LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 20 April 2016 7559
OFFICIAL RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Wednesday, 20 April 2016
The Council met at Eleven o'clock
MEMBERS PRESENT:
THE PRESIDENT THE HONOURABLE JASPER TSANG YOK-SING, G.B.M., G.B.S., J.P.
THE HONOURABLE ALBERT HO CHUN-YAN
THE HONOURABLE LEE CHEUK-YAN
THE HONOURABLE JAMES TO KUN-SUN
THE HONOURABLE CHAN KAM-LAM, S.B.S., J.P.
THE HONOURABLE LEUNG YIU-CHUNG
THE HONOURABLE EMILY LAU WAI-HING, J.P.
THE HONOURABLE TAM YIU-CHUNG, G.B.S., J.P.
THE HONOURABLE ABRAHAM SHEK LAI-HIM, G.B.S., J.P.
THE HONOURABLE TOMMY CHEUNG YU-YAN, G.B.S., J.P.
THE HONOURABLE FREDERICK FUNG KIN-KEE, S.B.S., J.P.
THE HONOURABLE VINCENT FANG KANG, S.B.S., J.P.
THE HONOURABLE WONG KWOK-HING, B.B.S., M.H.
7560 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 20 April 2016
PROF THE HONOURABLE JOSEPH LEE KOK-LONG, S.B.S., J.P., Ph.D., R.N.
THE HONOURABLE JEFFREY LAM KIN-FUNG, G.B.S., J.P.
THE HONOURABLE ANDREW LEUNG KWAN-YUEN, G.B.S., J.P.
THE HONOURABLE WONG TING-KWONG, S.B.S., J.P.
THE HONOURABLE CYD HO SAU-LAN, J.P.
THE HONOURABLE STARRY LEE 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 PRISCILLA LEUNG MEI-FUN, S.B.S., J.P.
DR THE HONOURABLE LEUNG KA-LAU
THE HONOURABLE CHEUNG KWOK-CHE
THE HONOURABLE WONG KWOK-KIN, S.B.S.
THE HONOURABLE IP KWOK-HIM, G.B.S., J.P.
THE HONOURABLE MRS REGINA IP LAU SUK-YEE, G.B.S., J.P.
THE HONOURABLE ALAN LEONG KAH-KIT, S.C.
THE HONOURABLE LEUNG KWOK-HUNG
THE HONOURABLE ALBERT CHAN WAI-YIP
THE HONOURABLE WONG YUK-MAN
LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 20 April 2016 7561
THE HONOURABLE CLAUDIA MO
THE HONOURABLE MICHAEL TIEN PUK-SUN, B.B.S., J.P.
THE HONOURABLE JAMES TIEN PEI-CHUN, G.B.S., J.P.
THE HONOURABLE NG LEUNG-SING, S.B.S., J.P.
THE HONOURABLE STEVEN HO CHUN-YIN, B.B.S.
THE HONOURABLE FRANKIE YICK CHI-MING, J.P.
THE HONOURABLE WU CHI-WAI, M.H.
THE HONOURABLE YIU SI-WING, B.B.S.
THE HONOURABLE GARY FAN 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 KENNETH LEUNG
THE HONOURABLE ALICE MAK MEI-KUEN, B.B.S., J.P.
DR THE HONOURABLE KWOK KA-KI
THE HONOURABLE KWOK WAI-KEUNG
7562 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 20 April 2016
THE HONOURABLE DENNIS KWOK
THE HONOURABLE CHRISTOPHER CHEUNG WAH-FUNG, S.B.S., J.P.
DR THE HONOURABLE FERNANDO CHEUNG CHIU-HUNG
THE HONOURABLE SIN CHUNG-KAI, S.B.S., J.P.
DR THE HONOURABLE HELENA WONG PIK-WAN
THE HONOURABLE IP KIN-YUEN
DR THE HONOURABLE ELIZABETH QUAT, J.P.
THE HONOURABLE MARTIN LIAO 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, S.B.S., M.H., J.P.
THE HONOURABLE CHUNG KWOK-PAN
THE HONOURABLE CHRISTOPHER CHUNG SHU-KUN, B.B.S., M.H., J.P.
THE HONOURABLE TONY TSE WAI-CHUEN, B.B.S.
THE HONOURABLE ALVIN YEUNG NGOK-KIU
MEMBERS ABSENT:
DR THE HONOURABLE LAU WONG-FAT, G.B.M., G.B.S., J.P.
THE HONOURABLE PAUL TSE WAI-CHUN, J.P.
LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 20 April 2016 7563
PUBLIC OFFICERS ATTENDING:
THE HONOURABLE MRS CARRIE LAM CHENG YUET-NGOR, G.B.S., J.P. THE CHIEF SECRETARY FOR ADMINISTRATION
THE HONOURABLE JOHN TSANG CHUN-WAH, G.B.M., J.P. THE FINANCIAL SECRETARY
THE HONOURABLE RIMSKY YUEN KWOK-KEUNG, S.C., J.P. THE SECRETARY FOR JUSTICE
PROF THE HONOURABLE ANTHONY CHEUNG BING-LEUNG, G.B.S., J.P. SECRETARY FOR TRANSPORT AND HOUSING
THE HONOURABLE MATTHEW CHEUNG KIN-CHUNG, G.B.S., J.P. SECRETARY FOR LABOUR AND WELFARE
PROF THE HONOURABLE K C CHAN, G.B.S., J.P. SECRETARY FOR FINANCIAL SERVICES AND THE TREASURY
THE HONOURABLE GREGORY SO KAM-LEUNG, G.B.S., J.P. SECRETARY FOR COMMERCE AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
MR RONALD CHAN NGOK-PANG, J.P. SECRETARY FOR CONSTITUTIONAL AND MAINLAND AFFAIRS
THE HONOURABLE LAI TUNG-KWOK, S.B.S., I.D.S.M., J.P. SECRETARY FOR SECURITY
THE HONOURABLE EDDIE NG HAK-KIM, S.B.S., J.P. SECRETARY FOR EDUCATION
DR THE HONOURABLE KO WING-MAN, B.B.S., J.P. SECRETARY FOR FOOD AND HEALTH
THE HONOURABLE WONG KAM-SING, J.P. SECRETARY FOR THE ENVIRONMENT
7564 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 20 April 2016
THE HONOURABLE PAUL CHAN MO-PO, M.H., J.P. SECRETARY FOR DEVELOPMENT
THE HONOURABLE NICHOLAS W. YANG, J.P. SECRETARY FOR INNOVATION AND TECHNOLOGY
MS FLORENCE HUI HIU-FAI, S.B.S., J.P. SECRETARY FOR HOME AFFAIRS
THE HONOURABLE CLEMENT CHEUNG WAN-CHING, J.P. SECRETARY FOR THE CIVIL SERVICE
MR SHIU SIN-POR, S.B.S., J.P. HEAD, CENTRAL POLICY UNIT
MR GODFREY LEUNG KING-KWOK, J.P. UNDER SECRETARY FOR COMMERCE AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
CLERKS IN ATTENDANCE:
MR KENNETH CHEN WEI-ON, S.B.S., SECRETARY GENERAL
MISS ODELIA LEUNG HING-YEE, DEPUTY SECRETARY GENERAL
MS ANITA SIT, ASSISTANT SECRETARY GENERAL
MS DORA WAI, ASSISTANT SECRETARY GENERAL
LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 20 April 2016 7565
PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Will the Clerk please ring the bell to summon Members to the Chamber.
(After the summoning bell had been rung, a number of Members entered the Chamber)
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.
Noise Control (General) (Amendment) Regulation 2016 ...... 42/2016
Noise Control (Air Compressors) (Amendment) Regulation 2016 ...... 43/2016
Noise Control (Hand Held Percussive Breakers) (Amendment) Regulation 2016 ...... 44/2016
Dangerous Drugs Ordinance (Amendment of Second Schedule) Order 2016 ...... 45/2016
Hospital Authority Ordinance (Amendment of Schedule 1) Order 2016 ...... 46/2016
Other Papers
No. 83 ─ Report No. 66 of the Director of Audit on the results of value for money audits - April 2016
Report of the Bills Committee on Eastern Harbour Crossing Legislation (Amendment) Bill 2015
Report of the Bills Committee on Chinese Permanent Cemeteries (Amendment) Bill 2015
7566 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 20 April 2016
Report of the Bills Committee on Inland Revenue (Amendment) (No. 4) Bill 2015
Report of the Bills Committee on Promotion of Recycling and Proper Disposal (Product Container) (Amendment) Bill 2015
Report of the Bills Committee on Companies (Winding Up and Miscellaneous Provisions) (Amendment) Bill 2015
Report of the Bills Committee on Electoral Legislation (Miscellaneous Amendments) (No. 2) Bill 2015
WRITTEN ANSWERS TO QUESTIONS
Residents of Care and Attention Homes for Elderly Being Referred to Mental Hospitals or Sentenced to Siu Lam Psychiatric Centre
1. MS CYD HO (in Chinese): President, it is learnt that some staff members of care and attention homes for the elderly (C&AHs) have referred emotionally unstable residents to the mental hospitals under the Hospital Authority. The family members of these residents believe that such a practice of C&AHs is to punish those residents who are not cooperative. Moreover, some residents have been sentenced to Siu Lam Psychiatric Centre (SLPC) for treatment. In this connection, will the Government inform this Council whether it knows:
(1) the number of cases in which C&AHs referred their residents to various mental hospitals in each of the past three years (with a tabulated breakdown by name of mental hospital), and the general reasons for making such referrals;
(2) the number of cases in which residents were sentenced to SLPC for treatment in each of the past three years and the general reasons for the sentences;
(3) among the cases in (1) and (2), the number of days for which residents stayed in mental hospitals or SLPC (set out the breakdown in the table below); and
LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 20 April 2016 7567
Number of residents Number of days in mental hospitals/SLPC 2013 2014 2015 Not more than 2 days 3 to 5 days 6 to 14 days More than 14 days
(4) among the cases in (1) and (2), the number of residents who were referred to mental hospitals by C&AHs or sentenced to SLPC more than once, and whether the reasons for referring or sentencing the residents to such institutions again were generally the same as the reasons for referring or sentencing them to such institutions for the first time; the number of days for which residents stayed in such institutions when they were referred or sentenced to such institutions again (set out the breakdown in the table below)?
Number of residents Number of days in mental hospitals/SLPC 2013 2014 2015 Not more than 2 days 3 to 5 days 6 to 14 days More than 14 days
SECRETARY FOR FOOD AND HEALTH (in Chinese): President,
(1), (3) and (4)
Generally speaking, patients in need of psychiatric in-patient service of the Hospital Authority (HA) (including those living in care and attention homes for the elderly (C&AHs)) will be sent to designated mental hospitals under the HA. The designated mental hospitals under the Declaration of Mental Hospital (Consolidation) Order (Cap. 136B) are Castle Peak Hospital, Kwai Chung Psychiatric Observation Unit (Kwai Chung Hospital), Pamela Youde Nethersole Eastern Psychiatric Observation Unit (Pamela Youde Nethersole Eastern Hospital), New Territories East Psychiatric Observation Unit (Tai Po Hospital) and Kowloon Psychiatric Observation Unit (Kowloon Hospital).
7568 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 20 April 2016
For any patient who has been assessed by a doctor of the HA to be in need of psychiatric in-patient service and has indicated his/her consent for hospitalization, the HA will ask him/her or his/her parent/guardian (if the patient is under the age of 16) to sign the "Application for reception as a voluntary patient" in accordance with section 30 of the Mental Health Ordinance (Cap. 136) (Ordinance). Upon receipt of the application form, the medical superintendent of the respective mental hospital may admit the patient as a voluntary patient.
According to section 31 of the Ordinance, an application may be made by anyone to a District Judge or magistrate for the detention of a patient suffering from mental disorder for observation in the interests of his/her own health or safety or with a view to the protection of other persons. The application shall include the opinion of a registered medical practitioner certifying that the patient has satisfied the relevant statutory conditions. A patient who is not satisfied with the order may, according to section 59B of the Ordinance, make an application to the Mental Health Review Tribunal for review of his/her case.
The number of admissions of patients from C&AHs to the designated mental hospitals under the HA through "voluntary admission" and "admission under a court order" is set out in Table 1.
Table 1: Number of admissions of patients from C&AHs to designated mental hospitals under the HA through "voluntary admission" and "admission under a court order"
Number of admissions Number of in which an admissions of "Application for patients from Cluster reception as a voluntary C&AHs for patient" was completed observation and lodged by a patient under section 31 from a C&AH of Ordinance 2013 Pamela Youde Nethersole Eastern 42 19 Hospital LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 20 April 2016 7569
Number of admissions Number of in which an admissions of "Application for patients from Cluster reception as a voluntary C&AHs for patient" was completed observation and lodged by a patient under section 31 from a C&AH of Ordinance Kowloon Hospital 88 11 Kwai Chung Hospital 112 12 Tai Po Hospital 64 25 Castle Peak Hospital 81 25 Total 387 92 2014 Pamela Youde Nethersole Eastern 39 20 Hospital Kowloon Hospital 110 18 Kwai Chung Hospital 95 25 Tai Po Hospital 52 21 Castle Peak Hospital 136 53 Total 432 137 2015 Pamela Youde Nethersole Eastern 35 23 Hospital Kowloon Hospital 101 24 Kwai Chung Hospital 116 24 Tai Po Hospital 58 30 Castle Peak Hospital 79 24 Total 389 125
Among the cases in Table 1, the number of days that patients from C&AHs stayed in the designated mental hospitals under the HA is set out in Table 2.
Table 2: Number of days that patients from C&AHs stayed in designated mental hospitals of the HA
Year 90 days or less More than 90 days 2013 411 68 7570 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 20 April 2016
Year 90 days or less More than 90 days 2014 503 66 2015 456 58
Note:
According to the records of the HA psychiatric services, the length of stay of patients is divided into two categories, namely 90 days or less and more than 90 days.
For the cases in Table 1, the number of patients from C&AHs who have been admitted to designated mental hospitals of the HA for more than once is set out in Table 3.
Table 3: Number of patients from C&AHs who have been admitted to designated mental hospitals of the HA for more than once
2013 2014 2015 Number of patients from C&AHs who have been admitted to the designated mental 74 88 84 hospitals of the HA for more than once
The HA psychiatric services do not maintain records about the reasons for admission and re-admission of patients.
(2) The Siu Lam Psychiatric Centre is a correctional institution for detention of persons in custody according to court orders. It provides psychiatric observation, treatment, assessment or special psychological services. The Correctional Services Department does not maintain information about the number of C&AHs residents who have been sentenced to Siu Lam Psychiatric Centre by court.
Hiring of Performance Venues Under Leisure and Cultural Services Department
2. MR SIN CHUNG-KAI (in Chinese): President, some cultural and arts organizations have complained to me that the Leisure and Cultural Services Department (LCSD) has, over the years, repeatedly rejected their applications for hiring performance venues under LCSD. In this connection, will the Government inform this Council:
LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 20 April 2016 7571
(1) of the dates and number of days of closure of each performance venue under LCSD in each of the past three years due to repair and maintenance or other reasons, as well as the number of days available for hire by organizations;
(2) of the number of applications rejected by LCSD, in each of the past three years, for hiring performance venues, and the names of the organizations making such applications; the general reasons for LCSD's refusal to let its performance venues to such organizations; and
(3) whether LCSD has drawn up a blacklist of organizations that are prohibited from hiring its performance venues; if LCSD has, of such lists for the past three years; if not, whether LCSD has looked into the reasons for individual organizations' repeated failure to hire such performance venues?
SECRETARY FOR HOME AFFAIRS (in Chinese): President, the creative liveliness of performing arts is the cultural heartbeat of any city. The Government is committed to the provision of quality performing arts venues and facilities to cater for the needs of members of the public and arts groups. These venues and facilities are open for public hiring as part of the Government's efforts in arousing public interest in and promoting the development and appreciation of arts and culture in Hong Kong. My reply to the various parts of Mr SIN's question is as follows:
(1) In order to maintain the quality of the facilities and service provided, time slots are reserved during the year to carry out routine repair, maintenance or improvement works at the performing arts venues of the Leisure and Cultural Services Department (LCSD). In general, 20 to 30 days are required per year for quarterly and annual inspections as well as follow-up maintenance of the major facilities of the venues. Also, works are continually arranged by the LCSD at some of its venues, particularly for those built during the 1980s or 1990s, for the replacement and upgrading of ageing and obsolete facilities. To ensure equal opportunities for people with disabilities 7572 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 20 April 2016
for using its facilities, the LCSD has been carrying out barrier-free access improvement works at all of its performing arts venues during recent years in accordance with the design standards set out in "Design Manual: Barrier-Free Access" (2008 edition). Information on the numbers of days available for hiring and closed for repair, maintenance or improvement works for the 14 performing arts venues managed by the LCSD from 2012-2013 to 2014-2015 are at Annex 1.
(2) and (3)
All along the LCSD has been ensuring fairness, openness and transparency in its hiring policy. All hiring applications are processed according to the established policy, criteria and procedures. The relevant criteria are laid down in "Booking Arrangements" of individual venues and uploaded to their webpage for potential hirers' reference.
The function organized by the hirer should be in compliance with the designated use of the respective facilities. If there is more than one applicant applying for the same slot, the LCSD will consider each application having regard to a number of factors including the nature (priority will be accorded to arts-related activities) and artistic merits of the proposed function, its value to the promotion of arts and culture in the community, whether a new applicant is organizing arts-related functions or the organizing ability of past successful hirer as well as the duration of period applied for in assessing the priority for slot allocation. If applicants score same marks, the time slot concerned will be allocated by random ballot through the computerized booking system.
In addition, according to the LCSD's existing policy, events organized/sponsored by the Department or funded by the Home Affairs Bureau as well as Cantonese opera troupes (only year-round for the Ko Shan Theatre and its New Wing; and designated slots for the Hong Kong Cultural Centre, Sha Tin Town Hall, Tsuen Wan Town Hall and Kwai Tsing Theatre) enjoy priority use of the performing arts venues.
LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 20 April 2016 7573
The LCSD does not bar any organizations from hiring its performing arts venues. However, inevitably there are unsuccessful applications due to the limited time slots available. During the period between 2012-2013 and 2014-2015, the numbers of unsuccessful applications are 8 257, 9 998 and 11 924 respectively, accounting for about 70% of the total number of applications received. Details are set out at Annex 2.
The Government will review the overall supply of performing arts venues and facilities from time to time so as to meet the needs of the arts and cultural sector and the community. The East Kowloon Cultural Centre in Ngau Tau Kok is now under construction; and Phase I of the facility upgrading work of the Tai Po Civic Centre will soon commence. In addition to the performing arts venues of the LCSD, the West Kowloon Cultural District will develop a cluster of arts and cultural facilities targeting at different art forms and world class presentation. Upon commissioning of these venues and facilities, more choices of performing arts venues will be made available to the arts groups.
Annex 1
Numbers of Days Available for Hiring and Closed for Maintenance or Other Reasons for Performing Arts Venues under the LCSD from 2012-2013 to 2014-2015
2012-2013 2013-2014 2014-2015
(2) (2) (2) Performing Major Arts Facilities Reasons Venue(1) Number of Number Days of Number Days of Number Days Number of Number Days of Number Days of Number Days or Other Reasons Other or or Other Reasons Available for Hiring for Available Hiring for Available Hiring for Available Closed for Maintenance Closed for Maintenance Closed for Maintenance Urban Area 1. Hong Kong Concert Hall 313 52 312 53 310 55 Cultural Grand 336 29 319 46 325 40 Centre Theatre Studio 310 55 303 62 311 54 Theatre 7574 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 20 April 2016
2012-2013 2013-2014 2014-2015
(2) (2) (2) Performing Major Arts Facilities Reasons Venue(1) Number of Number Days of Number Days of Number Days of Number Days of Number Days of Number Days or Other Reasons Other or or Other Reasons Available for Hiring for Available Hiring for Available Hiring for Available Closed for Maintenance Closed for Maintenance Closed for Maintenance 2. Hong Kong Concert Hall 312 53 291 74 312 53 City Hall Theatre 271 94 339 26 325 40 3. Sai Wan Theatre 321 44 326 39 337 28 Ho Civic Cultural 361 4 356 9 347 18 Centre Activities Hall 4. Sheung Theatre 334 31 323 42 333 32 Wan Civic Lecture Hall 326 39 335 30 336 29 Centre 5. Ngau Chi Theatre 269 96 325 40 321 44 Wan Civic Cultural 252 113 294 71 291 74 Centre Activities Hall 6. Ko Shan New Wing - - - - 125 27 Theatre Auditorium(3) Theatre 332 33 323 42 315 50 7. Yau Ma Theatre(4) 224 34 334 31 350 15 Tei Theatre New Territories 8. Sha Tin Auditorium 321 44 319 46 304 61 Town Hall Cultural 336 29 314 51 305 60 Activities Hall 9. Tuen Mun Auditorium 318 47 322 43 335 30 Town Hall Cultural 263 102 353 12 355 10 Activities Hall LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 20 April 2016 7575
2012-2013 2013-2014 2014-2015
(2) (2) (2) Performing Major Arts Facilities Reasons Venue(1) Number of Number Days of Number Days of Number Days of Number Days of Number Days of Number Days or Other Reasons Other or or Other Reasons Available for Hiring for Available Hiring for Available Hiring for Available Closed for Maintenance Closed for Maintenance Closed for Maintenance 10. Tsuen Wan Auditorium 323 42 325 40 324 41 Town Hall Cultural 332 33 349 16 347 18 Activities Hall 11. Kwai Tsing Auditorium 329 36 321 44 327 38 Theatre Black Box 330 35 342 23 338 27 Theatre 12. Yuen Long Auditorium 328 37 306 59 305 60 Theatre 13. North Auditorium 283 82 336 29 344 21 District Town Hall 14. Tai Po Auditorium 314 51 340 25 331 34 Civic Centre
Notes:
(1) Excluding the Hong Kong Coliseum and the Queen Elizabeth Stadium.
(2) Maintenance works are broadly classified into two types: (I) routine or regular maintenance/testing of venue systems and equipment related to public safety, public hygiene and performance facilities (such as testing of fire fighting, electricity and security systems; intensive cleaning of auditorium seats, flooring, carpets, stage facilities and furniture; testing and maintenance of sound and lighting systems, flying systems for sets and lighting equipment, mechanical and electronic stage equipment) as well as urgent repairs of systems and equipment on an ad hoc basis; and (II) upgrading and enhancement of venue facilities, such as improvement of barrier-free access facilities (including provision of tactile guide paths and ramps, enhancement of toilet facilities for the disabled, installation of assistive listening systems and modification of handrails) and replacement of obsolete systems and equipment.
(3) The Ko Shan Theatre New Wing Auditorium was opened in October 2014.
(4) The Yau Ma Tei Theatre was opened in July 2012.
7576 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 20 April 2016
Annex 2
Information on Unsuccessful Applications for Hiring the LCSD Performing Arts Venues from 2012-2013 to 2014-2015
2012-2013 2013-2014 2014-2015
Performing Arts Venue^ Received Received Received Applications Applications Applications Unsuccessful Rate (%) Rate Unsuccessful (%) Rate Unsuccessful (%) Rate Unsuccessful Number of Number Applications of Number Applications of Number Applications Unsuccessful of Number Unsuccessful of Unsuccessful Number of Unsuccessful Number Hong 855 709 82.92% 886 754 85.10% 914 758 82.93% Kong Cultural Centre Hong 1 515 1 243 82.05% 1 632 1 345 82.41% 1 568 1 260 80.36% Kong City Hall Sai Wan 1 281 962 75.10% 1 193 880 73.76% 1 270 918 72.28% Ho Civic Centre Sheung 1 009 561 55.60% 1 112 645 58.00% 1 179 698 59.20% Wan Civic Centre Ngau Chi 347 191 55.04% 548 333 60.77% 787 566 71.92% Wan Civic Centre Ko Shan 431 216 50.12% 670 442 65.97% 1 073 737 68.69% Theatre* Yau Ma 188 98 52.13% 420 256 60.95% 398 241 60.55% Tei Theatre# Sub-total/ 5 626 3 980 70.74% 6 461 4 655 72.05% 7 189 5 178 72.03% Percentage (Venues in Urban Areas) Sha Tin 2 097 1 709 81.50% 2 384 2 026 84.98% 2 697 2 366 87.73% Town Hall Tuen Mun 1 171 450 38.43% 1 698 874 51.47% 2 083 1 258 60.39% Town Hall LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 20 April 2016 7577
2012-2013 2013-2014 2014-2015
Performing Arts Venue^ Received Received Received Applications Applications Applications Unsuccessful Rate (%) Rate Unsuccessful (%) Rate Unsuccessful (%) Rate Unsuccessful Number of Number Applications of Number Applications of Number Applications Unsuccessful of Number Unsuccessful of Unsuccessful Number of Unsuccessful Number
Tsuen Wan 1 170 628 53.68% 1 306 770 58.96% 1 724 1 191 69.08% Town Hall Kwai 1 499 1 312 87.53% 1 625 1 448 89.11% 1 832 1 626 88.76% Tsing Theatre Yuen Long 315 123 39.05% 369 158 42.82% 464 234 50.43% Theatre North 181 20 11.05% 206 22 10.68% 227 51 22.47% District Town Hall Tai Po 162 35 21.60% 191 45 23.56% 183 20 10.93% Civic Centre Sub-total/ 6 595 4 277 64.85% 7 779 5 343 68.68% 9 210 6 746 73.25% Percentage (Venues in the New Territories) Total/ 12 221 8 257 67.56% 14 240 9 998 70.21% 16 399 11 924 72.71% Overall Percentage
Notes:
The above figures only represent applications for ordinary booking. Applications for late and special booking are not included.
^ Excluding the Hong Kong Coliseum and the Queen Elizabeth Stadium.
* Figures for 2014-2015 include the Ko Shan Theatre New Wing Auditorium which was opened in October 2014.
# The Yau Ma Tei Theatre was opened in July 2012.
7578 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 20 April 2016
Division of Work Between Environment Bureau and Environmental Protection Department and Relevant Personnel Arrangements
3. IR DR LO WAI-KWOK (in Chinese): President, the Permanent Secretary for the Environment is responsible for formulating environmental policies, while the Director of Environmental Protection (DEP) is responsible for executing such policies (including carrying out certain statutory functions). Since 1 July 2007, these two offices have been taken up by the same person. Some members of the community are concerned about the role conflicts arising from one person performing the dual roles of policy formulation and execution, and therefore suggest that the authorities should consider reverting to the previous practice of appointing different persons to take up the two offices and filling the DEP post with a professional grade staff member of the Environmental Protection Department (EPD), so as to ensure the impartiality of DEP in performing the relevant duties. In response to a question raised by a member at the meeting of the Panel on Environmental Affairs of this Council on 22 October 2012, the Secretary for the Environment (Secretary) indicated that there would be room for improvement and review in this regard. As it has been more than three years since the Secretary made the aforesaid response, will the Government inform this Council, whether the authorities have, in the light of the concerns and recommendations of members of the community, reviewed the division of work between and operation of the Environment Bureau and EPD, as well as the personnel arrangements for the aforesaid two posts, etc.; if they have, of the details; if not, the reasons for that?
SECRETARY FOR THE ENVIRONMENT (in Chinese): President, the Environmental Protection Department (EPD) and the Environment Branch of the former Environmental, Transport and Works Bureau were merged on 1 April 2005 to achieve synergy between policy formulation and implementation, as well as to enhance operational efficiency and effectiveness.
Upon the merger, the Environment Bureau and the EPD were responsible for the enforcement of environmental legislation, environmental monitoring, development and management of waste disposal facilities, management of the environmental impact assessment process and participation in the town planning process, conduct of activities designed to raise environmental awareness, and the day-to-day implementation of environmental policies. They were also responsible for the whole process of policy formulation, including the review and revision of existing policies and the conception of new ones, as well as the LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 20 April 2016 7579 required technical/scientific background research and data collection. The merger could pool government resources for implementing environmental policies and management on the one hand, and could enhance accountability for policies amongst officers responsible for their execution on the other. Under the merged structure, the Permanent Secretary for the Environment Bureau also held office as the Director of Environmental Protection (DEP), and had to perform statutory duties under the relevant legislation.
Subsequent to the reorganization of Government Secretariat bureaux on 1 July 2007, a new Environment Bureau was formed overseeing not only Environment Bureau policies but also polices on energy and sustainable development. To reflect the expanded policy portfolio, the Government has made necessary adjustment to the Environment Bureau establishment while maintaining the same merged structure (with the EPD). The Permanent Secretary for the Environment continues to hold office as the DEP and, as before, has to perform statutory duties under the relevant legislation.
The existing merged structure of the Environment Bureau and the EPD was worked out by the Government having regard to the need for enhancing environmental protection and the efforts required, and it was established according to standing procedures, including the vetting and approval of the Legislative Council. The Government has all along formulated policies and enforced laws in a fair, just, transparent and law-abiding manner. The existing structure does not lead to any conflicts of interest.
It is the Government's policy to review departmental structures and manpower as required from time to time, with a view to achieving higher operational efficiency and effectiveness, and ensuring that policy formulation and implementation keep pace with the times.
Views and Acts Advocating Independence of Hong Kong
4. DR LAM TAI-FAI (in Chinese): President, recently, some people have announced the establishment of the Hong Kong National Party (HKNP) which has a mission to seek the independence of Hong Kong, arousing concerns among various sectors. The Central Authorities, the Government of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region (SAR) and members from the pro-establishment camp have, one after another, criticized that such a move is in contravention of the Basic Law. The Director of the Liaison Office of the Central People's 7580 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 20 April 2016
Government in the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region has pointed out that the incident has far exceeded the limit of freedom of speech and touched the bottom line of the "one country, two systems", and that he trusts that the SAR Government will handle the issue in accordance with the law and never allow this carbuncle to turn into a big trouble. The Chief Executive has stated that the interests of Hong Kong people have all along come first when the SAR Government implements policies, and there is no need for people to take the issue onto the level of safeguarding their interests through advocating independence of Hong Kong. Furthermore, in response to media enquiries, a spokesperson for the Department of Justice (DoJ) has stated that advocacy of the independence of Hong Kong is contrary to Articles 1 and 12 of the Basic Law, and DoJ will keep a close watch on the issue and take appropriate actions as necessary. However, according to a professor from the Faculty of Law of the University of Hong Kong, the Basic Law only governs the power of the Government and it does not bind the general public. Some members from the pro-democratic camp have opined that a person does not contravene any provision of the existing legislation merely by expressing views advocating the independence of Hong Kong. There are comments that the emergence of views advocating the independence of Hong Kong is related to the fact that SAR has not, after a long time, enacted laws in accordance with Article 23 of the Basic Law to prohibit any act of treason, secession, etc., and it is therefore necessary for Hong Kong to get well prepared for enacting legislation on Article 23. In this connection, will the Government inform this Council:
(1) whether it has assessed if HKNP is a legitimate organization; if it has assessed, of the outcome and justifications; if not, the reasons for that;
(2) as the Government has made it clear that views advocating the independence of Hong Kong are in contravention of the Basic Law, and the SAR Government will "take action according to the law", how and when the authorities will "take action according to the law" about such views;
(3) whether it has assessed if views the advocacy of independence of Hong Kong are in contravention of the existing legislation; if it has assessed and the outcome is in the affirmative, of the legal provisions involved, as well as how and when the authorities will deal with the contravention cases concerned; if they will not deal with those cases, of the reasons for that;
LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 20 April 2016 7581
(4) whether it will apply to the Court for an injunction to prohibit organizations advocating the independence of Hong Kong from organizing any activities; if it will, of the details; if not, the reasons for that;
(5) whether it has assessed why some people advocate the independence of Hong Kong; if it has, of the details; if not, the reasons for that;
(6) whether it has assessed the impacts of the views advocating the independence of Hong Kong on the development of Hong Kong; if it has, of the details; if not, the reasons for that;
(7) whether it has conducted any survey on Hong Kong people's response to the views advocating the independence of Hong Kong; if it has, of the details; if not, the reasons for that;
(8) whether it has assessed if any foreign forces are involved in the actions striving for and advocating the independence of Hong Kong; if it has assessed, of the details; if not, the reasons for that;
(9) whether it has found out in what ways views advocating the independence of Hong Kong have touched the bottom line of the "one country, two systems"; if it has, of the details;
(10) of the specific measures and strategies to curb the continued dissemination of views advocating the independence of Hong Kong;
(11) given that Article 27 of the Basic Law stipulates that Hong Kong residents shall have freedom of speech, of the press and of publication, as well as freedom of association, of assembly, of procession and of demonstration, whether it has assessed if the expression of views advocating the independence of Hong Kong has exceeded the limit of the freedom of speech which Hong Kong residents enjoy under the Basic Law; if it has assessed and the outcome is in the affirmative, of the details; if the outcome of the assessment is in the negative, the justifications for that;
7582 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 20 April 2016
(12) whether it has assessed if the emergence of views advocating the independence of Hong Kong is related to the fact that the SAR still has not yet enacted legislation on Article 23 of the Basic Law; if it has, of the details; if not, the reasons for that; and
(13) whether it has reviewed the effectiveness of the work carried out by the SAR Government in the past to promote the Basic Law, and reviewed if there are any inadequacies in such work, which have resulted in some people putting forward advocacies that are in contravention of the Basic Law; if it has, of the details, and how it will enhance the effectiveness of such work; if not, the reasons for that?
