, Mr CHAN Han-pan, Dr Elizabeth QUAT, Dr CHIANG Lai-wan and Mr Christopher CHUNG voted against the amendment.

THE PRESIDENT, Mr Jasper TSANG, did not cast any vote.

THE PRESIDENT announced that among the Members returned by functional constituencies, 24 were present and 24 were against the amendment; while among the Members returned by geographical constituencies through direct elections, 15 were present, four were in favour of the amendment and 10 against it. Since the question was not agreed by a majority of each of the two groups of Members present, he therefore declared that the amendment was negatived.

LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014 1077

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): This Council will now proceed to deal with Amendment No 3 as set out in Appendix II to the Script.

Mr Albert CHAN, you may now move the amendment to the Secretary for Commerce and Economic Development's motion.

MR ALBERT CHAN (in Cantonese): President, I move that Amendment No 3, as set out in Appendix II to the Script, be passed.

Mr Albert CHAN moved the following amendment:

"RESOLVED that the motion to be moved by the Secretary for Commerce and Economic Development under section 54A of the Interpretation and General Clauses Ordinance (Cap. 1) at the Legislative Council meeting of 2 July 2014 be amended, in paragraph (l), by deleting everything after "commencement date ( 生效日期)" and substituting "means 1 July 2017;"."

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): I now propose the question to you and that is: That the amendment moved by Mr Albert CHAN be passed.

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): I now put the question to you as stated. Will those in favour please raise their hands?

(Members raised their hands)

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Those against please raise their hands.

(Members raised their hands)

Mr Albert CHAN rose to claim a division.

1078 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Mr Albert CHAN has claimed a division. The division bell will ring for one minute.

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Will Members please proceed to vote.

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Will Members please check their votes. If there are no queries, voting shall now stop and the result will be displayed.

Functional Constituencies:

Mr Albert HO, Dr LAU Wong-fat, Mr Abraham SHEK, Mr Tommy CHEUNG, Mr Jeffrey LAM, Mr Andrew LEUNG, Mr WONG Ting-kwong, Ms Starry LEE, Dr LAM Tai-fai, Mr CHAN Kin-por, Mr IP Kwok-him, Mr NG Leung-sing, Mr Steven HO, Mr Frankie YICK, Mr YIU Si-wing, Mr MA Fung-kwok, Mr Charles Peter MOK, Miss CHAN Yuen-han, Mr Kenneth LEUNG, Mr KWOK Wai-keung, Mr Christopher CHEUNG, Mr POON Siu-ping, Mr TANG Ka-piu, Ir Dr LO Wai-kwok and Mr Tony TSE voted against the amendment.

Geographical Constituencies:

Mr LEUNG Kwok-hung, Mr Albert CHAN, Ms Claudia MO and Mr CHAN Chi-chuen voted for the amendment.

Mr CHAN Kam-lam, Mr TAM Yiu-chung, Mr WONG Kwok-hing, Mr CHAN Hak-kan, Mrs Regina IP, Mr Michael TIEN, Mr CHAN Han-pan, Dr Elizabeth QUAT, Dr CHIANG Lai-wan and Mr Christopher CHUNG voted against the amendment.

THE PRESIDENT, Mr Jasper TSANG, did not cast any vote.

THE PRESIDENT announced that among the Members returned by functional constituencies, 25 were present and 25 were against the amendment; while among the Members returned by geographical constituencies through direct elections, 15 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014 1079 were present, four were in favour of the amendment and 10 against it. Since the question was not agreed by a majority of each of the two groups of Members present, he therefore declared that the amendment was negatived.

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): This Council will now proceed to deal with Amendment No 4 as set out in Appendix II to the Script.

Mr Albert CHAN, you may now move the amendment to the Secretary for Commerce and Economic Development's motion.

MR ALBERT CHAN (in Cantonese): President, I move that Amendment No 4, as set out in Appendix II to the Script, be passed.

Mr Albert CHAN moved the following amendment:

"RESOLVED that the motion to be moved by the Secretary for Commerce and Economic Development under section 54A of the Interpretation and General Clauses Ordinance (Cap. 1) at the Legislative Council meeting of 2 July 2014 be amended, in paragraph (1), by deleting everything after "commencement date ( 生效日期)" and substituting "means 1 July 2015;"."

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): I now propose the question to you and that is: That the amendment moved by Mr Albert CHAN be passed.

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): I now put the question to you as stated. Will those in favour please raise their hands?

(Members raised their hands)

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Those against please raise their hands.

(Members raised their hands)

Mr Albert CHAN rose to claim a division.

1080 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Mr Albert CHAN has claimed a division. The division bell will ring for one minute.

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Will Members please proceed to vote.

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Will Members please check their votes. If there are no queries, voting shall now stop and the result will be displayed.

Functional Constituencies:

Mr Albert HO, Dr LAU Wong-fat, Mr Abraham SHEK, Mr Tommy CHEUNG, Mr Jeffrey LAM, Mr Andrew LEUNG, Mr WONG Ting-kwong, Ms Starry LEE, Dr LAM Tai-fai, Mr CHAN Kin-por, Mr IP Kwok-him, Mr NG Leung-sing, Mr Steven HO, Mr Frankie YICK, Mr YIU Si-wing, Mr MA Fung-kwok, Mr Charles Peter MOK, Miss CHAN Yuen-han, Mr Kenneth LEUNG, Mr KWOK Wai-keung, Mr Christopher CHEUNG, Mr POON Siu-ping, Mr TANG Ka-piu, Ir Dr LO Wai-kwok and Mr Tony TSE voted against the amendment.

Geographical Constituencies:

Mr LEUNG Kwok-hung, Mr Albert CHAN, Ms Claudia MO and Mr CHAN Chi-chuen voted for the amendment.

Mr CHAN Kam-lam, Mr TAM Yiu-chung, Mr WONG Kwok-hing, Mr CHAN Hak-kan, Mr WONG Kwok-kin, Mrs Regina IP, Mr Michael TIEN, Mr CHAN Han-pan, Dr Elizabeth QUAT and Dr CHIANG Lai-wan voted against the amendment.

THE PRESIDENT, Mr Jasper TSANG, did not cast any vote.

THE PRESIDENT announced that among the Members returned by functional constituencies, 25 were present and 25 were against the amendment; while among LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014 1081 the Members returned by geographical constituencies through direct elections, 15 were present, four were in favour of the amendment and 10 against it. Since the question was not agreed by a majority of each of the two groups of Members present, he therefore declared that the amendment was negatived.

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): This Council will now proceed to deal with Amendment No 5 as set out in Appendix II to the Script.

Mr CHAN Chi-chuen, you may now move the amendment to the Secretary for Commerce and Economic Development's motion.

MR CHAN CHI-CHUEN (in Cantonese): President, I move that Amendment No 5, as set out in Appendix II to the Script, be passed.

Mr CHAN Chi-chuen moved the following amendment:

"RESOLVED that the motion to be moved by the Secretary for Commerce and Economic Development under section 54A of the Interpretation and General Clauses Ordinance (Cap. 1) at the Legislative Council meeting of 2 July 2014 be amended -

(a) in paragraph (1) in the definition of commencement date, in subparagraph (a), by deleting "the 14th day" and substituting "the 270th day";

(b) in paragraph (1), by deleting "Innovation and Technology Bureau" and substituting "High Technology Bureau";

(c) in paragraph (2)(a), by deleting "Secretary for Innovation and Technology" (wherever appearing) and substituting "Secretary for High Technology";

(d) in paragraph (2)(b), by deleting "Permanent Secretary for Innovation and Technology" (wherever appearing) and substituting "Permanent Secretary for High Technology";

1082 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014

(e) in the Schedule, by deleting "Secretary for Innovation and Technology" and substituting "Secretary for High Technology";

(f) in the Schedule, by deleting "Innovation and Technology Bureau" and substituting "High Technology Bureau"."

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): I now propose the question to you and that is: That the amendment moved by Mr CHAN Chi-chuen be passed.

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): I now put the question to you as stated. Will those in favour please raise their hands?

(Members raised their hands)

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Those against please raise their hands.

(Members raised their hands)

Mr LEUNG Kwok-hung rose to claim a division.

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Mr LEUNG Kwok-hung has claimed a division. The division bell will ring for one minute.

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Will Members please proceed to vote.

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Will Members please check their votes. If there are no queries, voting shall now stop and the result will be displayed.

LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014 1083

Functional Constituencies:

Dr LAU Wong-fat, Mr Abraham SHEK, Mr Tommy CHEUNG, Mr Jeffrey LAM, Mr Andrew LEUNG, Mr WONG Ting-kwong, Ms Starry LEE, Dr LAM Tai-fai, Mr CHAN Kin-por, Mr IP Kwok-him, Mr NG Leung-sing, Mr Steven HO, Mr Frankie YICK, Mr YIU Si-wing, Mr MA Fung-kwok, Mr Charles Peter MOK, Miss CHAN Yuen-han, Mr Kenneth LEUNG, Mr KWOK Wai-keung, Mr Christopher CHEUNG, Mr POON Siu-ping, Mr TANG Ka-piu, Ir Dr LO Wai-kwok and Mr Tony TSE voted against the amendment.

Geographical Constituencies:

Mr LEUNG Kwok-hung, Mr Albert CHAN, Ms Claudia MO and Mr CHAN Chi-chuen voted for the amendment.

Mr CHAN Kam-lam, Mr TAM Yiu-chung, Mr WONG Kwok-hing, Mr CHAN Hak-kan, Mr WONG Kwok-kin, Mrs Regina IP, Mr Michael TIEN, Mr CHAN Han-pan, Dr Elizabeth QUAT and Dr CHIANG Lai-wan voted against the amendment.

THE PRESIDENT, Mr Jasper TSANG, did not cast any vote.

THE PRESIDENT announced that among the Members returned by functional constituencies, 24 were present and 24 were against the amendment; while among the Members returned by geographical constituencies through direct elections, 15 were present, four were in favour of the amendment and 10 against it. Since the question was not agreed by a majority of each of the two groups of Members present, he therefore declared that the amendment was negatived.

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): This Council will now proceed to deal with Amendment No 6 as set out in Appendix II to the Script.

Mr CHAN Chi-chuen, you may now move the amendment to the Secretary for Commerce and Economic Development's motion.

1084 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014

MR CHAN CHI-CHUEN (in Cantonese): President, I move that Amendment No 6, as set out in Appendix II to the Script, be passed.

Mr CHAN Chi-chuen moved the following amendment:

"RESOLVED that the motion to be moved by the Secretary for Commerce and Economic Development under section 54A of the Interpretation and General Clauses Ordinance (Cap. 1) at the Legislative Council meeting of 2 July 2014 be amended -

(a) in paragraph (1), by deleting "the 14th day" (wherever appearing) and substituting "the 270th day";

(b) in paragraph (1), by deleting "Innovation and Technology Bureau" and substituting "High Technology Bureau";

(c) in paragraph (2)(a), by deleting "Secretary for Innovation and Technology" (wherever appearing) and substituting "Secretary for High Technology";

(d) in paragraph (2)(b), by deleting "Permanent Secretary for Innovation and Technology" (wherever appearing) and substituting "Permanent Secretary for High Technology";

(e) in the Schedule, by deleting "Secretary for Innovation and Technology" and substituting "Secretary for High Technology";

(f) in the Schedule, by deleting "Innovation and Technology Bureau" and substituting "High Technology Bureau"."

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): I now propose the question to you and that is: That the amendment moved by Mr CHAN Chi-chuen be passed.

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): I now put the question to you as stated. Will those in favour please raise their hands?

(Members raised their hands)

LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014 1085

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Those against please raise their hands.

(Members raised their hands)

Mr CHAN Chi-chuen rose to claim a division.

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Mr CHAN Chi-chuen has claimed a division. The division bell will ring for one minute.

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Will Members please proceed to vote.

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Will Members please check their votes. If there are no queries, voting shall now stop and the result will be displayed.

Functional Constituencies:

Dr LAU Wong-fat, Mr Abraham SHEK, Mr Tommy CHEUNG, Mr Jeffrey LAM, Mr Andrew LEUNG, Mr WONG Ting-kwong, Ms Starry LEE, Dr LAM Tai-fai, Mr CHAN Kin-por, Mr IP Kwok-him, Mr NG Leung-sing, Mr Steven HO, Mr Frankie YICK, Mr YIU Si-wing, Mr MA Fung-kwok, Mr Charles Peter MOK, Miss CHAN Yuen-han, Mr Kenneth LEUNG, Mr KWOK Wai-keung, Mr Christopher CHEUNG, Mr POON Siu-ping, Mr TANG Ka-piu, Ir Dr LO Wai-kwok and Mr Tony TSE voted against the amendment.

Geographical Constituencies:

Mr LEUNG Kwok-hung, Mr Albert CHAN, Ms Claudia MO and Mr CHAN Chi-chuen voted for the amendment.

Mr CHAN Kam-lam, Mr TAM Yiu-chung, Mr WONG Kwok-hing, Mr CHAN Hak-kan, Mr WONG Kwok-kin, Mrs Regina IP, Mr Michael TIEN, Mr CHAN Han-pan, Dr Elizabeth QUAT and Dr CHIANG Lai-wan voted against the amendment.

1086 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014

THE PRESIDENT, Mr Jasper TSANG, did not cast any vote.

THE PRESIDENT announced that among the Members returned by functional constituencies, 24 were present and 24 were against the amendment; while among the Members returned by geographical constituencies through direct elections, 15 were present, four were in favour of the amendment and 10 against it. Since the question was not agreed by a majority of each of the two groups of Members present, he therefore declared that the amendment was negatived.

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): This Council will now proceed to deal with Amendment No 7 as set out in Appendix II to the Script.

Mr CHAN Chi-chuen, you may now move the amendment to the Secretary for Commerce and Economic Development's motion.

MR CHAN CHI-CHUEN (in Cantonese): President, I move that Amendment No 7, as set out in Appendix II to the Script, be passed.

Mr CHAN Chi-chuen moved the following amendment:

"RESOLVED that the motion to be moved by the Secretary for Commerce and Economic Development under section 54A of the Interpretation and General Clauses Ordinance (Cap. 1) at the Legislative Council meeting of 2 July 2014 be amended, in paragraph (1), in the definition of commencement date, in subparagraph (a), by deleting "the 14th day" and substituting "the 270th day"."