SECRETARY FOR CONSTITUTIONAL AND MAINLAND AFFAIRS (in Chinese): President, our consolidated reply to Dr LAM's question, after consulting the relevant government departments, is as follows:
The Basic Law of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region of the People's Republic of China (the Basic Law) is the constitutional document for the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region (HKSAR), enacted by the National People's Congress in accordance with the Constitution of the People's Republic of China (the Constitution). The Basic Law prescribes the systems to be practised in the HKSAR, in order to ensure the implementation of the basic policies of the People's Republic of China (PRC) regarding Hong Kong, that is, "one country, two systems", "Hong Kong people administering Hong Kong" and a high degree of autonomy. The Preamble of the Basic Law spells out clearly that Hong Kong has been part of the territory of China since ancient times. Upholding national unity and territorial integrity, maintaining the prosperity and stability of Hong Kong, and taking account of its history and realities, the PRC has decided that upon China's resumption of the exercise of sovereignty over Hong Kong, a HKSAR will be established in accordance with the provisions of Article 31 of the Constitution.
Article 1 of the Basic Law clearly points out that the HKSAR is an inalienable part of the PRC. Article 12 of the Basic Law also clearly elucidates that the HKSAR shall be a local administrative region of the PRC, which shall enjoy a high degree of autonomy and come directly under the Central People's Government.
LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 20 April 2016 7583
The Chief Executive, the Chief Secretary for Administration and the Secretary for Justice have earlier and respectively reiterated on different occasions that the HKSAR is an inalienable part of the country. As the Chief Executive has stated explicitly, that the HKSAR is an inalienable part of the country (whether that fact itself or its stipulation in the Basic Law) does not have any time limit. The provision in the Basic Law stating "remain unchanged for 50 years" refers to the preservation of the previous capitalist system and way of life of Hong Kong for 50 years after its return to the Motherland. It does not mean that the sovereignty over Hong Kong can be changed after 50 years.
The Chief Secretary for Administration also pointed out earlier that Hong Kong has always been an inalienable part of China, and that "one country, two systems" is a constitutional requirement. Therefore, any views that advocate the independence of Hong Kong (Hong Kong independence) are wrong, and are in themselves in contravention of "one country, two systems" and the Basic Law, and in complete disregard of the well-being of 7 million Hong Kong people.
The Secretary for Justice has also made it clear that any action to advocate "Hong Kong independence" is in breach of the relevant provisions of the Basic Law and incompatible with the legal status and the overall interests of the HKSAR. Just as all acts that contravene the Basic Law or those that may constitute criminal offences, the Department of Justice will keep a close watch and maintain close contact with the relevant law-enforcement agencies, and the HKSAR Government will take appropriate action when necessary.
Hong Kong is governed by the rule of law. Irrespective of his/her age or background, any person must abide by the law and must exercise his/her rights and freedoms lawfully. In fact, Article 42 under Chapter III of the Basic Law on "Fundamental Rights and Duties of the Residents" states clearly that "Hong Kong residents and other persons in Hong Kong shall have the obligation to abide by the laws in force in the HKSAR". Although Article 27 of the Basic Law stipulates that Hong Kong residents shall have freedom of speech, such freedom is not entirely without restrictions. As a matter of fact, according to Article 19 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, everyone shall have the right to freedom of expression, but the exercise of the relevant right carries with it special duties and responsibilities. It may therefore be subject to certain restrictions that are provided by law and are necessary: (i) for respect of the rights or reputations of others; (ii) for the protection of national security or of public order (ordre public), or of public health or morals. Similar provisions are also found in Article 16 of the Hong Kong Bill of Rights. 7584 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 20 April 2016
Hong Kong citizens have an obligation to safeguard national sovereignty and territorial integrity. The great majority of the community do not accept proposals and actions advocating "Hong Kong independence", and they do not wish to see any harm done to the relationship between Hong Kong and our country or to the relationship between Hong Kong residents and Mainland residents. The HKSAR Government has stressed repeatedly that any proposals or actions advocating "Hong Kong independence" are in contravention of the constitutional order of Hong Kong and the provisions of the Basic Law, and are against the overall and long-term interests of Hong Kong society.
Vaccines Containing Mercury-based Preservatives
5. MR DENNIS KWOK: President, a mercury-containing organic compound, thimerosal, has been widely used as a preservative in vaccines. As thimerosal allegedly contributes to the development of autism and other neurological disorders in children, there have been concerns over the safety of vaccines containing thimerosal. In this connection, will the Government inform this Council:
(1) whether public antenatal check-up services currently include laboratory tests on the levels of mercury and other heavy metals in the blood of pregnant women; if not, of the reasons for that; if so, the respective average levels of mercury and other heavy metals found in the blood samples taken in the past 12 months, and whether the authorities have traced the sources of the mercury and other heavy metals found in the blood samples;
(2) whether public neonatal care services currently include laboratory tests on the respective levels of mercury and other heavy metals in the blood of infants; if so, of the average levels of the mercury and other heavy metals found in the blood samples taken in the past 12 months, and whether the authorities have traced the sources of the mercury and other heavy metals found in the blood samples; and
(3) whether public hospitals and health centres currently provide any mercury-free vaccines, in particular thimerosal-free vaccines, for infants; if not, of the reasons for that; if so, whether the authorities have conducted any laboratory tests on the mercury level in the blood of those infants who were injected with such vaccines; if so, of LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 20 April 2016 7585
the relevant average level in the blood samples taken in the past 12 months; whether the authorities have traced the sources of the mercury found in the blood samples?
SECRETARY FOR FOOD AND HEALTH: President,
(1) In collaboration with the obstetric department of the Hospital Authority, Maternal and Child Health Centres (MCHCs) of the Family Health Service under the Department of Health (DH) provide an antenatal shared-care programme for pregnant women to monitor their entire pregnancy and delivery process. According to the Guidelines on Antenatal Care issued by the Hong Kong College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists, routine antenatal check-ups in public hospitals do not cover examination of the level of heavy metals (including mercury). If any symptom of heavy metal poisoning is found in a pregnant woman, the doctor will conduct suitable examinations according to her clinical condition. The antenatal services provided by MCHCs include body checks, laboratory tests, health education and specialty referrals based on clinical needs. The list of items for laboratory tests is drawn up with reference to the relevant local and overseas guidelines on antenatal services and does not cover examination of the level of heavy metals (including mercury).
The Family Health Service also provides pregnant women with health education on balanced diet and food safety to help them minimize the health risks posed to the foetus by excessive exposure to metal contaminants. The DH will use different channels including pamphlets, webpages, individual counselling and health talks to remind pregnant women to consume a balanced and nutritionally adequate diet during pregnancy. Although fish contain omega-3 fatty acids, which are beneficial to the brain and vision development of the foetus, pregnant women are advised to opt for fish that are smaller in size for consumption because large-sized predatory fish, such as shark, swordfish, marlin, alfonsino and tuna, usually contain a higher level of mercury. According to food safety principles, pregnant women should consume fish in moderation and eat from a variety of fish so as to reduce the risk.
7586 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 20 April 2016
(2) The routine check-ups in public hospitals do not cover examinations of the level of heavy metals (including mercury) for newborns. If any symptom of heavy metal poisoning is found in a newborn, the doctor will conduct suitable examinations according to clinical condition.
(3) At present, the vaccines procured by the Government under the Hong Kong Childhood Immunisation Programme, namely (i) bacillus Calmette-Guérin (BCG) vaccine; (ii) hepatitis B vaccine; (iii) Diphtheria, tetanus, acellular Pertussis and inactivated poliovirus (DTaP-IPV) vaccine; (iv) diphtheria (reduced dose), tetanus, acellular pertussis (reduced dose) and inactivated poliovirus (dTap-IPV) vaccine ― booster dose; (v) pneumococcal vaccine (13-valent); (vi) measles, mumps and rubella (MMR) vaccine; and (vii) varicella vaccine, involve a total of 10 registered pharmaceutical products. None of these registered vaccines contains thiomersal (a mercury-containing preservative). Before getting a child vaccinated, healthcare personnel are required to explain the details to the child's parent/guardian or representative and seek his/her consent for the vaccination.
Given that some children may have adverse reactions to the acellular pertussis component of the 4-in-1 (DTaP-IPV or dTap-IPV) vaccine and such vaccine is contraindicated in these cases, the Government will separately provide diphtheria/tetanus vaccine or diphtheria (reduced dose)/tetanus vaccine, and poliovirus vaccine for these children. Both the diphtheria/tetanus vaccine and diphtheria (reduced dose)/tetanus vaccine contain thiomersal at a level not exceeding 50 μg/0.5 ml. At present, there is no registered alternative of these vaccines in Hong Kong which does not contain thiomersal.
The Global Advisory Committee on Vaccine Safety (the Advisory Committee) of the World Health Organization has discussed the safety of thimerosal-containing vaccines and issued a report in 2012. The Advisory Committee considers that available evidence strongly supports the use of thimerosal as a preservative for inactivated vaccines, and no safer and equally efficacious alternative has been identified for general use in vaccines.
LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 20 April 2016 7587
The Government will continue to monitor the results of studies on the safety of thimerosal-containing vaccines and the supply of registered thimerosal-free vaccines in Hong Kong.
Non-emergency Ambulance Transfer Service
6. PROF JOSEPH LEE (in Chinese): President, the non-emergency ambulance transfer service (NEATS) of the Hospital Authority (HA) mainly provides point-to-point transport service for geriatric day hospital patients, discharged patients and specialist out-patient clinic patients in need of such service. In reply to my question on 30 June 2010, the authorities indicated that HA would keep NEATS under review having regard to the service demand. In this connection, will the Government inform this Council if it knows:
(1) whether the utilization rate of the aforesaid service has increased since 2010, and set out, by year and hospital cluster, the average daily person-times using the service and the average waiting time, since 2010;
(2) (i) the number of non-emergency ambulances, their average age and the number of those which had been in use for over 10 years, in each year since 2010, with a breakdown by hospital cluster, and (ii) whether HA has increased the number of non-emergency ambulances since 2010; if so, the number;
(3) the number of cases of and causes for non-emergency ambulances being late for picking up patients, and the number of relevant complaints received by HA, since 2010; if such information is unavailable, whether HA will consider keeping such records; and
(4) whether HA assessed in the past three years if NEATS was sufficient to meet the demand; if HA did and the outcome was in the negative, whether HA has planned to increase the number of non-emergency ambulances, replace those ambulances which have been in use for over 10 years and recruit additional manpower so as to enhance the efficiency of such service; if HA has, of the details; if not, the reasons for that?
7588 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 20 April 2016
SECRETARY FOR FOOD AND HEALTH (in Chinese): President, my reply to Prof Joseph LEE's question on the provision of non-emergency ambulance transfer service (NEATS) by the Hospital Authority (HA) is as follows:
(1) The NEATS is a point-to-point transfer service (that is, between patients' residence and hospitals or specialist clinics) provided by the HA primarily for mobility-handicapped patients who are unable to take public transport such as buses, taxis and Rehabus. The HA assesses the use of NEATS based on the overall number of transfers in all clusters in a year. The table below sets out the overall number of transfers provided through NEATS in each year from 2010-2011.
Year 2010-2011 2011-2012 2012-2013 2013-2014 2014-2015 2015-2016* Number of 394 486 407 748 472 635 501 203 526 279 545 000 transfers
Note:
* The figures of February and March 2016 are projections based on that of January 2016
The above figures show a rising trend in the overall number of transfers provided through NEATS in the past six years.
The HA is committed to improving the waiting time for NEATS. Since 2012-2013, the HA has reduced the waiting time of 75% of patients who are ready for discharge and have made bookings for NEATS from the standard of 90 minutes or less to 60 minutes or less. Since 2013-2014, the HA has also reduced the waiting time of 85% of patients who are ready for inter-hospital transfer and have made bookings for NEATS from the standard of 90 minutes or less to 60 minutes or less.
(2) and (4)
The HA always endeavours to improve the provision of NEATS. The number of NEATS vehicles has increased from 133 in 2010-2011 to 198 in 2015-2016. Currently, the average age of the LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 20 April 2016 7589
fleet is 5.8 years, and there are 17 vehicles which are over 10 years of age. Among these vehicles with over 10 years of age, nine will be replaced in 2016-2017 and the remaining eight will be gradually replaced afterwards. Moreover, the HA plans to introduce 14 additional NEATS vehicles in 2016-2017, bringing the number of vehicles in the NEATS fleet to 212.
Furthermore, in order to meet the increasing demand for the service, the HA has increased the manpower for the provision of NEATS by 83% from 353 in 2009-2010 to 647 in 2015-2016.
The HA will keep the operation of NEATS under review having regard to the service demand.
(3) The table below sets out the number of complaints received by the HA on delay in NEATS since 2010.
Year 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Number of complaints 4 3 2 2 4 4
To optimize the use of resources, NEATS users are transferred in groups and patients making similar journeys will share the same vehicle as far as possible. This may result in a longer journey time, and the service may be delayed occasionally due to traffic congestion. Nonetheless, the HA will continue to monitor and enhance the provision of NEATS to meet patients' needs.
Regulation of Unmanned Aircraft Systems
7. MR TONY TSE (in Chinese): President, with the rapid development of unmanned aircraft systems (UASs), they have become increasingly versatile and are used for purposes including recreation, aerial photography, search, and monitoring of event progress. It has been reported that UASs may possibly be used by lawbreakers for criminal purposes. In recent years, the governments of a number of countries have strengthened the regulation of UASs. For example, the Federal Aviation Administration of the United States has recently introduced a requirement that anyone who owns a UAS weighing more than 250 grams and 7590 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 20 April 2016 less than 25 kilograms must register before operating the UAS outdoors, so that the identity of the owner can be tracked down when an accident involving UAS has occurred. In this connection, will the Government inform this Council:
(1) of the number of reports of accidents involving UASs (including remote-controlled model aircrafts and helicopters) received by the authorities in each of the past three years, together with the causes, location and casualties of each accident;
(2) whether the authorities conducted any review of the current legislation in the past three years to see if the regulation and requirements regarding the various aspects of UASs such as manufacturing, import, sale and ownership still suit the present circumstances, and whether they will, by making reference to the practice of the United States, require owners of UASs to register; if such a review was conducted, of the outcome and details of the follow-up actions taken; if they will require owners to make such registrations, of the details; if not, the reasons for that; and
(3) given that any person using a UAS (regardless of its volume or weight) for reward, such as providing aerial photography service, must comply with the requirement stipulated in Regulation 22 of the Air Transport (Licensing of Air Services) Regulations (Cap. 448 sub. leg. A) by applying for a permit with the Civil Aviation Department (CAD) before operating a UAS and observing the conditions stipulated in the permit granted by CAD in providing the service, how the authorities ensure that all individuals or companies using UASs for reward have been granted a permit and observe the conditions stipulated therein; of the total number of non-compliance cases recorded by the authorities in the past three years, and the penalties imposed on the offenders?
SECRETARY FOR TRANSPORT AND HOUSING (in Chinese): President, Unmanned Aircraft System (UAS) is a kind of aircraft, and its flight safety is regulated by the civil aviation legislation. The Civil Aviation Department (CAD) attaches great importance to flight safety, including the operation of UAS, to ensure that such activities are performed in accordance with air safety requirement. With reference to current regulations, UAS operators, regardless LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 20 April 2016 7591 of the weight and purpose of the UAS operated, are governed by Article 48 of the Air Navigation (Hong Kong) Order 1995 (Cap. 448C, Laws of Hong Kong) (the Order). The Order stipulates that a person shall not recklessly or negligently cause or permit an aircraft to endanger any person or property.
Separately, in accordance with Regulation 22 of the Air Transport (Licensing of Air Services) Regulations (Cap. 448A, Laws of Hong Kong), regardless of the weight, if a person uses a UAS for hire and reward, he/she must lodge an application with the CAD before operating such aircraft and abide by the conditions stipulated in the permit granted by the CAD in providing the service. Prior to the issuance of a permit, the CAD will take into consideration whether the applicant and his/her UAS can operate under a safe condition. The permit issued by the CAD will also stipulate relevant conditions and requirements to ensure safe operation.
Articles 3, 7 and 100 of the Order provide that, any person must apply to the CAD for a Certificate of Registration and a Certificate of Airworthiness for any unmanned aircraft weighing more than 7 kg (without fuel) before he/she can operate such aircraft.
My reply to the specific parts of Mr Tony TSE's question is as follows.
(1) According to the CAD's record, there is no report of accidents involving UAS (including radio-controlled model aircrafts and helicopters) in the past three years.
(2) As aforementioned, the flight safety of UAS is regulated by civil aviation legislation whereas other areas, including privacy protection, product safety, and so on, are regulated under relevant guidelines and regulations monitored by different Policy Bureaux and law-enforcement agencies.
With the rapid technological development of UAS and the increasing diversified use of UAS, Governments all over the world have been actively considering strengthening the regulatory regime on the use of UAS. At present, there is neither standardized international requirement on the manufacture, import, sale and operations of UAS, nor a set of unified international regulatory guidelines and principles. In order to strengthen the protection of public safety, the CAD is 7592 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 20 April 2016
currently reviewing the regulatory policies on UAS and the need of amending relevant legislations by taking into account overseas development of regulatory requirements, including that of registration, with due regard to the specific circumstances in Hong Kong. In the review of regulatory framework and enforcement measures, particular emphasis would be placed in striking a balance between the use of UAS for recreational and work purposes and the protection of public safety. At the same time, the CAD will continue to strengthen its publicity and educational efforts through different channels, so as to raise the safety awareness of the relevant sectors and organizations, as well as the general public, about the operations of UAS.
(3) As aforementioned, if a person uses UAS for hire and reward, he/she must lodge an application with the CAD before operating the UAS and abide by the conditions stipulated in the permit granted by the CAD in providing the service. The website of the CAD has set out the requirements and application method for using UAS for hire and reward. The CAD also promotes the relevant regulations, regulatory requirements and information on flight and operation safety through regular meeting with model flying clubs, professional UAS operators and UAS manufacturers.
For the past three years, the CAD received a total of 111 relevant permit applications, of which 84 applications were approved. Withdrawal of application or insufficient information provided were the main reasons for the disapproval of permit application. The CAD has no record of violation of permit condition for the past three years.
Generally speaking, after receiving reports on the reckless or illegal use of UAS, the CAD will take follow-up actions which include obtaining further information from the parties concerned for analysis, urging the parties concerned to comply with the flight safety regulations of UAS flights and requesting the relevant Police division to step up patrol. In addition, the CAD has been liaising with the Police and providing technical support to the Police in its enforcement action.
LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 20 April 2016 7593
A person who contravenes Regulation 22 of the Air Transport (Licensing of Air Services) Regulations, if convicted, will be liable to a fine up to $5 million and to imprisonment for up to two years.
National Studies Programmes for Staff of Hospital Authority
8. DR LEUNG KA-LAU (in Chinese): President, it has been reported that the Liaison Office of the Central People's Government in the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region (the Liaison Office) has earlier invited the Hospital Authority (HA) to recommend 30 young doctors to attend a one-week national studies programme for Hong Kong doctors (the Programme) to be held in Beijing in April this year. The participants invited are those junior doctors who have four to five years of service. The participants are granted paid study leave by HA during their attendance at the Programme, with airfare to be subsidized by HA and their expenses on meals, accommodation and transportation in Beijing to be borne by the Liaison Office. Some doctors of public hospitals have written to me expressing grave concern about the aforesaid arrangement. In this connection, will the Government inform this Council:
(1) whether it knows the criteria based on which HA has approved paying the airfare for its staff members attending the Programme with public money and granting them paid study leave;
(2) as some doctors of public hospitals have pointed out that according to its human resources procedures, HA generally would subsidize its healthcare staff members to attend work-related exchanges or seminars only, whether it knows the direct relevance between the contents of the Programme and the frontline clinical duties of the junior doctors attending the Programme, as well as the benefits towards their clinical work to be gained by participating in the Programme;
(3) whether it knows the number of times since 1997 for which HA was invited by the Liaison Office to send its staff members to attend similar programmes, and the following information in respect of each programme: (i) purposes, (ii) venue, (iii) target participants, (iv) contents, (v) the details of sponsorships received, and (vi) the number of participants, broken down by their years of service and grade;
7594 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 20 April 2016
(4) whether it knows the details of the sponsored training programmes organized by HA jointly with local or overseas organizations in the past 10 years, and set out in a table the following information in respect of each programme: (i) the name of the programme, (ii) the year in which the programme was held, (iii) the name of the co-organizer(s), (iv) the amount of sponsorships received, (v) the number of participants, and (vi) the number of days of paid study leave granted by HA to those staff members; and
(5) as it has been reported that recently, there has been a surge in the utilization of public hospital services and an acute shortage of healthcare manpower (e.g. the waiting time for semi-urgent and non-urgent patients at the accident and emergency departments is as long as 10-odd hours, and the inpatient bed occupancy rates of the medical wards of some public hospitals have persistently stood at 130%), whether it knows if HA has considered the manpower situation of the departments concerned before making arrangements for its doctors to attend the Programme; whether HA will, in the light of the shortage of doctors and the substantial increase in workload, consider not to send doctors to attend programmes unrelated to their clinical duties again in future?
SECRETARY FOR FOOD AND HEALTH (in Chinese): President, my consolidated reply to the various parts of the question raised by Dr LEUNG Ka-lau relating to the participation of Hospital Authority (HA) staff in training programmes is as follows:
The HA attaches great importance to providing comprehensive training and development opportunities for its staff of all grades and levels and hence clinical and non-clinical-related training and exchange visits are arranged for them from time to time. Such training covers a variety of areas, including development of professional specialties, quality management, development and planning of healthcare services around the world and general self-management. Generally speaking, for healthcare professionals, the HA provides them with training opportunities not only about clinical knowledge and skills, but also a variety of training in different areas including leadership, management and communication skills.
LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 20 April 2016 7595
The HA has an established mechanism for providing training assistance, for example, training subsidy or study leave, to its staff on training and exchange visits. When considering approval for training assistance, the HA will consider factors including the relationship between the training and career development of the staff and if the training is for the benefit of services for patients.
Apart from using its own resources to support staff training, the HA also accepts invitations and sponsorship from various organizations to enable its staff to attend local or overseas training/academic exchanges, study programmes, academic conferences/seminars, or field visits and workshops. The HA has organized staff training programmes in collaboration with other organizations or by accepting their sponsorship. For example, the HA's training partners in recent years include the Ministry of Health of Singapore, Hospital for Sick Children of Canada, Australian Council on Healthcare Standards, International Society for Quality in Healthcare, International Hospital Federation, Health Information and Management Systems Society in Singapore, overseas and local universities, Hong Kong Academy of Medicine and various specialist groups. An exhaustive list is not available because of the large number of training programmes and the volume of related information.
Sponsorship may be offered in various ways and the level of sponsorship received by staff will depend on the modes (local or overseas), duration and venues of the training courses concerned. The sponsorship may take the form of air passage, accommodation and course fees, subject to the HA's approval according to its guidelines on "Acceptance of Advantages, Entertainment and Sponsorship". General criteria for considering the acceptance of sponsorship include that acceptance of sponsorship will not give rise to actual or perceived conflict of interest and will not cause disrepute to the HA, whether the sponsorship is for the benefit of services for patients and the amount of sponsorship is reasonable.
The Course on National Affairs for Hong Kong Professionals (the Course) is organized by the Liaison Office of the Central People's Government in the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region and provided by the Chinese Academy of Governance. The HA is an invited participant, not a co-organizer of the Course. Over the years, the HA has accepted invitation to nominate its staff to attend the Course, and the nominations are made taking into account the work situation of its staff. In the past decade, almost 200 HA staff attended the Course. They comprise administrative and management staff, healthcare 7596 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 20 April 2016 personnel of various grades, including medical staff (Chief of Service, Consultant, Associate Consultant and Resident), nursing staff (Senior Nursing Officer, Department Operation Manager and Ward Manager) and allied health professionals of different disciplines.
The Course, which lasts for one week, is held in Mainland cities, for example, Shanghai or Beijing. Lectures are given by Mainland scholars and officials on national systems and policies in different areas, for example, healthcare reform. Visits to healthcare institutions in the Mainland are also arranged. The organizing party is responsible for the meal/accommodation, local transport and course fee. Under the HA's existing human resources policy, before accepting any sponsorship including training-related subsidies from other institutions, its staff must report the case through the existing mechanism and obtain their supervisors' approval.
The HA received an invitation to take part in the Course originally scheduled for April 2016 which was later rescheduled to mid-May. As the target participants for the Course are professionals in the healthcare sector, the HA has invited its clusters to nominate doctors interested in the Course to attend subject to their workload and availability. With nominations from the clusters, a total of 27 HA staff members are nominated to attend the Course. Of these HA staff, six are Residents and others include Chiefs of Service, Consultants, Associate Consultants, nursing and allied health professionals, and executive. Their participation in the Course is on a voluntary basis and is subject to confirmation by their respective departments, Hospital Chief Executives and Cluster Chief Executives that the work and service will not be so affected.
Rodent Disinfestation and Pest Control in Subsidized Housing Courts/Estates
9. MR JAMES TO (in Chinese): President, it has been reported that quite a number of residents of subsidized housing have recently complained about the serious problem of rodent infestation in their housing courts/estates, which has affected their daily living and even posed hazards to their health. Although the residents concerned have made as much efforts as possible to improve the hygiene conditions of their flats, due to the poor results of the rodent disinfestation operations carried out by the authorities in the common areas of these housing courts/estates, the rodent infestation problem cannot be uprooted. LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 20 April 2016 7597
Besides, some residents have relayed to me that pest problem in the eateries in their housing courts/estates is quite serious as well. In this connection, will the Government inform this Council, in the past three years:
(1) of (i) the number of complaints received by the Housing Department (HD) and the Hong Kong Housing Society (HKHS) about rodent infestation in residential flats in the subsidized housing courts/estates under their management, and (ii) the respective numbers of complaints about rodent infestation and pest problem in the eateries there, with a tabulated breakdown by type of housing and District Council district;
(2) of the specific follow-up actions taken by HD and HKHS on the complaints in (1), with a tabulated breakdown by the outcome/progress (e.g. settled, to be handled) of the handling of such complaints;
(3) whether HD and HKHS stepped up cleaning operations in those housing courts/estates with relatively more such complaints received; if not, of the reasons for that; if they did, the weekly increase in the frequency of cleaning, and whether the number of such complaints received subsequently has decreased; and
(4) of the details concerning the follow-up actions taken by the Food and Environmental Hygiene Department (FEHD) on the complaints about rodent infestation and pest problem in the eateries in such housing courts/estates, including the number of prosecutions instituted, and the respective numbers of eateries imposed with licence suspension, licence revocation and other penalties; whether FEHD stepped up inspections on the eateries concerned upon receiving complaints against them; if not, of the reasons for that; if FEHD did, whether the number of complaints received subsequently against such eateries has decreased?
SECRETARY FOR TRANSPORT AND HOUSING (in Chinese): President, the Hong Kong Housing Authority (HA) attaches great importance to the environmental hygiene of its public rental housing (PRH) estates. The HA has been closely monitoring its service contractors to ensure that they carry out 7598 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 20 April 2016 various cleansing work, including elimination of rodents, properly to create a clean and healthy living environment for its residents. As rodent problems can also be caused by poor environmental hygiene conditions of areas in the vicinity of the estates, the Housing Department (HD), as the executive arm of the HA, will collaborate with relevant government departments and organizations to combat rodent problems.
Having consolidated information provided by the Food and Health Bureau, my reply to Mr James TO's question is as follows:
(1) According to the HD's records, the number of complaints regarding rodent problems in residential areas and public places (excluding food premises) in PRH estates under the HA in the past three years with breakdown by districts is at Annex A. The number of complaints about rodent and pest problems in food premises in PRH estates under the HA with breakdown by districts is at Annex B. The HD does not have relevant figures in the case of Home Ownership Scheme courts and the Tenants Purchase Scheme estates where property management are carried out by management companies engaged by relevant incorporated owners.
According to the information provided by the Hong Kong Housing Society (HKHS), the number of complaints on rodent problems in its rental housing estates (excluding food premises within the estates) in the past three years, with breakdown by districts, is at Annex C. The number of complaints concerning rodent and pest problems in food premises within the estates are at Annex D. For developments under the Flat for Sale Scheme, Sandwich Class Housing Scheme and Subsidised Sale Flats Projects under the HKHS's management, the HKHS has not received any complaints concerning rodent and pest problems in the food premises within these developments in the past three years. As for the number of complaints received about rodent problems in these developments excluding food premises therein, the HKHS has only received five complaints in the past three years and all of them were recorded in the Eastern District in 2014.
(2) In relation to those complaints, the HD and the HKHS have taken concrete follow-up actions, including strengthening inspections in estate areas, putting rat baits at black spots and reinforcing the LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 20 April 2016 7599
cleansing of buildings and the surrounding areas so as to maintain a clean and hygienic environment. With these measures taken, all cases are under control. The HD and the HKHS will continue to carry out various measures to guard against rodent problems.
(3) Upon receipt of complaints, in addition to the follow-up actions outlined above, the HD and the HKHS will take into account the seriousness of the rodent and pest problems and enhance the cleansing work in those estates where more complaints on such problems are received. Depending on needs, additional cleansing work of one to two times would be arranged per week. For more serious cases, the cleansing work would be increased to seven times per week.
(4) Under the Food Business Regulation (Cap. 132X), no person engaged in any food business shall knowingly suffer or permit the presence of rats, mice or insects in any food premises. Offenders are liable on conviction to a maximum fine of $10,000 and imprisonment for three months, alongside with a daily fine of $300. From 2013 to 2015, the number of complaints against food premises found with hygienic problem, including presence of rats, mice or insects, dirty premises, food preparation in open space, and so on, is 17 110.
The Food and Environmental Hygiene Department (FEHD) does not keep a breakdown of complaints against rodent and insect problems in restaurants located within public housing area.
From 2013 to 2015, the FEHD instituted 1 310 prosecutions against unhygienic food premises, including presence of rats, mice or insects, dirty premises, food preparation in open space, and so on. The FEHD does not keep a breakdown of prosecutions against unhygienic restaurants located within public housing area.
Upon receipt of complaints concerning unhygienic condition in licensed restaurants, the FEHD's staff will carry out investigations to ensure that statutory standards for environmental hygiene and food safety are met and relevant licensing conditions are observed. In this connection, the FEHD's staff will inspect the overall hygienic 7600 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 20 April 2016
condition of the restaurant. If the complaint is related to the presence of rats, mice or insects, the FEHD's staff will specifically look for signs of rodent and insect problems, enquire about the appropriateness of the pest control measures and the waste disposal arrangement of the restaurant, as well as offer advice to the restaurant operator on control measures against rodent and insect problems as needed. Depending on the outcome of the investigations, the FEHD will step up inspections to the restaurant concerned and enhance the pest control measures in the public places in its vicinity. If there is any breach of licensing conditions or relevant legislation by the restaurant operator, the FEHD may issue warning letters or institute prosecutions. In addition, the FEHD may consider suspending or cancelling the restaurant licences under the Demerit Points System or the Warning Letter System for repeated breaches.
Where necessary, the FEHD District Environmental Hygiene Offices will convene special meetings with departments concerned including the HD to enhance their awareness of the importance of rodent control in the venues under their management and offer professional advice on rodent prevention and control. The FEHD will render assistance to the HD in implementing anti-rodent measures, which include conducting regular inspections to its building sites, organizing anti-rodent talks to staff of the HD and property service agents, and conducting joint inspections with the HD in PRH estates to monitor the effectiveness of the anti-rodent measures.