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): I now propose the question to you and that is: That the amendment moved by Mr CHAN Chi-chuen be passed.

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): I now put the question to you as stated. Will those in favour please raise their hands?

(Members raised their hands)

LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014 1087

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Those against please raise their hands.

(Members raised their hands)

Mr LEUNG Kwok-hung rose to claim a division.

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Mr LEUNG Kwok-hung has claimed a division. The division bell will ring for one minute.

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Will Members please proceed to vote.

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Will Members please check their votes. If there are no queries, voting shall now stop and the result will be displayed.

Functional Constituencies:

Dr LAU Wong-fat, Mr Abraham SHEK, Mr Tommy CHEUNG, Mr Jeffrey LAM, Mr Andrew LEUNG, Mr WONG Ting-kwong, Ms Starry LEE, Dr LAM Tai-fai, Mr CHAN Kin-por, Mr IP Kwok-him, Mr NG Leung-sing, Mr Steven HO, Mr Frankie YICK, Mr YIU Si-wing, Mr MA Fung-kwok, Mr Charles Peter MOK, Miss CHAN Yuen-han, Mr Kenneth LEUNG, Mr KWOK Wai-keung, Mr Christopher CHEUNG, Mr POON Siu-ping, Mr TANG Ka-piu, Ir Dr LO Wai-kwok and Mr Tony TSE voted against the amendment.

Geographical Constituencies:

Mr LEUNG Kwok-hung, Mr Albert CHAN, Ms Claudia MO and Mr CHAN Chi-chuen voted for the amendment.

Mr CHAN Kam-lam, Mr TAM Yiu-chung, Mr WONG Kwok-hing, Mr CHAN Hak-kan, Mrs Regina IP, Mr Michael TIEN, Mr CHAN Han-pan, Dr Elizabeth QUAT and Dr CHIANG Lai-wan voted against the amendment.

1088 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014

THE PRESIDENT, Mr Jasper TSANG, did not cast any vote.

THE PRESIDENT announced that among the Members returned by functional constituencies, 24 were present and 24 were against the amendment; while among the Members returned by geographical constituencies through direct elections, 14 were present, four were in favour of the amendment and nine against it. Since the question was not agreed by a majority of each of the two groups of Members present, he therefore declared that the amendment was negatived.

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): This Council will now proceed to deal with Amendment No 8 as set out in Appendix II to the Script.

Mr CHAN Chi-chuen, you may now move the amendment to the Secretary for Commerce and Economic Development's motion.

MR CHAN CHI-CHUEN (in Cantonese): President, I move that Amendment No 8, as set out in Appendix II to the Script, be passed.

Mr CHAN Chi-chuen moved the following amendment:

"RESOLVED that the motion to be moved by the Secretary for Commerce and Economic Development under section 54A of the Interpretation and General Clauses Ordinance (Cap. 1) at the Legislative Council meeting of 2 July 2014 be amended, in paragraph (1), by deleting "the 14th day" (wherever appearing) and substituting "the 270th day"."

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): I now propose the question to you and that is: That the amendment moved by Mr CHAN Chi-chuen be passed.

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): I now put the question to you as stated. Will those in favour please raise their hands?

(Members raised their hands)

LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014 1089

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Those against please raise their hands.

(Members raised their hands)

Mr LEUNG Kwok-hung rose to claim a division.

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Mr LEUNG Kwok-hung has claimed a division. The division bell will ring for one minute.

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Will Members please proceed to vote.

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Will Members please check their votes. If there are no queries, voting shall now stop and the result will be displayed.

Functional Constituencies:

Dr LAU Wong-fat, Mr Tommy CHEUNG, Mr Jeffrey LAM, Mr Andrew LEUNG, Mr WONG Ting-kwong, Ms Starry LEE, Dr LAM Tai-fai, Mr CHAN Kin-por, Mr IP Kwok-him, Mr NG Leung-sing, Mr Steven HO, Mr Frankie YICK, Mr YIU Si-wing, Mr MA Fung-kwok, Mr Charles Peter MOK, Miss CHAN Yuen-han, Mr Kenneth LEUNG, Mr KWOK Wai-keung, Mr Christopher CHEUNG, Mr POON Siu-ping, Mr TANG Ka-piu, Ir Dr LO Wai-kwok and Mr Tony TSE voted against the amendment.

Geographical Constituencies:

Mr LEUNG Kwok-hung, Mr Albert CHAN, Ms Claudia MO and Mr CHAN Chi-chuen voted for the amendment.

Mr CHAN Kam-lam, Mr TAM Yiu-chung, Mr WONG Kwok-hing, Mr CHAN Hak-kan, Mrs Regina IP, Mr Michael TIEN, Mr CHAN Han-pan, Dr Elizabeth QUAT and Dr CHIANG Lai-wan voted against the amendment.

1090 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014

THE PRESIDENT, Mr Jasper TSANG, did not cast any vote.

THE PRESIDENT announced that among the Members returned by functional constituencies, 23 were present and 23 were against the amendment; while among the Members returned by geographical constituencies through direct elections, 14 were present, four were in favour of the amendment and nine against it. Since the question was not agreed by a majority of each of the two groups of Members present, he therefore declared that the amendment was negatived.

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): This Council will now proceed to deal with Amendment No 9 as set out in Appendix II to the Script.

Mr CHAN Chi-chuen, you may now move the amendment to the Secretary for Commerce and Economic Development's motion.

MR CHAN CHI-CHUEN (in Cantonese): President, I move that Amendment No 9, as set out in Appendix II to the Script, be passed.

Mr CHAN Chi-chuen moved the following amendment:

"RESOLVED that the motion to be moved by the Secretary for Commerce and Economic Development under section 54A of the Interpretation and General Clauses Ordinance (Cap. 1) at the Legislative Council meeting of 2 July 2014 be amended -

(a) in paragraph (1) in the definition of commencement date, in subparagraph (a), by deleting "the 14th day" and substituting "the 100th day";

(b) in paragraph (1), by deleting "Innovation and Technology Bureau" and substituting "Information and Technology Bureau";

(c) in paragraph (2)(a), by deleting "Secretary for Innovation and Technology" (wherever appearing) and substituting "Secretary for Information and Technology";

LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014 1091

(d) in paragraph (2)(b), by deleting "Permanent Secretary for Innovation and Technology" (wherever appearing) and substituting "Permanent Secretary for Information and Technology";

(e) in the Schedule, by deleting "Secretary for Innovation and Technology" and substituting "Secretary for Information and Technology";

(f) in the Schedule, by deleting "Innovation and Technology Bureau" and substituting "Information and Technology Bureau"."

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): I now propose the question to you and that is: That the amendment moved by Mr CHAN Chi-chuen be passed.

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): I now put the question to you as stated. Will those in favour please raise their hands?

(Members raised their hands)

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Those against please raise their hands.

(Members raised their hands)

Mr LEUNG Kwok-hung rose to claim a division.

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Mr LEUNG Kwok-hung has claimed a division. The division bell will ring for one minute.

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Will Members please proceed to vote.

1092 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Will Members please check their votes. If there are no queries, voting shall now stop and the result will be displayed.

Functional Constituencies:

Dr LAU Wong-fat, Mr Abraham SHEK, Mr Tommy CHEUNG, Mr Jeffrey LAM, Mr Andrew LEUNG, Mr WONG Ting-kwong, Ms Starry LEE, Dr LAM Tai-fai, Mr CHAN Kin-por, Mr IP Kwok-him, Mr NG Leung-sing, Mr Steven HO, Mr Frankie YICK, Mr YIU Si-wing, Mr MA Fung-kwok, Mr Charles Peter MOK, Miss CHAN Yuen-han, Mr Kenneth LEUNG, Mr KWOK Wai-keung, Mr Christopher CHEUNG, Mr POON Siu-ping, Mr TANG Ka-piu, Ir Dr LO Wai-kwok and Mr Tony TSE voted against the amendment.

Geographical Constituencies:

Mr LEUNG Kwok-hung, Mr Albert CHAN, Ms Claudia MO and Mr CHAN Chi-chuen voted for the amendment.

Mr CHAN Kam-lam, Mr TAM Yiu-chung, Mr WONG Kwok-hing, Mr CHAN Hak-kan, Mrs Regina IP, Mr Michael TIEN, Mr CHAN Han-pan, Dr Elizabeth QUAT and Dr CHIANG Lai-wan voted against the amendment.

THE PRESIDENT, Mr Jasper TSANG, did not cast any vote.

THE PRESIDENT announced that among the Members returned by functional constituencies, 24 were present and 24 were against the amendment; while among the Members returned by geographical constituencies through direct elections, 14 were present, four were in favour of the amendment and nine against it. Since the question was not agreed by a majority of each of the two groups of Members present, he therefore declared that the amendment was negatived.

LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014 1093

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): This Council will now proceed to deal with Amendment No 10 as set out in Appendix II to the Script.

Mr CHAN Chi-chuen, you may now move the amendment to the Secretary for Commerce and Economic Development's motion.

MR CHAN CHI-CHUEN (in Cantonese): President, I move that Amendment No 10, as set out in Appendix II to the Script, be passed.

Mr CHAN Chi-chuen moved the following amendment:

"RESOLVED that the motion to be moved by the Secretary for Commerce and Economic Development under section 54A of the Interpretation and General Clauses Ordinance (Cap. 1) at the Legislative Council meeting of 2 July 2014 be amended -

(a) in paragraph (1), by deleting "the 14th day" (wherever appearing) and substituting "the 100th day";

(b) in paragraph (1), by deleting "Innovation and Technology Bureau" and substituting "Information and Technology Bureau";

(c) in paragraph (2)(a), by deleting "Secretary for Innovation and Technology" (wherever appearing) and substituting "Secretary for Information and Technology";

(d) in paragraph (2)(b), by deleting "Permanent Secretary for Innovation and Technology" (wherever appearing) and substituting "Permanent Secretary for Information and Technology";

(e) in the Schedule, by deleting "Secretary for Innovation and Technology" and substituting "Secretary for Information and Technology";

(f) in the Schedule, by deleting "Innovation and Technology Bureau" and substituting "Information and Technology Bureau"."

1094 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): I now propose the question to you and that is: That the amendment moved by Mr CHAN Chi-chuen be passed.

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): I now put the question to you as stated. Will those in favour please raise their hands?

(Members raised their hands)

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Those against please raise their hands.

(Members raised their hands)

Mr LEUNG Kwok-hung rose to claim a division.

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Mr LEUNG Kwok-hung has claimed a division. The division bell will ring for one minute.

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Will Members please proceed to vote.

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Will Members please check their votes. If there are no queries, voting shall now stop and the result will be displayed.

Functional Constituencies:

Dr LAU Wong-fat, Mr Abraham SHEK, Mr Tommy CHEUNG, Mr Jeffrey LAM, Mr Andrew LEUNG, Mr WONG Ting-kwong, Ms Starry LEE, Dr LAM Tai-fai, Mr CHAN Kin-por, Mr IP Kwok-him, Mr NG Leung-sing, Mr Steven HO, Mr Frankie YICK, Mr YIU Si-wing, Mr MA Fung-kwok, Mr Charles Peter MOK, Miss CHAN Yuen-han, Mr Kenneth LEUNG, Mr KWOK Wai-keung, Mr Christopher CHEUNG, Mr POON Siu-ping, Mr TANG Ka-piu, Ir Dr LO Wai-kwok and Mr Tony TSE voted against the amendment.

LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014 1095

Geographical Constituencies:

Mr LEUNG Kwok-hung, Mr Albert CHAN, Ms Claudia MO and Mr CHAN Chi-chuen voted for the amendment.

Mr CHAN Kam-lam, Mr TAM Yiu-chung, Mr WONG Kwok-hing, Mr CHAN Hak-kan, Mrs Regina IP, Mr Michael TIEN, Mr CHAN Han-pan, Dr Elizabeth QUAT and Dr CHIANG Lai-wan voted against the amendment.

THE PRESIDENT, Mr Jasper TSANG, did not cast any vote.

THE PRESIDENT announced that among the Members returned by functional constituencies, 24 were present and 24 were against the amendment; while among the Members returned by geographical constituencies through direct elections, 14 were present, four were in favour of the amendment and nine against it. Since the question was not agreed by a majority of each of the two groups of Members present, he therefore declared that the amendment was negatived.

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): This Council will now proceed to deal with Amendment No 11 as set out in Appendix II to the Script.

Mr CHAN Chi-chuen, you may now move the amendment to the Secretary for Commerce and Economic Development's motion.

MR CHAN CHI-CHUEN (in Cantonese): President, I move that Amendment No 11, as set out in Appendix II to the Script, be passed.

Mr CHAN Chi-chuen moved the following amendment:

"RESOLVED that the motion to be moved by the Secretary for Commerce and Economic Development under section 54A of the Interpretation and General Clauses Ordinance (Cap. 1) at the Legislative Council meeting of 2 July 2014 be amended, in paragraph (1), in the definition of commencement date, in subparagraph (a), by deleting "the 14th day" and substituting "the 100th day"."

1096 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): I now propose the question to you and that is: That the amendment moved by Mr CHAN Chi-chuen be passed.

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): I now put the question to you as stated. Will those in favour please raise their hands?

(Members raised their hands)

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Those against please raise their hands.

(Members raised their hands)

Mr LEUNG Kwok-hung rose to claim a division.

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Mr LEUNG Kwok-hung has claimed a division. The division bell will ring for one minute.

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Will Members please proceed to vote.

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Will Members please check their votes. If there are no queries, voting shall now stop and the result will be displayed.

Functional Constituencies:

Dr LAU Wong-fat, Mr Abraham SHEK, Mr Tommy CHEUNG, Mr Jeffrey LAM, Mr Andrew LEUNG, Mr WONG Ting-kwong, Ms Starry LEE, Dr LAM Tai-fai, Mr CHAN Kin-por, Mr IP Kwok-him, Mr NG Leung-sing, Mr Steven HO, Mr Frankie YICK, Mr YIU Si-wing, Mr MA Fung-kwok, Mr Charles Peter MOK, Miss CHAN Yuen-han, Mr Kenneth LEUNG, Mr KWOK Wai-keung, Mr Christopher CHEUNG, Mr POON Siu-ping, Mr TANG Ka-piu, Ir Dr LO Wai-kwok and Mr Tony TSE voted against the amendment.

LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014 1097

Geographical Constituencies:

Mr LEUNG Kwok-hung, Mr Albert CHAN, Ms Claudia MO and Mr CHAN Chi-chuen voted for the amendment.

Mr CHAN Kam-lam, Mr TAM Yiu-chung, Mr WONG Kwok-hing, Mr CHAN Hak-kan, Mrs Regina IP, Mr Michael TIEN, Mr CHAN Han-pan, Dr Elizabeth QUAT and Dr CHIANG Lai-wan voted against the amendment.

THE PRESIDENT, Mr Jasper TSANG, did not cast any vote.

THE PRESIDENT announced that among the Members returned by functional constituencies, 24 were present and 24 were against the amendment; while among the Members returned by geographical constituencies through direct elections, 14 were present, four were in favour of the amendment and nine against it. Since the question was not agreed by a majority of each of the two groups of Members present, he therefore declared that the amendment was negatived.

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): This Council will now proceed to deal with Amendment No 12 as set out in Appendix II to the Script.

Mr CHAN Chi-chuen, you may now move the amendment to the Secretary for Commerce and Economic Development's motion.

MR CHAN CHI-CHUEN (in Cantonese): President, I move that Amendment No 12, as set out in Appendix II to the Script, be passed.

Mr CHAN Chi-chuen moved the following amendment:

"RESOLVED that the motion to be moved by the Secretary for Commerce and Economic Development under section 54A of the Interpretation and General Clauses Ordinance (Cap. 1) at the Legislative Council meeting of 2 July 2014 be amended, in paragraph (1), by deleting "the 14th day" (wherever appearing) and substituting "the 100th day"."

1098 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): I now propose the question to you and that is: That the amendment moved by Mr CHAN Chi-chuen be passed.

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): I now put the question to you as stated. Will those in favour please raise their hands?

(Members raised their hands)

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Those against please raise their hands.

(Members raised their hands)

Mr LEUNG Kwok-hung rose to claim a division.

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Mr LEUNG Kwok-hung has claimed a division. The division bell will ring for one minute.

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Will Members please proceed to vote.

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Will Members please check their votes. If there are no queries, voting shall now stop and the result will be displayed.

Functional Constituencies:

Dr LAU Wong-fat, Mr Abraham SHEK, Mr Tommy CHEUNG, Mr Jeffrey LAM, Mr Andrew LEUNG, Mr WONG Ting-kwong, Ms Starry LEE, Dr LAM Tai-fai, Mr CHAN Kin-por, Mr IP Kwok-him, Mr NG Leung-sing, Mr Steven HO, Mr Frankie YICK, Mr YIU Si-wing, Mr MA Fung-kwok, Mr Charles Peter MOK, Miss CHAN Yuen-han, Mr Kenneth LEUNG, Mr KWOK Wai-keung, Mr Christopher CHEUNG, Mr POON Siu-ping, Mr TANG Ka-piu, Ir Dr LO Wai-kwok and Mr Tony TSE voted against the amendment.

LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014 1099

Geographical Constituencies:

Mr LEUNG Kwok-hung, Mr Albert CHAN, Ms Claudia MO and Mr CHAN Chi-chuen voted for the amendment.

Mr CHAN Kam-lam, Mr TAM Yiu-chung, Mr WONG Kwok-hing, Mr CHAN Hak-kan, Mrs Regina IP, Mr Michael TIEN, Mr CHAN Han-pan, Dr Elizabeth QUAT and Dr CHIANG Lai-wan voted against the amendment.

THE PRESIDENT, Mr Jasper TSANG, did not cast any vote.

THE PRESIDENT announced that among the Members returned by functional constituencies, 24 were present and 24 were against the amendment; while among the Members returned by geographical constituencies through direct elections, 14 were present, four were in favour of the amendment and nine against it. Since the question was not agreed by a majority of each of the two groups of Members present, he therefore declared that the amendment was negatived.

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): This Council will now proceed to deal with Amendment No 13 as set out in Appendix II to the Script.

Mr Albert CHAN, you may now move the amendment to the Secretary for Commerce and Economic Development's motion.

MR ALBERT CHAN (in Cantonese): President, I move that Amendment No 13, as set out in Appendix II to the Script, be passed.

Mr Albert CHAN moved the following amendment:

"RESOLVED that the motion to be moved by the Secretary for Commerce and Economic Development under section 54A of the Interpretation and General Clauses Ordinance (Cap. 1) at the Legislative Council meeting of 2 July 2014 be amended -

1100 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014

(a) in paragraph (1) in the definition of commencement date, in subparagraph (a), by deleting "the 14th day" and substituting "the 365th day";

(b) in paragraph (1), by deleting "Innovation and Technology Bureau" and substituting "Originality and Technology Bureau";

(c) in paragraph (2)(a), by deleting "Secretary for Innovation and Technology" (wherever appearing) and substituting "Secretary for Originality and Technology";

(d) in paragraph (2)(b), by deleting "Permanent Secretary for Innovation and Technology" (wherever appearing) and substituting "Permanent Secretary for Originality and Technology";

(e) in the Schedule, by deleting "Secretary for Innovation and Technology" and substituting "Secretary for Originality and Technology";

(f) in the Schedule, by deleting "Innovation and Technology Bureau" and substituting "Originality and Technology Bureau"."

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): I now propose the question to you and that is: That the amendment moved by Mr Albert CHAN be passed.

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): I now put the question to you as stated. Will those in favour please raise their hands?

(Members raised their hands)

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Those against please raise their hands.

(Members raised their hands)

Mr Albert CHAN rose to claim a division. LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014 1101

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Mr Albert CHAN has claimed a division. The division bell will ring for one minute.

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Will Members please proceed to vote.

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Will Members please check their votes. If there are no queries, voting shall now stop and the result will be displayed.

Functional Constituencies:

Dr LAU Wong-fat, Mr Abraham SHEK, Mr Tommy CHEUNG, Mr Jeffrey LAM, Mr Andrew LEUNG, Mr WONG Ting-kwong, Ms Starry LEE, Dr LAM Tai-fai, Mr CHAN Kin-por, Mr IP Kwok-him, Mr NG Leung-sing, Mr Steven HO, Mr Frankie YICK, Mr YIU Si-wing, Mr MA Fung-kwok, Mr Charles Peter MOK, Miss CHAN Yuen-han, Mr Kenneth LEUNG, Mr KWOK Wai-keung, Mr Christopher CHEUNG, Mr POON Siu-ping, Mr TANG Ka-piu, Ir Dr LO Wai-kwok and Mr Tony TSE voted against the amendment.

Geographical Constituencies:

Mr LEUNG Kwok-hung, Mr Albert CHAN, Ms Claudia MO and Mr CHAN Chi-chuen voted for the amendment.

Mr CHAN Kam-lam, Mr TAM Yiu-chung, Mr WONG Kwok-hing, Mr CHAN Hak-kan, Mrs Regina IP, Mr Michael TIEN, Mr CHAN Han-pan, Dr Elizabeth QUAT and Dr CHIANG Lai-wan voted against the amendment.

THE PRESIDENT, Mr Jasper TSANG, did not cast any vote.

THE PRESIDENT announced that among the Members returned by functional constituencies, 24 were present and 24 were against the amendment; while among the Members returned by geographical constituencies through direct elections, 14 1102 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014 were present, four were in favour of the amendment and nine against it. Since the question was not agreed by a majority of each of the two groups of Members present, he therefore declared that the amendment was negatived.

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): This Council will now proceed to deal with Amendment No 14 as set out in Appendix II to the Script.

Mr Albert CHAN, you may now move the amendment to the Secretary for Commerce and Economic Development's motion.

MR ALBERT CHAN (in Cantonese): President, I move that Amendment No 14, as set out in Appendix II to the Script, be passed.

Mr Albert CHAN moved the following amendment:

"RESOLVED that the motion to be moved by the Secretary for Commerce and Economic Development under section 54A of the Interpretation and General Clauses Ordinance (Cap. 1) at the Legislative Council meeting of 2 July 2014 be amended -

(a) in paragraph (1), by deleting "the 14th day" (wherever appearing) and substituting "the 365th day";

(b) in paragraph (1), by deleting "Innovation and Technology Bureau" and substituting "Originality and Technology Bureau";

(c) in paragraph (2)(a), by deleting "Secretary for Innovation and Technology" (wherever appearing) and substituting "Secretary for Originality and Technology";

(d) in paragraph (2)(b), by deleting "Permanent Secretary for Innovation and Technology" (wherever appearing) and substituting "Permanent Secretary for Originality and Technology ";

LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014 1103

(e) in the Schedule, by deleting "Secretary for Innovation and Technology" and substituting "Secretary for Originality and Technology";

(f) in the Schedule, by deleting "Innovation and Technology Bureau" and substituting "Originality and Technology Bureau"."

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): I now propose the question to you and that is: That the amendment moved by Mr Albert CHAN be passed.

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): I now put the question to you as stated. Will those in favour please raise their hands?

(Members raised their hands)

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Those against please raise their hands.

(Members raised their hands)

Mr Albert CHAN rose to claim a division.

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Mr Albert CHAN has claimed a division. The division bell will ring for one minute.

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Will Members please proceed to vote.

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Will Members please check their votes. If there are no queries, voting shall now stop and the result will be displayed.

1104 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014

Functional Constituencies:

Dr LAU Wong-fat, Mr Abraham SHEK, Mr Tommy CHEUNG, Mr Jeffrey LAM, Mr Andrew LEUNG, Mr WONG Ting-kwong, Ms Starry LEE, Dr LAM Tai-fai, Mr CHAN Kin-por, Mr IP Kwok-him, Mr NG Leung-sing, Mr Steven HO, Mr Frankie YICK, Mr YIU Si-wing, Mr MA Fung-kwok, Mr Charles Peter MOK, Miss CHAN Yuen-han, Mr Kenneth LEUNG, Mr KWOK Wai-keung, Mr Christopher CHEUNG, Mr POON Siu-ping, Mr TANG Ka-piu, Ir Dr LO Wai-kwok and Mr Tony TSE voted against the amendment.

Geographical Constituencies:

Mr LEUNG Kwok-hung, Mr Albert CHAN, Ms Claudia MO and Mr CHAN Chi-chuen voted for the amendment.

Mr CHAN Kam-lam, Mr TAM Yiu-chung, Mr WONG Kwok-hing, Mr CHAN Hak-kan, Mrs Regina IP, Mr Michael TIEN, Mr CHAN Han-pan, Dr Elizabeth QUAT and Dr CHIANG Lai-wan voted against the amendment.

THE PRESIDENT, Mr Jasper TSANG, did not cast any vote.

THE PRESIDENT announced that among the Members returned by functional constituencies, 24 were present and 24 were against the amendment; while among the Members returned by geographical constituencies through direct elections, 14 were present, four were in favour of the amendment and nine against it. Since the question was not agreed by a majority of each of the two groups of Members present, he therefore declared that the amendment was negatived.

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): This Council will now proceed to deal with Amendment No 15 as set out in Appendix II to the Script.

Mr Albert CHAN, you may now move the amendment to the Secretary for Commerce and Economic Development's motion.

LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014 1105

MR ALBERT CHAN (in Cantonese): President, I move that Amendment No 15, as set out in Appendix II to the Script, be passed.

Mr Albert CHAN moved the following amendment:

"RESOLVED that the motion to be moved by the Secretary for Commerce and Economic Development under section 54A of the Interpretation and General Clauses Ordinance (Cap. 1) at the Legislative Council meeting of 2 July 2014 be amended, in paragraph (1), in the definition of commencement date, in subparagraph (a), by deleting "the 14th day" and substituting "the 365th day"."

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): I now propose the question to you and that is: That the amendment moved by Mr Albert CHAN be passed.

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): I now put the question to you as stated. Will those in favour please raise their hands?

(Members raised their hands)

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Those against please raise their hands.

(Members raised their hands)

Mr Albert CHAN rose to claim a division.

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Mr Albert CHAN has claimed a division. The division bell will ring for one minute.

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Will Members please proceed to vote.

1106 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Will Members please check their votes. If there are no queries, voting shall now stop and the result will be displayed.

Functional Constituencies:

Dr LAU Wong-fat, Mr Abraham SHEK, Mr Tommy CHEUNG, Mr Jeffrey LAM, Mr Andrew LEUNG, Mr WONG Ting-kwong, Ms Starry LEE, Dr LAM Tai-fai, Mr CHAN Kin-por, Mr IP Kwok-him, Mr NG Leung-sing, Mr Steven HO, Mr Frankie YICK, Mr YIU Si-wing, Mr MA Fung-kwok, Mr Charles Peter MOK, Miss CHAN Yuen-han, Mr Kenneth LEUNG, Mr KWOK Wai-keung, Mr Christopher CHEUNG, Mr POON Siu-ping, Mr TANG Ka-piu, Ir Dr LO Wai-kwok and Mr Tony TSE voted against the amendment.

Geographical Constituencies:

Mr LEUNG Kwok-hung, Mr Albert CHAN, Ms Claudia MO and Mr CHAN Chi-chuen voted for the amendment.

Mr CHAN Kam-lam, Mr TAM Yiu-chung, Mr WONG Kwok-hing, Mr CHAN Hak-kan, Mrs Regina IP, Mr Michael TIEN, Mr CHAN Han-pan, Dr Elizabeth QUAT and Dr CHIANG Lai-wan voted against the amendment.

THE PRESIDENT, Mr Jasper TSANG, did not cast any vote.

THE PRESIDENT announced that among the Members returned by functional constituencies, 24 were present and 24 were against the amendment; while among the Members returned by geographical constituencies through direct elections, 14 were present, four were in favour of the amendment and nine against it. Since the question was not agreed by a majority of each of the two groups of Members present, he therefore declared that the amendment was negatived.

LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014 1107

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): This Council will now proceed to deal with Amendment No 16 as set out in Appendix II to the Script.

Mr Albert CHAN, you may now move the amendment to the Secretary for Commerce and Economic Development's motion.

MR ALBERT CHAN (in Cantonese): President, I move that Amendment No 16, as set out in Appendix II to the Script, be passed.

Mr Albert CHAN moved the following amendment:

"RESOLVED that the motion to be moved by the Secretary for Commerce and Economic Development under section 54A of the Interpretation and General Clauses Ordinance (Cap. 1) at the Legislative Council meeting of 2 July 2014 be amended, in paragraph (1), by deleting "the 14th day" (wherever appearing) and substituting "the 365th day"."

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): I now propose the question to you and that is: That the amendment moved by Mr Albert CHAN be passed.

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): I now put the question to you as stated. Will those in favour please raise their hands?

(Members raised their hands)

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Those against please raise their hands.

(Members raised their hands)

Mr Albert CHAN rose to claim a division.

1108 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Mr Albert CHAN has claimed a division. The division bell will ring for one minute.

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Will Members please proceed to vote.

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Will Members please check their votes. If there are no queries, voting shall now stop and the result will be displayed.

Functional Constituencies:

Dr LAU Wong-fat, Mr Abraham SHEK, Mr Tommy CHEUNG, Mr Jeffrey LAM, Mr Andrew LEUNG, Mr WONG Ting-kwong, Ms Starry LEE, Dr LAM Tai-fai, Mr CHAN Kin-por, Mr IP Kwok-him, Mr NG Leung-sing, Mr Steven HO, Mr Frankie YICK, Mr YIU Si-wing, Mr MA Fung-kwok, Mr Charles Peter MOK, Miss CHAN Yuen-han, Mr Kenneth LEUNG, Mr KWOK Wai-keung, Mr Christopher CHEUNG, Mr POON Siu-ping, Mr TANG Ka-piu, Ir Dr LO Wai-kwok and Mr Tony TSE voted against the amendment.

Geographical Constituencies:

Mr LEUNG Kwok-hung, Mr Albert CHAN, Ms Claudia MO, Mr CHAN Chi-chuen and Dr KWOK Ka-ki voted for the amendment.

Mr CHAN Kam-lam, Mr TAM Yiu-chung, Mr WONG Kwok-hing, Mr CHAN Hak-kan, Mr WONG Kwok-kin, Mrs Regina IP, Mr Michael TIEN, Mr CHAN Han-pan, Dr Elizabeth QUAT and Dr CHIANG Lai-wan voted against the amendment.

THE PRESIDENT, Mr Jasper TSANG, did not cast any vote.

THE PRESIDENT announced that among the Members returned by functional constituencies, 24 were present and 24 were against the amendment; while among LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014 1109 the Members returned by geographical constituencies through direct elections, 16 were present, five were in favour of the amendment and 10 against it. Since the question was not agreed by a majority of each of the two groups of Members present, he therefore declared that the amendment was negatived.

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): This Council will now proceed to deal with Amendment No 17 as set out in Appendix II to the Script.

Mr Albert CHAN, you may now move the amendment to the Secretary for Commerce and Economic Development's motion.

MR ALBERT CHAN (in Cantonese): President, I move that Amendment No 17, as set out in Appendix II to the Script, be passed.

Mr Albert CHAN moved the following amendment:

"RESOLVED that the motion to be moved by the Secretary for Commerce and Economic Development under section 54A of the Interpretation and General Clauses Ordinance (Cap. 1) at the Legislative Council meeting of 2 July 2014 be amended -

(a) in paragraph (1), in the definition of commencement date, in subparagraph (a), by deleting "the 14th day" and substituting "the 182nd day";

(b) in paragraph (1), by deleting "Innovation and Technology Bureau" and substituting "Technology Bureau";

(c) in paragraph (2)(a), by deleting "Secretary for Innovation and Technology" (wherever appearing) and substituting "Secretary for Technology";

(d) in paragraph (2)(b), by deleting "Permanent Secretary for Innovation and Technology" (wherever appearing) and substituting "Permanent Secretary for Technology";

1110 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014

(e) in the Schedule, by deleting "Secretary for Innovation and Technology" and substituting "Secretary for Technology";

(f) in the Schedule, by deleting "Innovation and Technology Bureau" and substituting "Technology Bureau"."

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): I now propose the question to you and that is: That the amendment moved by Mr Albert CHAN be passed.

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): I now put the question to you as stated. Will those in favour please raise their hands?

(Members raised their hands)

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Those against please raise their hands.

(Members raised their hands)

Mr Albert CHAN rose to claim a division.

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Mr Albert CHAN has claimed a division. The division bell will ring for one minute.

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Will Members please proceed to vote.

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Will Members please check their votes. If there are no queries, voting shall now stop and the result will be displayed.

Functional Constituencies:

Dr LAU Wong-fat, Mr Abraham SHEK, Mr Tommy CHEUNG, Mr Jeffrey LAM, Mr Andrew LEUNG, Mr WONG Ting-kwong, Ms Starry LEE, Dr LAM LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014 1111

Tai-fai, Mr CHAN Kin-por, Mr IP Kwok-him, Mr NG Leung-sing, Mr Steven HO, Mr Frankie YICK, Mr YIU Si-wing, Mr MA Fung-kwok, Mr Charles Peter MOK, Miss CHAN Yuen-han, Mr Kenneth LEUNG, Mr KWOK Wai-keung, Mr Christopher CHEUNG, Mr POON Siu-ping, Mr TANG Ka-piu, Ir Dr LO Wai-kwok and Mr Tony TSE voted against the amendment.

Geographical Constituencies:

Mr LEUNG Kwok-hung, Mr Albert CHAN, Ms Claudia MO, Mr CHAN Chi-chuen and Dr KWOK Ka-ki voted for the amendment.

Mr CHAN Kam-lam, Mr TAM Yiu-chung, Mr WONG Kwok-hing, Mr CHAN Hak-kan, Mr WONG Kwok-kin, Mrs Regina IP, Mr Michael TIEN, Mr CHAN Han-pan, Dr Elizabeth QUAT and Dr CHIANG Lai-wan voted against the amendment.

THE PRESIDENT, Mr Jasper TSANG, did not cast any vote.

THE PRESIDENT announced that among the Members returned by functional constituencies, 24 were present and 24 were against the amendment; while among the Members returned by geographical constituencies through direct elections, 16 were present, five were in favour of the amendment and 10 against it. Since the question was not agreed by a majority of each of the two groups of Members present, he therefore declared that the amendment was negatived.

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): This Council will now proceed to deal with Amendment No 18 as set out in Appendix II to the Script.

Mr Albert CHAN, you may now move the amendment to the Secretary for Commerce and Economic Development's motion.

1112 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014

MR ALBERT CHAN (in Cantonese): President, I move that Amendment No 18, as set out in Appendix II to the Script, be passed.

Mr Albert CHAN moved the following amendment:

"RESOLVED that the motion to be moved by the Secretary for Commerce and Economic Development under section 54A of the Interpretation and General Clauses Ordinance (Cap. 1) at the Legislative Council meeting of 2 July 2014 be amended -

(a) in paragraph (1), by deleting "the 14th day" (wherever appearing) and substituting "the 182nd day";

(b) in paragraph (1), by deleting "Innovation and Technology Bureau" and substituting "Technology Bureau";

(c) in paragraph 2(a), by deleting "Secretary for Innovation and Technology" (wherever appearing) and substituting "Secretary for Technology";

(d) in paragraph 2(b), by deleting "Permanent Secretary for Innovation and Technology" (wherever appearing) and substituting "Permanent Secretary for Technology";

(e) in the Schedule, by deleting "Secretary for Innovation and Technology" and substituting "Secretary for Technology";

(f) in the Schedule, by deleting "Innovation and Technology Bureau" and substituting "Technology Bureau"."

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): I now propose the question to you and that is: That the amendment moved by Mr Albert CHAN be passed.

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): I now put the question to you as stated. Will those in favour please raise their hands?

(Members raised their hands)

LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014 1113

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Those against please raise their hands.

(Members raised their hands)

Mr Albert CHAN rose to claim a division.

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Mr Albert CHAN has claimed a division. The division bell will ring for one minute.

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Will Members please proceed to vote.

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Will Members please check their votes. If there are no queries, voting shall now stop and the result will be displayed.

Functional Constituencies:

Dr LAU Wong-fat, Mr Abraham SHEK, Mr Tommy CHEUNG, Mr Jeffrey LAM, Mr Andrew LEUNG, Mr WONG Ting-kwong, Ms Starry LEE, Dr LAM Tai-fai, Mr CHAN Kin-por, Mr IP Kwok-him, Mr NG Leung-sing, Mr Steven HO, Mr Frankie YICK, Mr YIU Si-wing, Mr MA Fung-kwok, Mr Charles Peter MOK, Miss CHAN Yuen-han, Mr Kenneth LEUNG, Mr KWOK Wai-keung, Mr Christopher CHEUNG, Mr POON Siu-ping, Mr TANG Ka-piu, Ir Dr LO Wai-kwok and Mr Tony TSE voted against the amendment.

Geographical Constituencies:

Mr LEUNG Kwok-hung, Mr Albert CHAN, Ms Claudia MO, Mr CHAN Chi-chuen and Dr KWOK Ka-ki voted for the amendment.

Mr CHAN Kam-lam, Mr TAM Yiu-chung, Mr WONG Kwok-hing, Mr CHAN Hak-kan, Mr WONG Kwok-kin, Mrs Regina IP, Mr Michael TIEN, Mr CHAN Han-pan, Dr Elizabeth QUAT and Dr CHIANG Lai-wan voted against the amendment.

1114 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014

THE PRESIDENT, Mr Jasper TSANG, did not cast any vote.

THE PRESIDENT announced that among the Members returned by functional constituencies, 24 were present and 24 were against the amendment; while among the Members returned by geographical constituencies through direct elections, 16 were present, five were in favour of the amendment and 10 against it. Since the question was not agreed by a majority of each of the two groups of Members present, he therefore declared that the amendment was negatived.

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): This Council will now proceed to deal with Amendment No 19 as set out in Appendix II to the Script.

Mr Albert CHAN, you may now move the amendment to the Secretary for Commerce and Economic Development's motion.

MR ALBERT CHAN (in Cantonese): President, I move that Amendment No 19, as set out in Appendix II to the Script, be passed.

Mr Albert CHAN moved the following amendment:

"RESOLVED that the motion to be moved by the Secretary for Commerce and Economic Development under section 54A of the Interpretation and General Clauses Ordinance (Cap. 1) at the Legislative Council meeting of 2 July 2014 be amended, in paragraph (1), in the definition of commencement date, in subparagraph (a), by deleting "the 14th day" and substituting "the 182nd day"."

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): I now propose the question to you and that is: That the amendment moved by Mr Albert CHAN be passed.

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): I now put the question to you as stated. Will those in favour please raise their hands?

(Members raised their hands)

LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014 1115

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Those against please raise their hands.

(Members raised their hands)

Mr Albert CHAN rose to claim a division.

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Mr Albert CHAN has claimed a division. The division bell will ring for one minute.

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Will Members please proceed to vote.

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Will Members please check their votes. If there are no queries, voting shall now stop and the result will be displayed.

Functional Constituencies:

Dr LAU Wong-fat, Mr Abraham SHEK, Mr Tommy CHEUNG, Mr Jeffrey LAM, Mr Andrew LEUNG, Mr WONG Ting-kwong, Ms Starry LEE, Dr LAM Tai-fai, Mr CHAN Kin-por, Mr IP Kwok-him, Mr NG Leung-sing, Mr Steven HO, Mr Frankie YICK, Mr YIU Si-wing, Mr MA Fung-kwok, Mr Charles Peter MOK, Miss CHAN Yuen-han, Mr Kenneth LEUNG, Mr KWOK Wai-keung, Mr Christopher CHEUNG, Mr POON Siu-ping, Mr TANG Ka-piu, Ir Dr LO Wai-kwok and Mr Tony TSE voted against the amendment.

Geographical Constituencies:

Mr LEUNG Kwok-hung, Mr Albert CHAN, Ms Claudia MO, Mr CHAN Chi-chuen and Dr KWOK Ka-ki voted for the amendment.

Mr CHAN Kam-lam, Mr TAM Yiu-chung, Mr WONG Kwok-hing, Mr CHAN Hak-kan, Mr WONG Kwok-kin, Mrs Regina IP, Mr Michael TIEN, Mr CHAN Han-pan, Dr Elizabeth QUAT and Dr CHIANG Lai-wan voted against the amendment.

1116 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014

THE PRESIDENT, Mr Jasper TSANG, did not cast any vote.

THE PRESIDENT announced that among the Members returned by functional constituencies, 24 were present and 24 were against the amendment; while among the Members returned by geographical constituencies through direct elections, 16 were present, five were in favour of the amendment and 10 against it. Since the question was not agreed by a majority of each of the two groups of Members present, he therefore declared that the amendment was negatived.

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): This Council will now proceed to deal with Amendment No 20 as set out in Appendix II to the Script.

Mr Albert CHAN, you may now move the amendment to the Secretary for Commerce and Economic Development's motion.

MR ALBERT CHAN (in Cantonese): President, I move that Amendment No 20, as set out in Appendix II to the Script, be passed.

Mr Albert CHAN moved the following amendment:

"RESOLVED that the motion to be moved by the Secretary for Commerce and Economic Development under section 54A of the Interpretation and General Clauses Ordinance (Cap. 1) at the Legislative Council meeting of 2 July 2014 be amended, in paragraph (1), by deleting "the 14th day" (wherever appearing) and substituting "the 182nd day"."

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): I now propose the question to you and that is: That the amendment moved by Mr Albert CHAN be passed.

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): I now put the question to you as stated. Will those in favour please raise their hands?

(Members raised their hands)

LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014 1117

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Those against please raise their hands.

(Members raised their hands)

Mr Albert CHAN rose to claim a division.

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Mr Albert CHAN has claimed a division. The division bell will ring for one minute.

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Will Members please proceed to vote.

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Will Members please check their votes. If there are no queries, voting shall now stop and the result will be displayed.