Annex A
Number of complaints on rodent problems in residential areas and public places (excluding food premises) in PRH estates of the HA (Breakdown by districts)
Number of complaints on rodent problems District Council(1) (excluding food premises) 2013 2014 2015 Kowloon City 27 18 24 Yuen Long 0 1 22 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 20 April 2016 7601
Number of complaints on rodent problems District Council(1) (excluding food premises) 2013 2014 2015 Tuen Mun 3 6 6 Eastern 1 2 5 Southern 0 2 12 Tsuen Wan 0 5 9 Sham Shui Po 28 29 28 Wong Tai Sin 22 27 49 Kwai Tsing 2 14 20 Islands 0 1 1 Kwun Tong 17 17 44 North 0 1 2 Sai Kung 0 1 4 Shatin 0 0 14 Central and Western 0 0 0 Tai Po 0 0 0 Yau Tsim Mong 0 0 0
The figures above do not include complaints from Tenant Purchase Scheme estates.
Note:
(1) Wan Chai District is not included as there is no PRH estate under HA there.
Annex B
Number of complaints on rodent problems in food premises in the PRH estates of the HA (Breakdown by districts)
Number of complaints on rodent problems in food District Council(2) premises 2013 2014 2015 Kowloon City 0 0 0 Yuen Long 0 0 0 Tuen Mun 0 0 0 Eastern 0 2 1 7602 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 20 April 2016
Number of complaints on rodent problems in food District Council(2) premises 2013 2014 2015 Southern 0 0 1 Tsuen Wan 0 0 0 Sham Shui Po 2 1 3 Wong Tai Sin 9 12 8 Kwai Tsing 1 2 1 Islands 0 0 0 Kwun Tong 0 0 0 North 0 0 0 Sai Kung 0 0 0 Shatin 0 0 0 Central and Western 0 0 0 Tai Po 0 0 0 Yau Tsim Mong 0 0 0
The figures above do not include complaints from Tenant Purchase Scheme estates and food premises within divested non-domestic properties.
Note:
(2) Wan Chai District is not included as there is no PRH estate under HA there.
Annex C
Number of complaints received by the HKHS on rodent problems in its rental housing estates (excluding food premises within the estates) (Breakdown by districts)
Number of complaints received on rodent problems in rental housing estates District Council(3) (excluding food premises within the estates) 2013 2014 2015 Central and Western 0 0 0 Eastern 0 0 1 Southern 0 0 0 Wan Chai 0 0 1 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 20 April 2016 7603
Number of complaints received on rodent problems in rental housing estates District Council(3) (excluding food premises within the estates) 2013 2014 2015 Kowloon City 2 4 5 Yau Tsim Mong 0 0 0 Kwun Tong 0 5 49 Shatin 1 1 3 North 0 1 0 Sai Kung 0 0 0 Tsuen Wan 4 5 6 Kwai Tsing 0 0 0
Note:
(3) Yuen Long, Tuen Mun, Sham Shui Po, Wong Tai Sin, Islands and Tai Po Districts are not included as there are no rental housing estates under HKHS in these six districts.
Annex D
Number of complaints received by the HKHS on rodent and pest problems in food premises within its rental housing estates (Breakdown by districts)
Number of complaints received about rodent and pest problems in food premises within District Council(4) its rental housing estates 2013 2014 2015 Central and Western 0 0 0 Eastern 0 0 0 Southern 0 0 0 Wan Chai 0 0 0 Kowloon City 0 0 0 Yau Tsim Mong 0 0 0 Kwun Tong 0 0 7 Shatin 1 1 1 North 0 0 0 7604 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 20 April 2016
Number of complaints received about rodent and pest problems in food premises within District Council(4) its rental housing estates 2013 2014 2015 Sai Kung 0 0 0 Tsuen Wan 0 0 0 Kwai Tsing 0 0 2
Note:
(4) Yuen Long, Tuen Mun, Sham Shui Po, Wong Tai Sin, Islands and Tai Po Districts are not included as there are no rental housing estates under HKHS in these six districts.
Enhancing Measures to Tackle Next Winter Influenza Season
10. MR IP KWOK-HIM (in Chinese): President, in the first quarter of this year, the Centre for Health Protection recorded more than 200 severe influenza cases. According to the Hospital Authority (HA), there has been an acute demand for public hospital services arising from this winter influenza surge. On the other hand, the Government currently provides, through various schemes, free or subsidized seasonal influenza vaccination (IV) to people in priority groups, mainly young children and the elderly. As at mid-March, about 570 000 people received IV under those schemes, but the population of young children (i.e. aged five or below) and elderly people (i.e. aged 65 or above) was 1.5 million at the end of last year, showing an unsatisfactory vaccination coverage. On enhancing the measures to tackle the next winter influenza season, will the Government inform this Council:
(1) whether it will arrange as early as possible free IV for people in the aforesaid age groups upon the onset of autumn this year, so as to reduce the incidence rate of influenza in the next winter influenza season; if it will, of the schedule; if not, the reasons for that;
(2) given that about 40% of elderly people at present are living in public housing estates, whether the Government will, apart from continuing to implement the Elderly Vaccination Subsidy Scheme, arrange the nursing staff of public or private healthcare facilities to go to various housing estates to provide free IV to elderly residents so as to enhance the coverage; if it will, of the schedule; if not, the reasons for that;
LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 20 April 2016 7605
(3) given that under the Residential Care Home Vaccination Programme implemented by the Government, free IV is provided to residents of residential care homes for the elderly and residential care homes for persons with disabilities, whether it knows if there are residential care homes which have been unable to secure any doctor visiting them to provide the relevant vaccination to their eligible residents in 2015-2016; if there are, the reasons for that and the number of residents involved;
(4) whether it will arrange the nursing staff of public or private healthcare facilities to go to all kindergartens in Hong Kong to provide free IV to young children so as to enhance the coverage; if not, of the reasons for that; and
(5) whether it has assessed the annual expenditure on providing free IV comprehensively to all people in the aforesaid age groups, and how such figure compares with HA's additional expenditure and the social costs incurred by the major outbreak of seasonal influenza during the period from January to March this year?
SECRETARY FOR FOOD AND HEALTH (in Chinese): President, the Scientific Committee on Vaccine Preventable Diseases (SCVPD) of the Centre for Health Protection (CHP) reviews recommendations for seasonal influenza vaccination on a regular basis with reference to local epidemiology and international evidence. In the 2015-2016 season, the SCVPD recommended seasonal influenza vaccination for nine priority groups, including elderly persons and children. People in these groups are generally at increased risk of severe complications or even death caused by influenza or spreading the infection to those at high risk. The Government will determine the eligibility of the influenza vaccination schemes after taking into consideration the recommendations of the SCVPD, resource allocation, risks and other factors. The Government currently provides free or subsidized seasonal influenza vaccination to some people of the above groups through the Government Vaccination Programme (GVP) (which includes the Residential Care Home Vaccination Programme) and the Vaccination Subsidy Scheme (VSS).
(1) The SCVPD will convene a meeting in July 2016 to provide recommendations on seasonal influenza vaccination for the 2016-2017 season. As it takes about two weeks after vaccination 7606 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 20 April 2016
for antibodies to develop in the body and provide protection against influenza virus infection, the Government, as usual, plans to commence the 2016-2017 influenza vaccination schemes in October this year, so that eligible groups will have ample time to receive vaccination and develop antibodies during the winter influenza season (usually from January to March) for protection.
(2) The Government provides subsidized seasonal influenza vaccination for elderly persons aged 65 or above through private clinics participating in the VSS. Besides, the GVP was expanded in 2015-2016 to allow all elderly persons aged 65 or above to receive free seasonal influenza vaccination from the public healthcare facilities, with a view to encouraging more elderly persons to receive vaccination. These measures have proved to be effective. As at 10 April 2016, the two schemes provided about 454 000 doses of influenza vaccination for elderly persons aged 65 or above, representing an increase of 22% over the same period in the previous year and covering 40% of the target elderly population. The Government will regularize the above measures in 2016-2017.
At present, the Department of Health (DH) does not have additional manpower to provide outreach influenza vaccination service for all elderly people living in public housing estates. Nevertheless, some private doctors enrolled in the VSS will, in collaboration with different organizations (including elderly centres and non-profit-making organizations), provide outreach vaccination service in the elderly/community centres. If any mutual aid committees of estates or other community organizations are interested in providing subsidized outreach vaccination service for their service users in partnership with private doctors, the DH will provide them with the relevant information and guidelines. The guidelines have also been uploaded onto the CHP's website for reference. Moreover, the DH will organize briefings for relevant organizations on the details of the VSS (including points to note for provision of outreach vaccination service by private doctors) and distribute posters and leaflets to encourage them to help promote the scheme.
LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 20 April 2016 7607
(3) In 2015-2016, more than 1 000 residential care homes (RCHs) for the elderly and persons with disabilities have participated in the Residential Care Home Vaccination Programme. This accounted for about 99% of all RCHs in the territory. Some 61 000 doses of seasonal influenza vaccines have been provided for residents in these RCHs, the coverage rate was about 80%. In this year, only seven (about 1%) RCHs for elderly and persons with disabilities did not make arrangement for visits by private doctors to provide on-site vaccination. These seven RCHs involve about 200 eligible persons, including residents and staff. The reasons for these RCHs not to make such arrangements included limited resources and relatively small number of persons eligible for the vaccination. The responsible persons of these RCHs thus encouraged the eligible persons to receive free seasonal influenza vaccination in the public healthcare facilities or subsidized seasonal influenza vaccination from private doctors who have joined the VSS.
(4) Under the Childhood Influenza Vaccination Subsidy Scheme (CIVSS), parents may bring their eligible children (between the age of six months and less than six years, or aged 6 or above but attending kindergartens or child care centres) to the participating private clinics for subsidized seasonal influenza vaccination. Of over 2 000 private clinics participating in the CIVSS, some do not charge additional service fee on vaccination (that is, eligible children do not need to pay when receiving vaccination at these clinics). Parents can choose a suitable clinic for vaccination according to their needs. Some participating private doctors also provide outreach vaccination service in collaboration with kindergartens and child care centres.
Moreover, the CHP has noted that some places (for example, Taiwan and the United Kingdom) have expanded their influenza vaccination schemes to cover primary school students. The Government is making reference to the results of the schemes and considering whether there is a need to expand the CIVSS progressively to provide subsidized influenza vaccination for children aged 6 to 12.
(5) In 2015-2016, the DH purchased about 400 000 doses of influenza vaccines, involving about $21 million.
7608 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 20 April 2016
The increased demand for public healthcare services during the winter influenza season early this year was due to three reasons, namely the overall ageing of patients, diseases (especially among the elderly) caused by the cold weather, the elevation of influenza activities affecting in particular patients with chronic diseases. The Hospital Authority does not maintain information about the additional expenditure incurred by the increased service demand.
In conclusion, vaccination offers us the best protection against infectious diseases through strengthening our immune system. In the future, the DH will continue to maintain communications with stakeholders to collect their views and understand their difficulties, so as to review on the vaccination programmes and fine tune the programme details, and provide reference for preparation of next year's programmes.
Rationalization of Franchised Bus Services Based on "Area Approach"
11. MISS ALICE MAK (in Chinese): President, since 2013, the Transport Department (TD) and various franchised bus companies have been pursuing rationalization of franchised bus services based on an "Area Approach" (bus service rationalization) for various districts to review franchised bus services in a holistic manner on a district basis, with a view to improving bus routes, easing traffic congestion and reducing emissions. In this connection, will the Government inform this Council:
(1) of the respective districts bus service rationalizations for which have been completed, are being pursued and will be pursued; when TD expects to complete bus service rationalizations across the territory;
(2) in respect of each district the bus service rationalization for which has been completed or is being pursued, of the respective numbers of those routes (i) which are newly introduced, (ii) whose services have been/will be enhanced, (iii) whose frequencies have been/will be improved, (iv) which are newly included in bus-bus interchange concession schemes, (v) whose services have been/will be curtailed, (vi) which have been/will be cancelled or amalgamated, and LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 20 April 2016 7609
(vii) whose frequencies have been/will be reduced, and the relevant bus numbers, with a breakdown of such information in the table below;
District (i) (ii) (iii) (iv) (v) (vi) (vii)
(3) whether it has reviewed the effectiveness of bus service rationalizations; if it has, of the districts such reviews for which have been completed and the outcome of the reviews; if not, how the authorities get to know the effectiveness of bus service rationalizations;
(4) given that some members of the public have relayed to me that direct bus routes from Tsing Yi to New Territories North and land boundary control points and vice versa are lacking, and that despite the proximity of Tsing Yi to the airport, the bus services plying between Tsing Yi and the airport are also inadequate, of the criteria adopted by TD for planning the bus services for Tsing Yi; whether TD will assess and examine afresh the demand of the residents of Tsing Yi for bus services; if TD will, of the details; if not, the reasons for that; and
(5) given that quite a number of cross-harbour bus routes currently plying new towns (e.g. No. 948 plying between Cheung On Estate, Tsing Yi and Causeway Bay (Tin Hau)) only operate during peak periods, with some of them providing uni-directional service only, of the criteria adopted by TD for planning cross-harbour bus routes for new towns, and among such criteria, the weighting of the views of the residents in the service areas; whether TD will introduce new cross-harbour bus routes on a pilot basis?
SECRETARY FOR TRANSPORT AND HOUSING (in Chinese): President, bus route rationalization is an ongoing task of the Transport Department (TD) with the objectives of enhancing network efficiency, improving service quality, easing traffic congestion and reducing roadside air pollution. Since the announcement in the 2013 Policy Address that the Government would pursue 7610 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 20 April 2016 rationalization more vigorously, the TD and franchised bus companies have started pursuing bus route rationalization using an Area Approach. Under this approach, bus service is reviewed holistically for a district as a whole, rather than on a route-by-route basis, for achieving additional benefits. Generally speaking, this means that with the number of buses kept at a broadly similar level, bus resources are deployed flexibly to provide new or enhanced services where demand is high. Services with low demand are meanwhile reduced or cancelled so as to utilize resources efficiently. Also, as per the established mechanism, the TD and franchised bus companies have continued to make service adjustments through annual submission of Route Planning Programmes (RPPs) by franchised bus operators to the department so as to cater for changes in passenger demand and improve the efficiency of franchised bus operation.
My reply to the various parts of Miss Alice MAK's question is as follows:
(1) to (3)
From 2013 to 2015, the TD adopted the Area Approach to rationalize franchised bus service in North District, Tuen Mun, Yuen Long, Sha Tin, Tsing Yi, Tai Po and Kowloon. Please refer to Annex 1 for details of the bus routes involved. Bus route rationalization can enhance the efficiency of bus network for more cost-effective usage of bus resources. According to data analysis by the TD and franchised bus companies, the patronage on bus routes in the six districts with Area Approach rationalization completed (that is, North District, Tuen Mun, Yuen Long, Sha Tin, Tsing Yi and Tai Po)(1) has increased by some 3% to 9% on the whole with roughly the same number of buses being deployed. This suggests that rationalization is effective to a certain extent. Meanwhile, the number of bus trips travelling along busy corridors in Central, Causeway Bay and Mong Kok has decreased by over 3 800 between 2013 and 2015 as a result of the rationalization efforts. This helps improve road traffic conditions and reduce roadside air pollution.
(1) The Area Approach rationalization for bus routes in Kowloon has only been implemented progressively since June last year. Given the short period of implementation, the travelling pattern of the passengers will take some time to stabilize. The TD and the franchised bus companies will continue to closely monitor the situation. LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 20 April 2016 7611
In addition, to tie in with the commissioning of the West Island Line, the TD has implemented a public transport reorganization plan that covers franchised bus routes serving the western district. Public transport reorganization plans are also being formulated in the wake of commissioning of the Kwun Tong Line Extension and South Island Line. The TD will continue to keep in view the utilization of franchised bus service in all districts as well as changes in passenger demand, and will rationalize bus routes in different districts in a timely manner through the Area Approach or other means as necessary.
(4) and (5)
Under the current mechanism, franchised bus companies will submit proposals for service adjustment through the annual RPPs to meet passenger demand. These proposals may include introduction of new routes, adjustment to the frequencies, operating hours and alignments of existing routes, as well as cancellation or amalgamation of routes to meet passenger demand. Franchised bus companies would also from time to time consider introducing special departures with service for specific periods only in response to passenger demand during peak hours. In formulating proposals for bus route rationalization, the TD and franchised bus companies make reference to the Guidelines on Service Improvement and Reduction in Bus Route Development Programmes (the Guidelines), which were amended and promulgated by the TD after consultation with the Legislative Council in 2010. The text of the Guidelines is at Annex 2. The Guidelines state that in approving any new bus service, the TD will consider the impact of such new service on the traffic conditions on major roads, and will as far as possible refrain from providing long haul bus routes or routes that operate via busy districts such as Mong Kok, Tsim Sha Tsui, Central, Wan Chai, Causeway Bay, and so on. Priority will be accorded to routes serving areas that are beyond the catchment area of existing railways or to railway feeders. The Guidelines are applicable to proposals for adjustment to the franchised bus networks in different districts, including proposals on airport routes, cross-harbour routes and 7612 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 20 April 2016
routes serving boundary crossing facilities. Every year, the TD consults the Traffic and Transport Committees of relevant District Councils (DCs) on the RPP proposals. The TD will duly consider all views canvassed and revise the implementation details as necessary before implementing individual proposals.
Regarding public transport services to/from the airport and the North District, Tsing Yi residents can take the Airport Express at MTR Tsing Yi Station for direct access to the airport. They can also reach the North District by train services from Tsing Yi Station. Meanwhile, the residents may take several bus routes, namely Airport Route A31 and North Lantau External Bus Route E21, E32 and E42, to travel to/from the airport. Tsing Yi is also served by a whole-day express bus route (KMB Route 279X) travelling directly from Tsing Yi to Sheung Shui and Fanling via Tai Lam Tunnel. As regards the transport arrangements for land boundary crossing facilities at Lo Wu, Lok Ma Chau and Shenzhen Bay, Tsing Yi residents can use train services for direct access to these facilities or interchange with franchised bus or cross-boundary coach services.
In the 2016-2017 RPPs, the TD and Long Win Bus Company Limited have proposed to introduce a new route plying between Kwai Chung and the airport via Tsing Yi, and to rationalize Airport Route A31 (which is already serving Tsing Yi at present) with a view to expanding the catchment area of the airport bus service in Tsing Yi. As regards cross-harbour bus service, the TD and franchised bus companies have proposed to extend the operating hours of Cross-Harbour Tunnel Route 948 (plying between Tsing Yi and Causeway Bay) on Saturdays and to introduce new services on Sundays and public holidays. Consultation with the DCs is underway. If there is support for implementation of the aforesaid proposals, we expect that they can be implemented progressively beginning from the fourth quarter of this year. The TD will continue to adjust the franchised bus service in different districts through the current mechanism in response to changes in passenger demand.
LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 20 April 2016 7613
Annex 1
Details of bus routes involved in Area Approach rationalization from 2013 to 2015
Routes with service Routes with service Route(s) enhancement reduction (including newly Newly (including frequency Routes being frequency reduction, included in District introduced improvement, route cancelled or route truncation, bus-bus route(s) extension, additional amalgamated replacement by interchange special departures, single-decked buses, concession and so on) and so on) schemes North - KMB - KMB Rt. 70K, - KMB - KMB Rt. 73, Nil District Rt. N73 77K, 78K, Rt. 70X, 73A, 73K, 76K - XHT 270A, 270B, N76 and and 79K Rt. 678 270S, 273A, N270 (Total: 5 routes) (Total: 273S, 277E, (Total: 2 routes) 277P and 277X 3 routes) - XHT Rt. 373 and 373A (Total: 13 routes) Tuen Nil - KMB Rt. 61M, - KMB - KMB Rt. 59S, Nil Mun 66M, 66X, 68A, Rt. 66 63X, 259B, 259D and 263 and 263M 259C, 259E, - XHT Rt. 960S, (Total: 260B, 260C and 960X and 961 2 routes) 267S (Total: 9 routes) (Total: 8 routes) Yuen - KMB - LWB E34 - KMB - KMB Rt. 51, - KMB Long Rt. 68E - KMB Rt. B1, Rt. 264M 251M, 265M Rt. 41M, (Total: 68M, 68X, 69M, (Total: and 269B 51, 212 1 route) 251A, 251B, 1 route) (Total: 4 routes) and 268B, 268X, 251B 269A, 269M, (Total: 269P, 276 and 4 routes) 276P - XHT Rt. 968 and 968X (Total: 16 routes) 7614 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 20 April 2016
Routes with service Routes with service Route(s) enhancement reduction (including newly Newly (including frequency Routes being frequency reduction, included in District introduced improvement, route cancelled or route truncation, bus-bus route(s) extension, additional amalgamated replacement by interchange special departures, single-decked buses, concession and so on) and so on) schemes Sha Tin - KMB - KMB Rt. 47X, - KMB - KMB Rt. 80M, - KMB Rt. 83A, 286C, 286P and Rt. 280P 81S, 82S, 86C, Rt. 88X, 88X, 287X (Total: 87D, 281B, 240X 240X and - XHT Rt. 680P 1 route) 281X and 286X and 280X and 982X (Total: 8 routes) 280X (Total: (Total: 6 routes) (Total: 4 routes) 3 routes) Tsing Yi Nil - KMB Rt. X42C Nil - KMB Rt. 41, 42, Nil and 44 43M, 44P, 45, - XHT Rt. 948 46 and N241 (Total: 3 routes) (Total: 7 routes) Tai Po Nil - KMB Rt. 64S, Nil - KMB Rt. 64P, Nil 72C, 74B, 74C, 65K, 72A, 72X 74D, 74P, 271, and 74A 272A, 272X and (Total: 5 routes) 272P - XHT Rt. 307C and 307P (Total: 12 routes) Kowloon Nil - KMB Rt. 2E, Nil - KMB Rt. 2A - KMB 2X, 24 and 28B (Total: 1 route) Rt. 5M, - XHT Rt. 108 5S, 13X, (Total: 5 routes) 28, 41 and 45 (Total: 6 routes)
Notes:
KMB - The Kowloon Motor Bus Company (1933) Limited LWB - Long Wing Bus Company Limited Rt. - Route Number XHT - Cross-Harbour Tunnel
LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 20 April 2016 7615
Annex 2
Guidelines on Service Improvement and Reduction in Bus Route Development Programmes
Service Improvement
(I) Frequency Improvement
If the occupancy rate of any bus route reaches 100% during any half-hour of the peak period and 85% during that one hour, or reaches 60% during the busiest one hour of the off-peak period, the Transport Department (TD) will consider the deployment of more vehicles to enhance the service level. In increasing the vehicle allocation, priority will be given to redeploying vehicles saved from other rationalization items.
(II) New Bus Service
If the frequency improvement alone is not sufficient to meet demand and no practical alternatives are available, we will give consideration to the provision of new bus service, with priority to serve areas that are beyond the catchment area of existing railways or railway feeders. In approving any new bus service, we will also consider the impact of such new service on the traffic condition on major roads, and will as far as possible refrain from providing long haul bus routes or routes that operate via busy districts such as Mong Kok, Tsim Sha Tsui, Central, Wan Chai, Causeway Bay, and so on.
Service Reduction
In pursuance of our policy objective of providing a safe, efficient and reliable transport system in a sustainable environment, franchised bus routes with low utilization would be rationalized from time to time to enhance bus operation efficiency while meeting passenger demand and matching local operating environment, reducing traffic congestion and roadside emission. These guidelines set out the situations whereby rationalization measures such as adjustment to service frequency and timetable, route cancellation/amalgamation, route truncation, and so on, would be pursued.
7616 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 20 April 2016
(III) Reduction of Bus Trips along Busy Corridors
In view of concentration of activities in the urban areas leading to serious environmental and traffic concerns, the TD is committed to reducing the number of bus trips along busy corridors and bus stoppings through various measures of service cancellation/reduction and route rationalization. If it is inevitable for new routes or enhanced bus services to operate via these busy corridors, the bus operators will have to reduce the same number of trips plying through the same corridor from other routes in order not to aggravate the traffic and environmental conditions in these busy corridors.
(IV) Frequency Reduction
If the average occupancy rate of an individual route is below 85% during the peakiest half-hour of the peak period, or below 30% during the off-peak period, the TD will consider reducing bus deployment for the route.
Railway feeder routes, socially essential routes (such as bus routes serving remote areas or where the majority of the passengers are elderlies) with no alternatives available, and routes with peak headways at 15 minutes or more will be considered on individual merits.
(V) Route Cancellation/Amalgamation
If the utilization of a low-frequency route does not improve (that is, a bus route with average occupancy rate lower than 50% during peak hour, despite its headways having already been reduced to 15 minutes and 30 minutes during peak hours and off-peak hours respectively), the TD will consider proposing cancellation of the route or amalgamation of the route with other route(s) in consultation with the bus operators.
(VI) Route Truncation
To optimize the use of resources, the TD will review with relevant bus operators the feasibility of truncating routes, in particular those where majority of the passengers will have alighted en route. In formulating truncation proposals, the TD will consider whether the number of affected passengers is excessive (that is, the occupancy rate of not more than 20% to 30% at the proposed truncated section during the peakiest hour); whether LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 20 April 2016 7617
enough roadside space is available to accommodate the affected passengers for interchange; and whether terminal space for the changed route is available.
Factors to be Considered in Bus Service Rationalization
In formulating rationalization proposals, in particular those where drastic measures are to be adopted, the TD would give due consideration to ensure that the interests of passengers would be taken care of and to minimize impact on them as far as possible. Factors that will be taken into account include:
(i) nature of the services proposed to be cancelled: For services the utilization rates of which have been consistently low but are socially essential (that is, those serving remote areas or where majority of the passengers are elderlies) and without reasonable alternatives, the TD would consider other means to improve the service performance, such as through the use of vehicles with smaller carrying capacities, provision of alternatives such as introduction of replacement green minibus services, and so on;
(ii) availability of reasonable alternatives: In proposing service cancellation, measures have to be taken to ensure that reasonable alternatives for the affected passengers are provided as far as possible. Factors such as the availability of spare capacity of alternative services in taking up the diverted passengers, the number and convenience of interchanges involved, the total journey time (including interchange and on-vehicle time) as compared with the existing services, and so on, would be assessed carefully to ensure the reasonableness of the alternative services;
(iii) fare of the best available alternative service: The total journey fare as compared with the fare of the existing service would be assessed. Positive consideration to route cancellation will be given if the total journey fare is not higher than that of the service being considered for cancellation. The relevant bus operators would also be requested to consider the provision of fare concessions, such as interchange discounts, section fares, special discounts to elderly, and 7618 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 20 April 2016
other incentives wherever appropriate and feasible, to provide attraction to the affected passengers to facilitate the implementation of the rationalization proposals;
(iv) transport operational considerations: The proposed service rationalization should not cause undue hardship to passengers or operational problems. Factors such as the number of passengers requiring interchanges, the availability of space for interchange activities, and so on, would be carefully assessed. The deployment of the saved vehicles to improve services within the same district would also be spelt out where appropriate;
(v) impact of the proposed service rationalization on bus captains: Factors to be considered include the number of bus captains that would be affected by the proposed service rationalization, and whether the excess bus captains could be absorbed through natural wastage or other means without causing any major staff issues; and
(vi) environmental benefits arising from the service rationalization: Environmental benefits such as the reduction in emission, reduction of bus trips in busy corridors, and so on, would be spelt out in the consultation documents for the public to take note of.
Advance Booking for Consultation Timeslots at General Out-patient Clinics Through Telephone Appointment System
12. MR LEUNG CHE-CHEUNG (in Chinese): President, at present, patients with episodic diseases may book in advance consultation timeslots at general out-patient clinics (GOPCs) within the next 24 hours through the telephone appointment system (appointment system) of the Hospital Authority (HA). In this connection, will the Government inform this Council if it knows:
(1) the respective numbers of consultation quotas reserved for allocation by the appointment system in respect of the morning, afternoon and evening sessions on weekdays and holidays in various GOPCs in New Territories West at present (set out in a table);
LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 20 April 2016 7619
(2) regarding the daily consultation quotas reserved for allocation by the appointment system in respect of the morning, afternoon and evening sessions in various GOPCs in New Territories West at present, the respective average time lapse between the commencement of quota allocation and completion of allocation of all quotas (set out in a table);
(3) in each of the past three years, the number of appointments for which patients failed to show up after securing consultation quotas through the appointment system, and the percentage of that number in the total number of appointments; how various GOPCs handled the consultation timeslots concerned;
(4) regarding the situation where patients with episodic diseases, having failed to secure the consultation quotas for GOPCs, switch to seek consultation at the accident and emergency (A&E) departments of public hospitals, whether HA has conducted any study on the pressure caused by such situation to the services of A&E departments; if HA has, of the details; and
(5) whether HA will consider launching a mobile phone application interface for the appointment system, so as to make it more convenient and faster for members of the public to make advance booking for consultation timeslots; if HA will, of the details?
SECRETARY FOR FOOD AND HEALTH (in Chinese): President, my reply to the question raised by Mr LEUNG Che-cheung is as follows:
The general out-patient services provided by the Hospital Authority (HA) are primarily targeted at the elderly, the low-income group and the chronically ill. Patients under the care of general out-patient clinics (GOPCs) comprise two major categories: chronic disease patients in stable medical condition, such as patients with diabetes mellitus or hypertension; and episodic disease patients with relatively mild symptoms, such as those suffering from influenza, cold or gastroenteritis. For chronic disease patients requiring follow-up consultations, they will be assigned a visit time slot after each consultation and do not need to 7620 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 20 April 2016 make separate appointment. For those with episodic diseases, consultation time slots in the next 24 hours are available for booking through the GOPC telephone appointment system.
Launched in 2006, the GOPC Telephone Appointment Service allows patients to make appointments at home instead of queuing for discs, thereby alleviating the problems of overcrowding and long waiting time in clinics as well as reducing the risk of cross-infection among patients. Through the telephone appointment system, which currently operates round-the-clock with over 650 lines, episodic disease patients can book, at any time of the day, consultation time slots at GOPCs in the next 24 hours. For example, if a patient makes a call through the system in the morning, the system will search for the consultation time slots available from that day to the following morning; and if the patient calls in the afternoon, the system will search for the consultation time slots available from that day to the following afternoon, and so forth.
At present, the HA operates eight GOPCs in the New Territories West Cluster (NTWC), namely Tuen Mun Clinic, Yan Oi GOPC and Tuen Mun Wu Hong Clinic in Tuen Mun District, and Yuen Long Jockey Club Health Centre, Madam Yung Fung Shee Health Centre, Kam Tin Clinic, Tin Shui Wai (Tin Yip Road) Community Health Centre and Tin Shui Wai Health Centre in Yuen Long District.
(1) The average number of consultation quotas of the GOPCs in Tuen Mun and Yuen Long Districts for the preceding four weeks (20 March to 16 April 2016) is set out below:
Monday Tuesday Wednesday Thursday Friday Saturday Sunday Tuen Mun 499.5 494.0 478.0 500.5 505.0 163.0 117.8 Clinic Yan Oi 479.0 475.5 479.3 419.8 465.7 238.7 N/A GOPC Tuen Mun 348.5 266.3 347.3 273.0 273.7 165.3 N/A Wu Hong Clinic Yuen Long 419.0 412.0 423.8 464.3 422.7 204.7 174.5 Jockey Club Health Centre LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 20 April 2016 7621
Monday Tuesday Wednesday Thursday Friday Saturday Sunday Madam 340.0 350.3 340.5 345.0 351.7 207.0 N/A Yung Fung Shee Health Centre Kam Tin 35.0 35.0 35.3 N/A 35.7 N/A N/A Clinic Tin Shui 333.5 270.0 274.5 336.0 324.7 123.0 N/A Wai (Tin Yip Road) Community Health Centre Tin Shui 610.5 591.8 593.5 587.5 613.3 247.7 N/A Wai Health Centre
(2) and (3)
The usage of GOPC services is always a concern for the HA. Through the telephone appointment system, consultation quotas of different GOPCs are now pooled together in a network. When a particular clinic has run out of consultation time slots, the system will automatically search for unused quotas of other nearby clinics. This will save patients the trouble of visiting clinics in person to queue for an appointment and optimize the use of consultation quotas within a district. The system will continuously update the quota status of future time slots, including appointments cancelled by patients. When an appointment is cancelled, the quota concerned will be released by the system for booking by other patients to ensure optimal use of consultation quota.
The HA has taken various measures to reduce quota wastage caused by patients' failure to show up for scheduled consultations. A message has been added to the telephone appointment system to remind patients to arrive at the clinics 15 minutes before the consultation time or to cancel appointments through the telephone appointment system as early as possible and at least one hour before the consultation time if they are unable to attend the scheduled consultations so that the quotas concerned can be released for 7622 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 20 April 2016
booking by other patients. Moreover, the HA has an established mechanism to handle cases of failure to show up for scheduled consultations. For patients who make their booking through the telephone appointment system, their use of the system will be suspended if they fail to attend three appointments without prior cancellation within two months. These patients have to visit the clinics in person to go through the necessary procedures should they wish to continue using the GOPC services in the future. The HA has also produced educational video clips and pamphlets for broadcasting and distribution at various GOPCs to remind patients of the importance of appointment cancellation and the relevant procedures. The above measures can effectively address the issue of patients' failure to show up for scheduled consultations, thus ensuring the optimal use of consultation quota.
The HA understands the strong demand for GOPC services in the community, and that the demand as such may sometimes exceed service provision. To meet the rising service demand of the target users, the HA has always endeavoured to improve its GOPC services, including renovating the premises and modernizing the facilities of ageing clinics to improve clinic environment, streamline patient flow and increase the space for consultation. The HA also actively recruits staff to enhance service capacity.
The HA has been actively enhancing GOPC services in Tuen Mun and Yuen Long. Comprehensive primary care services, such as medical consultation services, multi-disciplinary healthcare services, chronic disease management and patient education, are provided at Tin Shui Wai (Tin Yip Road) Community Health Centre, which commenced operation in 2012, at Tin Shui Wai North. Interior renovation and facility modernization for Yuen Long Jockey Club Health Centre, Madam Yung Fung Shee Health Centre, Tuen Mun Clinic, Yan Oi GOPC and Tuen Mun Wu Hong Clinic were completed during the period from 2011-2012 to 2015-2016, while interior renovation for Tin Shui Wai Health Centre will be carried out this year. With the implementation of various measures, there has been an increase of over 60 000 attendances in the NTWC from 2012-2013 to date, and the GOPC consultation quotas are expected LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 20 April 2016 7623
to increase by over 10 000 in 2016-2017. In mid-2014, the HA also launched the General Out-patient Clinic Public-Private Partnership Programme (GOPC PPP) in Kwun Tong, Wong Tai Sin and Tuen Mun. Clinically stable patients having hypertension with or without hyperlipidemia who have been receiving GOPC services provided by the HA for at least 12 months in the three pilot districts are invited to participate in the programme under which they can opt to receive private primary care services in the community. The consultation quotas released under the GOPC PPP can be given to other needy patients to meet service demand in the respective districts. The programme will be extended to cover diabetes mellitus patients. Having considered the initial positive feedback from the medical professional bodies, patients, private doctors and staff, and the community's call for extension to other districts, the HA plans to extend the GOPC PPP to nine districts (including Yuen Long District) of the seven clusters in phases starting from the third quarter of 2016. The remaining districts will be covered in 2017-2018 and 2018-2019. The HA will continue to closely monitor the implementation of the GOPC PPP and maintain close communication with the stakeholders.
(4) While the GOPCs are primarily targeted at chronic disease patients in stable medical condition and episodic disease patients with relatively mild symptoms, the GOPC telephone appointment system is mainly established for episodic disease patients to reserve consultation time slots available in the next 24 hours. Although patients with episodic diseases (such as influenza, cold and gastroenteritis) are not in urgent medical condition, the HA wishes patients to receive medical attention as soon as possible. As such, the 24-hour appointment arrangement best suits the need of these patients for early medical consultation. The provision of appointment time slot beyond the next 24 hours, however, not only fails to properly address patients' need for early medical consultation, but may also increase their default rate, resulting in quota wastage. The HA has thoroughly considered and balanced various factors and views before adopting the 24-hour appointment arrangement.
7624 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 20 April 2016
As the GOPCs are not intended for provision of emergency services, patients with severe and acute symptoms should go to the accident and emergency departments of hospitals where the necessary staffing, equipment and ancillary facilities are in place to provide comprehensive and appropriate treatment and care for them. As the two categories of patients under the care of the GOPCs do not require 24-hour service, the HA will not consider operating out-patient services round-the-clock for the time being taking into account the need to ensure efficient use of resources.
(5) The GOPCs provide a huge volume of services, involving about 6 million GOPC attendances for more than 1 million patients every year. To optimize the use of resources, the appointment system is currently connected to the HA's patient database to verify callers' identity so as to ensure that those allocated consultation time slots are all eligible persons (for example, Hong Kong Identity Card holders or children aged below 11 with Hong Kong residency status). The purpose is to safeguard the rights of the eligible persons to access GOPC services and avoid quota wastage. Also, the system will search for the suitable type of quotas for patients according to their identity information, for example, Elderly Appointment Quotas for patients aged 65 or above.
The use of smartphone mobile applications for making appointments involves storage of patients' personal data, and even requires connection to the HA's patient database for identity verification. Hence, the HA should, when developing mobile applications for this purpose, have comprehensive planning to ensure that, among other things, patients' information is protected. The elderly, the low-income group and the chronically ill are the target users of GOPC services, and their use of mobile applications for making GOPC appointments is expected to be lower than that of telephone. It is easier and more convenient for them to make appointments through telephone. Hence, the telephone appointment system can better safeguard their rights to access GOPC services. The HA attaches great importance to the views of various sectors and will maintain an open mind in examining improvement proposals based on the above considerations.
LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 20 April 2016 7625
Odour Problem in West Kowloon Caused by a Refuse Transfer Station and Sewage Treatment Works
13. DR PRISCILLA LEUNG (in Chinese): President, since 6 January this year, the South East New Territories Landfill located in Tseung Kwan O has been designated to receive only construction waste, and the domestic, commercial and industrial waste that the landfill used to receive has to be diverted to other refuse transfer stations (transfer stations) and landfills (new measure). Quite a number of the residents in Mei Foo and the neighbouring residential areas (including the "West Kowloon Four-Little-Dragon Estates" and Hoi Lai Estate) have relayed to me that as refuse collection vehicles travel to and from the West Kowloon Refuse Transfer Station more frequently under the new measure, and the Stonecutters Island Sewage Treatment Works has increased the volume of sewage it handles upon completion of its extension works, the odour problem in the district has worsened. The residents often have to keep their windows closed and switch on air-conditioners to insulate themselves from the odour. They have also pointed out that as the transfer station is already overloaded, quite a number of refuse collection vehicles need to queue up for a long time to enter that transfer station every day, emitting odour and blocking the traffic during such process. In this connection, will the Government inform this Council:
(1) whether it has reviewed the impacts of the new measure on the loading of the various transfer stations and on the residents near the transfer stations; if it has, of the details; whether it has assessed if the implementation of the new measure is fair to the residents near the transfer stations, and whether it has formulated any long-term plan to improve the waste diversion; if it has, of the details; if not, the reasons for that;
(2) of the number of complaints about the odour problem that the authorities received from the residents of the aforesaid district and the follow-up actions taken in each of the past five years; whether they have conducted any study on the relationship between the odour problem in the district and the transfer station; if they have, of the details; if not, the reasons for that;
(3) given that while the new facilities of the Stonecutters Island Sewage Treatment Works were commissioned at the end of last year to enable the sewage treatment works to treat more sewage, the residents nearby are complaining about the worsening of the odour 7626 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 20 April 2016
problem, whether the Government has reviewed the management and effectiveness of the existing deodourization facilities at the sewage treatment works; if it has, of the details; if not, the reasons for that; and
(4) given that the odour in the aforesaid district partly comes from the food waste in the domestic waste, whether the authorities have any measures in place to encourage members of the public to further reduce food waste?
SECRETARY FOR THE ENVIRONMENT (in Chinese): President, our reply to the question raised by Dr Priscilla LEUNG is as follows:
(1) The Environmental Protection Department (EPD) implemented a "Waste Diversion Plan" (WDP) to ensure that, after the designating of South East New Territories (SENT) Landfill at Tseung Kwan O to receive only construction waste, other waste that could not be accepted by the SENT Landfill would be properly handled by the existing waste collection network. Under the WDP, the EPD has redistributed the amount of waste received by various refuse transfer stations (RTSs) and landfills so as to maximize the utilization of those waste management facilities with spare capacity and minimize the environmental impact on the community due to waste diversion. To facilitate the above arrangement, the Food and Environmental Hygiene Department has adjusted some of its refuse collection routes by which waste is diverted away from the areas affected by the waste diversion to other RTSs or landfills as assigned by the EPD, so as to make available sufficient handling capacity for the waste diverted from the SENT Landfill. The EPD has also opened up the Shatin Transfer Station and aligned the fee for use of refuse transfer service in urban areas to the same level so as to encourage private waste collectors to better utilize the waste management facilities in various districts. With the SENT Landfill receiving only construction waste since 6 January this year, the operation of various RTSs has been smooth. As for the West Kowloon Transfer Station (WKTS), there is no significant difference in terms of the amount and type of waste received before and after the implementation of the WDP, details are as follows:
LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 20 April 2016 7627
Average Daily Waste Intake
Municipal Solid Waste (tonnes) Before implementation 2 701 (January to March 2015) After implementation 2 614 (January to March 2016)
Furthermore, as the improvement and refurbishment works completed earlier on have enhanced the operational efficiency of the WKTS, the traffic flow inside the station for waste disposal is smoother, the time required for handling waste has been shortened, the queuing situation has been improved and the efficiency on odour control has been enhanced. At present vehicles entering the WKTS can normally dispose of waste within 30 minutes, which has significantly improved when comparing with the time required for waste disposal during peak hours in the past. No plant failure or operation incident has occurred which would otherwise have led to long queuing at the WKTS.
(2) The figures on complaints about the odour problem that the EPD received from residents of the aforesaid areas over the past five years are as follows:
2016 Year 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 (January to March) Number of 23 7 15 17 16 0 Complaints
The EPD has carried out follow-up investigation for every complaint received and conducted regular inspections on the WKTS and Stonecutters Island Sewage Treatment Works (SCISTW). During these inspections over the past five years, the EPD officers found that the operation of both facilities and their odour mitigation measures was normal.
On the other hand, the EPD is committed to enhancing the odour control and environmental performance of the WKTS. It has also set out stringent contractual requirements for the contractor of the 7628 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 20 April 2016
WKTS with respect to its operational and environmental management, with a view to ensuring that its operation will not cause any environmental nuisance to the neighbourhood. For the monitoring of odour, three inspections are carried out by the station staff every day and another three by an independent consultant every week. The odour management of the WKTS has been found to be in compliance with the contractual requirements over the past six months (and also since the WDP was implemented). In December 2012, several improvement works were commenced and measures implemented for the WKTS. They included the enhancement of air scrubbing devices and the installation of air curtains to further reduce odour emission; the improvement of the vehicle washing facilities to ensure cleanliness of refuse collection vehicles leaving the station; and the installation of additional mobile deodourisers in the WKTS. These improvement works were completed in December 2014. To ensure compliance with environmental performance requirements, the contractor of the WKTS has increased the frequency of cleansing the station, nearby roads and the containers used for waste transfer. The contractor has also increased the frequency of odour monitoring. In January 2014 and July 2015, the Environment and Hygiene Committee of the Sham Shui Po District Council conducted two site visits to the WKTS to inspect its operation. Members of the Committee witnessed the improvement in odour management within the station. The EPD will continue to closely monitor the operation and environmental performance of the WKTS to prevent it from causing any environmental nuisance to the neighbourhood.
(3) The Drainage Services Department (DSD) takes the environmental management of the SCISTW very seriously and strives to ensure that all the treatment processes operate properly. Currently, all the sewage and sludge treatment processes of the SCISTW are conducted in an enclosed environment. The plant workers also strictly comply with the established odour control measures, which include:
(i) application of chemicals, such as ferric chloride and other deodourizing agents, to curb odour emission from sewage;
LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 20 April 2016 7629
(ii) covering up potential odour emission sources, such as channels and sewage treatment facilities;
(iii) installation of odour abatement units, such as activated carbon systems, chemical scrubbers and biofilters, at appropriate locations; and
(iv) regular cleansing of the sewer system.
The Harbour Area Treatment Scheme Stage 2A has been commissioned since late 2015 to upgrade and strengthen the odour control measures for the SCISTW. Indeed, the DSD has significantly curbed potential odour emission by covering up all sedimentation tanks in the SCISTW since September 2012. In addition to closely monitoring the plant operation, the DSD has also engaged an independent accredited laboratory to regularly monitor the level of ambient hydrogen sulphide within the plant. According to its air quality monitoring records, the average monthly level of ambient hydrogen sulphide at the plant perimeters remained below 0.2 ppm for the past five years. This odour level would not cause nuisance to the odour sensitive areas in the neighbourhood.
The DSD will closely monitor the performance of the system and carry out regular inspections and appropriate maintenance works. To protect the surrounding environment, the DSD will also monitor the plant operation and efficacy of its odour abatement facilities to ensure their proper operation.
(4) The Environment Bureau unveiled the "Food Waste and Yard Waste Plan 2014-2022" in February 2014 to set out four main strategies as the backbone to tackle the food waste challenge, namely reduction at source, reuse and donation, recyclable collection, and turning food waste into energy, with a target of reducing food waste disposal to landfills by 40% in 2022. To mobilize our community to avoid and reduce food waste at source, the EPD has launched various education and publicity programmes in the past few years, such as the Food Wise Hong Kong Campaign, Food Waste Recycling Partnership Scheme and Food Waste Recycling Projects in Housing Estates. The EPD, in collaboration with the commercial and industrial 7630 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 20 April 2016
sectors, implemented the Food Waste Recycling Partnership Scheme in June 2010 to assist with the training of managerial and front-line staff of participating organizations on good food waste management practices and rules. The Scheme aims to encourage the concerned trades (such as food factories) to avoid and reduce food waste at source, and perform separation at source and recycling for unavoidable food waste. Launched in May 2013, the Food Wise Hong Kong Campaign encourages behavioural changes in the community through various programmes that promote food waste reduction at source. Good practices of food waste reduction have also been drawn up for the trades concerned (such as the catering sector) to facilitate their reduction of food waste. In November 2015, the EPD further launched the Food Wise Eateries Scheme to encourage eateries in the catering and hotel industries to offer food portioning options and take food waste reduction measures, thereby collaborating with their customers to reduce food waste at source. As regards waste treatment, the first phase of the organic waste treatment facilities (OWTF) is under construction. It is expected that the OWTF will commence operation in 2017 and about 200 tonnes of food waste can then be treated and turned into energy per day.
Regulation of Playgroups for Pre-school Children
14. MR IP KIN-YUEN (in Chinese): President, at the end of last year, some private organizations which operated playgroups for pre-school children suddenly closed down one after another, causing financial losses to quite a number of parents who had prepaid the fees. Such cases also aroused concern about the adequacy of the authorities' current regulation of playgroups operated by private organizations. In this connection, will the Government inform this Council:
(1) whether it knows the number of organizations operating playgroups in each year since 2012, with a breakdown by District Council district; if such information is unavailable, of the reasons for that;
(2) whether the existing legislation has prescribed certain requirements to be met by persons or organizations operating playgroups; if so, of the details; LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 20 April 2016 7631
(3) whether it knows the following information regarding the playgroup activities conducted at the venues under the Leisure and Cultural Services Department in each of the past three years: the total number of such activities, names of the operators, contents of such activities, names of the venues, and total number of participating young children;
(4) whether it will consider providing venues in various districts for non-profit making organizations to operate playgroups, so as to meet the demand of parents; if it will, of the details; if not, the reasons for that;
(5) as it is learnt that the United Kingdom has put in place a system for regulating organizations which provide pre-school educational services, including the requirements that a specified proportion of the staff members of organizations operating playgroups for pre-school children must have received relevant training, and that they are subject to regular inspections, whether the Government will, by making reference to such a practice, regulate the playgroups operated in Hong Kong by private organizations, so as to ensure that young children can participate in the relevant activities in a safe environment, and that such activities are beneficial to such children's physical and psychological development; and
(6) given that the Government has indicated in the Policy Agenda of this year's Policy Address and related documents that it will implement a two-year pilot project to help grandparents become well-trained child carers in a home setting while promoting life-long learning and active ageing for such elderly grandparents, whether the Government will make reference to this initiative and support more non-profit making organizations in providing parents with training in respect of enhancing children's physical and psychological development through playgroup activities, so as to promote parent-child and parenting education as well as to help parents and children develop healthy and fruitful lives?
7632 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 20 April 2016
SECRETARY FOR EDUCATION (in Chinese): President, my reply to the question raised by Mr IP is as follows:
(1) and (2)
In accordance with the Child Care Services Ordinance (CCSO) (Cap. 243), any premises which habitually receive at any one time more than five children who are under the age of three years for the purposes of care and supervision requires registration as a registered child care centre. A playgroup, which provides play learning classes for children accompanied by their parents or carers, is not under the ambit of the CCSO. The relevant data and other information as requested in the question are not available from the Social Welfare Department.
In respect of section 3(1) of the Education Ordinance (EO) (Cap. 279), a "school" means an institution, organization or establishment which provides for 20 or more persons during any one day or eight or more persons at any one time, any nursery, kindergarten, primary, secondary or post secondary education or any other educational course by any means, including correspondence delivered by hand or through the postal services. Any organization which provides educational courses with the number(s) of students attending these courses meeting the number(s) stipulated in the above definition of "school" is required to be registered or provisionally registered in accordance with section 10(1) and regulated by the EO. Playgroups which do not provide educational courses (for example, those aiming at facilitating children's mental development or at developing their physical and social skills) are not subject to the regulation of the EO. The relevant data and other information as requested in the question are not available.
(3) Statistical data on playgroups conducted at its rental venues are not available from the Leisure and Cultural Services Department.
(4) and (6)
Parents play a very important role in the development of their children's early life and are their children's role models. As regards promotion of parent education, the Education Bureau aims to LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 20 April 2016 7633
provide students with quality education, develop students' potential to the fullest extent and prepare them for the challenges ahead. Our parent education measures thus mainly centre on schools, including kindergartens (KGs), as the platform for supporting parents to guide their children at home and promoting the whole-person development of students through home-school co-operation. On KG education, we continue to enlighten parents about the development needs of their children through parent education. This includes organizing talks on different themes for parents, such as children's development needs, quality KG education, transition from KG to primary education and application for KG admission, as well as publishing relevant leaflets and booklets such as the booklet entitled "Helping Your Children of Kindergarten Age", a storybook on helping children to adapt to their new primary school life, and so on. In addition, the Education Bureau encourages KGs to set up Parent-Teacher Associations and promotes the involvement of parents in the learning of their children.
The Education Bureau has no plan to provide venues for operators of playgroups. As a matter of fact, in accordance with the established mechanism, non-profit-making organizations can apply to use suitable venues and facilities of the Government as they see fit. Details and application forms are available at relevant websites for their reference. Moreover, parents who wish to enrol their children on playgroups available in the market should pay attention to their rights as consumers, which include making a pre-enrolment visit to the venue; reading carefully the respective leaflet, with particular attention to the fees, activity details, refund policy and procedures, and so on; ensuring that information such as the organizer's name and address, name of the activity, date of payment and the amount paid, and so on, is shown on the receipt; and keeping the receipt as a proof for refund purpose when necessary.
(5) If an organization provides educational courses, irrespective of the mode of activities and the age of students, it is required to be registered or provisionally registered as a school under the EO so long as it meets the above thresholds regarding the number of students. Schools registered or provisionally registered under the EO have to fulfil the requirements of the EO in respect of school 7634 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 20 April 2016
premises, fees collection, teacher qualification, teacher-pupil ratio, curriculum, and so on, and to comply with guidelines issued by the Education Bureau from time to time. The Education Bureau officers can also conduct visits to any school to ensure its compliance with the EO and it is being run satisfactorily. The Education Bureau has no plan to amend the EO.
Rehousing and Compensation for Tenants Affected by Redevelopment Projects
15. DR KWOK KA-KI (in Chinese): President, at present, the Urban Renewal Authority (URA) conducts a freezing survey on the commencement date of the implementation of a redevelopment project (i.e. the date on which a notice in respect of that project is first published in the Gazette), and makes acquisition offers to the property owners in the proposed redevelopment project areas after all necessary planning procedures for the project have been completed. In the event that URA cannot reach agreements with the property owners concerned on issues such as acquisition prices and vesting of titles, it may, under the Urban Renewal Authority Ordinance (Cap. 563), apply to the Government requesting it to resume the relevant titles under the Lands Resumption Ordinance (Cap. 124) so that the relevant titles would revert to the Government. In this connection, will the Government inform this Council:
(1) whether it knows the following information in respect of each of the redevelopment projects of URA since 2010 (set out the information in the table below by name of project):
(i) the commencement date of the implementation of the project;
(ii) the number of tenants at the time of the freezing survey;
(iii) the number of registered tenants who had moved out of the properties before URA completed the acquisition of the relevant titles or the relevant titles reverted to the Government;
(iv) the date(s) on which URA made its acquisition offers to the property owners;
LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 20 April 2016 7635
(v) the number of registered tenants involved in those properties for which URA completed acquisition within six months after making its acquisition offers;
(vi) the number of registered tenants involved in those properties for which URA completed acquisition within the period from the seventh to 12th month after making its acquisition offers;
(vii) the number of registered tenants involved in those properties for which URA completed acquisition within the period from the 13th to 24th month after making its acquisition offers;
(viii) the date(s) on which the relevant property titles reverted to the Government (if applicable); and
(ix) the number of registered tenants involved in those properties the titles of which reverted to the Government; and
(i) (ii) (iii) (iv) (v) (vi) (vii) (viii) (ix)
domestic tenant domestic tenant domestic tenant domestic tenant domestic tenant domestic tenant ------Name of propertyName Domestic tenant Domestic tenant Domestic tenant Domestic tenant Domestic tenant Domestic tenant Non Non Non Non Non Non
(2) given that it often takes a long time for URA to complete the acquisition of property titles or for the Government to resume the relevant titles within the proposed redevelopment project areas, and that prior to the completion of such, URA will not formally process the compensation/ex-gratia payments and rehousing arrangements that the affected tenants may receive, whether the Government has evaluated the distress that such situation may cause to the affected tenants, and whether it has advised URA to make improvements by 7636 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 20 April 2016
expeditiously processing the compensation/ex-gratia payments and rehousing arrangements that the affected domestic and non-domestic tenants may receive?
SECRETARY FOR DEVELOPMENT (in Chinese): President,
(1) Since 2010, land titles for the following 11 redevelopment projects have been resumed by the Government under the Lands Resumption Ordinance (Cap. 124) upon application by the Urban Renewal Authority (URA) in accordance with the Urban Renewal Authority Ordinance (Cap. 563):
Number of Commencement Tenants* Name of The URA's Land Titles Project Date of the at the Redevelopment Acquisition Reversion Number Implementation time of Project Offer Date Date of the Project the Freezing Survey KC-006 Pak Tai 25-03-2011 106 27-02-2012 10-08-2013 Street/San Shan Road, Ma Tau Kok SSP-014 Fuk Wing 25-03-2011 104 04-05-2012 12-10-2013 Street, Sham Shui Po KC-007 Kowloon City 25-11-2011 164 29-10-2012 25-07-2014 Road/Sheung Heung Road, Ma Tau Kok YTM-010 Reclamation 10-02-2012 268 04-07-2013 16-01-2016 Street/Shantun g Street, Mong Kok DL-1:SSP 229A-G, Hai 20-04-2012 31 04-07-2012 12-10-2013 Tan Street, Sham Shui Po LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 20 April 2016 7637
Number of Commencement Tenants* Name of The URA's Land Titles Project Date of the at the Redevelopment Acquisition Reversion Number Implementation time of Project Offer Date Date of the Project the Freezing Survey
DL-2:SSP 205-211A, Hai 20-04-2012 70 25-10-2012 16-08-2014 Tan Street, Sham Shui Po DL-3:YTM Pine Street/Oak 20-04-2012 80 25-10-2012 10-01-2015 Street, Tai Kok Tsui DL-4:SSP Kowloon 12-04-2013 99 27-06-2013 06-06-2015 Road/Kiu Yam Street, Sham Shui Po DL-5:SSP Tung Chau 12-04-2013 158 27-06-2013 06-06-2015 Street/Kweilin Street, Sham Shui Po DL-6:YTM Fuk Chak 28-06-2013 45 11-09-2013 24-07-2015 Street/Li Tak Street, Sham Shui Po DL-8:KC Kai Ming 19-12-2013 38 04-03-2014 27-06-2015 Street, Ma Tau Kok
Note:
* domestic tenants and non-domestic tenants included
Among these 11 redevelopment projects, about 1 000 domestic tenants and 80 non-domestic tenants were involved in the acquisitions that were completed within 24 months after acquisition offers were made. There were about 250 domestic tenants and 50 non-domestic tenants involved after the land titles reverted to the 7638 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 20 April 2016
Government under the redevelopment projects. Since the URA would not be able to enter some of the flats to conduct the survey during the period of the Freezing Survey or some residents would move to live in the affected flats after the survey, the total number of tenants processed by the URA would generally be greater than the number of tenants at the time of the survey. Among these 11 projects, four projects completed land titles reversion to the Government within one and a half years after acquisition offers were made, five within two years, one within two and a half years and one within three years.
(2) The URA would carry out social impact assessment to assess the impacts on the area arising from the redevelopment project and the needs of the affected residents, and propose relevant mitigation measures.
After announcing the commencement of the redevelopment project, the URA would distribute leaflets to the tenants affected by the project and conduct public briefings. The social workers of the urban renewal social service teams would immediately provide the households in need with appropriate assistance, including tenancy matters, elderly support and emotional support/counselling, with a view to facilitating a deeper understanding of the details of property acquisition and minimizing their worries about the redevelopment.
When authorization was obtained for implementing the redevelopment project, the URA would make acquisition offers to the property owners within the redevelopment area as soon as possible. Upon successful acquisition and becoming the owner of the flats, the URA would immediately carry out the relevant assessment process for the tenants and to provide rehousing arrangements to the eligible tenants, such as public rental housing units or rehousing units of the URA, or offering ex-gratia compensation to facilitate removal. In the event that it could not acquire the land titles within the redevelopment project area, the URA would make an application for land resumption by the Government in accordance with the Urban Renewal Authority Ordinance (Cap. 563). The Government would resume the land titles under the Lands Resumption Ordinance (Cap. 124). Upon LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 20 April 2016 7639
reversion of the land titles to the Government, the URA, in the capacity of the Government's agent, would process expeditiously the rehousing and relevant compensation arrangement for the tenants of the flats which could not be acquired previously.
Since the URA does not have property titles of individual flats before the acquisition is completed, the URA is not able to undertake assessment on the rehousing and compensation arrangement for the tenants of the flats. Moreover, when the concerned tenants moved out after receiving rehousing assistance or ex-gratia compensation, the owners could still rent out the vacant portions to other tenants. According to the prevailing arrangement, the new tenants would also be offered ex-gratia payment. If compensation were granted more than once for the same occupied portion of a flat, it would not be a fair and optimal use of public resources.
Opening a Site in Central Promenade for Public Use
16. DR KENNETH CHAN (in Chinese): President, currently, a site in the Central promenade, which is 150 metres long and has an area of about 0.3 hectare, has all along been fenced off and watched by security guards. According to the authorities, the site has been set aside for use as a military dock by the People's Liberation Army Hong Kong Garrison (the Garrison). In reply to a question raised by a Member of this Council on 16 March this year, the Secretary for Development has advised that as the military dock is a military facility, the site is not suitable to be opened for public use before it is handed over to the Garrison. In this connection, will the Government inform this Council:
(1) of the amount of public resources spent on the maintenance, management and security matters of the site last year;
(2) of the specific justifications for the authorities' making the aforesaid remark that the site is not suitable to be opened for public use; whether the authorities will review regularly the suitability of opening the site for public use; if they will, of the details; if not, the reasons for that;
7640 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 20 April 2016
(3) of the ordinance under which the Government is empowered to fence off the site and prevent members of the public from gaining access to and using the site; and
(4) whether it will take actions against members of the public who have gained unauthorized access to the site; if it will, of the actions to be taken by the Government, and whether the actions include prosecution; of the legal basis of such actions and the government departments responsible for taking such actions?
SECRETARY FOR DEVELOPMENT (in Chinese): President, the site mentioned in the question is the Central Military Dock (CMD). As set out in our reply to Question 22 of the Legislative Council meeting on 16 March 2016, according to the original plan, the Government will hand over the CMD to the People's Liberation Army Hong Kong Garrison (the Garrison) after completion of construction works and all the necessary procedures. At present, the statutory planning procedures for zoning of the CMD site to "Other Specified Uses" annotated "Military Use (1)" are under judicial review proceedings and have yet to be completed. The CMD is a military facility. The Government considers it not suitable to open up the CMD site for any public activities before it is handed over to the Garrison, and will continue to keep in view the progress of the judicial review and take forward the follow-up actions required to complete the handover process as appropriate.
Pending the handing over of the CMD site to the Garrison, Lands Department (LandsD) undertakes the daily management of the site, incurring about $175,000 per annum mainly for the hiring of security guard service. The expenses on maintenance and repairs are about $100,000 per annum. For sites on Government land managed by the LandsD pending their handover to relevant parties, it is not an unusual practice for the LandsD to fence off the sites to facilitate effective management. In so doing, the LandsD is exercising its right like other private land owners. As with all fenced off sites managed by the LandsD, if any person enters into the site without permission or authorization, the LandsD will report this to the Police for follow-up. Depending on the circumstances and the nature of the conduct on site, the Government may take further action under the relevant ordinances which could, for instance, include the Land (Miscellaneous Provisions) Ordinance which provides for sanctions against unlawful occupation of unleased Government land.
LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 20 April 2016 7641
Implementation of Law on Paternity Leave
17. MR KWOK WAI-KEUNG (in Chinese): President, under the Employment (Amendment) Ordinance 2014 which came into operation on 27 February last year (the law on paternity leave), eligible male employees are entitled to three days' paternity leave for each confinement of their spouse or partner, and to receive paternity leave pay at the rate of 80% of their average daily wages. Regarding the implementation of the law on paternity leave, will the Government inform this Council:
(1) whether it has compiled statistics on the number of male employees who have taken paternity leave during the period from 27 February last year to date, and the number of families involved; if it has, of the following information concerning such male employees:
(i) the type of organizations in which they work (i.e. public/private),
(ii) the number of days of paternity leave taken (i.e. less than three days, three days, four days, five days, six days, seven days and more than seven days),
(iii) the manner in which the paternity leave was taken (i.e. in one go, on separate days, and others),
(iv) the time when paternity leave was taken (i.e. within three to four weeks before the expected date of delivery of the child, within one to two weeks before the expected date of delivery of the child, within the first to the second week beginning on the actual date of delivery of the child, within three to four weeks beginning on the actual date of delivery of the child, within five to 10 weeks beginning on the actual date of delivery of the child, and others), and
(v) the rate of paternity leave pay (i.e. 100%, 80% of the male employee's average daily wages, and others); and
7642 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 20 April 2016
(2) given that the authorities have undertaken to review the operation of the law on paternity leave one year after its implementation, and explore areas for improvement of the relevant arrangements, whether such a review has commenced; if so, of the contents of the review and its progress; if not, the reasons for that and when the review will commence?
SECRETARY FOR LABOUR AND WELFARE (in Chinese): President, my reply to the two parts of the question raised by Mr KWOK Wai-keung is as follows:
(1) Employers are statutorily required to provide paid paternity leave to their eligible male employees, as provided for in Employment (Amendment) Ordinance 2014. Employers are also encouraged to provide, among others, paternity leave benefits above the statutory paternity leave to their male employees if and when practicable as a family friendly employment measure. Employers and employees are not required to report their paternity leave arrangements to the Government. The Labour Department (LD) therefore does not have information on the number of employees who have taken paternity leave and the number of families involved. Nevertheless, it is roughly estimated that tens of thousands of eligible male employees and their families have enjoyed paternity leave since the above-mentioned Amendment Ordinance has come into operation in February 2015.