Functional Constituencies:

Dr LAU Wong-fat, Mr Abraham SHEK, Mr Tommy CHEUNG, Mr Jeffrey LAM, Mr Andrew LEUNG, Mr WONG Ting-kwong, Ms Starry LEE, Dr LAM Tai-fai, Mr CHAN Kin-por, Mr IP Kwok-him, Mr NG Leung-sing, Mr Steven HO, Mr Frankie YICK, Mr YIU Si-wing, Mr MA Fung-kwok, Mr Charles Peter MOK, Miss CHAN Yuen-han, Mr Kenneth LEUNG, Mr KWOK Wai-keung, Mr Christopher CHEUNG, Mr POON Siu-ping, Mr TANG Ka-piu, Ir Dr LO Wai-kwok and Mr Tony TSE voted against the amendment.

Geographical Constituencies:

Mr LEUNG Kwok-hung, Mr Albert CHAN, Ms Claudia MO and Mr CHAN Chi-chuen voted for the amendment.

Mr CHAN Kam-lam, Mr TAM Yiu-chung, Mr WONG Kwok-hing, Mr CHAN Hak-kan, Mr WONG Kwok-kin, Mrs Regina IP, Mr Michael TIEN, Mr CHAN Han-pan, Dr Elizabeth QUAT and Dr CHIANG Lai-wan voted against the amendment.

1118 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014

THE PRESIDENT, Mr Jasper TSANG, did not cast any vote.

THE PRESIDENT announced that among the Members returned by functional constituencies, 24 were present and 24 were against the amendment; while among the Members returned by geographical constituencies through direct elections, 15 were present, four were in favour of the amendment and 10 against it. Since the question was not agreed by a majority of each of the two groups of Members present, he therefore declared that the amendment was negatived.

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): This Council will now proceed to deal with Amendment No 21 as set out in Appendix II to the Script.

Mr CHAN Chi-chuen, you may now move the amendment to the Secretary for Commerce and Economic Development's motion.

MR CHAN CHI-CHUEN (in Cantonese): President, I move that Amendment No 21, as set out in Appendix II to the Script, be passed.

Mr CHAN Chi-chuen moved the following amendment:

"RESOLVED that the motion to be moved by the Secretary for Commerce and Economic Development under section 54A of the Interpretation and General Clauses Ordinance (Cap. 1) at the Legislative Council meeting of 2 July 2014 be amended -

(a) in paragraph (1), by deleting "Innovation and Technology Bureau" and substituting "High Technology Bureau";

(b) in paragraph (2)(a), by deleting "Secretary for Innovation and Technology" (wherever appearing) and substituting "Secretary for High Technology";

(c) in paragraph (2)(b), by deleting "Permanent Secretary for Innovation and Technology" (wherever appearing) and substituting "Permanent Secretary for High Technology";

LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014 1119

(d) in the Schedule, by deleting "Secretary for Innovation and Technology" and substituting "Secretary for High Technology";

(e) in the Schedule by deleting "Innovation and Technology Bureau" and substituting "High Technology Bureau"."

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): I now propose the question to you and that is: That the amendment moved by Mr CHAN Chi-chuen be passed.

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): I now put the question to you as stated. Will those in favour please raise their hands?

(Members raised their hands)

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Those against please raise their hands.

(Members raised their hands)

Mr LEUNG Kwok-hung rose to claim a division.

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Mr LEUNG Kwok-hung has claimed a division. The division bell will ring for one minute.

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Will Members please proceed to vote.

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Will Members please check their votes. If there are no queries, voting shall now stop and the result will be displayed.

1120 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014

Functional Constituencies:

Dr LAU Wong-fat, Mr Abraham SHEK, Mr Tommy CHEUNG, Prof Joseph LEE, Mr Jeffrey LAM, Mr Andrew LEUNG, Mr WONG Ting-kwong, Ms Starry LEE, Dr LAM Tai-fai, Mr CHAN Kin-por, Mr IP Kwok-him, Mr Steven HO, Mr Frankie YICK, Mr YIU Si-wing, Mr MA Fung-kwok, Mr Charles Peter MOK, Miss CHAN Yuen-han, Mr Kenneth LEUNG, Mr KWOK Wai-keung, Mr Christopher CHEUNG, Mr POON Siu-ping, Mr TANG Ka-piu, Ir Dr LO Wai-kwok and Mr Tony TSE voted against the amendment.

Geographical Constituencies:

Mr LEUNG Kwok-hung, Mr Albert CHAN, Ms Claudia MO and Mr CHAN Chi-chuen voted for the amendment.

Mr CHAN Kam-lam, Mr TAM Yiu-chung, Mr WONG Kwok-hing, Mr CHAN Hak-kan, Mr WONG Kwok-kin, Mrs Regina IP, Mr Michael TIEN, Mr CHAN Han-pan, Dr Elizabeth QUAT and Dr CHIANG Lai-wan voted against the amendment.

THE PRESIDENT, Mr Jasper TSANG, did not cast any vote.

THE PRESIDENT announced that among the Members returned by functional constituencies, 24 were present and 24 were against the amendment; while among the Members returned by geographical constituencies through direct elections, 15 were present, four were in favour of the amendment and 10 against it. Since the question was not agreed by a majority of each of the two groups of Members present, he therefore declared that the amendment was negatived.

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): This Council will now proceed to deal with Amendment No 22 as set out in Appendix II to the Script.

Mr CHAN Chi-chuen, you may now move the amendment to the Secretary for Commerce and Economic Development's motion.

LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014 1121

MR CHAN CHI-CHUEN (in Cantonese): President, I move that Amendment No 22, as set out in Appendix II to the Script, be passed.

Mr CHAN Chi-chuen moved the following amendment:

"RESOLVED that the motion to be moved by the Secretary for Commerce and Economic Development under section 54A of the Interpretation and General Clauses Ordinance (Cap. 1) at the Legislative Council meeting of 2 July 2014 be amended -

(a) in paragraph (1), by deleting "Innovation and Technology Bureau" and substituting "Information and Technology Bureau";

(b) in paragraph (2)(a), by deleting "Secretary for Innovation and Technology" (wherever appearing) and substituting "Secretary for Information and Technology";

(c) in paragraph (2)(b), by deleting "Permanent Secretary for Innovation and Technology" (wherever appearing) and substituting "Permanent Secretary for Information and Technology";

(d) in the Schedule, by deleting "Secretary for Innovation and Technology" and substituting "Secretary for Information and Technology";

(e) in the Schedule, by deleting "Innovation and Technology Bureau" and substituting "Information and Technology Bureau"."

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): I now propose the question to you and that is: That the amendment moved by Mr CHAN Chi-chuen be passed.

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): I now put the question to you as stated. Will those in favour please raise their hands?

(Members raised their hands)

1122 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Those against please raise their hands.

(Members raised their hands)

Mr LEUNG Kwok-hung rose to claim a division.

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Mr LEUNG Kwok-hung has claimed a division. The division bell will ring for one minute.

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Will Members please proceed to vote.

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Will Members please check their votes. If there are no queries, voting shall now stop and the result will be displayed.

Functional Constituencies:

Dr LAU Wong-fat, Mr Abraham SHEK, Mr Tommy CHEUNG, Prof Joseph LEE, Mr Jeffrey LAM, Mr Andrew LEUNG, Mr WONG Ting-kwong, Ms Starry LEE, Dr LAM Tai-fai, Mr CHAN Kin-por, Mr IP Kwok-him, Mr NG Leung-sing, Mr Steven HO, Mr Frankie YICK, Mr YIU Si-wing, Mr MA Fung-kwok, Mr Charles Peter MOK, Miss CHAN Yuen-han, Mr Kenneth LEUNG, Mr KWOK Wai-keung, Mr Christopher CHEUNG, Mr POON Siu-ping, Mr TANG Ka-piu, Ir Dr LO Wai-kwok and Mr Tony TSE voted against the amendment.

Geographical Constituencies:

Mr LEUNG Kwok-hung, Mr Albert CHAN, Ms Claudia MO and Mr CHAN Chi-chuen voted for the amendment.

Mr CHAN Kam-lam, Mr TAM Yiu-chung, Mr WONG Kwok-hing, Mr CHAN Hak-kan, Mr WONG Kwok-kin, Mr Michael TIEN, Mr CHAN Han-pan, Dr Elizabeth QUAT and Dr CHIANG Lai-wan voted against the amendment.

LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014 1123

THE PRESIDENT, Mr Jasper TSANG, did not cast any vote.

THE PRESIDENT announced that among the Members returned by functional constituencies, 25 were present and 25 were against the amendment; while among the Members returned by geographical constituencies through direct elections, 14 were present, four were in favour of the amendment and nine against it. Since the question was not agreed by a majority of each of the two groups of Members present, he therefore declared that the amendment was negatived.

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): This Council will now proceed to deal with Amendment No 23 as set out in Appendix II to the Script.

Mr Albert CHAN, you may now move the amendment to the Secretary for Commerce and Economic Development's motion.

MR ALBERT CHAN (in Cantonese): President, I move that Amendment No 23, as set out in Appendix II to the Script, be passed.

Mr Albert CHAN moved the following amendment:

"RESOLVED that the motion to be moved by the Secretary for Commerce and Economic Development under section 54A of the Interpretation and General Clauses Ordinance (Cap. 1) at the Legislative Council meeting of 2 July 2014 be amended -

(a) in paragraph (1), by deleting "Innovation and Technology Bureau" and substituting "Originality and Technology Bureau";

(b) in paragraph (2)(a), by deleting "Secretary for Innovation and Technology" (wherever appearing) and substituting "Secretary for Originality and Technology";

(c) in paragraph (2)(b), by deleting "Permanent Secretary for Innovation and Technology" (wherever appearing) and substituting "Permanent Secretary for Originality and Technology"; 1124 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014

(d) in the Schedule, by deleting "Secretary for Innovation and Technology" and substituting "Secretary for Originality and Technology";

(e) in the Schedule, by deleting "Innovation and Technology Bureau" and substituting "Originality and Technology Bureau"."

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): I now propose the question to you and that is: That the amendment moved by Mr Albert CHAN be passed.

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): I now put the question to you as stated. Will those in favour please raise their hands?

(Members raised their hands)

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Those against please raise their hands.

(Members raised their hands)

Mr Albert CHAN rose to claim a division.

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Mr Albert CHAN has claimed a division. The division bell will ring for one minute.

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Will Members please proceed to vote.

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Will Members please check their votes. If there are no queries, voting shall now stop and the result will be displayed.

LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014 1125

Functional Constituencies:

Dr LAU Wong-fat, Mr Abraham SHEK, Mr Tommy CHEUNG, Prof Joseph LEE, Mr Jeffrey LAM, Mr Andrew LEUNG, Mr WONG Ting-kwong, Ms Starry LEE, Dr LAM Tai-fai, Mr CHAN Kin-por, Mr IP Kwok-him, Mr NG Leung-sing, Mr Steven HO, Mr Frankie YICK, Mr YIU Si-wing, Mr MA Fung-kwok, Mr Charles Peter MOK, Miss CHAN Yuen-han, Mr Kenneth LEUNG, Mr KWOK Wai-keung, Mr Christopher CHEUNG, Mr POON Siu-ping, Mr TANG Ka-piu, Ir Dr LO Wai-kwok and Mr Tony TSE voted against the amendment.

Geographical Constituencies:

Mr LEUNG Kwok-hung, Mr Albert CHAN, Ms Claudia MO and Mr CHAN Chi-chuen voted for the amendment.

Mr TAM Yiu-chung, Mr WONG Kwok-hing, Mr CHAN Hak-kan, Mr WONG Kwok-kin, Mrs Regina IP, Mr Michael TIEN, Mr CHAN Han-pan, Dr Elizabeth QUAT, Dr CHIANG Lai-wan and Mr Christopher CHUNG voted against the amendment.

THE PRESIDENT, Mr Jasper TSANG, did not cast any vote.

THE PRESIDENT announced that among the Members returned by functional constituencies, 25 were present and 25 were against the amendment; while among the Members returned by geographical constituencies through direct elections, 15 were present, four were in favour of the amendment and 10 against it. Since the question was not agreed by a majority of each of the two groups of Members present, he therefore declared that the amendment was negatived.

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): This Council will now proceed to deal with Amendment No 24 as set out in Appendix II to the Script.

Mr Albert CHAN, you may now move the amendment to the Secretary for Commerce and Economic Development's motion.

1126 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014

MR ALBERT CHAN (in Cantonese): President, I move that Amendment No 24, as set out in Appendix II to the Script, be passed.

Mr Albert CHAN moved the following amendment:

"RESOLVED that the motion to be moved by the Secretary for Commerce and Economic Development under section 54A of the Interpretation and General Clauses Ordinance (Cap. 1) at the Legislative Council meeting of 2 July 2014 be amended -

(a) in paragraph (1), by deleting "Innovation and Technology Bureau" and substituting "Technology Bureau";

(b) in paragraph (2)(a), by deleting "Secretary for Innovation and Technology" (wherever appearing) and substituting "Secretary for Technology";

(c) in paragraph (2)(b), by deleting "Permanent Secretary for Innovation and Technology" (wherever appearing) and substituting "Permanent Secretary for Technology";

(d) in the Schedule, by deleting "Secretary for Innovation and Technology" and substituting "Secretary for Technology";

(e) in the Schedule, by deleting "Innovation and Technology Bureau" and substituting "Technology Bureau"."

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): I now propose the question to you and that is: That the amendment moved by Mr Albert CHAN be passed.

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): I now put the question to you as stated. Will those in favour please raise their hands?

(Members raised their hands)

LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014 1127

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Those against please raise their hands.

(Members raised their hands)

Mr Albert CHAN rose to claim a division.

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Mr Albert CHAN has claimed a division. The division bell will ring for one minute.

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Will Members please proceed to vote.

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Will Members please check their votes. If there are no queries, voting shall now stop and the result will be displayed.