(2) The LD has just commenced its work on the review of the implementation of the statutory paternity leave. The LD will shortly report the progress of the review to the Labour Advisory Board and the Legislative Council Panel on Manpower.
Provision of Accident and Emergency Services to Residents of Wong Tai Sin District
18. MR WU CHI-WAI (in Chinese): President, according to the arrangement made by the Fire Services Department (FSD) and the Hospital Authority (HA), the territory is divided into 20 catchment areas, and the ambulances under FSD will take patients to the designated hospitals or clinics within the catchment areas LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 20 April 2016 7643 where they are located. However, patients in critical conditions will be taken to the nearest hospital. On the other hand, some residents of the Wong Tai Sin (WTS) district have complained to me that as there is no acute hospital in the district, and Our Lady of Maryknoll Hospital (OLMH) in the district provides out-patient services only up to 10.00 pm, when chronically ill patients who regularly attend follow-up consultations at OLMH are in need of medical care late at night, such patients have no choice but to call an ambulance to take them to Queen Elizabeth Hospital (QEH) or other acute hospitals outside the district for treatment. In this connection, will the Government inform this Council:
(1) among the patients taken to hospital by the ambulance in each of the past three years, of the number and percentage of those who died in transit, with a breakdown by District Council district in which such patients boarded the ambulance; whether it has assessed, among those cases in which the patients died in transit to hospital, the percentage of those in which the patients died as a result of not having arrived at the accident and emergency (A&E) departments in time to be saved (set out in a table);
(2) whether it knows, among the patients taken to hospital by the ambulance mentioned in item (1), (i) the respective numbers and percentages of those patients whose conditions were categorized as critical, emergency, urgent, semi-urgent and non-urgent upon their arrival at the A&E departments, as well as (ii) the number of those who regularly attended follow-up consultations at OLMH (set out in a table);
(3) in each of the past three years, (i) of the total number of patients who boarded the ambulance in the WTS district, and (ii) among such patients, the respective numbers and percentages of those who were taken to United Christian Hospital, QEH, Kwong Wah Hospital and other hospitals (set out in a table);
(4) of the respective average time taken (i) from FSD's receipt of the emergency calls concerning the patients mentioned in item (3) to the arrival of the ambulance at the scene, and (ii) from such patients' boarding the ambulance at the scene to their arrival at the A&E departments;
7644 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 20 April 2016
(5) as I have learnt that OLMH had provided 24-hour out-patient services before it was incorporated into HA's structure, and some residents of the WTS district have proposed that such services be resumed at OLMH, whether the authorities have assessed the additional resources required for implementing this proposal, and whether they will consider this proposal so that the chronically ill patients in the district can go to OLMH when they are in need of medical care late at night; if not, of the reasons for that; and
(6) how the services to be provided by OLMH after its redevelopment compare with those currently provided by it; of the expected time that the Government will submit to this Council the funding proposal for the redevelopment of OLMH?
SECRETARY FOR FOOD AND HEALTH (in Chinese): President, my reply to the various parts of the question raised by Mr WU Chi-wai relating to the arrangements for conveying patients to hospitals by ambulance is as follows:
(1) The Fire Services Department (FSD) is responsible for providing emergency ambulance service to those in need. If ambulance personnel find that the patients are obviously dead at the scene of the incident, the body will be handed over to police officers on site to handle. Except those obviously dead patients mentioned above, ambulance personnel will convey the patients to hospitals for treatment. Resuscitation will continue during the journey to the hospitals without assessing whether the patients are alive or not under normal circumstances. Hence, the FSD does not have information on the number of patients who died in an ambulance on the way to the hospitals.
(2) The Hospital Authority (HA) does not maintain information of the triage categories of patients conveyed to the accident and emergency (A&E) departments of hospitals by ambulance. Nor does the HA keep records of the number of such patients who are required to attend regular follow-up consultations at Our Lady of Maryknoll Hospital (OLMH).
LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 20 April 2016 7645
The tables below set out the breakdown of A&E attendances of the HA's hospitals by triage categories in the past three years.
2013-2014 Attendance at the A&E Department Cluster Hospital Triage 1 Triage 2 Triage 3 Triage 4 Triage 5 (critical) (emergency) (urgent) (semi-urgent) (non-urgent) Hong Pamela Youde Kong East Nethersole Eastern 1 580 2 504 37 537 94 172 9 114 Hospital Ruttonjee Hospital 664 1 626 14 260 56 448 6 610 St. John Hospital 35 44 1 691 7 587 1 355 Hong Kong West Queen Mary Hospital 957 2 380 33 238 85 453 6 263 Kowloon Queen Elizabeth 3 373 4 614 92 529 76 490 5 753 Central Hospital Kowloon Tseung Kwan O 449 932 31 256 89 277 8 029 East Hospital United Christian 2 366 4 684 65 605 95 017 16 319 Hospital Kowloon Caritas Medical Centre 1 268 1 581 34 439 80 348 15 907 West Kwong Wah Hospital 1 854 2 331 55 214 67 234 5 762 North Lantau 68 127 3 983 18 630 3 359 Hospital^ Princess Margaret 1 269 2 632 65 662 65 973 9 275 Hospital Yan Chai Hospital 1 290 2 411 42 671 84 863 4 356 New Alice Ho Miu Ling 413 1 253 22 186 99 258 13 446 Territories Nethersole Hospital East North District Hospital 845 1 669 39 117 63 617 6 819 Prince of Wales 1 380 4 927 35 755 98 923 1 972 Hospital New Pok Oi Hospital 505 2 229 32 483 75 320 15 702 Territories West Tuen Mun Hospital 1 042 5 192 67 215 129 749 15 365 Total of the HA 19 358 41 136 674 841 1 288 359 145 406
2014-2015 Attendance at the A&E Department Cluster Hospital Triage 1 Triage 2 Triage 3 Triage 4 Triage 5 (critical) (emergency) (urgent) (semi-urgent) (non-urgent) Hong Pamela Youde Kong East Nethersole Eastern 1 624 2 446 37 657 89 994 8 588 Hospital Ruttonjee Hospital 697 1 580 13 907 55 519 6 083 St. John Hospital 32 43 1 595 7 701 1 291 7646 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 20 April 2016
Attendance at the A&E Department Cluster Hospital Triage 1 Triage 2 Triage 3 Triage 4 Triage 5 (critical) (emergency) (urgent) (semi-urgent) (non-urgent) Hong Kong Queen Mary Hospital 880 2 502 35 180 82 441 4 832 West Kowloon Queen Elizabeth 3 690 4 470 93 533 71 948 4 909 Central Hospital Kowloon Tseung Kwan O 503 989 33 101 89 362 8 289 East Hospital United Christian 2 336 4 618 63 511 92 680 14 461 Hospital Kowloon Caritas Medical Centre 1 366 1 415 33 016 77 561 14 342 West Kwong Wah Hospital 1 599 2 207 55 479 64 523 4 244 North Lantau 185 471 13 046 59 565 5 793 Hospital^ Princess Margaret 1 145 2 482 61 809 60 079 6 849 Hospital Yan Chai Hospital 1 079 2 567 40 737 83 203 3 323 New Alice Ho Miu Ling 371 1 081 21 748 101 633 10 042 Territories Nethersole Hospital East North District Hospital 834 1 567 37 938 59 945 5 666 Prince of Wales 1 505 5 437 35 774 92 726 1 409 Hospital New Pok Oi Hospital 547 2 332 31 957 74 572 12 289 Territories West Tuen Mun Hospital 960 5 137 67 469 123 399 13 675 Total of the HA 19 353 41 344 677 457 1 286 851 126 085
2015-2016 (as at 31 December 2015) [provisional figures] Attendance at the A&E Department Cluster Hospital Triage 1 Triage 2 Triage 3 Triage 4 Triage 5 (critical) (emergency) (urgent) (semi-urgent) (non-urgent) Hong Pamela Youde Kong East Nethersole Eastern 1 186 1 621 28 671 66 090 5 618 Hospital Ruttonjee Hospital 491 960 10 199 40 399 4 684 St. John Hospital 20 20 1 118 5 468 555 Hong Kong Queen Mary Hospital 636 2 061 27 835 59 064 3 241 West Kowloon Queen Elizabeth 2 757 3 596 71 264 54 936 3 793 Central Hospital Kowloon Tseung Kwan O 354 665 24 660 67 520 5 324 East Hospital United Christian 1 639 3 569 47 309 68 240 9 194 Hospital LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 20 April 2016 7647
Attendance at the A&E Department Cluster Hospital Triage 1 Triage 2 Triage 3 Triage 4 Triage 5 (critical) (emergency) (urgent) (semi-urgent) (non-urgent) Kowloon Caritas Medical Centre 1 048 1 153 24 068 59 124 11 084 West Kwong Wah Hospital 935 1 771 40 626 48 340 2 935 North Lantau 143 449 11 737 49 786 2 658 Hospital^ Princess Margaret 858 1 783 45 055 44 925 5 179 Hospital Yan Chai Hospital 651 1 797 29 824 61 066 2 263 New Alice Ho Miu Ling 279 831 17 193 77 853 5 527 Territories Nethersole Hospital East North District Hospital 573 1 210 29 243 45 417 3 826 Prince of Wales 1 086 4 215 28 161 69 887 1 005 Hospital New Pok Oi Hospital 374 1 728 24 102 55 895 9 418 Territories West Tuen Mun Hospital 719 3 999 50 902 93 533 11 244 Total of the HA 13 749 31 428 511 967 967 543 87 548
Note:
^ The North Lantau Hospital has provided A&E services since September 2013.
(3) The table below sets out the statistics on conveyance of patients in Wong Tai Sin District to hospitals in response to emergency ambulance calls received by the FSD in the past three years.
Hospitals to 2013 2014 2015 which patients in Wong Tai Sin District were taken Number Number Number Percentage Percentage Percentage in response of times of times of times to emergency ambulance calls United 103 0.4% 201 0.7% 117 0.4% Christian Hospital Queen 24 915 86.2% 24 349 84.6% 25 077 84.8% Elizabeth Hospital 7648 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 20 April 2016
Hospitals to 2013 2014 2015 which patients in Wong Tai Sin District were taken Number Number Number Percentage Percentage Percentage in response of times of times of times to emergency ambulance calls Kwong 1 228 4.2% 1 405 4.9% 1 516 5.1% Wah Hospital Other 2 674 9.2% 2 816 9.8% 2 855 9.7% hospitals Total 28 920 100% 28 771 100% 29 565 100%
(4) The table below sets out the average ambulance arrival time in response to emergency ambulance calls in Wong Tai Sin District in the past three years.
2013 2014 2015 Average time taken from receiving the call to 7.9 minutes 7.8 minutes 7.9 minutes ambulance's arrival at the scene Average time taken from receiving the call to 51.4 minutes 49.6 minutes 50.0 minutes ambulance's arrival at the A&E department
The FSD does not have a breakdown of the above arrival time by hospital.
(5) Resident doctors of OLMH did provide consultation outside normal out-patient service hours many years ago. However, in 2002, OLMH, after considering the fact that resident doctors were not able LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 20 April 2016 7649
to attend to the evening consultation service in addition to their normal duties, had stopped providing such service since 29 November of the same year.
As general out-patient clinics (GOPCs) are not intended for the provision of emergency services, patients with severe and acute symptoms should go to the A&E departments of hospitals where the necessary staffing, equipment and ancillary facilities are in place to provide appropriate treatment and comprehensive care. The provision of 24-hour out-patient services will create greater pressure on healthcare manpower. Considering the need to use GOPC resources cost-effectively, the HA has no plan to provide 24-hour out-patient services at this stage.
(6) The HA attaches importance to catering for the demand of Wong Tai Sin residents for healthcare services, and has drawn up a long-term blueprint to improve the healthcare services in Wong Tai Sin District. Having regard to the ageing population of the district, the HA will provide a full range of healthcare services for residents in Wong Tai Sin through a network of hospitals, comprising the new acute general hospital in the Kai Tak Development Area and the existing OLMH, Hong Kong Buddhist Hospital and Wong Tai Sin Hospital.
After evaluating and assessing the long-term development directions of OLMH, the HA has affirmed that OLMH should take the role of a non-acute hospital focusing on the provision of ambulatory healthcare services. OLMH has to be redeveloped to strengthen the ambulatory healthcare facilities to meet the needs of people in the district. The HA is preparing the details of the OLMH redevelopment project with a view to enhancing the services provided for the residents as early as possible.
The preliminary proposals for the OLMH redevelopment project include the redevelopment of the East and North Wings into a new block and the refurbishment of the Outpatient Department Building to improve old hospital facilities which have been in use for a long time and to enhance existing services. The redeveloped OLMH will provide 252 in-patient and day beds in total and four operating 7650 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 20 April 2016
theatres in the day surgery centre which meet the present-day standards. The number of out-patient consultation rooms will also be increased from 33 to 55. There will be in-patient and ambulatory healthcare service covering the main specialty areas. OLMH will continue to offer diagnostic and ancillary services such as diagnostic radiography, computed tomography scanning, ultrasound scanning, cardiac diagnostic and care centre, endoscopic service, physiotherapy and occupational therapy, and so on.
The HA is carrying out the preliminary preparatory work, including ground investigation, geotechnical assessment and traffic impact assessment, for the redevelopment of OLMH with a view to finalizing the project details. After completing the relevant planning work, we will seek funding approval from the Legislative Council in due course according to the established procedures so as to commence the redevelopment works as early as possible.
Measures to Ease Passenger Flows of Railway Stations
19. MR TANG KA-PIU (in Chinese): President, railways are the backbone of Hong Kong's public transport system. However, the railway passenger throughput has been rising in recent years, arousing concerns about whether the carrying capacity of the railway system is able to meet the service demand. In this connection, will the Government inform this Council:
(1) whether it knows in respect of the various stations along the East Rail Line, the Kwun Tong Line and the Tsuen Wan Line, the respective design passenger throughput of (i) the stations as a whole, (ii) platforms, (iii) ticket gates and (iv) entrances (set out in a table); the respective actual average passenger flows of (v) those stations as a whole, (vi) platforms, (vii) ticket gates and (viii) entrances during peak hours and non-peak hours in the past five years (set out in a table);
(2) whether it knows the names of those railway stations whose actual passenger flows at present have exceeded their design passenger throughput (overloaded) during peaks hours, and the respective percentages by which they are overloaded (set out in a table);
LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 20 April 2016 7651
(3) whether it knows the measures the MTR Corporation Limited (MTRCL) has put in place to ease the passenger flows at various railway stations; whether the company has formulated specific measures for each of the overloaded stations to ease their passenger flows; if MTRCL has, of the details; if not; the reasons for that;
(4) whether it knows if MTRCL has (i) assessed the safety and fire hazards of various railway stations when they are overcrowded with passengers or overloaded, and (ii) formulated contingency measures and arrangements for crowd control to deal with unexpected incidents that may occur during peak hours, so as to ensure the safety of passengers; if MTRCL has, of the assessment results of various stations along the East Rail Line, the Kwun Tong Line and the Tsuen Wan Line;
(5) whether it knows if MTRCL has planned to expand the stations along the East Rail Line, the Kwun Tong Line and the Tsuen Wan Line or has formulated other measures to increase the design passenger throughput of those stations; if MTRCL has, of the details; if not, the reasons for that; and
(6) as it has been reported that the Urban Renewal Authority has suggested lending some spaces to MTRCL for it to carry out the redevelopment project for the Kwun Tong Station (including replacement of tracks and widening of platforms and station concourse), whether the Government will support and help facilitate that redevelopment project; if it will, of the follow-up work to be undertaken; if not, the measures the authorities have in place to address the problem of that station being overloaded?
SECRETARY FOR TRANSPORT AND HOUSING (in Chinese): President, an average of over 5 million passenger trips are made in the MTR network every day. The MTR Corporation Limited (MTRCL) is committed to providing safe, reliable and smooth railway services. The MTRCL will continue its efforts to maintain smooth train operations even at the busiest sections and during the peak periods and keep passenger flow management in an orderly manner, through implementation of various measures. In this regard, while the design and arrangement of various "hardware" components of the railway system, including 7652 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 20 April 2016 train design, service frequency, platforms, ticket gates and entrances of railway stations, will set some parameters for the passenger flow and management, it is worth noting that whether the passenger flow management is in order would depend more on the compatibility of the "software" part ― passenger flow management measures. Since the commissioning of MTR in 1979, even though the MTR network and patronage have been expanding and increasing in light of population growth (the existing railway stations would rarely be expanded in this process), overall, the passenger flow have been well managed, thereby maintaining a good order.
My reply to various parts of Mr TANG Ka-piu's question is as follows:
(1) to (5)
All train compartments of the existing MTR railway lines are designed based on the industry standard design adopted at the time of the construction of railway lines, and the maximum carrying capacity of train compartments is calculated based on an accommodation of up to six persons (standing) per square metre (ppsm) on average. However, it has been observed that over the years, passenger riding habits have changed. Nowadays, passengers are less willing to board a train that looks crowded even when there is still room available. They prefer waiting for the next train. This in effect reduces the carrying capacity of the trains and the railway line as a whole. In actual operation, trains running during the busiest hours on the busiest corridors achieve a passenger density of only around 4 ppsm. Based on a 4 ppsm passenger density and current train frequency, the loading during morning peak hours for critical links of the East Rail Line, Kwun Tong Line and Tsuen Wan Line in 2015 is 93%, 92% and 102% respectively. When calculating based on the passenger density of 6 ppsm, the corresponding loading of East Rail Line, Kwun Tong Line and Tsuen Wan Line is 66%, 66% and 73% respectively. The number of compartments a train comprises and train frequencies are determined at the design stage to meet projected passenger demand. It should be stressed that when setting the maximum density benchmark of 6 ppsm for train compartments, apart from ensuring the compatibility of the size and number of train compartments a train comprises and the train frequency, the other components of the LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 20 April 2016 7653 heavy rail network, including the design of railway station structures (for example, the concourses and the number of exits), platform size, passageways, and escalator throughput are also designed and constructed accordingly to ensure that the railway service can cater for the passenger flow. In designing the stations, the MTRCL has also taken into account the community development and ancillary facilities in the vicinity. The designs of the stations were also approved by the relevant government departments at that time.
According to the MTRCL, overall speaking, various parts of the present heavy rail network are able to maintain safe, reliable and smooth train operations while meeting the standard of 6 ppsm in terms of carrying capacity. Among the various parts, the loading of platform is the most critical. When a platform is overcrowded, the station staff of MTR will launch passenger flow management measures correspondingly, according to the actual situation. These measures include temporary closure of some escalators and ticket gates. The Corporation will also adjust entry and exit direction for the entrances of certain stations, according to actual situation, to limit the number of passengers heading from the concourse to the platform and close down some entrances, where situation warrants. The MTRCL's nearly 40 years of experience in railway operation shows that, as long as the passenger flow management measures are suitably deployed, safe and smooth railway facilities and service can be maintained even when it is crowded.
In so far as individual stations are concerned, there are variations in train frequencies at different stations at different hours of the day, and in the amount, direction and density of passenger flow entering or exiting the stations or parts of the stations. In addition, the above-mentioned passenger flow management measures have been playing a critical role in ensuring smooth train operations. Therefore, even at one time where the overall number of passengers at a station or those using particular facilities in the railway station is higher than the actual number of passengers on train at the same time, it does not necessary mean that the actual passenger flow has exceeded the limit. Moreover, with incessant passenger flow, coupled with the integration of quite a number of MTR stations with various facilities in the neighbourhood, the passenger flow in the 7654 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 20 April 2016
stations may not be heading for the trains or facilities and shops in the stations. Furthermore, the MTR covers an extensive network of some 10 heavy railway lines and 87 stations, including 19 interchange stations, while the multiple entrances at the stations may be as many as some ten of them. Therefore, the use of passenger throughput calculated on the basis of the stations as a whole, or passenger throughout at platforms, ticket gates and entrances, as mentioned in the question, may not be the most appropriate way to understand the passenger flow and loading of stations. It is worth noting that, the year of design and construction of various railway stations vary, and further alteration works have been done after the commissioning of service of some of the stations (such as addition of entrances). The MTRCL advised that more time is required to search and collate information. A written reply will be issued to the Legislative Council once the work is completed.
Furthermore, the MTRCL has been striving to ease passenger flow at stations by enhancing the carrying capacity of the railway network and station management measures through strengthening train service. Details are at Legislative Council paper CB(4)854/15-16(07) issued on 12 April 2016.
In case of incidents, the Operations Control Centre will co-ordinate train operations and arrangement at various stations, the MTRCL staff would be on duty at each MTR station to carry out crowd management duties, including making public announcements, issuing station notices and assisting passengers on fare matters according to the established procedures. The number of station staff will also be increased as needed. The Customer Service Rapid Response Unit in their pink vests may also be deployed to stations to provide assistance to passengers. The staff assigned to contingency duties are familiar with the contingency plans. The MTRCL will also continue to review and update regularly its contingency plans for railway service disruption in the light of operational experience gained.
For expansion works to be carried out at stations in operation, an array of factors have to be considered. These include constraints posed by the structures of individual stations, the space within a LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 20 April 2016 7655
station, the surrounding environment of a station, passenger flow, and whether the expansion part involves property rights or land use rights of other parties and so forth. Except for the recently completed modification works at Fo Tan and Mong Kok Stations (to connect the two separate paid areas for facilitating passenger flow and their use of station facilities), and the ongoing works at Diamond Hill, Hung Hom and Admiralty Stations of the Shatin to Central Link, the MTRCL currently has no other plan for station expansion. Besides, the MTRCL has rolled out enhancement measures at Mong Kok and Kowloon Bay Stations. These include installing additional escalators and ticket gates, and so on, so as to rationalize passenger flow.
(6) As mentioned above, the MTRCL has implemented a series of measures to enhance the carrying capacity of railway service and management of passenger flow at stations. One of the MTRCL's key tasks at present is the upgrade of signalling systems of seven MTR lines including Kwun Tong Line. Upon the completion of the upgrade, the train frequency could be increased, and the passenger flow at station will also be smoothened.
Redevelopment of any MTR station in operation require considerations of a variety of factors. Apart from the technical factors mentioned above, how to ensure continuous provision of undisrupted railway service for passengers during redevelopment is also a difficult question. According to the MTRCL, the existing structure of Kwun Tong Station, various station facilities and passenger flow management measures are largely able to meet passenger needs. Therefore, the Corporation has no plan to redevelop Kwun Tong Station. The MTRCL has also advised that it has not received from any organization any "land-lending" proposal for redevelopment of Kwun Tong Station. When the upgrade of signalling system of Kwun Tong Line is completed, it will also help ease the passenger flow at the Kwun Tong Station.
As far as the Development Bureau understands, the Urban Renewal Authority is currently exploring options for improving local public transport facilities (including its passageway with MTR Kwun Tong Station), in conjunction with the MTRCL and other departments, for 7656 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 20 April 2016
the purpose of the Kwun Tong Town Centre redevelopment project, with a view to enhancing the integration of the redevelopment project with these public transport facilities and facilitating the travelling of citizens. Concrete proposals have yet to be formulated.
Kwun Tong Ferry Pier Waterfront Development Under "Energizing Kowloon East" Initiatives
20. MR PAUL TSE (in Chinese): President, the "Energizing Kowloon East" initiatives launched by the Government include "Action Area 2 ― Kwun Tong Ferry Pier Waterfront Development" (Action Area 2) to complement the tourism node to be developed at the former Kai Tak runway. On the other hand, the kaito ferry service plying between the Kwun Tong Public Pier and the Kai Tak Runway Park Pier (near the Kai Tak Cruise Terminal) made its first journey on the 9th of this month. Upon making a visit to that area on that day, I have found that the problems relating to transport connectivity of that area and water quality of the Kwun Tong Typhoon Shelter are yet to be solved. In this connection, will the Government inform this Council:
(1) whether it has assessed if the water quality of the Kwun Tong Typhoon Shelter is suitable for water-friendly activities (e.g. dragon boat races, etc.) to be held there; of the improvement plans that the Government has in place to deal with the poor water quality;
(2) given that the Environmental Impact Assessment Report of the Kai Tak Development approved in 2009 has made recommendations including the following: an artificial opening of 600 metre wide be made at the north of the former runway near Kowloon City, and that it is learnt that this measure will help direct the rainwaters from the Kai Tak Nullah and the treated sewage from the Shatin Sewage Treatment Works to flow towards To Kwa Wan, as well as change the water flow at the Kai Tak Approach Channel from a west-to-east to an east-to-west direction, while at the same time taking in seawater coming from Lei Yue Mun, thereby improving the water quality of the Kwun Tong Typhoon Shelter, whether the authorities will implement this recommendation;
LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 20 April 2016 7657
(3) given that some Kwun Tong residents have relayed to me that it is very inconvenient for them and the guests of the hotels in that district to travel between the MTR Station and Action Area 2, and that the kaito ferry service connecting the end of the Kai Tak runway with the Kwun Tong waterfront and Action Area 2 is available only on weekends and public holidays, whether the Government will expeditiously implement the construction of the Environmentally Friendly Linkage System for Kowloon East (which includes a monorail system together with the pedestrian linkage bridge), or construct a temporary floating pedestrian bridge, and extend the kaito ferry service to weekdays, so as to enhance the pedestrian linkage system in that area, thereby facilitating the holding of cultural and recreational activities in Action Area 2 in future, as well as making it more convenient for members of the public to commute to and from that area; and
(4) as some members of the public have relayed to me that there are quite a number of homeless people staying in the vicinity of the Kwun Tong Public Pier, of the measures the Government has in place to assist those homeless people in finding accommodation elsewhere, so as to avoid their obstructing members of the public and tourists in using the kaito ferry service?
SECRETARY FOR DEVELOPMENT (in Chinese): President, as Kai Tak Approach Channel (KTAC)/Kwun Tong Typhoon Shelter (KTTS) is embayed by the former airport runway and the breakwaters of KTTS, its water circulation and flushing capacity are poor. To address the problems of poor water quality and odour nuisance, the Government has gradually implemented the proposed mitigation measures in the Approved Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) Report for the Kai Tak Development over the past few years. To date, both the water quality and odour issue of these water bodies have improved significantly. Furthermore, the disused pier adjacent to the ex-fire station at the former runway (the Runway Park Pier) has been refurbished and reopened to the public in order to improve the connectivity of and bring vibrancy to the waterfronts in the East Kowloon and to contribute to the policy of water-friendly culture announced in the 2015 Policy Address. My reply to the Councillor's question is as follows:
7658 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 20 April 2016
(1) As mentioned above, the Government has gradually implemented the proposed mitigation measures in the EIA report, including interception of polluted discharges from the hinterland into the KTAC and KTTS as well as localized dredging and bioremediation treatment works at the seabed of these water bodies. The water monitoring survey of the Civil Engineering and Development Department (CEDD) in 2015 indicated that the current water quality of KTTS has generally met the water quality requirement for secondary contact water recreational use (such as rowing and dragon boat events). To further improve the water quality of KTTS and KTAC, the relevant departments will continue to review the situation with a view to rectifying the existing pollution sources, and the stormwater drainage and sewerage facilities in the Kai Tak Development and its vicinity.
(2) As regards the proposed mitigation measures in the EIA Report, the Environmental Protection Department and Drainage Services Department have substantially completed the works for intercepting polluted discharges from the hinterland into KTAC and KTTS in 2013 and mid-2014 respectively. The CEDD has also carried out localized dredging and bioremediation treatment works in the seabed of these water bodies. The relevant monitoring data reflects that the odour issue and water quality of these water bodies have improved significantly. In light of the above developments, we have conducted a comprehensive review of the last outstanding mitigation measure (that is, a 600 m opening underneath the Metro Park at the northern section of the former runway).
The review concluded that an Interception and Pumping Scheme could substitute the original option of the 600 m opening and achieve similar effect in terms of improving water quality and odour. The new plan can effectively reduce the polluted flow entering into the above water body and improve its water circulation, which can in turn alleviate the odour problem. The general arrangement of the scheme is as follows:
LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 20 April 2016 7659
(i) Constructing a new pumping station near the outlet of Kai Tak Nullah (KTN) to intercept part of the flow from KTN for direct discharge into the Victoria Harbour, thereby reducing the volume of flows and pollutants discharging into the KTAC/KTTS; and
(ii) Modifying the existing seawater intake location of the seawater pumphouse of the Kai Tak District Cooling System from the Victoria Harbour to the KTAC to enhance the water flow circulation at KTAC and, hence, improve its water quality.
We have consulted and received general support for the new scheme from the District Councils concerned (that is, Kwun Tong, Kowloon City and Wong Tai Sin), and the Task Force on Kai Tak Harbourfront Development in the third quarter of 2015. Design work for the new scheme is currently underway.
(3) To facilitate the transformation of Kowloon East, the Energizing Kowloon East Office (EKEO) has been advocating the concept on "walkability" in the planning and provision of a convenient and comfortable pedestrian network. To enhance the connectivity between MTR Kwun Tong Station and Kwun Tong waterfront including the Kwun Tong Action Area (that is, Action Area 2), the EKEO has commenced the Pedestrian Environment Improvement Scheme for Transformation of Kwun Tong Business Area Feasibility Study since May 2014 to formulate improvement measures for the short, medium and long term. The options under study include the provision of a footbridge to link up the MTR Kwun Tong Station and the Kwun Tong Action Area, widening the pavement along the Hoi Yuen Road, and improving the pedestrian crossings. Measures which can be implemented in the short term have been gradually implemented while those for the medium and long term are still subject to conclusion of the above study. The whole study is expected to be completed by the end of this year.
7660 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 20 April 2016
As for the public marine transport service, there is a kaito ferry service plying between Kwun Tong Public Pier and Runway Park Pier on Saturdays, Sundays and public holidays. The Transport Department will consider proposals, if any, from other operators for operating ferry services connecting to the Runway Park Pier.
For ancillary transport facilities in the long term, the Government has commenced a detailed feasibility study for the Environmentally Friendly Linkage System (EFLS) for Kowloon East in October 2015, which is scheduled for completion in about two years. The study scope covers reviewing and identifying the suitable option for the EFLS, impact of the proposed Kwun Tong Transportation Link on the use of the water body at the KTTS, and the feasibility of a temporary floating pedestrian bridge, and so on. We will conduct consultation on the recommendation of the study in due course.
(4) The Government all along concerns the street sleeping issue. The relevant government bureaux and departments (including Social Welfare Department (SWD) and Home Affairs Department) have been in close liaison and collaboration to provide support to street sleepers together with local welfare organizations. Three SWD-subvented non-governmental organizations, each operates a service team, are providing various support services to street sleepers through a package of integrated services to help them quit street sleeping. According to the information available to the relevant government departments about the actual street condition, the street sleepers have not caused severe hygiene or law and order problems in the vicinity of the Kwun Tong Public Pier. It is believed that they would not pose any difficulties for the public and tourists to use the kaito ferry service.
Development of a Green Transport System
21. MR CHAN HAK-KAN (in Chinese): President, exhaust emission from vehicles is one of the major sources of air pollution in Hong Kong. In March 2011, the Government allocated $300 million to set up a Pilot Green Transport Fund (PGTF) to fund the testing of related green and innovative technologies by LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 20 April 2016 7661 the public and goods transport sectors so as to improve air quality. However, some environmentalists have pointed out that the Government currently does not have a comprehensive plan for developing green transport. They have also pointed out that quite a number of advanced countries in Europe and the United States as well as Mainland China have been proactively promoting green transport and, therefore, the Government should catch up with them. In this connection, will the Government inform this Council:
(1) whether it knows, among the beneficiary organizations funded under PGTF to purchase vehicles using green transport technologies, the number of organizations which have chosen this type of vehicles when purchasing new vehicles after the completion of the two-year trial period; if none of these organizations have done so, whether it has looked into the reasons for that;
(2) given that the Government proposed in 2010 the target of "30% of the private cars in Hong Kong [being] electric or hybrid vehicles by 2020", how far away from the target the current situation is; whether the authorities have assessed the prospect of achieving the target and what new measures they will take to achieve the target;
(3) given that the Government amended in June 2011 the planning guidelines for new buildings to recommend that 30% of private car parking spaces in a new building be installed with general electric vehicle chargers, whether it knows, among those car parks in private residential buildings which were completed before the planning guidelines were so amended, the number of car parks which are currently installed with such charging facilities;
(4) given that the "SmartBike" service was launched in 2014 as a trial programme by the West Kowloon Cultural District Authority and the Tung Wah Group of Hospitals BiciLine Cycling Eco-Tourism Social Enterprise to encourage better use of bicycles by the public, whether the authorities will allocate land to set up more bike rental points and extend the programme to other districts; if they will, of the details; if not, the reasons for that; and
7662 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 20 April 2016
(5) whether it has plans to step up publicity and public educational efforts to promote public awareness of the benefits that a green transport system will bring to public health and economic development, thereby garnering public support for the development of such a system; if it does, of the details; if not, the reasons for that; whether the Government has provided incentives to encourage active public engagement in the development of such a system; if it has, of the details; if not, the reasons for that?
SECRETARY FOR THE ENVIRONMENT (in Chinese): President, the Government is committed to developing green transport. Our efforts include implementing the transport policy of having railways as the backbone of public transport, enhancing the franchised bus network, fostering a "bicycle-friendly" environment in new towns and new development areas, setting up the Pilot Green Transport Fund (PGTF) and carrying out various measures to promote the wider use of electric vehicles.
As the technology of electric vehicles is still under development, it will take some time before the technology can be put into full scale application. The Government has launched a series of funding schemes and facilitation measures to encourage the transport sector and the pubic to use different types of electric vehicles.
My specific replies to the questions raised by Mr CHAN Hak-kan are as follows:
(1) To encourage the transport sector to try out green innovative transport technologies, the Government set up in March 2011 the $300 million PGTF to subsidize the public transport sector and non-profit organizations to try out these technologies. As at the end of February 2016, the PGTF approved 87 trials with a total subsidy of $88 million. The trials included 67 commercial electric vehicles (taxis, light buses, coaches and goods vehicles), 63 commercial hybrid vehicles (goods vehicles and light buses), one solar air-conditioning system, four electric inverter air-conditioning systems and, for an in-use ferry, the installation of a diesel-electric propulsion system in replacement of the old one and the addition of a seawater scrubber. Among them, 21 trials have been completed. Apart from uploading the trial reports to the website of the Environmental Protection Department (EPD) for public reference, LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 20 April 2016 7663
we have also organized experience sharing sessions to share with the public transport sector on the trial results of electric vans, electric coaches and hybrid goods vehicles so as to promote and publicize green transport. The PGTF has attracted a wide range of businesses to try out new green transport technologies. The applicants include operators from the courier and logistics services, construction sector, passenger services, beverage delivery sector, supermarket trade, universities and schools, taxi business, and so on.
Recipients of the PGTF have continued to use the subsided vehicles after completion of their two-year trial. While we do not have information on whether the recipients have purchased additional green vehicles after completing the two-year trial, we plan to conduct a relevant follow-up survey.
(2) When the Government reviewed Hong Kong's climate change strategy and action agenda in 2008, a consultant who had been engaged to conduct the study had assessed the progress of introducing electric vehicles and other low emission vehicles, as well as their impacts on improving air quality, while the technology was still in the developing stage. In this connection, the consultant had assessed the ratio of electric vehicles and other types of vehicles in future and the information had been publicized in the public consultation document. On the other hand, Hong Kong is a free market. The Government's policy on promoting electric vehicles is to encourage more electric vehicle models to be supplied in the local market, arose the public's awareness on electric vehicles and enhance the supporting facilities. The Government has not set targets for each type of vehicles. In fact, the public will consider using electric vehicles or hybrid vehicles, having regard to their technology development (including vehicle performance, durability, maintenance and repair requirements, daily operation requirements, vehicle price, and so on) and the availability of suitable models in the market.
Hong Kong is a small place. The daily travelling distance of private cars is normally tens of km and so it is suitable to use electric vehicles. As electric vehicles have no tailpipe emissions and are efficient in converting energy from the grid to power, the replacement of conventional vehicles with electric vehicles can help improve roadside air quality. The Government has been actively 7664 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 20 April 2016
promoting the use of electric vehicles through various measures such as waiving first registration tax for electric vehicles, working with the private sector to expand the electric vehicle charging network and encouraging vehicle suppliers to introduce more suitable electric vehicle models into Hong Kong.
As at the end of this March, there were 4 753 registered electric private cars, with a nearly 80-fold increase when comparing with 60 in 2010. With the advance in electric vehicle technology, we believe that the use of electric vehicles will become more popular in future.
(3) In June 2011, the Government revised the planning guidelines for new buildings which recommended that 30% of private car parking spaces in a new building be installed with electric vehicle charging facilities. For those car parks in private residential buildings that were completed before the planning guidelines were so revised, we have no information on the number of car parks that are currently installed with such charging facilities and the details of such properties.
To facilitate owners of electric private cars to install charging facilities in their parking spaces, the two power companies introduced a one-stop service last year to provide dedicated support to those owners interested. The Electrical and Mechanical Services Department has established a dedicated team and a hotline (Tel: 3757 6222) to provide relevant information and technical support for those who intend to install charging facilities. It has also issued guidelines on the arrangements and technical requirements for setting up electric vehicle charging facilities. We also note that there are companies in the market that provide one-stop service, including installation of charging facilities and provision of charging service, for those private housing estates that require such service.
In addition, starting from April 2011, the Government has been encouraging developers to put in place basic infrastructure for electric vehicle charging facilities (including adequate power supply and electrical wiring and ducts) in car parks of new buildings, with a view to facilitating installation of electric vehicle chargers in future LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 20 April 2016 7665
having regard to the needs of carpark users. Such policy is implemented through granting concessions on Gross Floor Areas for car parks in new buildings. From April 2011 to December 2015, nearly 80% of car parking spaces under newly approved development plans have been equipped with the infrastructure for installation of electric vehicle charging facilities.
(4) According to the Transport and Housing Bureau, the West Kowloon Cultural District Authority (WKCDA) has launched a pilot self-service bicycle rental scheme at the waterfront promenade of the West Kowloon Cultural District (WKCD), with two bicycle stations set up for public use. The WKCDA will continue to assess and improve the service before the commissioning of the WKCD Park.
The Government will also continue to foster a "bicycle-friendly" environment where road safety and conditions permit, especially in new towns and new development areas, so as to promote cycling as a green mode for short-distance commuting and to reduce the use of mechanized means of transport.
(5) The Government has been promoting green living and driving behavioural changes in our community through government websites and announcements of public interest. Members of the public are encouraged to use public transport more, walk more and drive less to ease traffic congestion and hence improve roadside air quality and reduce carbon emissions. Moreover, the EPD is arranging for the production of a new series of videos to raise public awareness of the close relationship between air quality and public health. The use of electric vehicles and other green transport technologies is also promoted in the videos.
To encourage the transport sector and transport product suppliers to proactively participate in the testing of green and innovative transport technologies, the EPD has held a number of briefings to explain to members of various trades the application criteria and procedures for the PGTF. A hotline has also been set up to answer enquiries from the trades. In addition, we have arranged for electric vehicle suppliers to introduce their products to the trades so that 7666 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 20 April 2016
those interested may have trial rides. We will continue to step up our publicity and promotion efforts, such as introducing the PGTF and electric vehicles to the transport sector and the public during the international conference on vehicle emission control technology to be held in Hong Kong at the end of this year.
Provision of Drinking Fountains in Open Spaces of Housing Estates/Courts Managed by Housing Department
22. MR FREDERICK FUNG (in Chinese): President, some members of the public have recently relayed to me that drinking fountains are not provided for public use in the open spaces (including parks, gardens and playgrounds) of public housing estates and Home Ownership Scheme courts (housing estates/courts) currently managed by the Housing Department (HD). In this connection, will the Government inform this Council:
(1) of the housing estates/courts in the open spaces of which drinking fountains are provided; and
(2) whether drinking fountains are currently included in the standard provisions for housing estates/courts; if they are not, of the reasons for that; whether the authorities will conduct a review in this respect to consider making drinking fountains a standard provision, with a view to meeting the needs of the public, and promoting the drinking of more water as a way of healthy living and encouraging members of the public to reduce buying fattening drinks with a high sugar content from retail outlets or vending machines?
SECRETARY FOR TRANSPORT AND HOUSING (in Chinese): President, there is no guidelines stipulated under the Hong Kong Planning Standards and Guidelines on the provision of drinking facilities; and drinking facilities are not standard provision in existing public housing estates. The Hong Kong Housing Authority provides parks and leisure grounds in public housing estates for use of local residents. It is convenient for residents to bring their own beverages for drinking in these venues. They can also buy beverages in shops in the estates.
LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 20 April 2016 7667
GOVERNMENT BILLS
Second Reading of Government Bills
Resumption of Second Reading Debate on Government Bill
PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): This Council now resumes the Second Reading debate on the Appropriation Bill 2016. I now call upon public officers to speak.
APPROPRIATION BILL 2016
Resumption of debate on Second Reading which was moved on 24 February 2016
SECRETARY FOR DEVELOPMENT (in Cantonese): Good morning, President, and Members. I am very grateful to Members for their opinions on the implementation of the Capital Works Programme by the Government. I would like to give a consolidated reply here and provide some figures for Members' reference.
The Government has all along maintained its capital works investment in an appropriate and orderly manner to improve the people's quality of living, enhance the long-term competitiveness of Hong Kong, promote its economic development and create job opportunities, with a view to laying a solid foundation for the sustainable development of the community and economy of Hong Kong. The Government's actual capital works expenditure amounted to about $75 billion in 2015-2016, accounting for around 3.1% of Hong Kong's Gross Domestic Product, and the expenditure estimate for the current year is about $78.5 billion, encompassing the supply of land and housing, transport network, hospitals and medical facilities, schools, recreational and culture facilities, Signature Project Scheme projects, water supply and drainage systems, and so on. Given the community's sustained keen demand for capital works, the government expenditure in this regard is projected to remain at a comparatively high level in the next few years. Amid the general trend of economic globalization, the trade relations among economies are becoming increasingly close. As a small and open economy, Hong Kong is susceptible to external factors, so there is a need to pursue livelihood-related initiatives and 7668 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 20 April 2016 infrastructure development in a sustained and stable manner so as to maintain the long-term competitiveness of Hong Kong and facilitate the sustainable development of its community and economy.
The external economic environment has turned bad since the financial tsunami in 2008, and the economy of Hong Kong and that of the world could only maintain modest growth in recent years. The only exception is the Mainland, whose economy has managed to keep growing rather robustly, allowing Hong Kong a share of its high-rate growth in this process. Nevertheless, the Mainland economy has been in transition over the past two years. The newly released first-quarterly growth rate for the Mainland economy this year has slackened to 6.7%, which is lower than the past, and a growth rate in this range is estimated to become a new norm for the Mainland economy. Given how Hong Kong, the Mainland as well as the world are closely related to each other in economic terms, Hong Kong is not going to be immune. Its economic growth this year is forecast at only 1% to 2%, significantly lower than the full-year rate of 2.4% for the last year. It is an undisputed fact that different sectors are set to meet challenging business conditions, as evident in the latest figures on retail performance, visitors and unemployment.
Looking around the world, infrastructural investment in advanced economies can be countercyclical when the economy is subject to downside pressure. It is imperative for us to keep implementing works projects with economic and social benefits to counter part of the pressure of an economic downturn and maintain the overall employment situation of the community.
However, since the 2013-2014 Legislative Session, the filibustering actions taken by some Members have greatly slowed down the progress of scrutinizing funding applications for works projects by both the Finance Committee and the Public Works Subcommittee. In the 2013-2014 Legislative Session, the amount of funding for new works projects approved by the Finance Committee significantly dropped by more than 90% to merely $3.6 billion, vis-à-vis the $160 billion and $90 billion approved in the previous two years respectively. Despite the approval of about $85 billion worth of works projects in the previous Session, which represented a slight turnaround, the situation for the current Session has become very grave again. In our estimate, about 60 funding applications for new works projects worth around $65 billion will be submitted in the current Legislative Session, yet only two new works projects worth about LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 20 April 2016 7669
$2 billion in total have been approved so far, whereas the remaining 60 have been delayed for more than six months on average or even a year or so in individual cases.
Some Members hold that filibustering can reduce the tender prices of public works projects and thus is a plus for project implementation. We absolutely disagree with this view. In fact, filibustering will drastically slash the number and amount of new public works contracts approved. Taking the previous five fiscal years as an example, in the three Sessions from 2011-2012 to 2013-2014, 50 new works contracts involving about $50 billion were approved in a year on average; but under the influence of filibustering, the number of new works contracts approved dropped to only 20 in 2014-2015, involving less than $30 billion; the number of new works contracts approved in 2015-2016 increased to about 40, yet the amount involved was less than $40 billion. A lower number and amount of new works contracts available for tender has given rise to intense competition, which temporarily checks the momentum of project tender prices; but filibustering will only delay the implementation of works projects, leading to a peak in the subsequent years in which various projects are opened for tender and launched concurrently. Apart from pushing up the tender prices, it will also distort the demand for construction manpower, which will then become acute. In addition, the current delay in project funding has caused consultants and contractors in engineering-related sectors to freeze recruitment or even dismiss staff, upsetting the employment situation of the sectors. Students in engineering-related courses who are graduating this year or going to look for training opportunities during summer are particularly set to bear the brunt of it.
The unfavourable effects brought about by filibustering to the construction sector as well as the community not only prevent the early implementation of projects beneficial to the public, but also stifle the social and economic development of Hong Kong, undermine its competitiveness and deal a great blow to workers engaged in the construction sector and the livelihood of their families, as they may have to face unemployment or financial difficulties. As a result, there will be a drain of talent, and young people pursuing construction-related courses will be denied access to job opportunities, and so their development prospects are affected. The local unemployment figure released by the Census and Statistics Department yesterday indicates an upward movement for the first time in nine months, rising by 0.1 percentage point between January and March this year to 3.4%, the highest level since late 2013. The growth in unemployment rate of the construction sector is more evident than that of others. 7670 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 20 April 2016
The dramatic changes in the amount of engineering projects have greatly upset the demand and supply situation of the sector and will have serious implications on the effectiveness of training workers and attracting new recruits, imposing a negative impact on the construction sector in the long run. Moreover, sectors related to materials supply, purchasing, logistics, and so on, will also be implicated. Filibustering will only do harm rather than good.
Recently, having regard for the overall picture and aspiring to meet the urgent needs of the public, the Government agreed to reprioritize the agenda of the Finance Committee on the premise of "livelihood first" and "handling easier items first", hoping that projects awaiting funding approval can be launched expeditiously. The Government has now demonstrated the utmost sincerity to answer Members' requests proactively. We sincerely hope that Members can stop their filibustering, which is purely motivated by political stances rather than a sense of right or wrong, and arrange additional meetings, with a view to completing the scrutiny of all the works projects submitted by the Government before the current-term Legislative Council rises in mid-July.
The construction cost in Hong Kong has remained at a high level in recent years, and the Government is gravely concerned about the enormous cost overruns in various infrastructure projects over the past few years. In fact, our studies show that the construction cost in Hong Kong has risen by more than 50% over the past five years. In view of this, the Chief Executive and the Financial Secretary have stated in this year's Policy Address and Budget respectively that the Government will strengthen cost management of public works, including the establishment of an office dedicated to controlling the cost of public works under the Development Bureau, to ensure that public funds are properly spent.
The Government will implement cost management in a three-pronged approach: (1) comprehensively review the existing policies and requirements on public works; (2) closely scrutinize the cost estimates of major new works projects; and (3) enhance the level of public works project management in order to save costs.
As regards project design, we will require relevant departments to adopt the "no frills" principle in works project design and avoid unnecessary fancy elements by all means; yet I have to stress that this would not smother creativity. In fact, simple designs and the sense of aesthetics and creativity are not mutually exclusive. In many modern instances of interior design, we realize a sense of LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 20 April 2016 7671 novelty from simple designs, whereas on the contrary, lavishness does not necessarily result in beauty. Some of the works projects undertaken by the Architectural Services Department in the past, such as the new columbarium and garden of remembrance at Kiu Tau Road, Wo Hop Shek, the Trade and Industry Tower in Kai Tak, and so on, could be completed at a comparatively low cost while winning the recognition and commendation of the public and relevant sectors on the merit of their designs.
In addition, we plan to put in place an indicative cost system for several major new government building types, such as schools, office buildings, departmental quarters, and so on. The benchmarks will be set under the "fit for purpose" principle, making reference to the cost of similar projects in the past, the latest building standards and requirements as well as market conditions in order to set out an approximate cost benchmark for each of these buildings. We will require relevant works departments to make reference to the indicative costs during the design stage and outline the designs within the benchmarks.
At the same time, we will continue to strengthen the co-ordination among architects, engineers and contractors to promote the code of practice on "design for buildability". We will also foster the concept of 3S, namely standardization, simplification and single integrated element, to optimize project designs. This will facilitate the use of prefabricated components, improve construction efficiency and alleviate the demand for construction manpower for eventual reduction in project prices.
Capitalizing on the successful overseas experience and the outcomes of a trial in Hong Kong over the past few years, we will endeavour to promote the implementation of public works contracts in the form of partnership, namely the New Engineering Contract (NEC), to enhance the management efficiency and cost-effectiveness of such contracts. The target cost approach in the NEC has a pain share/gain share mechanism with a view to encouraging the contracting parties to commit to the common goal of completing the works at reduced costs and within a shorter construction period. The Government and contractors share the difference between the actual construction costs and the final target costs. This mechanism also encourages contractors, by providing incentives, to propose alternative designs which can facilitate construction on site and reduce construction costs. In case of project cost overruns, the Government's share will be capped. The NEC will contribute to our cost control efforts.
7672 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 20 April 2016
The price of construction works consists mainly of two components, namely materials and workers' wages. Prices of materials are subject to global commodity prices, whereas workers' wages are subject to the local labour market as well as wages in other related sectors. We will endeavour to control and reduce project costs and will resort to system re-engineering, design optimization, and so on, to reduce project costs for the benefit of the community as a whole.
The Development Bureau is planning to set up a dedicated multi-disciplinary office to co-ordinate and implement the above cost management efforts on public works projects to ensure that public funds are properly spent. We earnestly hope to secure the Legislative Council's support for the expeditious establishment of the Project Cost Management Office.
President, I am very grateful to Members and different sectors of the community for their valuable views on the implementation of the Capital Works Programme by the Government, including our cost control efforts. We will continue to implement infrastructure projects in an orderly manner and utilize the resources effectively to ensure the proper use of public funds. This is my consolidated reply on matters related to infrastructure and public works. Thank you, President.
SECRETARY FOR FOOD AND HEALTH (in Cantonese): President, apropos topics of popular concern such as health, food safety and environmental hygiene, I will now focus my response on Members' views given in their debate speeches.
The recurrent expenditure on medical and health has seen steady growth. The relevant recurrent expenditure in 2016-2017 is $57.3 billion, accounting for 16.5% of the recurrent government expenditure and representing an increase of $870 million and 1.5% compared with last year.
To cope with an ageing population and growing demands for healthcare services, the Hospital Authority (HA) will continue to enhance public services. The overall operating expenditure for the HA is forecast to be $58 billion in 2016-2017, an increase of 4% (that is, around $2 billion) compared with 2015-2016. As usual, the Government's recurrent funding to the HA accounts for 90% of its operating expenditure, that is, $51.6 billion (including $800 million non-recurrent funding). The upcoming major improvements of the HA include providing 231 additional hospital beds in 10 hospitals and additional operating LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 20 April 2016 7673 theatre sessions, increasing the service capacity of echocardiogram and service places for haemodialysis for renal patients, extending the service hours of radiotherapy, expanding the consultation capacity of general out-patient clinics by 27 000, setting up the fifth Joint Replacement Centre in Hong Kong and strengthening the Community Geriatric Assessment Team Services.
To cope with an ageing population, the Government has set aside a dedicated provision of $200 billion for a ten-year hospital development plan to enable the HA to expand and upgrade healthcare facilities in a more flexible and long-term manner. In addition to the redevelopment projects of Kwong Wah Hospital, Queen Mary Hospital and United Christian Hospital which have already commenced, the ten-year hospital development plan also covers the construction of an acute general hospital in the Kai Tak area and the Operating Theatre Block of Tuen Mun Hospital, as well as expansion or redevelopment of Haven of Hope Hospital, Prince of Wales Hospital, Kwai Chung Hospital and North District Hospital. All hospital projects will provide 5 000 additional beds and over 90 more operating theatres after completion. At the district level, community health centres will be set up in Mong Kok, Shek Kip Mei and North District. Additional services for 410 000 attendances will be provided at the general out-patient clinics each year.
To address the manpower shortage, the HA has implemented a series of mitigation measures, including continuous recruitment of full-time and part-time healthcare staff, employment of non-local doctors with limited registration and greater flexibility for the Special Honorarium Scheme to encourage more colleagues to join the scheme. At the same time, the HA will also consider extending the present Special Retired and Rehire Scheme to retired doctors, nurses, allied health professionals and supporting staff as appropriate subject to an age limit of 65. Through various measures, the annual manpower of HA doctors, nurses, allied health professionals and other supporting staff in 2016-2017 is expected to increase by 1 822, in full-time equivalent and in comparison with 2015-2016.
Concerning long-term healthcare manpower, the Government has set up a steering committee to conduct a strategic review on healthcare manpower planning and professional development in Hong Kong. The review aims to make recommendations that would better enable our society to meet the projected demand for healthcare professionals as well as to foster professional development 7674 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 20 April 2016 with a view to ensuring healthy and sustainable development of our healthcare system. We expect that the review will be completed in mid-2016 and the Panel on Health Services of the Legislative Council will be briefed on the report.
Meanwhile, in early March we introduced into the Legislative Council the Medical Registration (Amendment) Bill 2016, which aims to, through amendments to the Medical Registration Ordinance, increase lay participation in the Medical Council of Hong Kong (MCHK), improve its complaint investigation and disciplinary inquiry mechanism for greater efficiency and facilitate the admission of non-locally trained doctors to practise in Hong Kong. The Bill is now under scrutiny by the Legislative Council. All sectors of society, including Legislative Council Members, the medical profession, patient groups and the general public, all have expectations for the operation of the MCHK, which align with the general direction of the Bill introduced by the Government. After consulting doctor organizations, patient groups and Legislative Council Members, the Government will consider proposing Committee stage amendments to increase elected element in the composition of the MCHK. We hope Members will support the proposals and early passage of the Bill so as to improve the operation of the MCHK and answer the aspirations of society.
Moreover, the Government launched the pilot Elderly Health Care Voucher Scheme (EHV Scheme) in 2009 to provide subsidies for local residents aged 70 or above to use primary care services provided by the private sector. The EHV Scheme was converted from a pilot project into a regular programme in 2014 and the annual voucher amount has increased from $1,000 in 2014 to the current $2,000. According to the projections by the Census and Statistics Department, if the eligible age for the EHV Scheme is lowered from 70 to 65, based on the population in 2016, the number of eligible elderly will rise from 770 000 to 1.17 million, adding a rough estimate of $700 million to the Government's financial commitment each year.
Due to an ageing population, we estimate that by lowering the eligible age to 65 the number of eligible elderly and the corresponding annual financial commitment will continue to rise. Therefore, as regards requests for lowering the eligible age, we need to carefully examine the effectiveness of subsidizing primary care services in the form of healthcare vouchers, assess in detail the long-term financial implications to the Government and gauge the overall financial position before we consider implementing further enhancement measures.
LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 20 April 2016 7675
On the subject of food, the Government always attaches great importance to assuring food safety. The Government will continue to adopt a multi-pronged approach next year to raise the level of food safety in Hong Kong.
Since the Fukushima nuclear power plant incident in Japan in 2011, the Food and Environmental Hygiene Department (FEHD) has prohibited the import of certain fresh produce, milk, milk beverages and milk powder from the five most affected prefectures and has activated radiation testing on all food imported from Japan. To date, the Centre for Food Safety has tested in total 320 000 food samples and all the test results have been satisfactory. We have all along maintained constant communication with relevant Japanese authorities on the safety of Japanese food. We hold that it is reasonable and appropriate to maintain the prohibition order at this stage. We will review the control on Japanese imported food pending developments of the situation.
Some Members have expressed concern over the certification of organic food. The Government has all along taken food safety very seriously. Food sold in Hong Kong, organic or not, is all subject to the same set of safety standards and labelling requirements. Moreover, since December 2002, with funding support from the Agricultural Development Fund of the Vegetable Marketing Organization, the Hong Kong Organic Resource Centre has been providing certification services to farmers on a voluntary basis. Currently there are over 140 certified operations in Hong Kong, including vegetables, fish farming and other food product processing. The Hong Kong Organic Resource Centre also conducts regular surveys to monitor the market. The Government prefers strengthening consumer education to legislation. We will also continue to pay close attention to the latest developments in international regulation of organic food and regularly examine the local market and needs.
In respect of supporting the development of the agriculture and fisheries industries, our goal is to drive the modernization and sustainable development of the industries so as to upgrade their productivity and competiveness. Established in 2014, the Sustainable Fisheries Development Fund has so far granted subsidies totalling $28 million to help the fishing industry move towards sustainable or high value-added operations. The Chief Executive announced in the 2016 Policy Address the implementation of the New Agriculture Policy to promote the modernization of local agriculture. Related measures include setting up an Agricultural Park, which is to help nurture agro-technology and agro-business, and a $500 million Sustainable Agricultural Development Fund.
7676 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 20 April 2016
Earlier red tides have caused deaths of farmed fish. Apart from offering a basic grant to eligible mariculturists, the Government has also, with the backing of the Emergency Relief Fund Committee, provided a special grant to eligible mariculturists being $14,000 at the maximum. In addition, the Agriculture, Fisheries and Conservation Department (AFCD) has secured the support of the Kadoorie Agricultural Aid Loan Fund Committee to relax the requirements under the loan fund so as to make it easier for mariculturists to acquire a loan for resumption of business. Regarding the exemption of marine fish culture licence fee, we consider it of limited help to the affected mariculturists. The current licence fee is $7.8 per square metre, making up a relatively small proportion of their overall operating cost. The Government appreciates that natural disasters have caused damages to mariculturists and will maintain its efforts in exploring effective assistance measures.
Furthermore, the Government has all along put great emphasis on animal welfare and management and will continue to adopt a multi-pronged approach to enhance animal welfare, including strengthening public education and publicity, fostering a close partnership with animal welfare organizations, properly managing stray animals, tightening control of animal trading and preventing cruelty to animals. As regards management of stray animals, the AFCD has joined hands with the Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals and the Society for Abandoned Animals to launch a three-year Trap-Neuter-Return trial programme for stray dogs in designated districts starting from January 2015. The AFCD will monitor the implementation of the trial programme and evaluate its effectiveness.
Concerning the construction of new markets, in formulating or reviewing the town plans of different districts, the Planning Department will consult relevant bureaux and departments to determine if there is a need to set aside land for public markets. The Government will give holistic consideration to all relevant factors in planning public markets, including the effects caused by the changing society and economy, living habits, purchasing power and other various factors to public purchasing patterns. We will also fully consider demands and cost-effectiveness to ensure public resources invested in the construction and management of public markets are put to good use.
We have received a number of proposals for setting up local bazaars within a specific period of time. We are happy to consider such proposals. If suitable sites are identified and support from relevant District Councils (DC) has been LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 20 April 2016 7677 obtained, and provided that food safety and environmental hygiene are not compromised and public passageways are not obstructed, the Food and Health Bureau stands ready to facilitate liaison with relevant government departments. In this connection, we received in late 2015 proposals to set up local bazaars in Yuen Long District, North District, Islands District and Sham Shui Po District. Follow-up with the relevant DCs is in hand.
As for environmental hygiene, the Government launched the Keep Clean campaign last year, which garnered the full support of 18 DCs and different sectors of community. After evaluating relevant experiences, we have established a mechanism for regular meetings with the Environmental Hygiene Committees of all DCs to discuss the latest environmental hygiene situations. This will help the Government to review and adjust our strategies in a timely manner. In 2016-2017, we will allocate more resources to relevant departments for them to continuously strengthen their cleaning efforts. We will provide additional funding of $24 million to the FEHD to sustain the cleaning efforts delivered under the Keep Clean campaign.
With these remarks, President, I appeal to Members to pass the Appropriation Bill 2016.
SECRETARY FOR LABOUR AND WELFARE (in Cantonese): President, I am grateful to Members for the precious suggestions made on social welfare, labour and manpower development in their speeches made in the debate. I will respond to some salient points.
The current-term Government always accords priority to the work on poverty alleviation, elderly care and supporting the underprivileged in administration. We have made proactive efforts of support in terms of resources to ensure the smooth implementation of the relevant policies. The amount of resources allocated by the Government to welfare has increased significantly in the past few years, showing clearly the Government's commitment to and care for these issues. The recurrent expenditure on welfare this year reaches $66.2 billion, accounting for 19% of the total recurrent expenditure. Compared with the revised estimate of $58.4 billion of the previous year, there is an increase of 13.4%, which is the highest among all policy areas. In comparison with the $42.8 billion for 2012-2013, the year of commencement of the current-term 7678 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 20 April 2016
Government, the expenditure on welfare has increased significantly by 55%, which is far higher than the 25% increase in the total recurrent expenditure of the Government.
Many Members have highlighted the importance of poverty alleviation, and I very much agree with this. The Low-income Working Family Allowance (LIFA) Scheme to be introduced by the Government soon is the "flagship" poverty alleviation measure of the current-term Government. The policy principle of the Scheme is to "encourage self-reliance and ease inter-generational poverty" through the flexible provision of assistance to grass-roots working families in different situations. The expenditure estimate of the allowance under the Scheme will amount to around $2.9 billion per annum. We expect the Scheme to benefit 200 000-odd families, whereas the overall poverty rate will be reduced by two percentage points and the child poverty rate will be reduced by 4.2 percentage points. Actually, the International Monetary Fund has commented positively of the Scheme, saying that the Scheme will encourage labour force participation and help mitigate welfare burdens. Moreover, we will continue to help the needy through the social security and welfare systems and make proactive efforts in addressing poverty.
The Budget this year proposes granting an extra allowance to social security recipients, equal to one month of the standard rate payments for Comprehensive Society Security Assistance, Old Age Allowance, Old Age Living Allowance or Disability Allowance, which will involve an additional expenditure of $2.8 billion. I earnestly hope that the Finance Committee of the Legislative Council will approve the funding application as soon as possible to enable the 1.18 million grassroots to benefit from the Scheme early.
Given the rapidly growing elderly population, resources committed by the Government to elderly care services have continued to increase over the years. The recurrent government expenditure on elderly services in 2016-2017 is $7.4 billion, representing an increase of 8.5% over the revised estimate last year. This year, apart from a moderate increase in the number of subsidized residential care places and day care places, we will comprehensively strengthen the inspection and monitoring of residential care homes for the elderly and persons with disabilities. We will co-operate with the Licensing Office of Residential Care Homes for the Elderly and the Licensing Office of Residential Care Homes for Persons with Disabilities under the Social Welfare Department (SWD) to enhance their efficiency and increase their manpower significantly by about 50%.
LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 20 April 2016 7679
We will continue working on the long-term planning for elderly facilities. We will adopt a multi-pronged approach to increase the number of residential care places for the elderly by 10 000 within the next five to 10 years. First, the SWD will provide 1 000 additional subsidized places in the next three years. Moreover, the SWD has reserved space in 15 development projects or vacant buildings for the provision and conversion of residential care homes and day care centres for the elderly. It is estimated that about 1 400 additional residential care places and 540 day care places will be provided.
At the same time, we are pressing ahead with the Special Scheme on Privately Owned Sites for Welfare Uses to provide additional places for elderly and rehabilitation services through the redevelopment or expansion of existing service facilities, as well as new development. According to a rough estimate and provided that all projects can be implemented smoothly within the next five to 10 years, about 9 000 additional elderly service places, including 7 000 residential care places and 2 000 day care places, will be provided, and there will be 8 000 rehabilitation service places.
The Government fully understands that Members are deeply concerned about the highly controversial issue of retirement protection. I have to stress that the Government has never evaded the problem. During the public consultation conducted in the past four months or so, the Chief Secretary for Administration and me, and the colleagues concerned have attended several consultation sessions and forums organized by the Government, political parties and community organizations, as well as meetings of the Legislative Council, District Councils, government committees and advisory bodies, to listen to the views on the relevant topics expressed by people from all walks of life. The consultation period will end on 21 June, before that, our work in these areas will continue. And after that, the independent consultant team commissioned by the Government will organize, conclude and analyse the views collected from the public engagement exercise. We hope to receive more rational and pragmatic proposals in the remaining consultation period, so that we can draw on the collective wisdom of the community and foster a consensus on this issue with far-reaching effects on Hong Kong community.