Functional Constituencies:

Dr LAU Wong-fat, Mr Abraham SHEK, Mr Tommy CHEUNG, Prof Joseph LEE, Mr Jeffrey LAM, Mr WONG Ting-kwong, Ms Starry LEE, Dr LAM Tai-fai, Mr CHAN Kin-por, Mr IP Kwok-him, Mr NG Leung-sing, Mr Steven HO, Mr Frankie YICK, Mr YIU Si-wing, Mr MA Fung-kwok, Mr Charles Peter MOK, Miss CHAN Yuen-han, Mr Kenneth LEUNG, Mr KWOK Wai-keung, Mr Christopher CHEUNG, Mr POON Siu-ping, Mr TANG Ka-piu, Ir Dr LO Wai-kwok and Mr Tony TSE voted against the amendment.

Geographical Constituencies:

Mr LEUNG Kwok-hung, Mr Albert CHAN, Ms Claudia MO and Mr CHAN Chi-chuen voted for the amendment.

Mr TAM Yiu-chung, Mr WONG Kwok-hing, Mr CHAN Hak-kan, Mr WONG Kwok-kin, Mrs Regina IP, Mr Michael TIEN, Mr CHAN Han-pan, Dr Elizabeth QUAT, Dr CHIANG Lai-wan and Mr Christopher CHUNG voted against the amendment.

1128 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014

THE PRESIDENT, Mr Jasper TSANG, did not cast any vote.

THE PRESIDENT announced that among the Members returned by functional constituencies, 24 were present and 24 were against the amendment; while among the Members returned by geographical constituencies through direct elections, 15 were present, four were in favour of the amendment and 10 against it. Since the question was not agreed by a majority of each of the two groups of Members present, he therefore declared that the amendment was negatived.

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): This Council will now proceed to deal with Amendment No 25 as set out in Appendix II to the Script.

Mr CHAN Chi-chuen, you may now move the amendment to the Secretary for Commerce and Economic Development's motion.

MR CHAN CHI-CHUEN (in Cantonese): President, I move that Amendment No 25, as set out in Appendix II to the Script, be passed.

Mr CHAN Chi-chuen moved the following amendment:

"RESOLVED that the motion to be moved by the Secretary for Commerce and Economic Development under section 54A of the Interpretation and General Clauses Ordinance (Cap. 1) at the Legislative Council meeting of 2 July 2014 be amended -

(a) in paragraph (1), by deleting "Innovation and Technology Bureau" and substituting "High Technology Bureau";

(b) in paragraph (1), in the definition of commencement date, in subparagraph (b), by deleting "the 14th day" and substituting "the 270th day";

(c) in paragraph (2)(a), by deleting "Secretary for Innovation and Technology" (wherever appearing) and substituting "Secretary for High Technology";

LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014 1129

(d) in paragraph (2)(b), by deleting "Permanent Secretary for Innovation and Technology" (wherever appearing) and substituting "Permanent Secretary for High Technology";

(e) in the Schedule, by deleting "Secretary for Innovation and Technology" and substituting "Secretary for High Technology";

(f) in the Schedule, by deleting "Innovation and Technology Bureau" and substituting "High Technology Bureau"."

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): I now propose the question to you and that is: That the amendment moved by Mr CHAN Chi-chuen be passed.

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): I now put the question to you as stated. Will those in favour please raise their hands?

(Members raised their hands)

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Those against please raise their hands.

(Members raised their hands)

Mr LEUNG Kwok-hung rose to claim a division.

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Mr LEUNG Kwok-hung has claimed a division. The division bell will ring for one minute.

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Will Members please proceed to vote.

1130 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Will Members please check their votes. If there are no queries, voting shall now stop and the result will be displayed.

Functional Constituencies:

Dr LAU Wong-fat, Mr Abraham SHEK, Mr Tommy CHEUNG, Prof Joseph LEE, Mr Jeffrey LAM, Mr WONG Ting-kwong, Ms Starry LEE, Dr LAM Tai-fai, Mr CHAN Kin-por, Mr IP Kwok-him, Mr NG Leung-sing, Mr Steven HO, Mr Frankie YICK, Mr YIU Si-wing, Mr MA Fung-kwok, Mr Charles Peter MOK, Miss CHAN Yuen-han, Mr Kenneth LEUNG, Mr KWOK Wai-keung, Mr Christopher CHEUNG, Mr POON Siu-ping, Mr TANG Ka-piu, Ir Dr LO Wai-kwok and Mr Tony TSE voted against the amendment.

Geographical Constituencies:

Mr LEUNG Kwok-hung, Mr Albert CHAN, Ms Claudia MO and Mr CHAN Chi-chuen voted for the amendment.

Mr CHAN Kam-lam, Mr TAM Yiu-chung, Mr WONG Kwok-hing, Mr CHAN Hak-kan, Mr WONG Kwok-kin, Mrs Regina IP, Mr Michael TIEN, Mr CHAN Han-pan, Dr Elizabeth QUAT, Dr CHIANG Lai-wan and Mr Christopher CHUNG voted against the amendment.

THE PRESIDENT, Mr Jasper TSANG, did not cast any vote.

THE PRESIDENT announced that among the Members returned by functional constituencies, 24 were present and 24 were against the amendment; while among the Members returned by geographical constituencies through direct elections, 16 were present, four were in favour of the amendment and 11 against it. Since the question was not agreed by a majority of each of the two groups of Members present, he therefore declared that the amendment was negatived.

LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014 1131

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): This Council will now proceed to deal with Amendment No 26 as set out in Appendix II to the Script.

Mr CHAN Chi-chuen, you may now move the amendment to the Secretary for Commerce and Economic Development's motion.

MR CHAN CHI-CHUEN (in Cantonese): President, I move that Amendment No 26, as set out in Appendix II to the Script, be passed.

Mr CHAN Chi-chuen moved the following amendment:

"RESOLVED that the motion to be moved by the Secretary for Commerce and Economic Development under section 54A of the Interpretation and General Clauses Ordinance (Cap. 1) at the Legislative Council meeting of 2 July 2014 be amended -

(a) in paragraph (1), by deleting "Innovation and Technology Bureau" and substituting "Information and Technology Bureau";

(b) in paragraph (1), in the definition of commencement date, in subparagraph (b), by deleting "the 14th day" and substituting "the 100th day";

(c) in paragraph (2)(a), by deleting "Secretary for Innovation and Technology" (wherever appearing) and substituting "Secretary for Information and Technology";

(d) in paragraph (2)(b), by deleting "Permanent Secretary for Innovation and Technology" (wherever appearing) and substituting "Permanent Secretary for Information and Technology";

(e) in the Schedule, by deleting "Secretary for Innovation and Technology" and substituting "Secretary for Information and Technology";

1132 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014

(f) in the Schedule, by deleting "Innovation and Technology Bureau" and substituting "Information and Technology Bureau"."

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): I now propose the question to you and that is: That the amendment moved by Mr CHAN Chi-chuen be passed.

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): I now put the question to you as stated. Will those in favour please raise their hands?

(Members raised their hands)

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Those against please raise their hands.

(Members raised their hands)

Mr LEUNG Kwok-hung rose to claim a division.

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Mr LEUNG Kwok-hung has claimed a division. The division bell will ring for one minute.

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Will Members please proceed to vote.

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Will Members please check their votes. If there are no queries, voting shall now stop and the result will be displayed.

Functional Constituencies:

Dr LAU Wong-fat, Mr Abraham SHEK, Mr Tommy CHEUNG, Prof Joseph LEE, Mr Jeffrey LAM, Mr Andrew LEUNG, Mr WONG Ting-kwong, Ms Starry LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014 1133

LEE, Mr CHAN Kin-por, Mr IP Kwok-him, Mr NG Leung-sing, Mr Steven HO, Mr Frankie YICK, Mr YIU Si-wing, Mr MA Fung-kwok, Mr Charles Peter MOK, Miss CHAN Yuen-han, Mr Kenneth LEUNG, Mr KWOK Wai-keung, Mr Christopher CHEUNG, Mr POON Siu-ping, Mr TANG Ka-piu, Ir Dr LO Wai-kwok, Mr CHUNG Kwok-pan and Mr Tony TSE voted against the amendment.

Geographical Constituencies:

Mr LEUNG Kwok-hung, Mr Albert CHAN, Ms Claudia MO and Mr CHAN Chi-chuen voted for the amendment.

Mr CHAN Kam-lam, Mr TAM Yiu-chung, Mr WONG Kwok-hing, Mr WONG Kwok-kin, Mrs Regina IP, Mr Michael TIEN, Mr CHAN Han-pan, Dr Elizabeth QUAT, Dr CHIANG Lai-wan and Mr Christopher CHUNG voted against the amendment.

THE PRESIDENT, Mr Jasper TSANG, did not cast any vote.

THE PRESIDENT announced that among the Members returned by functional constituencies, 25 were present and 25 were against the amendment; while among the Members returned by geographical constituencies through direct elections, 15 were present, four were in favour of the amendment and 10 against it. Since the question was not agreed by a majority of each of the two groups of Members present, he therefore declared that the amendment was negatived.

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): This Council will now proceed to deal with Amendment No 27 as set out in Appendix II to the Script.

Mr Albert CHAN, you may now move the amendment to the Secretary for Commerce and Economic Development's motion.

1134 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014

MR ALBERT CHAN (in Cantonese): President, I move that Amendment No 27, as set out in Appendix II to the Script, be passed.

Mr Albert CHAN moved the following amendment:

"RESOLVED that the motion to be moved by the Secretary for Commerce and Economic Development under section 54A of the Interpretation and General Clauses Ordinance (Cap. 1) at the Legislative Council meeting of 2 July 2014 be amended -

(a) in paragraph (1), by deleting "Innovation and Technology Bureau" and substituting "Originality and Technology Bureau";

(b) in paragraph (1), in the definition of commencement date, in subparagraph (b), by deleting "the 14th day" and substituting "the 365th day";

(c) in paragraph (2)(a), by deleting "Secretary for Innovation and Technology" (wherever appearing) and substituting "Secretary for Originality and Technology";

(d) in paragraph (2)(b), by deleting "Permanent Secretary for Innovation and Technology" (wherever appearing) and substituting "Permanent Secretary or Originality and Technology";

(e) in the Schedule, by deleting "Secretary for Innovation and Technology" and substituting "Secretary for Originality and Technology";

(f) in the Schedule, by deleting "Innovation and Technology Bureau" and substituting "Originality and Technology Bureau"."

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): I now propose the question to you and that is: That the amendment moved by Mr Albert CHAN be passed.

LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014 1135

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): I now put the question to you as stated. Will those in favour please raise their hands?

(Members raised their hands)

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Those against please raise their hands.

(Members raised their hands)

Mr Albert CHAN rose to claim a division.

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Mr Albert CHAN has claimed a division. The division bell will ring for one minute.

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Will Members please proceed to vote.

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Will Members please check their votes. If there are no queries, voting shall now stop and the result will be displayed.

Functional Constituencies:

Dr LAU Wong-fat, Mr Abraham SHEK, Mr Tommy CHEUNG, Prof Joseph LEE, Mr Jeffrey LAM, Mr Andrew LEUNG, Mr WONG Ting-kwong, Ms Starry LEE, Dr LAM Tai-fai, Mr CHAN Kin-por, Mr IP Kwok-him, Mr NG Leung-sing, Mr Steven HO, Mr Frankie YICK, Mr YIU Si-wing, Mr MA Fung-kwok, Mr Charles Peter MOK, Miss CHAN Yuen-han, Mr Kenneth LEUNG, Mr KWOK Wai-keung, Mr Christopher CHEUNG, Mr POON Siu-ping, Mr TANG Ka-piu, Ir Dr LO Wai-kwok, Mr CHUNG Kwok-pan and Mr Tony TSE voted against the amendment.

1136 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014

Geographical Constituencies:

Mr LEUNG Kwok-hung, Mr Albert CHAN, Ms Claudia MO and Mr CHAN Chi-chuen voted for the amendment.

Mr CHAN Kam-lam, Mr TAM Yiu-chung, Mr WONG Kwok-hing, Mr WONG Kwok-kin, Mrs Regina IP, Mr Michael TIEN, Mr CHAN Han-pan, Dr Elizabeth QUAT, Dr CHIANG Lai-wan and Mr Christopher CHUNG voted against the amendment.

THE PRESIDENT, Mr Jasper TSANG, did not cast any vote.

THE PRESIDENT announced that among the Members returned by functional constituencies, 26 were present and 26 were against the amendment; while among the Members returned by geographical constituencies through direct elections, 15 were present, four were in favour of the amendment and 10 against it. Since the question was not agreed by a majority of each of the two groups of Members present, he therefore declared that the amendment was negatived.

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): This Council will now proceed to deal with Amendment No 28 as set out in Appendix II to the Script.

Mr Albert CHAN, you may now move the amendment to the Secretary for Commerce and Economic Development's motion.

MR ALBERT CHAN (in Cantonese): President, I move that Amendment No 28, as set out in Appendix II to the Script, be passed.

Mr Albert CHAN moved the following amendment:

"RESOLVED that the motion to be moved by the Secretary for Commerce and Economic Development under section 54A of the Interpretation and General Clauses Ordinance (Cap. 1) at the Legislative Council meeting of 2 July 2014 be amended -

LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014 1137

(a) in paragraph (1), by deleting "Innovation and Technology Bureau" and substituting "Technology Bureau";

(b) in paragraph (1), in the definition of commencement date, in subparagraph (b), by deleting "the 14th day" and substituting "the 182nd day";

(c) in paragraph (2)(a), by deleting "Secretary for Innovation and Technology" (wherever appearing) and substituting "Secretary for Technology";

(d) in paragraph (2)(b), by deleting "Permanent Secretary for Innovation and Technology" (wherever appearing) and substituting "Permanent Secretary for Technology";

(e) in the Schedule, by deleting "Secretary for Innovation and Technology" and substituting "Secretary for Technology";

(f) in the Schedule, by deleting "Innovation and Technology Bureau" and substituting "Technology Bureau"."

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): I now propose the question to you and that is: That the amendment moved by Mr Albert CHAN be passed.

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): I now put the question to you as stated. Will those in favour please raise their hands?

(Members raised their hands)

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Those against please raise their hands.

(Members raised their hands)

Mr Albert CHAN rose to claim a division.

1138 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Mr Albert CHAN has claimed a division. The division bell will ring for one minute.

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Will Members please proceed to vote.

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Will Members please check their votes. If there are no queries, voting shall now stop and the result will be displayed.

Functional Constituencies:

Dr LAU Wong-fat, Mr Abraham SHEK, Mr Tommy CHEUNG, Prof Joseph LEE, Mr Jeffrey LAM, Mr Andrew LEUNG, Mr WONG Ting-kwong, Ms Starry LEE, Dr LAM Tai-fai, Mr CHAN Kin-por, Mr IP Kwok-him, Mr NG Leung-sing, Mr Steven HO, Mr Frankie YICK, Mr YIU Si-wing, Mr MA Fung-kwok, Mr Charles Peter MOK, Miss CHAN Yuen-han, Mr Kenneth LEUNG, Mr KWOK Wai-keung, Mr Christopher CHEUNG, Mr POON Siu-ping, Mr TANG Ka-piu, Ir Dr LO Wai-kwok, Mr CHUNG Kwok-pan and Mr Tony TSE voted against the amendment.

Geographical Constituencies:

Mr LEUNG Kwok-hung, Mr Albert CHAN and Mr CHAN Chi-chuen voted for the amendment.

Mr CHAN Kam-lam, Mr TAM Yiu-chung, Mr WONG Kwok-hing, Mr CHAN Hak-kan, Mr WONG Kwok-kin, Mrs Regina IP, Mr Michael TIEN, Mr CHAN Han-pan, Dr Elizabeth QUAT, Dr CHIANG Lai-wan and Mr Christopher CHUNG voted against the amendment.

Ms Emily LAU abstained.

THE PRESIDENT, Mr Jasper TSANG, did not cast any vote.

LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014 1139

THE PRESIDENT announced that among the Members returned by functional constituencies, 26 were present and 26 were against the amendment; while among the Members returned by geographical constituencies through direct elections, 16 were present, three were in favour of the amendment, 11 against it and one abstained. Since the question was not agreed by a majority of each of the two groups of Members present, he therefore declared that the amendment was negatived.

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): This Council will now proceed to deal with Amendment No 29 as set out in Appendix II to the Script.

Mr CHAN Chi-chuen, you may now move the amendment to the Secretary for Commerce and Economic Development's motion.

MR CHAN CHI-CHUEN (in Cantonese): President, I move that Amendment No 29, as set out in Appendix II to the Script, be passed.

Mr CHAN Chi-chuen moved the following amendment:

"RESOLVED that the motion to be moved by the Secretary for Commerce and Economic Development under section 54A of the Interpretation and General Clauses Ordinance (Cap. 1) at the Legislative Council meeting of 2 July 2014 be amended, in paragraph (1), in the definition of commencement date, in subparagraph (b), by deleting "the 14th day" and substituting "the 270th day"."

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): I now propose the question to you and that is: That the amendment moved by Mr CHAN Chi-chuen be passed.

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): I now put the question to you as stated. Will those in favour please raise their hands?

(Members raised their hands)

1140 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Those against please raise their hands.

(Members raised their hands)

Mr LEUNG Kwok-hung rose to claim a division.

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Mr LEUNG Kwok-hung has claimed a division. The division bell will ring for one minute.

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Will Members please proceed to vote.

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Will Members please check their votes. If there are no queries, voting shall now stop and the result will be displayed.

Functional Constituencies:

Dr LAU Wong-fat, Mr Abraham SHEK, Mr Tommy CHEUNG, Prof Joseph LEE, Mr Jeffrey LAM, Mr Andrew LEUNG, Mr WONG Ting-kwong, Ms Starry LEE, Dr LAM Tai-fai, Mr CHAN Kin-por, Mr IP Kwok-him, Mr NG Leung-sing, Mr Steven HO, Mr Frankie YICK, Mr YIU Si-wing, Mr MA Fung-kwok, Mr Charles Peter MOK, Miss CHAN Yuen-han, Mr Kenneth LEUNG, Mr KWOK Wai-keung, Mr Christopher CHEUNG, Mr POON Siu-ping, Mr TANG Ka-piu, Ir Dr LO Wai-kwok, Mr CHUNG Kwok-pan and Mr Tony TSE voted against the amendment.

Geographical Constituencies:

Mr LEUNG Kwok-hung, Mr Albert CHAN, Mr Gary FAN, Mr CHAN Chi-chuen and Dr KWOK Ka-ki voted for the amendment.

Mr CHAN Kam-lam, Ms Emily LAU, Mr TAM Yiu-chung, Mr WONG Kwok-hing, Mr CHAN Hak-kan, Mr WONG Kwok-kin, Mrs Regina IP, Mr Michael TIEN, Mr CHAN Han-pan, Dr Elizabeth QUAT, Dr CHIANG Lai-wan and Mr Christopher CHUNG voted against the amendment.

LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014 1141

THE PRESIDENT, Mr Jasper TSANG, did not cast any vote.

THE PRESIDENT announced that among the Members returned by functional constituencies, 26 were present and 26 were against the amendment; while among the Members returned by geographical constituencies through direct elections, 18 were present, five were in favour of the amendment and 12 against it. Since the question was not agreed by a majority of each of the two groups of Members present, he therefore declared that the amendment was negatived.

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): This Council will now proceed to deal with Amendment No 30 as set out in Appendix II to the Script.

Mr CHAN Chi-chuen, you may now move the amendment to the Secretary for Commerce and Economic Development's motion.

MR CHAN CHI-CHUEN (in Cantonese): President, I move that Amendment No 30, as set out in Appendix II to the Script, be passed.

Mr CHAN Chi-chuen moved the following amendment:

"RESOLVED that the motion to be moved by the Secretary for Commerce and Economic Development under section 54A of the Interpretation and General Clauses Ordinance (Cap. 1) at the Legislative Council meeting of 2 July 2014 be amended, in paragraph (1), in the definition of commencement date, in subparagraph (b), by deleting "the 14th day" and substituting "the 100th day"."

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): I now propose the question to you and that is: That the amendment moved by Mr CHAN Chi-chuen be passed.

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): I now put the question to you as stated. Will those in favour please raise their hands?

(Members raised their hands)

1142 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Those against please raise their hands.

(Members raised their hands)

Mr LEUNG Kwok-hung rose to claim a division.

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Mr LEUNG Kwok-hung has claimed a division. The division bell will ring for one minute.

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Will Members please proceed to vote.

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Will Members please check their votes. If there are no queries, voting shall now stop and the result will be displayed.

Functional Constituencies:

Dr LAU Wong-fat, Mr Abraham SHEK, Mr Tommy CHEUNG, Prof Joseph LEE, Mr Jeffrey LAM, Mr Andrew LEUNG, Mr WONG Ting-kwong, Ms Starry LEE, Dr LAM Tai-fai, Mr CHAN Kin-por, Mr IP Kwok-him, Mr NG Leung-sing, Mr Steven HO, Mr Frankie YICK, Mr YIU Si-wing, Mr MA Fung-kwok, Mr Charles Peter MOK, Miss CHAN Yuen-han, Mr Kenneth LEUNG, Mr KWOK Wai-keung, Mr Christopher CHEUNG, Mr POON Siu-ping, Mr TANG Ka-piu, Ir Dr LO Wai-kwok, Mr CHUNG Kwok-pan and Mr Tony TSE voted against the amendment.

Mr IP Kin-yuen abstained.

Geographical Constituencies:

Mr LEUNG Kwok-hung, Mr Albert CHAN, Ms Claudia MO, Mr Gary FAN, Mr CHAN Chi-chuen, Dr Kenneth CHAN and Dr KWOK Ka-ki voted for the amendment.

LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014 1143

Mr CHAN Kam-lam, Mr TAM Yiu-chung, Mr WONG Kwok-hing, Mr CHAN Hak-kan, Mr WONG Kwok-kin, Mrs Regina IP, Mr Michael TIEN, Mr CHAN Han-pan, Dr Elizabeth QUAT, Dr CHIANG Lai-wan and Mr Christopher CHUNG voted against the amendment.

Mr LEE Cheuk-yan, Ms Emily LAU, Mr Ronny TONG, Ms Cyd HO, Mr Alan LEONG, Dr Fernando CHEUNG and Mr SIN Chung-kai abstained.

THE PRESIDENT, Mr Jasper TSANG, did not cast any vote.

THE PRESIDENT announced that among the Members returned by functional constituencies, 27 were present, 26 were against the amendment and one abstained; while among the Members returned by geographical constituencies through direct elections, 26 were present, seven were in favour of the amendment, 11 against it and seven abstained. Since the question was not agreed by a majority of each of the two groups of Members present, he therefore declared that the amendment was negatived.

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): This Council will now proceed to deal with Amendment No 31 as set out in Appendix II to the Script.

Mr Albert CHAN, you may now move the amendment to the Secretary for Commerce and Economic Development's motion.

MR ALBERT CHAN (in Cantonese): President, I move that Amendment No 31, as set out in Appendix II to the Script, be passed.

Mr Albert CHAN moved the following amendment:

"RESOLVED that the motion to be moved by the Secretary for Commerce and Economic Development under section 54A of the Interpretation and General Clauses Ordinance (Cap. 1) at the Legislative Council meeting of 2 July 2014 be amended, in paragraph (1), in the definition of commencement date, in subparagraph (b), by deleting "the 14th day" and substituting "the 365th day"."

1144 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): I now propose the question to you and that is: That the amendment moved by Mr Albert CHAN be passed.

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): I now put the question to you as stated. Will those in favour please raise their hands?

(Members raised their hands)

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Those against please raise their hands.

(Members raised their hands)

Mr Albert CHAN rose to claim a division.

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Mr Albert CHAN has claimed a division. The division bell will ring for one minute.

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Will Members please proceed to vote.

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Will Members please check their votes. If there are no queries, voting shall now stop and the result will be displayed.

Functional Constituencies:

Dr LAU Wong-fat, Mr Abraham SHEK, Mr Tommy CHEUNG, Prof Joseph LEE, Mr Jeffrey LAM, Mr Andrew LEUNG, Mr WONG Ting-kwong, Ms Starry LEE, Dr LAM Tai-fai, Mr CHAN Kin-por, Mr IP Kwok-him, Mr NG Leung-sing, Mr Steven HO, Mr Frankie YICK, Mr YIU Si-wing, Mr MA Fung-kwok, Mr Charles Peter MOK, Miss CHAN Yuen-han, Mr Kenneth LEUNG, Mr KWOK Wai-keung, Mr Christopher CHEUNG, Mr POON Siu-ping, Mr TANG Ka-piu, Ir Dr LO Wai-kwok, Mr CHUNG Kwok-pan and Mr Tony TSE voted against the amendment.

LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014 1145

Mr IP Kin-yuen abstained.

Geographical Constituencies:

Mr LEUNG Kwok-hung, Mr Albert CHAN, Ms Claudia MO, Mr Gary FAN, Mr CHAN Chi-chuen, Dr Kenneth CHAN and Dr KWOK Ka-ki voted for the amendment.

Mr CHAN Kam-lam, Mr TAM Yiu-chung, Mr WONG Kwok-hing, Mr CHAN Hak-kan, Mr WONG Kwok-kin, Mrs Regina IP, Mr Michael TIEN, Mr CHAN Han-pan, Dr Elizabeth QUAT, Dr CHIANG Lai-wan and Mr Christopher CHUNG voted against the amendment.

Mr LEE Cheuk-yan, Ms Emily LAU, Mr Ronny TONG, Ms Cyd HO, Mr Alan LEONG, Dr Fernando CHEUNG and Mr SIN Chung-kai abstained.

THE PRESIDENT, Mr Jasper TSANG, did not cast any vote.

THE PRESIDENT announced that among the Members returned by functional constituencies, 27 were present, 26 were against the amendment and one abstained; while among the Members returned by geographical constituencies through direct elections, 26 were present, seven were in favour of the amendment, 11 against it and seven abstained. Since the question was not agreed by a majority of each of the two groups of Members present, he therefore declared that the amendment was negatived.

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): This Council will now proceed to deal with Amendment No 32 as set out in Appendix II to the Script.

Mr Albert CHAN, you may now move the amendment to the Secretary for Commerce and Economic Development's motion.

1146 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014

MR ALBERT CHAN (in Cantonese): President, here comes the last one as my final struggle. President, I move that Amendment No 32, as set out in Appendix II to the Script, be passed.

Mr Albert CHAN moved the following amendment:

"RESOLVED that the motion to be moved by the Secretary for Commerce and Economic Development under section 54A of the Interpretation and General Clauses Ordinance (Cap. 1) at the Legislative Council meeting of 2 July 2014 be amended, in paragraph (1), in the definition of commencement date, in subparagraph (b), by deleting "the 14th day" and substituting "the 182nd day"."

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): I now propose the question to you and that is: That the amendment moved by Mr Albert CHAN be passed.

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): I now put the question to you as stated. Will those in favour please raise their hands?

(Members raised their hands)

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Those against please raise their hands.

(Members raised their hands)

Mr Albert CHAN rose to claim a division.

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Mr Albert CHAN has claimed a division. The division bell will ring for one minute.

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Will Members please proceed to vote.

LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014 1147

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Will Members please check their votes. If there are no queries, voting shall now stop and the result will be displayed.

Functional Constituencies:

Dr LAU Wong-fat, Mr Abraham SHEK, Mr Tommy CHEUNG, Prof Joseph LEE, Mr Jeffrey LAM, Mr Andrew LEUNG, Mr WONG Ting-kwong, Ms Starry LEE, Dr LAM Tai-fai, Mr CHAN Kin-por, Mr IP Kwok-him, Mr NG Leung-sing, Mr Steven HO, Mr Frankie YICK, Mr YIU Si-wing, Mr MA Fung-kwok, Mr Charles Peter MOK, Miss CHAN Yuen-han, Mr Kenneth LEUNG, Mr KWOK Wai-keung, Mr Christopher CHEUNG, Mr POON Siu-ping, Mr TANG Ka-piu, Ir Dr LO Wai-kwok, Mr CHUNG Kwok-pan and Mr Tony TSE voted against the amendment.

Mr James TO and Mr IP Kin-yuen abstained.