I have to reiterate here that all proposals for retirement protection must have financial sustainability, and it must be affordable to the Government and the community. The proposal cannot be detached from financial reality and must be practically viable, giving full regard to the interest of the elderly in need and the 7680 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 20 April 2016 overall and long-term interest of Hong Kong. We must act prudently and plan thoughtfully. Furthermore, the Government has decided to deal with the long-standing controversial issue of the offsetting mechanism under the Mandatory Provident Fund (MPF) System, seeking to identify an approach acceptable to all parties.
As for persons with disabilities, the Government will continue allocating additional resources to strengthening support. The recurrent expenditure on rehabilitation service overall in the year 2007-2008 was around $2.8 billion, and it is doubled to $5.75 billion this year. This year, apart from increasing rehabilitation service places, we will procure nine new Rehabuses for the Rehabus fleet and replace 10 existing ones of older service age. We will also procure 73 centre buses for day activity centres cum hostels for severely mentally handicapped persons and community rehabilitation day centres to strengthen the transport-for-all service for persons with disabilities.
To achieve the policy objective of "early identification and prompt intervention", we will fully implement the Pilot Scheme on On-site Pre-school Rehabilitation Services. We plan to provide 2 925 places for over 450 kindergartens or kindergarten-cum-child care centres under the Scheme. The Government has reserved recurrent funding of $470 million for provision of up to 7 000 service places in phases when the Scheme is regularized to ensure immediate provision of services to children in need. This is an exceptional approach for the Government to reserve recurrent funds at the commencement of a pilot scheme, which reflects that the Government attaches great importance to these children and its care and commitment to them.
As many Members have expressed their views on various labour and manpower issues, I will respond to the salient points. Apart from the LIFA Scheme I mentioned earlier, we will reinforce the Employment Service of the Labour Department to encourage more able persons to work to improve their quality of life and to release the labour force for the development of society and the economy. Later, I will report to the Panel on Manpower the outcome of the comprehensive review on the Work Incentive Transport Subsidy Scheme. We will continue to develop corresponding courses and services targeting social groups with special needs through the Employees Retraining Board, and this includes developing more new courses for more senior persons, women and household workers, as well as ethnic minorities and young people.
LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 20 April 2016 7681
Some Members have requested the Government to continue to enhance labour rights. I fully understand the aspirations of the labour sector. In fact, in considering the balance between employees' interest and employers' affordability, as well as the pace of development of Hong Kong community and its economy, the Government has made proactive efforts to inspect and enhance the rights and protection for workers from time to time.
The statutory minimum wage has been implemented for five years by now. The operation has been smooth and there has been continuous improvement in the income of grass-roots employees. Moreover, over 100 000 grass-roots women have entered the labour market upon the implementation of minimum wage. The Minimum Wage Commission is conducting a new round of review of the statutory minimum wage rate and will submit a report in the fourth quarter of this year.
Statutory paternity leave was implemented on 27 February last year, under which eligible working fathers are entitled to three days' paternity leave. The new requirement has been working smoothly so far. According to our rough estimate, tens of thousands of employees have benefited from this requirement. The Labour Department has commenced a review of the implementation of statutory paternity leave.
Standard working hours is a matter of concern to Members. The Standard Working Hours Committee (SWHC) established in April 2013 has since completed a large amount of consultation and data collection work thanks to the efforts made by the Chairperson, Dr LEONG Che-hung, and committee members. I would like to express my heartfelt gratitude to Dr LEONG and all committee members. Under the data-based principle, the SWHC will soon commence the final-stage consultation on the working hours policy directions under exploration. The Government has agreed to extending the term of office of the SWHC to November this year, so that the SWHC will have ample time to complete the remaining work and submit a report to the Government. I hope all sectors in the community will actively express their views during the consultation period. I would also like to take this opportunity to call on the six employees' representatives of the Labour Advisory Board once again to carefully consider rejoining the work of the SWHC to convey proactively the views of the labour sector and employees, making a joint effort to facilitate taking forward of the policy on working hours at this crucial moment.
7682 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 20 April 2016
President, the current-term Government attaches great importance to poverty alleviation, elderly care, welfare, and labour and manpower development, and we will improve and reinforce the services appropriately to cater for the needs arising from changes in society and the demographic structure. In view of the rapid ageing of the community, we will continue to make proper and comprehensive planning, so that in upholding the principle of financial prudence, public resources can be directed to helping the needy. We will endeavour to enable various sectors of the community to join hands in establishing a caring, inclusive and harmonious society.
With these remarks, I implore Members to support the Appropriation Bill 2016. Thank you.
PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Financial Secretary, please reply.
FINANCIAL SECRETARY (in Cantonese): President, after delivering the 2016-2017 Budget at the end of February, I have attended a number of media interviews and forums and listened to the views of the public and various sectors of the community on the Budget. I would also like to extend my heartfelt thanks to the Members who gave valuable views on individual policy areas at last week's meeting.
Our three Secretaries have just responded in detail to the views on specific policy areas. I shall now give a brief account of the latest global and local economic situation, then my views on how we can sustain our competitiveness to give impetus to Hong Kong's economic and social development in the long term.
Facing immense challenges, global economic growth is expected to remain slow and patchy in 2016. In its forecast released early this month, the International Monetary Fund (IMF) lowered the global economic growth rate for this year to 3.2%, on par with last year's 3.1%.
While having a rather sound nature of recovery, the United States economy is only expected to maintain modest growth as the exports and industrial production are dictated by a strong US dollar and sluggish global demand. At its meeting in March, the United States Federal Reserve Board decided to keep the United States interest rate unchanged and signalled a slower pace of interest rate rises for this year. Nevertheless, there are still uncertainties as to the pace of LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 20 April 2016 7683 the interest hikes which depends on economic data. What is certain is that the marked divergent policies among major central banks have complicated the international monetary environment, making it difficult to keep track of exchange rates and capital flows, thus risking the stability of global financial markets.
With the Eurozone persistently beset by high unemployment rates and elevated debt levels, the European Central Bank set forth further quantitative easing measures in March to counter deflation risks. We shall keep watch on whether issues such as the refugee influx and Britain's possible exit from the European Union would further affect the already tepid recovery process.
As for Japan, its negative interest rate policy has yet to take effect and its economy even went into a quarter on quarter contraction in the fourth quarter last year. In the face of structural problems such as an ageing population and high government debts, Japan's economic outlook is expected to remain dim in the short term. With the plunge in crude oil and commodity prices, the economies of some emerging markets, including Brazil and Russia, will also suffer further setbacks.
Despite the downward pressure that comes along with the weak external environment, the Mainland economy is growing at a rate higher than those of other developed economies. It will continue to be the major driver of the global economy. The Mainland economy recorded year-on-year growth of 6.7% for the first quarter. I believe the Central Government will provide adequate policy manoeuvres and headroom to achieve the growth target of 6.5% to 7% for the whole year.
As an externally oriented, small and open economy, Hong Kong is susceptible to changes in the external environment. Being dragged by the weak demand in overseas markets, the volume of total exports of goods in the first two months of this year has dropped by 4% year on year. Along with a 14% year-on-year decline in the numbers of our inbound tourists over the same period, total retail sales have tumbled by 12%.
The labour market is largely stable at present, with the wages and payroll sustaining growth in real terms. However, we all note that the latest unemployment rate announced yesterday slightly rose by 0.1 percentage point to 3.4%, with retail, accommodation and food services sectors experiencing more noticeable rises.
7684 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 20 April 2016
The unemployment rate in Hong Kong had been staying at 3.3% or lower for over two years, and the rebound of 0.1 percentage point in this quarter is an important signal from the market. I shall closely monitor the pressure on the employment market that might be caused by the fall in labour demand in the related industries and, in particular, by the weakened retail sales. Inflation is expected to remain moderate. The underlying inflation rate for this year will ease from 3% last year to 2%.
As for the property market, it faces pressure for adjustment as a result of the normalization of the United States interest rate policy, slackened economic growth and additional supply of residential flats. Trading in the market has turned quiet since last July. Property prices fell for five consecutive months since last October, with a cumulative drop of about 11% as at February 2016. Market data shows that the downtrend continued in March.
Property prices are still out of tune with the economic situation and affordability. The overall property prices as at February this year soared 58% over the peak in 1997, and the ratio of mortgage payment to household income stood at 62% in the fourth quarter last year, higher than the long-term average of 46%. We shall continue to closely monitor the property market and ensure its healthy and stable development.
On the whole, I forecast that our economy will grow by only 1% to 2% in real terms in 2016, which is lower than last year's 2.4%. In preparing this year's Budget, I anticipated a difficult year ahead for both the local economy and the labour market. I have therefore allocated in the Budget $38.8 billion for tax and short-term relief measures to help enterprises, especially those of small and medium size, to get through difficult times, and to safeguard the jobs of workers. Measures such as reducing tax, increasing tax allowances and waiving rates can ease the burden of citizens and help stimulate local consumption. The package of measures, together with other spending initiatives, will have a fiscal stimulus effect of boosting Gross Domestic Product for this year by 1.1%. This is indeed a great and timely boost to our economy amid a year fraught with challenges.
Recently, there were international credit rating agencies downgrading Hong Kong's rating outlook to negative out of concern over China's economic outlook and Hong Kong's close linkage with the Mainland. I would like to reiterate that Hong Kong has sound economic fundamentals, a robust financial regulatory regime, a resilient banking system and a healthy fiscal position. We LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 20 April 2016 7685 certainly have the capability, the experience and the determination to rise to the challenges brought about by economic cycles. The IMF Staff Report released in January has fully affirmed our economic and financial strengths.
In fact, the structural rebalancing in the Mainland's economy from labour-intensive production to high value-added production, coupled with the transformation of its mode of economic development from investment to consumption, will create more business opportunities for service-oriented economies like Hong Kong.
Apart from addressing the issue of cyclical economic adjustment and the needs of individual industries in the short term, I have also proposed in the Budget measures to foster the sustainable economic development of Hong Kong in keeping with the new economic order.
The latest breakthroughs in technologies have brought about paradigm shifts in traditional business modalities. Hong Kong abounds with world-class research and development (R&D) personnel in various fields, underpinned by advanced technology and equipment. We are well equipped to promote the application and production of innovative technologies and develop high value-added industries.
I have in my Budget proposed an array of measures which include an allocation of $8.2 billion to construct purpose-built buildings in Tseung Kwan O Industrial Estate for furthering the development of advanced manufacturing industries, as well as the introduction and enhancement of various funding schemes to encourage universities and industries to pursue commercialization of R&D results.
Hong Kong is an international financial centre. We shall endeavour to create a favourable environment to attract financial institutions and professionals to develop Fintech in Hong Kong and help enhance the efficiency and quality of our financial services. We shall also strive for further diversification of local industries. To this end, we shall continue to facilitate the robust growth of start-ups in various areas such as financing, incubation and office space, and support the development of the fashion industry and the film sector as well as arts and sports.
7686 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 20 April 2016
With the global economic gravity shifting towards the East, emerging markets have been playing an increasingly influential role. We must seize this opportunity to find new markets by making good use of Hong Kong's advantages in trading and logistics, business and professional services, financial services, tourism and creative industries.
The Hong Kong Monetary Authority has been working on the establishment of the Infrastructure Financing Facilitation Office, which will provide a platform for pooling the efforts of investors, banks and the financial sector, to facilitate the provision of comprehensive financial services for infrastructure projects in emerging markets.
We shall continue to widen our commercial and trading networks and promote the development of high value-added logistics and e-commerce through various trade and taxation agreements. The Government launched a public consultation exercise on the implementation of "single window" last week. We look forward to the early implementation of the initiative.
With our ageing population and the continuous growth in demand for social services, the Government will actively respond to the needs of the community and allocate resources for the enhancement of public services. Total government expenditure will reach $490 billion in 2016-2017, an increase of 14% over 2015-2016 or more than doubled when compared with a decade ago. The rate of increase is much higher than the rate of our economic growth.
The estimated recurrent expenditure on education, health and social welfare accounts for 60% of government recurrent expenditure. Compared with 10 years ago, the expenditure of the three areas has increased by 80% and among which social welfare spending has more than doubled. This shows the Government's commitment to improving people's livelihood and adhering to the principle of allocating public resources where justified and needed.
There are concerns in the community about the large amount of expenditure on infrastructure works. Infrastructure developments, which are one-off in nature, are important long-term investments that can help strengthen Hong Kong's competitiveness and spur our economic growth. Apart from strategic infrastructure to improve transportation and develop new areas, many infrastructure works are closely related to people's livelihood, including those related to culture, education, environmental protection, healthcare, sports and LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 20 April 2016 7687 district work. We shall establish a multi-disciplinary office to conduct a comprehensive review of the guidelines on public works and to scrutinize closely the cost estimates of major new projects to ensure the proper use of public funds.
In preparing this year's Budget, I have been mindful of making forward planning for meeting the long-term needs of Hong Kong, to ensure that the expenditure on important policy areas can be met in the event of economic downturn in the future. I have set up the Housing Reserve to implement the Public Housing Construction Programme, established the Future Fund as long-term savings, and set aside provisions for the 10-year hospital development plan.
The Government's medium-range forecast has projected that Hong Kong's economy will achieve an average growth of 3% per annum in real terms from 2017 to 2020, lower than the trend growth of 3.4% over the past 10 years. An ageing population will have far-reaching implications on public expenditure. The shrinking labour force in Hong Kong from around 2018 will affect our economic development and slow down growth of government revenue. A structural deficit is bound to emerge when expenditure growth keeps outpacing revenue growth.
It is of the utmost importance to ensure our public finances remain healthy, allowing us more room and flexibility to gear up for economic adversity ahead. We shall continue to adopt a three-pronged strategy by containing expenditure, preserving the revenue base and making long-term planning to maintain our fiscal health.
We initiated a three-year plan as from last year to contain expenditure by encouraging Policy Bureaux and departments to achieve more efficient use of resources through re-engineering and re-prioritizing. Our aim is to conduct a timely review of expenditure in various areas, thereby containing government expenditure growth, rather than reducing spending.
In 2016-2017, the second year of implementing the plan, we shall save $2.7 billion in recurrent expenditure. In the same year, however, there will be an increase of $21.8 billion in government recurrent expenditure over last year's revised estimate, which is more than eight times the amount saved. This shows that our efforts to contain expenditure have by no means stifled the reasonable 7688 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 20 April 2016 growth in expenditure. Furthermore, the resources saved have all been re-allocated to Policy Bureaux for enhancing existing services and launching new ones.
As announced in my Budget at the end of February, the revised estimate for the Government's surplus for 2015-2016 is $30 billion. According to the latest figures, the actual government revenue and expenditure are lower than the corresponding revised estimates by about $7 billion and $1 billion respectively, and the Finance Committee of this Council approved after the announcement of the Budget the $10 billion provision for public-private partnership programmes for the Hospital Authority (HA). As a result, the latest estimated surplus for last year has been revised to about $14 billion. As that allocation to the HA has been charged to the 2015-2016 account, the expenditure for 2016-2017 will decrease and the surplus will increase accordingly.
President, nearly 2 200 amendments have been proposed by Members this year. The number has been reduced to 407 after the President's ruling. Yet, discussions on individual items will take time, and voting alone will require over 10 hours. The Government will make every effort to support this Council in scrutinizing the Budget for its early passage.
I note that some Members have requested the Government to submit some of the funding proposals included in the draft Estimates separately to the Finance Committee for consideration.
Over the years, many new funding proposals, including both recurrent and non-recurrent expenditure items, have been included into the draft Estimates for scrutiny by the Legislative Council in the context of the Budget in accordance with sections 5 and 6 of the Public Finance Ordinance. With an aim of improving the efficiency of deliberations, we have submitted some of the less controversial funding proposals for the Legislative Council's scrutiny in the context of the Budget.
For key new funding proposals included in the draft Estimates, Policy Bureaux will set them out clearly under the respective heads and subheads of expenditure, provide appropriate descriptions in the controlling officer's reports, and consult relevant Legislative Council panels at a suitable juncture. Members may also request the bureaux to provide detailed information on these funding proposals at the special Finance Committee meetings.
LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 20 April 2016 7689
The funds on account totalling $90.5 billion previously authorized by the Legislative Council are sufficient to meet the overall government expenditure up to the end of May. If we fail to secure the passage of the Budget by the end of May, government departments and the public sector will begin to see resources running out in early June, making it difficult to maintain the delivery of public services. Also, the practical and pressing initiatives for relieving people's hardship would not be implemented in a timely manner.
I earnestly seek Members' support for the early passage of the Appropriation Bill 2016 in the overall interests of the community so that these initiatives can be implemented as soon as possible.
I so submit, President.
(Mr CHAN Chi-chuen stood up)
PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Mr CHAN Chi-chuen, what is your point?
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): I now put the question to you and that is: That the Appropriation Bill 2016 be read the Second time. Will those in favour please raise their hands?
(Members raised their hands)
7690 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 20 April 2016
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 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 Albert HO, Mr James TO, Mr CHAN Kam-lam, Ms Emily LAU, Mr TAM Yiu-chung, Mr Abraham SHEK, Mr Tommy CHEUNG, Mr WONG Kwok-hing, Prof Joseph LEE, Mr Jeffrey LAM, Mr Andrew LEUNG, Mr WONG Ting-kwong, Ms Starry LEE, Dr LAM Tai-fai, Mr CHAN Hak-kan, Mr CHAN Kin-por, Dr Priscilla LEUNG, Dr LEUNG Ka-lau, Mr WONG Kwok-kin, Mr IP Kwok-him, Mr Michael TIEN, Mr James TIEN, Mr NG Leung-sing, Mr Steven HO, Mr Frankie YICK, Mr WU Chi-wai, Mr YIU Si-wing, Mr Charles Peter MOK, Mr CHAN Han-pan, Miss CHAN Yuen-han, Mr LEUNG Che-cheung, Mr Kenneth LEUNG, Miss Alice MAK, Mr KWOK Wai-keung, Mr Christopher CHEUNG, Mr SIN Chung-kai, Dr Helena WONG, Dr Elizabeth QUAT, Mr Martin LIAO, 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 motion.
Mr LEE Cheuk-yan, Ms Cyd HO, Mr Alan LEONG, Mr LEUNG Kwok-hung, Mr Albert CHAN, Ms Claudia MO, Mr Gary FAN, Mr CHAN Chi-chuen, Dr Kenneth CHAN, Mr Dennis KWOK and Mr Alvin YEUNG voted against the motion.
LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 20 April 2016 7691
THE PRESIDENT, Mr Jasper TSANG, did not cast any vote.
THE PRESIDENT announced that there were 58 Members present, 46 were in favour of the motion and 11 against it. Since the question was agreed by a majority of the Members present, he therefore declared that the motion was passed.
CLERK (in Cantonese): Appropriation Bill 2016.
Council went into Committee.
Committee Stage
CHAIRMAN (in Cantonese): Committee stage. Council is now in Committee.
Committee will conduct a total of eight debates. The first debate involves heads with no amendments, and we shall proceed to vote on whether the sums for the relevant heads stand part of the Schedule immediately following the conclusion of the debate. Committee will then conduct the second to sixth debates on the amendments, the themes of which are, in the same way as last year, based on the grouping of areas for the debate on the Motion of Thanks in respect of the Policy Address. The time available for the debates on the amendments is similar to that of last year.
Following the conclusion of debates and voting on the amendments, Committee will conduct the seventh debate on heads with amendments before voting on whether the sum for each head stands part of the Schedule and whether the Schedule stands part of the Bill. The last debate is on clauses 1 and 2, and then we shall put to vote that the two clauses stand part of the Bill. All proceedings of Committee on the Bill will be completed by then. Council will thereafter vote on the Third Reading of the Bill. I expect all proceedings on the Bill to be completed at the meeting to be held on 11 May.
7692 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 20 April 2016
APPROPRIATION BILL 2016
CHAIRMAN (in Cantonese): In accordance with Rule 68 of the Rules of Procedure, Committee will first consider the Schedule.
I now propose the question to you and that is: That the sums for the following heads stand part of the Schedule.
CLERK (in Cantonese): Heads 26, 27, 79, 95, 114, 136, 169, 174, 180 and 184.
CHAIRMAN (in Cantonese): The Clerk has just read out the heads with no amendments. Committee now proceeds to the first debate. Will Members who wish to speak please press the "Request to speak" button.
MR JAMES TO (in Cantonese): Chairman, I would like to speak on the Leisure and Cultural Services Department (LCSD). I believe Members should be aware of a recent incident involving "denationalization". In my opinion, the LCSD should follow a set of good practices in its daily handling of names of universities or organizations with Taiwanese background to facilitate understanding by the public. In response to our recent enquiries made with the Secretary for Home Affairs in respect of this incident, the LCSD has given us a most interesting reply. It said that not a single colleague should be blamed despite reports that a certain colleague should be held accountable. So far, the LCSD has not … because we are now discussing matters concerning appropriation of funds. In fact, the LCSD should formulate a system of good practices. When front-line personnel think that something might go wrong, they should report to high-ranking officials such as an Assistant Director or even the Director. These high-salaried officials are obliged to spend time on solving problems. And they should also understand that serious harm might be caused by these issues related to titles.
Although some people might think that the incident involves merely a title, the feelings of Taiwanese people may be hurt if it is not handled properly. Moreover, many people of Hong Kong who have studied in Taiwan ― they feel closely related to these Taiwanese universities whom they regard as their alma maters ― will definitely strongly question why such a large number of high-ranking officials, who have benefited from the funding, could have handled LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 20 April 2016 7693 the incident in this manner when they were supposed to make a prudent decision and formulate best procedures. If a relevant procedure has been formulated by the LCSD but then what happens is not permitted by the law or policy and yet no special legal consideration is required since the matter involves purely administrative considerations but not statutory powers, should the policy be formulated by the LCSD or the Secretary? Should the matter be dealt with by the Secretary? The problem is, after the occurrence of the incident, the Government has been behaving like "a turtle hiding inside its shell", with no government official explaining to us who made the decision. Was the decision really made by a front-line officer exercising his administrative authority or the high-salaried Assistant Director, Director or Secretary? Chairman, it appears to me that the Government intends to resort to procrastination in dealing with this incident as long as it can since it has so far failed to offer a clear explanation. In a word, the Government thinks that the incident should be considered resolved so long as no explanation is offered.
Chairman, concerning the effective utilization of these public funds, I think that high-ranking officials should have a macro vision and be capable of discerning and taking into consideration problems encountered by various parties. If the incident is related to administration but not the law, is this the best approach? From the perspective of making effective use of public coffers, high-ranking officials should be assigned to formulate procedures and guidelines. If certain problems are encountered or if the LCSD really considers the wording sensitive, should the decision be made by a highly paid and accountable high-ranking official, and a consistent policy be adopted? If the Government's high-salaried officials consider that the incident was handled properly, they should come forth and explain to the public why such a decision was made rather than remaining indifferent as if nothing has happened.
(Mr LEUNG Kwok-hung stood up)
MR LEUNG KWOK-HUNG (in Cantonese): I think that a quorum is not present.
CHAIRMAN (in Cantonese): Will the Clerk please ring the bell to summon Members back to the Chamber.
7694 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 20 April 2016
(While the summoning bell was ringing, THE CHAIRMAN'S DEPUTY, MR ANDREW LEUNG, took the Chair)
(After the summoning bell had been rung, a number of Members returned to the Chamber)
DEPUTY CHAIRMAN (in Cantonese): Mr Albert HO, please speak.
MR ALBERT HO (In Cantonese): Deputy Chairman, although Members have not proposed any amendment or deletion of expenditure estimate with regard to this series of heads, I wish to particularly remind staff of the Leisure and Cultural Services Department (LCSD) of the need to exercise care in their work. I mean they must execute policies fairly and reasonably to enable members of the public to enjoy the venues managed by the LCSD.
Over the last two years I have received complaints from an organization, and I have actually conveyed these complaints to the Secretary before. This organization has for many times applied for hire of performance venues in Hong Kong for an overseas dance troupe to stage a performance in the territory. But its applications were repeatedly rejected on the ground that no venue would be available. This organization said that since their applications for hire of venues on those days of the subsequent year or the next were rejected, they asked the LCSD on which days the venues would be available for booking. The LCSD invariably said that they would need to submit an application but did not answer their question. As such, although this organization has time and again submitted an application over the past four to five years, none of its applications has been approved.
We have reasons to believe that staff of the LCSD were given instructions on not to allow the hire of venues for performance by this dance troupe for the latter is believed to have relations with Falun Gong. But I wish to point out that this violates the principle of fair policies on the one hand and will give rise to judicial reviews on the other, and I believe in the event of the LCSD losing the case, not only would the Government's reputation be tarnished but the Government would even have to make compensation for the huge legal costs incurred.
LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 20 April 2016 7695
In fact, three years ago the Immigration Department also targetted that organization and owing to some mistakes, abruptly refused to issue entry permits to the staff concerned in the end. As a result, a judicial review was filed against the Government and the Government ultimately lost the case.
I have to remind the LCSD of addressing this matter squarely and managing their venues in a fair, impartial and reasonable manner, so that all organizations are accorded fair treatment as long as they have submitted their applications in accordance with the legal procedures.
I wish to make one more point. As Mr James TO also mentioned in his speech earlier on, the LCSD had exercised political censorship in taking the approach of deleting "National" from a person's title. This is entirely unlawful, doing damage to the status of Hong Kong as an open city and hurting the feelings of people in the neighbouring region.
Here, I once again urge the Bureau to review its policies in order not to give people the feeling that there is more and more political censorship in Hong Kong. Such political censorship can be found in various Policy Bureaux and apart from the LCSD, I will explain later that there is also this practice in the Food and Environmental Hygiene Department, the Immigration Department and the Hongkong Post. This will cause Hong Kong to regress continuously to become a closed place.
I so submit.
DEPUTY CHAIRMAN (in Cantonese): Does any other Member wish to speak?
MR CHAN CHI-CHUEN (in Cantonese): Deputy Chairman, I move that further proceedings of the Committee be now adjourned under Rule 40(4) of the Rules of Procedure.
I wish to raise a point of order. Will the time spent on debating this motion be counted towards the time for the debate as specified in the President's ruling?
7696 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 20 April 2016
DEPUTY CHAIRMAN (in Cantonese): According to my understanding of the explanation given by the President of the Legislative Council yesterday on the debate and voting arrangements, the debates on the various amendments will take 60-odd hours and the Bill is expected to be put to a vote on its Third Reading at the meeting on 11 May. Therefore, all the debates, irrespective of the form taken, will be counted towards the 60-odd hours as estimated by the President of the Legislative Council.
Mr CHAN Chi-chuen has moved that further proceedings of the Committee be now adjourned. Mr CHAN Chi-chuen, do you wish to speak?
MR CHAN CHI-CHUEN (in Cantonese): Deputy Chairman, I wish to request a headcount before that.
DEPUTY CHAIRMAN (in Cantonese): Will the Clerk please ring the bell to summon Members back to the Chamber.
(While the summoning bell was ringing, some Members returned to the Chamber but not their seats yet)
DEPUTY CHAIRMAN (in Cantonese): Will Members please return to their seats.
(After the summoning bell had been rung, a number of Members returned to the Chamber)
DEPUTY CHAIRMAN (in Cantonese): Mr CHAN Chi-chuen, please speak.
MR CHAN CHI-CHUEN (in Cantonese): Deputy Chairman, I move that further proceedings of the Committee be now adjourned under Rule 40(4) of the Rules of Procedure (RoP). I have moved this motion with the purpose of expressing disagreement with a number of views presented in the ruling made by President Jasper TSANG on the Appropriation Bill 2016 yesterday. I hope that Members can consider rendering me support after listening to my speech. This is not a LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 20 April 2016 7697 question of whether or not Members support this Budget. The point is that if the ruling made by President Jasper TSANG yesterday should set a precedent, there would be endless troubles and grave consequences.
First, President TSANG made this ruling only yesterday, and it was only in the afternoon of yesterday that Members noted the amendments admitted by him. Meanwhile, concerning the overall debate and voting arrangements made by him, actually they are still unclear even at this juncture. Deputy Chairman, you may think that your understanding is different from mine or the arrangements are already very clear to you. But I think members of the public, the media and even Members have many doubts and questions about the debate arrangements made by President Jasper TSANG. Through this debate on the motion for adjournment, even though the President is not in the Chamber or he is not available to debate with me within the scope of our Agenda here, I hope he can explain clearly to the public and the media the questions that I am going to ask in this adjournment debate.
Earlier on I asked you, Deputy Chairman, whether this adjournment debate proposed by me now will be counted towards the time allocated for the entire debate. What is going on here right now? Honourable colleagues, no filibuster is taking place here. What happened was that President Jasper TSANG, in accordance with the RoP, made a ruling on the Committee stage amendments (CSAs) proposed by Members. He ruled that 407 amendments were admissible and then drew up a timetable for the debate. According to this brief table containing the debate arrangements distributed to Members, this debate is going to take 94.5 hours in total with all the procedures completed at the meeting on 11 May. This is my first question because it is written in this table that all the procedures will be completed at the meeting on 11 May, which means that this is a time-limited debate. Of course, to me, I always oppose the imposition of a time limit on debates. Debates should be conducted in their natural course. The President should chair the meeting in accordance with the RoP, and in case Members made repetitions or strayed from the question in their speeches, the President should stop them from speaking, and if the President considers that there is not sufficient time for the meeting, he should arrange for more meetings. Even though I take exception to holding meetings round the clock, if the majority of Members agree to this option, we would have to abide. The President should deal with the debates and CSAs with the use of time.
7698 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 20 April 2016
In this connection, I have to thank President Jasper TSANG for not adopting this practice, namely, imposing a time limit on a debate, in the past debate on the Copyright (Amendment) Bill 2014 (the Bill). I understand that this idea might have crossed the President's mind or he might have thought of doing so for a split second, but he ultimately stated that since the first debate had yet been completed, he had no basis for drawing up a timetable for a time-limited debate. Had President Jasper TSANG also distributed a timetable to limit the debate to 94.5 hours for the Bill, I think the Bill would have been passed. It is because if there is a timetable, Members need only wait for time to pass; but while a timetable is provided here, Members do not even have to wait for time to pass.
The kernel of my argument is: I oppose the arrangement for time spent on headcounts to be counted towards the time for the debate, though President Jasper TSANG will certainly say that this has been a proven practice over the past two years. But with regard to this ridiculous arrangement, as I said before, theoretically requests for headcount can actually preclude all Members from delivering their speeches. Besides, if even the time spent on the adjournment debate is counted towards these 94.5 hours, I think that would be ridiculous too.
Third, what if, most interestingly, the meeting is aborted? Some media said that this should be counted as well because the President has set a deadline requiring all the procedures to be completed on 11 May. If so, that would save Members from having to form a quorum ― Is there a quorum now? Members please help find out if there is one ― Members can simply let all meetings abort until 11 May when they come back to vote, and everyone would be happy, right? But this is so ridiculous. It is like saying that a deadline has been set and so, no debate will be necessary before asking …
(Mr Albert CHAN stood up)
DEPUTY CHAIRMAN (in Cantonese): Mr Albert CHAN, what is your point?
MR ALBERT CHAN (in Cantonese): Deputy Chairman, just now Mr CHAN Chi-chuen asked me to find out if a quorum was present and I found that a quorum was lacking. Please do a headcount.
LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 20 April 2016 7699
DEPUTY CHAIRMAN (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 CHAIRMAN (in Cantonese): Mr CHAN Chi-chuen, please continue.
MR CHAN CHI-CHUEN (in Cantonese): Just now I said that the debates in the Committee stage should not be time-limited. Members should be given sufficient speaking time in the deliberations on all Bills, including this Appropriation Bill 2016. But even though Members may argue that such a practice was adopted in the past few years, I must still say that it is most unreasonable for headcounts, adjournment debates or even aborted meetings to be counted as well. I hope that President Jasper TSANG can clearly explain this to the public once again because yesterday when a reporter asked him how aborted meetings would be handled, he evaded the question ingeniously without giving a reply direct. Will aborted meetings be counted towards these 94.5 hours? What if a Black Rainstorm Signal or Typhoon Signal 8 is in force? Will it be counted as well? Jasper TSANG said that as this year is the fourth Session, that is, the last Session, and there are still 22 Government Bills pending, it is therefore necessary to handle the debate on this Appropriation Bill more stringently.