Geographical Constituencies:

Mr LEUNG Kwok-hung, Mr Albert CHAN, Ms Claudia MO, Mr Gary FAN, Mr CHAN Chi-chuen, Dr Kenneth CHAN and Dr KWOK Ka-ki voted for the amendment.

Mr CHAN Kam-lam, Mr TAM Yiu-chung, Mr WONG Kwok-hing, Mr CHAN Hak-kan, Mr WONG Kwok-kin, Mrs Regina IP, Mr Michael TIEN, Mr CHAN Han-pan, Dr Elizabeth QUAT, Dr CHIANG Lai-wan and Mr Christopher CHUNG voted against the amendment.

Mr LEE Cheuk-yan, Ms Emily LAU, Mr Ronny TONG, Ms Cyd HO, Mr Alan LEONG, Dr Fernando CHEUNG and Mr SIN Chung-kai abstained.

THE PRESIDENT, Mr Jasper TSANG, did not cast any vote.

1148 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014

THE PRESIDENT announced that among the Members returned by functional constituencies, 28 were present, 26 were against the amendment and two abstained; while among the Members returned by geographical constituencies through direct elections, 26 were present, seven were in favour of the amendment, 11 against it and seven abstained. Since the question was not agreed by a majority of each of the two groups of Members present, he therefore declared that the amendment was negatived.

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): I now call upon the Secretary for Commerce and Economic Development to reply.

SECRETARY FOR COMMERCE AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT (in Cantonese): President, I would like to thank the Members who have spoken just now. Let me respond in brief.

The proposed Innovation and Technology Bureau will strengthen policy support for the development of innovation and technology through a more dedicated high level leadership, together with a stronger policy co-ordination across the innovation and technology industries, so as to fully capture the opportunities and the commercial potential provided by advancement in technology.

While the early establishment of the Innovation and Technology Bureau is a common wish of the community, it is also a crucial step for propelling the long-term sustainable economic development of Hong Kong and enhancing our competitiveness in the global race. Sincerely, I urge for Members' support of this resolution so as to facilitate the early establishment of the Innovation and Technology Bureau.

Thank you, President.

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): I now put the question to you and that is: That the motion moved by the Secretary for Commerce and Economic Development be passed.

LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014 1149

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Will those in favour please raise their hands?

(Members raised their hands)

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Those against please raise their hands.

(Members raised their hands)

Mr CHAN Chi-chuen rose to claim a division.

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Mr CHAN Chi-chuen has claimed a division. The division bell will ring for one minute.

(Some Members were talking loudly)

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Will Members please keep quiet.

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Will Members please proceed to vote.

(Some Members were still talking loudly)

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Please keep quiet.

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Will Members please check their votes.

(Mr Albert CHAN was still talking loudly)

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Mr Albert CHAN, please keep quiet.

1150 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): If there are no queries, voting shall now stop and the result will be displayed.

Mr CHAN Kam-lam, Dr LAU Wong-fat, Mr TAM Yiu-chung, Mr Abraham SHEK, Mr Tommy CHEUNG, Mr WONG Kwok-hing, Mr Jeffrey LAM, Mr Andrew LEUNG, Mr WONG Ting-kwong, Ms Starry LEE, Mr CHAN Hak-kan, Mr CHAN Kin-por, Mr WONG Kwok-kin, Mr IP Kwok-him, Mrs Regina IP, Mr Michael TIEN, Mr NG Leung-sing, Mr Steven HO, Mr YIU Si-wing, Mr MA Fung-kwok, Mr Charles Peter MOK, Mr CHAN Han-pan, Miss CHAN Yuen-han, Mr Kenneth LEUNG, Miss Alice MAK, Mr KWOK Wai-keung, Mr Christopher CHEUNG, Dr Elizabeth QUAT, Mr POON Siu-ping, Mr TANG Ka-piu, Dr CHIANG Lai-wan, Ir Dr LO Wai-kwok, Mr CHUNG Kwok-pan, Mr Christopher CHUNG and Mr Tony TSE voted for the amendment.

Mr Albert HO, Mr LEE Cheuk-yan, Mr James TO, Ms Emily LAU, Mr Ronny TONG, Ms Cyd HO, Dr LAM Tai-fai, Mr Alan LEONG, Mr LEUNG Kwok-hung, Mr Albert CHAN, Ms Claudia MO, Mr WU Chi-wai, Mr Gary FAN, Mr CHAN Chi-chuen, Dr Kenneth CHAN, Dr KWOK Ka-ki, Dr Fernando CHEUNG, Mr SIN Chung-kai and Mr IP Kin-yuen voted against the amendment.

Prof Joseph LEE abstained.

THE PRESIDENT, Mr Jasper TSANG, did not cast any vote.

THE PRESIDENT announced that there were 56 Members present, 35 were in favour of the motion, 19 against it and one abstained. Since the question was agreed by a majority of the Members present, he therefore declared that the motion was passed.

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Proposed resolution under the Pharmacy and Poisons Ordinance to approve the Pharmacy and Poisons (Amendment) (No. 2) Regulation 2014 and the Poisons List (Amendment) (No. 2) Regulation 2014.

LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014 1151

Members who wish to speak on the motion will please press the "Request to speak" button.

I now call upon the Secretary for Food and Health to speak and move the motion.

PROPOSED RESOLUTION UNDER THE PHARMACY AND POISONS ORDINANCE

SECRETARY FOR FOOD AND HEALTH: President, I move that the motion under my name, as printed on the Agenda, be passed.

Currently, we regulate the sale and supply of pharmaceutical products through a registration and monitoring system set up in accordance with the Pharmacy and Poisons Ordinance. The Ordinance maintains several Schedules under the Pharmacy and Poisons Regulations and a Poisons List under the Poisons List Regulations. Pharmaceutical products put under different parts of the Poisons List and different Schedules are subject to different levels of control in regard to the conditions of sale and keeping of records.

For the protection of public health, some pharmaceutical products can only be sold in pharmacies under the supervision of registered pharmacists and in their presence. For certain pharmaceutical products, proper records of the particulars of the sale must be kept, including the date of sale, the name and address of the purchaser, the name and quantity of the medicine and the purpose for which it is required. The sale of some pharmaceutical products must be authorized by prescription from a registered medical practitioner, dentist or veterinary surgeon.

Arising from ...

(Mr LEUNG Kwok-hung stood up)

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Secretary, please hold on. Mr LEUNG Kwok-hung, what is your point?

1152 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014

MR LEUNG KWOK-HUNG (in Cantonese): I doubt that a quorum is not present in the Chamber. I request a headcount according to Rule 17(2) of the Rules of Procedure.

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Will the Clerk please ring the bell to summon Members back to the Chamber.

(After the summoning bell had been rung, a number of Members returned to the Chamber)

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Secretary, please continue with your speech.

SECRETARY FOR FOOD AND HEALTH: Arising from an application for registration of four pharmaceutical products, the Pharmacy and Poisons Board proposes to add the following substances to Part I of the Poisons List and the First and Third Schedules to the Pharmacy and Poisons Regulations:

(i) Dapagliflozin; its salts;

(ii) Regorafenib; its salts;

(iii) Tofacitinib; its salts; and

(iv) Vilanterol; its salts.

Pharmaceutical products containing the above four substances must then be sold in pharmacies under the supervision of registered pharmacists and in their presence, with the support of prescriptions.

For amendment regulations concerning the adding of the above four substances to Part I of the Poisons List and the First and Third Schedules to the Pharmacy and Poisons Regulations, we propose them to take immediate effect upon gazettal on 31 October 2014, to allow early control and sale of the relevant medicines.

LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014 1153

The two Amendment Regulations are made by the Pharmacy and Poisons Board, which is a statutory authority established under the Ordinance to regulate pharmaceutical products. The Board comprises members engaged in the pharmacy, medical and academic professions. The Board considers the proposed amendments necessary in view of the potency, toxicity and potential side effects of the medicines concerned.

With these remarks, President, I hope Members could support the motion.

Thank you.

The Secretary for Food and Health moved the following motion:

"RESOLVED that the following Regulations, made by the Pharmacy and Poisons Board on 16 June 2014, be approved -

(a) the Pharmacy and Poisons (Amendment) (No. 2) Regulation 2014; and

(b) the Poisons List (Amendment) (No. 2) Regulation 2014."

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): I now propose the question to you and that is: That the motion moved by the Secretary for Food and Health be passed.

MR CHAN CHI-CHUEN (in Cantonese): President, I speak in support of this proposed resolution under the Pharmacy and Poisons Ordinance. I think not many Members have actually study this resolution in detail, and they may not show much concern about the four kinds of drugs mentioned therein. Why did the Secretary speak in English just now? Because it would be better to mention the names of those drugs in English.

I want to point out in my speech that this resolution should have been passed before the summer recess, yet owing to the obstacle related to the Innovation and Technology Bureau, discussion had been held up during the end of last session, and the resolution can only be dealt with today. I certainly support this resolution and will not propose a motion to adjourn the debate. I merely want to tell the Government that such an important resolution which 1154 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014 affects people's livelihood should be dealt with flexibly. Knowing perfectly well that the passage of the motion on establishing the Innovation and Technology Bureau will be met with obstacles, the Secretary should have made use of his influential power to deal with this resolution first.

Members may not have necessarily read this resolution. In this resolution, some pharmaceutical products can only be sold in pharmacies under the supervision of registered pharmacists and in their presence; for certain pharmaceutical products, proper records of the particulars of the sale must be kept, including the date of sale, the name and address of the purchaser, the name and quantity of the medicine and the purpose for which it is required; and the sale of some pharmaceutical products must be authorized by prescription from a registered medical practitioner, dentist or veterinary surgeon. What exactly are those four kinds of pharmaceutical products? The first one: Dapagliflozin is for diabetic treatment; the second one: Regorafenib is for the treatment of bowel cancer; the third one: Tofacitinib is for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis; and the fourth one: Vilanterol is for the treatment of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. I think Members may not necessarily know the contents of this resolution. Some doctors once asked me, since Members do not show concern, why should the matter be examined by the Legislative Council. As enactment of legislation is involved, such procedure is a must.

What I want to say is that this resolution can only be passed today, and before its passage, I am sorry, many doctors of public hospitals had to do extra paperwork because they needed to write special reports before they could prescribe such drugs to their patients, in particular the drugs for the treatment of bowel cancer, that is, Regorafenib. If this resolution is passed, prescription of drugs will be made easier. Therefore, we wish to point out with this example that the Government should really act with flexibility for motions which are closely related to people's livelihood, life and death or health. I simply what to raise this point in my speech.

Thank you, President.

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Does any other Member wish to speak?

(No Member indicated a wish to speak)

LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014 1155

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Secretary for Food and Health, do you wish to reply?

SECRETARY FOR FOOD AND HEALTH (in Cantonese): No, I do not, President.

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): I now put the question to you and that is: That the motion moved by the Secretary for Food and Health be passed. Will those in favour please raise their hands?

(Members raised their hands)

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Those against please raise their hands.

(No hands raised)

Mr CHAN Chi-chuen rose to claim a division.

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Mr CHAN Chi-chuen has claimed a division. The division bell will ring for five minutes.

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Will Members please proceed to vote.

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Will Members please check their votes. If there are no queries, voting shall now stop and the result will be displayed.

Mr CHAN Kam-lam, Ms Emily LAU, Mr TAM Yiu-chung, Mr Abraham SHEK, Prof Joseph LEE, Mr Jeffrey LAM, Mr Andrew LEUNG, Mr WONG Ting-kwong, Ms Starry LEE, Mr CHAN Hak-kan, Mr CHAN Kin-por, Mr WONG Kwok-kin, Mr IP Kwok-him, Mrs Regina IP, Mr Alan LEONG, Mr WONG Yuk-man, Mr Michael TIEN, Mr Steven HO, Mr Frankie YICK, 1156 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014

Mr YIU Si-wing, Mr MA Fung-kwok, Mr Charles Peter MOK, Mr CHAN Chi-chuen, Mr CHAN Han-pan, Dr Kenneth CHAN, Miss CHAN Yuen-han, Miss Alice MAK, Dr KWOK Ka-ki, Mr KWOK Wai-keung, Mr Christopher CHEUNG, Mr SIN Chung-kai, Dr Helena WONG, Dr Elizabeth QUAT, Mr POON Siu-ping, Mr TANG Ka-piu, Dr CHIANG Lai-wan, Ir Dr LO Wai-kwok, Mr CHUNG Kwok-pan and Mr Tony TSE voted for the motion.

THE PRESIDENT, Mr Jasper TSANG, did not cast any vote.

THE PRESIDENT announced that there were 40 Members present and 39 were in favour of the motion. Since the question was agreed by a majority of the Members present, he therefore declared that the motion was passed.

SUSPENSION OF MEETING

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): I now suspend the meeting until 9 am tomorrow.

Suspended accordingly at 8.12 pm.

LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 29 October 2014 A1

Appendix I

WRITTEN ANSWER

Written answer by the Secretary for Labour and Welfare to Ir Dr LO Wai-kwok's supplementary question to Question 5

As regards the number of applications for Comprehensive Social Security Assistance (CSSA) from One-way Permit (OWP) holders, as at end-September this year, among the 18 439 recipients of CSSA residing in Hong Kong for less than seven years, a total of 16 984 persons were born on the Mainland. In general, the Social Welfare Department (SWD) would use an applicant's Hong Kong Identity Card as documentary proof of his identity when processing the CSSA application. Therefore, the SWD does not keep the statistics on CSSA recipients who entered Hong Kong with OWPs(1) for settlement.

The SWD has all along been encouraging able-bodied CSSA recipients to secure employment and move towards self-reliance so as to leave the safety net. Able-bodied CSSA recipients are therefore required to participate in the Integrated Employment Assistance Programme for Self-reliance (IEAPS) operated by non-governmental organizations. IEAPS provides one-stop employment assistance services to participants according to the needs of individual groups for the purpose of enhancing their employability. These services include interviewing the participants, assisting them in formulating job search plans, and providing them with information on employment and various training courses.

(1) During the seven-year period between 2007 and 2013, a total of 309 742 persons entered Hong Kong with OWPs.