As we all know, the Government has its own timetable, and as Members can learn from the Financial Secretary's speech earlier on, he hoped that this Appropriation Bill can be passed in the middle of May if its deliberations can be completed early or at the end of May the latest. As such, on what basis did President Jasper TSANG decide on the completion of all the procedures on 11 May? Frankly speaking, putting up resistance in the legislature can be a means to an end for all different camps, and it is not confined only to the opposition camp as the pro-establishment camp may also be extremely dissatisfied with certain pieces of legislation, such as the Bill concerning the Medical Council. This will set a precedent. If Members do not see any problem with time-limited debates, nor do they see any problem with counting towards the time limit time spent on headcounts and adjournment debates or the time forgone by aborted meetings and on occasions when a meeting cannot be convened, this would set a very bad precedent.
7700 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 20 April 2016
Besides, compared with the past, the most serious problem this time around is the practice adopted to reduce the number of amendments proposed by Members. Many pro-democracy Members may not have strong views about it because insofar as their amendments are concerned, almost 90% of them were admitted and despite cases in which their amendments were ruled inadmissible, for instance, Mr LEE Cheuk-yan had proposed 22 amendments of which only one was rejected and Mr IP Kin-yuen had proposed two amendments of which only one was rejected, the others have all their amendments admitted and therefore, they may think that there is not any problem. But the problem lies not in whether their amendments were scrapped or not, but whether President Jasper TSANG had abused his powers in the course of making this ruling, or whether he made his ruling entirely without any principle or criterion.
The People Power did not propose a copious amount of or voluminous amendments this year. The number of our amendments is more or less the same as that of last year. I had proposed 200 amendments, 73 of which were admitted, whereas Mr Albert CHAN had proposed 260 amendments, 60 of which were admitted. I do not intend to discuss the question of how many of our amendments were admitted, but what principles the President applied in permitting these amendments. I found that President Jasper TSANG had acted most rashly this time around. It is not that his approach is more stringent this time around because a more stringent approach than in the past means that he has a principle to base on, just that he has tightened the principle. For example, I remember that in the first year, Members put forward the so-called sequential amendments proposing to delete the salaries of officials for one month, two months or three months, and these amendments were admitted by Jasper TSANG then. But in the second year he did not permit these amendments and he admitted only those amendments proposing the deletion of officials' salaries for one year or six months. Later, even these amendments in pair were not admitted. But this year, it strikes me as very strange because, for instance, with regard to the amendments proposed by me, many of them which I had proposed and were admitted before were ruled inadmissible this time around, and I am entirely unable to find out the criteria for their rejection. For example, I proposed to deduct the estimated expenditure for the annual salaries of the Chief Executive and this amendment was not permitted; I proposed to deduct the estimated expenditure for the annual salaries of the Director-General of Civil Aviation and this amendment was not permitted; I proposed to deduct the estimated expenditure for the annual salaries of the Secretary for Education and again, this amendment was not permitted, and I think if I could propose this LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 20 April 2016 7701 amendment, even Dr LAM Tai-fai might probably support it. Then I thought: Is it that he would not permit amendments proposing the deduction of estimated expenditure for salaries this year? No, it is not.
In the evening of yesterday, we received the 407 admissible amendments, of which the amendment proposed by Ms Emily LAU to deduct the estimated expenditure for the annual salaries of the Chief Executive of the Chief Executive's Office was ruled admissible. Why is it that Ms Emily LAU could propose the deduction of LEUNG Chun-ying's salaries but when I proposed to deduct LEUNG Chun-ying's salaries, my amendment was considered frivolous and hence inadmissible. This is entirely incomprehensible. Then I thought: Is it that I would not be allowed to propose an amendment which was already proposed by another Member? No, it is not. I then read the President's ruling again and found that, for example, with regard to the deduction of the annual estimated expenditure for the euthanasia of animals of the Agriculture, Fisheries and Conservation Department, both Ms Claudia MO and I had put forward identical proposals on this deletion but both of us were allowed to propose our amendments, which means that Ms Claudia MO's amendment was ruled admissible and so was mine. In other words, there is no such criterion of not allowing an amendment already proposed by another Member, unless President Jasper TSANG told us that he made a mistake or overlooked it, and if President Jasper TSANG had used this criterion, he should come forth and tell us so. We did not even have a chance to make enquiries with him about these criteria. He only told us to go back and take a look, saying that he had criteria to base on. Let me tell Members now that he had no criteria to base on.
Moreover, just now I mentioned the amendment seeking to deduct the estimated expenditure for the annual salaries of the Secretary for Education, Eddie NG, and I thought: Is there a principle that does not allow proposed deduction of expenditure targeting a person? No, there is not. I saw that Mr WONG Yuk-man's amendment proposing to deduct the estimated expenditure for the annual salaries of the Secretary for the Environment was admitted and so was the amendment seeking to deduct the estimated expenditure for the annual salaries of the Secretary for Transport and Housing. Do Members not think that there is entirely no criterion to speak of? Another example is the amendment seeking to deduct the estimated expenditure for the annual salaries of the Secretary for Commerce and Economic Development, which was again admitted. This is very strange indeed. Why was the amendment proposing the deduction of the estimated expenditure for the annual salaries of the Secretary for Education 7702 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 20 April 2016 not admitted? We can think of a reason and that is, this would cause embarrassment to the pro-establishment camp, including Dr LAM Tai-fai, as they would not know whether or not they should support it but hardly could they refuse to give it their support, for his popularity rating is the lowest.
Another point which is even more weird is that while my amendment seeking to deduct the estimated expenditure for the annual salaries of the Director-General of Civil Aviation was not admitted, the amendment proposed by Mr Albert CHAN to deduct the estimated expenditure for the annual salaries of two Deputy Director-Generals of Civil Aviation was nevertheless admitted. What principle is it? What criterion is it? You have to tell me what it is. Then some people said that the principle is this: Members proposing less amendments have all their amendments admitted whereas those proposing more amendments have less of their amendments admitted. They said that for example, you proposed 200 amendments and now, you have some 70 amendments admitted, and your admissible amendments already account for the highest percentage, excluding Members proposing only one or two amendments which were all admitted. They said that yours is already higher than those of "Long Hair", "Hulk" and Yuk-man and so, should you not quit while you have already gained an advantage? This is not the point. The point is the principle. If Members do not see any problem with this, I would say that the situation is actually even worse than that of the Finance Committee. For example, if you proposed 35 amendments and Mr CHAN Kin-por or Mr CHAN Kam-lam of the Finance Committee told the Member to go back and consolidate them into four amendments, at least they still asked the Member to go back and consolidate their amendments, which means that there is still room for discussion. Had Jasper TSANG asked me to go back and consolidate my amendments, I might have felt in the course of consolidating my amendments that the deduction of Eddie NG's salaries is most important and so, I might have preferred to delete the other amendments concerning some trivial expenditures of the Education Bureau and I might have chosen not to propose such amendments altogether.
Therefore, Members, especially the pro-democracy Members, should go back and really take a look at the ruling. How rashly President Jasper TSANG acted in making this ruling! What a mess! If this became a precedent, the situation would be condemned to a deep abyss of despair and endless troubles would follow. If he is capable enough, he may as well reject all the amendments and rule that they are all frivolous. I can do nothing about him because it shows that he has applied the same principle, and whether or not I can file a judicial review against him is a later story. However, President Jasper TSANG has LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 20 April 2016 7703 entirely no principle to form the basis. Even for the same amendment, other Members are permitted to propose it whereas I am not; or the deduction of the expenditure for the salaries of an Under Secretary was ruled admissible whereas the deduction of expenditure for the salaries of a Secretary was not, making people feel at a complete loss. Therefore, I hope that President Jasper TSANG can go back and read his ruling again. Has he actually read it? How come he made such a blunder and performed so badly in reducing the number of amendments this time around?
Therefore, I hope Members will support this motion for adjournment.
DEPUTY CHAIRMAN (in Cantonese): As Mr CHAN Chi-chuen has moved a motion for adjournment, I have to deal with it first.
I now propose the question to you and that is: That further proceedings of the Committee be now adjourned. Under Rule 40(5) of the RoP, no amendment shall be moved to this motion for adjournment.
Secretary, do you wish to speak?
(Secretary for Labour and Welfare indicated that he did not wish to speak)
(Mr CHAN Chi-chuen stood up)
DEPUTY CHAIRMAN (in Cantonese): Mr CHAN Chi-chuen, what is your point?
MR CHAN CHI-CHUEN (in Cantonese): Deputy Chairman, I request a headcount under Rule 17(3) of the RoP.
DEPUTY CHAIRMAN (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)
7704 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 20 April 2016
DEPUTY CHAIRMAN (in Cantonese): Mr WONG Kwok-hing, please speak.
MR WONG KWOK-HING (in Cantonese): Deputy Chairman, I speak against the motion for adjournment moved by Mr CHAN Chi-chuen from the People Power, and strongly condemn the People Power for ignoring the interest of the people.
Deputy Chairman, after proceeding to this debate session earlier, he has requested four headcounts before and after moving the adjournment motion. Members of the public in Hong Kong may do some calculations. These four headcounts have wasted almost one hour of the meeting time of the Legislative Council today. Based on the situation last year, I have found after calculation that each day of their filibustering will result in a waste of $2.55 million. If we calculate it on the basis of a nine-hour meeting of the Legislative Council today and divide $2.55 million by nine, we will know that they are wasting hundreds of thousand dollars per hour. Members may do some computations. The People Power should be held responsible for such wastage of public money.
(Mr Albert CHAN stood up)
DEPUTY CHAIRMAN (in Cantonese): Mr Albert CHAN, what is your point?
MR ALBERT CHAN (in Cantonese): Deputy Chairman, it seems that a quorum is not present. Please do a headcount again, and remind Mr WONG Kwok-hing how many headcounts have been done. This is the fifth time.
MR WONG KWOK-HING (in Cantonese): He is again wasting our time.
DEPUTY CHAIRMAN (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)
LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 20 April 2016 7705
DEPUTY CHAIRMAN (in Cantonese): Mr WONG Kwok-hing, please continue with your speech.
MR WONG KWOK-HING (in Cantonese): Deputy Chairman, the headcount done just now is the fifth one. The previous four headcounts have wasted members of the public in Hong Kong $383,333, which is an indivisible number. As of this financial year, I estimate that $300,000 in total has been wasted, which should not be far off the exact amount. I hope those electors who are going to vote in September will ask why the People Power has wasted our hard-earned money like this.
Deputy Chairman, earlier I listened carefully to the two reasons cited by Mr CHAN Chi-chuen in moving the adjournment motion. First, he was not happy with President Jasper TSANG's ruling that the speaking time must be limited. The other point is that he considered it is unreasonable of President Jasper TSANG to reduce the number of his amendments as he had got fewer amendments admitted than others. Hence, he considered President Jasper TSANG's ruling arbitrary, and vented his dissatisfaction with President TSANG. If Mr CHAN Chi-chuen wants to vent his spleen, should he filibuster by moving the adjournment motion, followed by the requests for headcounts made by Mr Albert CHAN and his party comrades to hold the whole Legislative Council captive at the expense of public interest? Such a practice is extremely unreasonable in itself, which has grossly neglected and ignored the interest of the general public. How dare they talk about the People Power? He is only oppressing and maltreating the people. Will he please take away his signboard? If they are unhappy with President Jasper TSANG's ruling, it is absolutely fine for them to debate with President TSANG through other channels and means. They may even elaborate on their points during the debate on the amendments in Committee. But what good does an adjournment do? Does it mean that Members can suspend the meeting so that they need not attend it? I hope members of the public will understand the meaning of an adjournment is that the Legislative Council will now stop examining the Budget. Can we do that? We certainly cannot do that because this Budget serves to determine all of the expenditure of the Government in the coming year. No matter whether he likes it or how dissatisfied he is, all of the expenditure is related to members of the public and the economy of Hong Kong. How can the appropriation be held up? 7706 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 20 April 2016
How can we adjourn the meeting and not examine it? He made no mention of and paid no regard to such a simple and obvious principle. Hence, it is impossible for us to adjourn the meeting.
In fact, they know full well that the adjournment motion is detestable to the public. But why do they insist on doing so? They merely attempt to filibuster by making use of an adjournment and headcounts. As he has moved the adjournment motion, now we have to spend time discussing this motion instead of the Budget or the 400-odd amendments proposed by Members. In fact, regarding the reduction of more than 2 000 frivolous amendments, which are basically not in order, to some 400 by President Jasper TSANG, his ruling is still on the lenient side from my point of view. They should be reduced to some 40, just as Mr CHAN Kin-por did. He did the right thing. But never mind. Even if they are reduced to some 400, we are still wasting time.
Moreover, according to the timetable drawn up by the President, the final voting has to be held on 11 May. As the President of the Legislative Council, he is certainly obliged to ensure that the Government's Budget is examined in an orderly manner, and that the relevant amendments are tackled efficiently in the meeting. What is wrong with his time allocation? If the President does not decide how time should be allocated and allows them to arbitrarily abuse their power as Members, what kind of Legislative Council is that? Hence, this does not hold water. In addition, in moving the adjournment motion, Mr CHAN Chi-chuen has absolutely ignored the interest of members of the public in Hong Kong and totally run counter to domestic, local and public interest. Deputy Chairman, in the meeting of the Panel on Manpower of the Legislative Council yesterday, the Government reported to us that the unemployment rate had rebounded. Not long ago, the responses from public officers, be it Financial Secretary John TSANG or several other Directors of Bureaux, repeatedly sounded the alarm that Hong Kong economy had entered a downward consolidation phase. I am referring to a downward instead of an upward consolidation phase. Unemployment has rebounded to the record high seen many years ago. The current economy has gone from bad to worse under the influence of the external economic environment. What is more, the previous violent acts, the conduct of driving tourists away, the 79-day illegal occupation, the "shopping tours", as well as the so-called "dragging suitcases" and "locusts" incidents have discouraged tourists from coming to Hong Kong, thereby dealing a severe blow to the tourism, hotel, retail and catering industries.
LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 20 April 2016 7707
Earlier on, the Government also pointed out that about $60 billion to $70 billion would be needed for public works projects every year. But due to their filibusters, funding could not be approved for actual commencement of works last year and this year. They said that these were "white elephant" projects. But they are the ones who should be called "white elephants" and "rice weevils". Now, the originally robust construction industry has gone into a downturn. Consultants, designers, surveyors and draughtsmen, and so on, in the industry are the first to bear the brunt. Such professional grades handling preliminary work in the relevant sectors have been seriously affected. But it seems that they are turning a blind eye and a deaf ear to them. They get paid handsome salaries with attractive perks every month, yet they just filibuster, request headcounts and move amendments in an air-conditioned room, while ignoring those employees who are moaning out there, not knowing whether they will be able to make the mortgage payment and pay school fees for their children next month. And for those investors who have pledged their personal properties and tools of trade as security for mortgage, they also do not know whether they will still have funds to carry on their business. But it seems that they are completely indifferent. Now the alarm has been sounded, and the unemployment rate has rebounded. Why do they still have to drag down Hong Kong economy?
(Mr Albert CHAN stood up)
MR ALBERT CHAN (in Cantonese): Deputy Chairman, a quorum is not present. Please ring the bell.
MR WONG KWOK-HING (in Cantonese): Look, the People Power has again requested a headcount.
DEPUTY CHAIRMAN (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)
7708 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 20 April 2016
DEPUTY CHAIRMAN (in Cantonese): Mr WONG Kwok-hing, please continue with your speech.
MR WONG KWOK-HING (in Cantonese): Deputy Chairman, the Financial Secretary has pointed out in his reply that the Government is now using the funds on account for operation, which will be used up by the end of May. Will funding be available in June? Can the entire Civil Service get paid? Can the publicly-funded organizations secure any funding? Will payments be disbursed to the underprivileged including recipients of the "fruit grant", Old Age Living Allowance, Disability Allowance and Comprehensive Social Security Assistance. They all depend on whether this Budget can be passed. In such circumstances, may I ask for what reasons Members of the Legislative Council can still request an adjournment and suspend the meeting?
Deputy Chairman, I have received a poem from Mr KWOK Hing-lau, a painter from the construction industry, who asked me to read it out to Honourable Members. This poem is written by ZHENG Banqiao, a famous ancient Chinese poet who cared about the interest of the people. His poem reads: "Lying in bed in my office library, I heard the rustling of bamboos outside, which sounded like the moaning of the needy. Though a low-rank county magistrate, I care about every detail of the life of my people." This poem shows that ZHENG Banqiao cared about the suffering and interest of the people, and he heard the rustling of bamboo leaves in the wind. Now there is widespread suffering among the people. But does the People Power take it to heart?
I find it strange. As they call themselves the People Power, they certainly should work for the people. Now the people have let out a painful groan. But they just filibuster and seek an adjournment while turning a deaf ear to them. They wish to adjourn the meeting, but keep getting paid and receiving handsome salaries with attractive perks. Mr CHAN Chi-chuen and Mr Albert CHAN, can you face members of the public in Hong Kong? Can you face the people?
(Mr Albert CHAN stood up)
DEPUTY CHAIRMAN (in Cantonese): Mr Albert CHAN, what is your point?
LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 20 April 2016 7709
MR ALBERT CHAN (in Cantonese): Deputy Chairman, please do a headcount.
DEPUTY CHAIRMAN (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 CHAIRMAN (in Cantonese): Mr WONG Kwok-hing, please continue with your speech.
MR WONG KWOK-HING (in Cantonese): Deputy Chairman, as my comments were harsh and straight to the point, I have been interrupted by the People Power for five times. It has broken the record of Legislative Council meetings because no Member has ever been interrupted for as many as five times in a 15-minute speech.
Deputy Chairman, I have to tell Mr KWOK Hing-lau, a veteran in the construction industry, that I have conveyed his poem for him. But the People Power does not take it to heart, and keeps sacrificing the interest of the people. Hence, I have to quote the remark made by Secretary Gregory SO in concluding the debate on the Copyright (Amendment) Bill 2014, that we must remember every one of those Members who filibuster and waste public money, and keep every one of them in mind!
Thank you, Deputy Chairman.
DR KWOK KA-KI (in Cantonese): Deputy Chairman, I rise to speak on the adjournment motion. Having heard the justifications and approach presented by Mr CHAN Chi-chuen in respect of the adjournment motion just now, I have some feelings which I wish to express in this debate.
The Budget debate is nothing new actually. Many Members will propose amendments to the Government's Appropriation Bill, and those amendments are exactly a manifestation of the right of this Council to raise different views 7710 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 20 April 2016 through examination of the Budget under the constitutional system. I must talk to Mr WONG Kwok-hing about logic ― regrettably, he is not present right now ― because I am worried that if specious arguments are repeated incessantly in the Legislative Council, no one will respond to such specious arguments anymore after they were recorded.
Just now he made a lot of comments describing debates in the Legislative Council as a waste of time and unnecessary. I wonder why he ran for the Legislative Council seat because very often, Members need to spend time in this aspect, but most importantly, this is our duty, our constitutional duty to examine the Budget. Take this year as an example. The Budget covers many different items, and a number of them are quite controversial. For example, facing many economic and livelihood problems pending resolution, the Government still proposed the Belt and Road scholarship which surprised and even infuriated members of the public, though the Chief Executive mentioned more than once when he assumed office in 2012 that he would tackle the problems of retirement of the elderly and unfair treatment to grass-roots workers, including the issues of working hours and the arrangement of offsetting the Mandatory Provident Fund accrued benefits against long service payments. These are absolutely unacceptable to grass-roots workers, but the policies have yet to see any changes.
Mr WONG represents the labour sector. Yet strangely enough, why did he accept this Budget which makes no mention of the most fundamental problems faced by workers or employees at the grass-roots level? What matters most is, as mentioned by Mr CHAN Chi-chuen in his speech just now, the President has made some moves in connection with this debate at the Committee stage. The President's reduction of the number of amendments, I believe, is quite contentious, but this is not the topic I would like to speak on here. Instead, I am interested in talking about the time allocation and arrangement of sessions.
Despite the reduction in the number of amendments by President Jasper TSANG, it still exceeds 400. As a matter of fact, many amendments are well-founded rather than being frivolous. For instance, Members can further expound their views on the provisions for different government officials, departments and policies in the hope of setting things right through the amendments. In fact, conducting debates on and proposing amendments to the Budget is the only way through which the Legislative Council can bring about a greater change in the Government's administration. Hence, it is improper for Members to give up this right or for the President to cause this Council to lose LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 20 April 2016 7711 this right and function. For this reason, I consider the President's ruling to end the debates at the meeting of 11 May after some 90 hours of debate inappropriate. I am not saying there is anything wrong with the date of 11 May. Yet many Members are prepared to spend more time if we need a longer time for speaking and holding discussions. In the past, this Council also held meetings on Saturdays and Sundays when there was such a need. In other words, if Members hold different views on the amendments in the various debates, we should present these views as far as possible through discussions at the Committee stage. It is unwise of President Jasper TSANG to adopt such an approach of setting a time limit. It also sets a very bad precedent for the Legislative Council.
As we all know, it is very likely that President Jasper TSANG will not stand for election again upon expiry of his term this year. If the President of the next term cites his logic … actually, among all the Members of the pro-establishment camp, he is more liberal. For this reason, he has been attacked by many Members of the pro-establishment camp. However, even such a relatively liberal President ― I am not saying I accept his approach ― has adopted such logic to reduce the time which we should use for debates. That is to say, in the future, the Government can act more blatantly with fewer restraints. Members of the pro-establishment camp will act more ruthlessly. They can continue to casually endorse practices unfavourable to people's livelihood and even in conflict with members of the public in the Legislative Council.
Just now a Member of the pro-establishment camp said that now he is very concerned about the livelihood issues of the ordinary masses. Let us look at what the Budget provides to the ordinary masses this time. Whether it be economic development, long-term retirement protection or elderly … let me reiterate how the Government treats the elderly in Hong Kong. The Government will merely provide 160 additional day care places for the elderly, improve the quality of 1 200 residential care places and increase the number of service vouchers in the next two years. Given the continual growth in the elderly population, this is only a drop in the bucket. If we submit to such an attitude and approach without protest, the Government, seeing this, will be able to reduce and cut anything as it pleases by making use of the protection afforded by the pro-establishment camp or collaborating with the President in the future.
Hence, this is a very bad precedent. I agree that the President has aroused strong discontent among Members for setting such a bad precedent. Actually, the number of proposed amendments this time is much smaller than the number 7712 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 20 April 2016 of amendments proposed in respect of the Budget last year. The overall comment of the community on the Budget delivered by Financial Secretary John TSANG this year is not bad. For this reason, not only do many Members who do not belong to the pro-establishment camp refrain from castigating him, they even consider him as having delivered his homework and done a better job than LEUNG Chun-ying and Chief Secretary Carrie LAM in the same Government. For this same reason, many Members of the pro-establishment camp, including those of the Democratic Alliance for the Betterment and Progress of Hong Kong, have kept attacking him, hurling lots of unreasonable criticisms at him. We find this a bit unbearable. Why do they kick up a row so unreasonably?
Although the overall comment is not too bad, one point is very clear, which is the dereliction of duty and lousy performance of individual officials such as Chief Executive LEUNG Chun-ying, as well as the Chief Secretary for Administration and the Secretary for Education, whom we will discuss later. Their performance is poor. In fact, they do not deserve high salaries and handsome perks.
Hence, these amendments rightfully allow the Legislative Council to deduct from the financial provisions amounts which should not be spent. The President, however, has even abolished the practice for Members to respond to policies and the Budget without providing sufficient time for discussion. Such an act is not only detrimental to this Budget and the current-term Legislative Council, but it will also be cited as a precedent in the future, I am afraid. After September, the Council may be even worse and more terrible than it is now. At that time, the newly elected President may behave in an even more outrageous manner ― in Mr CHAN Kam-lam's words, it can be quite outrageous ― for he may use the Rules of Procedure to delete everything which the Government or LEUNG Chun-ying does not wish to hear. Hence, in my view, the initiator on this occasion of responding to the President's approach with the adjournment motion, thus unnecessarily prolonging the discussion, may be President Jasper TSANG himself.
I so submit. Thank you, Deputy Chairman.
DEPUTY CHAIRMAN (in Cantonese): Does any other Member wish to speak?
LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 20 April 2016 7713
MR ALBERT CHAN (in Cantonese): Deputy Chairman, I would like to request a headcount first. Thank you.
DEPUTY CHAIRMAN (in Cantonese): Will the Clerk please ring the bell to summon Members back to the Chamber.
(While the summoning bell was ringing, some Members returned to the Chamber but not their seats yet)
DEPUTY CHAIRMAN (in Cantonese): Will Members please return to their seats.
(After the summoning bell had been rung, a number of Members returned to the Chamber)
DEPUTY CHAIRMAN (in Cantonese): Mr Albert CHAN, please continue.
MR ALBERT CHAN (in Cantonese): Deputy Chairman, the People Power has got used to the attacks launched by various parties in recent years. Hence, the abusive and low-quality criticisms levelled by Mr WONG Kwok-hing will not be taken by us seriously.
Mr WONG Kwok-hing criticized us just now of causing waste of resources by filibustering, but he has left the Chamber again. Moreover, he is often found absent. SHIU Sin-por once criticized the pro-Government camp and described the 40-odd pro-Government Members as nonsensical, referring directly to their refusal to bear responsibilities. In his opinion, they would not have gone out of their minds had the Government been able to convince them. In that case, he would not have to work so hard. What he really meant was that these Members should have sat here to attend the meetings. Just now, Mr WONG Kwok-hing pointed out again that we are highly paid. Are they not paid? Deputy Chairman, Mr WONG Kwok-hing is not present again. Please do a headcount and summon him back.
7714 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 20 April 2016
DEPUTY CHAIRMAN (in Cantonese): Will the Clerk please ring the bell to summon Members back to the Chamber.
(While the summoning bell was ringing, THE CHAIRMAN'S DEPUTY, MR MA FUNG-KWOK, took the Chair)
(After the summoning bell had been rung, a number of Members returned to the Chamber)
DEPUTY CHAIRMAN (in Cantonese): Mr Albert CHAN, please continue.
MR ALBERT CHAN (in Cantonese): Deputy Chairman, since SHIU Sin-por dared not criticize the pro-Government camp and Mr WONG Kwok-hing face to face, let me do it for him. He once described these 40-odd Members as trouble-makers because they have failed to perform their duties, not to mention supporting the Government ― Mr WONG Kwok-hing was absent from the meetings even though he receives more than $100,000 a month ― SHIU Sin-por once criticized these 40-odd Members for being irresponsible, right?
MR WONG KWOK-HING (in Cantonese): Deputy Chairman, I would like to clarify that I have attended every meeting. I demand that Mr Albert CHAN retracts his remarks.
MR ALBERT CHAN (in Cantonese): Deputy Chairman, please tell him to sit down. This is not the time for him to speak.
DEPUTY CHAIRMAN (in Cantonese): Mr WONG Kwok-hing, please sit down.
(Mr WONG Kwok-hing sat down)
LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 20 April 2016 7715
DEPUTY CHAIRMAN (in Cantonese): Mr Albert CHAN, please continue.
MR ALBERT CHAN (in Cantonese): Stop barking; sit. Stop barking; sit. He is so obedient that he is sitting down now. When I told him to stop barking, he shut up immediately.
Deputy Chairman, SHIU Sin-por has criticized these 40-odd Members for frequently leaving the Chamber to attend to private businesses ― another Member left the Chamber just now ― the failure of these 40-odd Members to attend meetings here is, in his words, dereliction of duty. These remarks, which were made by Hong Kong's "extreme leftist", were targeted particularly at Mr WONG Kwok-hing for "barking indiscriminately" all the time.
Deputy Chairman, the request for adjournment of further proceedings is absolutely right, why? Because this Council has come to a really lamentable pass. When I was small, I asked my father this question: Although the Kuomintang was hugely successful, why was it defeated by the communists and forced to run away to a faraway place, Taiwan? This was the brief reply my father gave at that time, "Those people appointed by CHIANG Kai-shek to important positions were lackeys, not talents." That was precisely the problem with the Kuomintang ― only obedient people were appointed to important positions. The current situation with the governance by Hong Kong communists is even worse. Not only will a talented person be turned into a lackey, but a genius will also become a fool. The ruling made by the President lately is really bad. President Jasper TSANG has turned into someone like Mr CHAN Kam-lam or Mr CHAN Kin-por. He has obviously turned from a talent into a fool.
Regarding his ruling ― Mr CHAN Chi-chuen already spoke on certain parts of his ruling just now ― when I reviewed my amendments, I found that Jasper TSANG was no longer the man I knew. I even doubted if the ruling was made by him personally or he was merely reading from a script written after a decision was made by the Liaison Office of the Central People's Government (LOCPG). According to his ruling, 200 amendments proposed by me were considered frivolous and therefore rejected. However, all of the 190 amendments proposed by me last year were admitted. In fact, the vast majority of the amendments proposed by me this year are very similar to those proposed last year. However, the amendments considered not frivolous by the President 7716 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 20 April 2016 last year are regarded as frivolous this year. Why? Why did the President change his channel all of a sudden? Or is there something wrong with his mental health?
A parliamentary assembly should take traditions seriously in making a ruling. Nonetheless, the President might think it is now time to introduce change. I have pointed out repeatedly that the Westminster-style tradition of the Legislative Council has turned into the National People's Congress (NPC) tradition. This ruling made by President Jasper TSANG to significantly slash my proposed amendments, together with his justifications, has fully demonstrated the demise of the British parliamentary tradition in Hong Kong, as well as its formal replacement by the NPC tradition. I am really saddened to see a talent turning into a fool.
If Members care to examine his ruling, they will find that there are several absurdities. Although my amendment of reducing the annual emoluments of the Chief Executive is considered by the President as frivolous and disallowed, Ms Emily LAU and Mr LEE Cheuk-yan are allowed to propose similar amendments. Obviously, he is according differential treatment that varies with individuals. While the amendments proposed by "Hulk" are ruled as frivolous, those proposed by Ms Emily LAU and Mr LEE Cheuk-yan have been admitted. Likewise, the amendments proposed by Ms Cyd HO and Dr KWOK Ka-ki to reduce the annual emoluments of the Information Coordinator (the reduction rate proposed by Dr KWOK Ka-ki was 50%) have been approved, too. So, why is the amendment proposed by me to reduce the emoluments of the Chief Executive for reason of his dereliction of duty considered frivolous?
I have just addressed a two-page letter to the President, pointing out his fallacies. The Information Coordinator is supposed to assist the Chief Executive and the Government in improving their image, as well as improving their relationship with the media, but why did the arrangement for the Chief Executive to walk his dog in West Kowloon turn into a PR disaster?
Let us take a look at the two dogs kept by President OBAMA, which are so adorable. So were the couple of puppies kept by Chris PATTEN years ago. When two of his puppies were reported missing, almost all the people of Hong Kong lent him their helping hands in the search for the missing puppies. However, when the Chief Executive walked his dog on the streets, he was told to "eat dog shit" … the Member who has been "barking" all day long should return to the Chamber. Please summon Mr WONG Kwok-hing back.
LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 20 April 2016 7717
Deputy Chairman, on behalf of SHIU Sin-por, please summon the pro-Government Members back to the Chamber to attend the meeting. They should not loiter outside the Chamber or loaf around. I request a headcount.
DEPUTY CHAIRMAN (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)
(THE CHAIRMAN'S DEPUTY, MR ANDREW LEUNG, took the Chair)
DEPUTY CHAIRMAN (in Cantonese): According to Rule 44 of the RoP, the President's ruling is not subject to comment or debate. Therefore, Members should not express their views on it.
Mr Albert CHAN, please continue with your speech.
MR ALBERT CHAN (in Cantonese): I would like to thank the Deputy Chairman for his advice. Although Members are not supposed to comment on the President's ruling, I can still explain why my proposed amendments are not frivolous.
Why are my proposed amendments not frivolous? If an act committed by a Member, such as the making of comments by Mr WONG Kwok-hing, is absolutely meaningless, then it should be considered frivolous. That object placed by him here is frivolous, too. He had better put a "paper doll" here, right? However, the amendments now proposed by Members have been deleted, even though they stand a chance of being supported. Furthermore, how could the same act or proposal admitted last year be considered frivolous this year? For instance, I actually proposed in 2014 and 2015 respectively reducing the emoluments of two Executive Council Members, and both proposals were approved. This year, a similar proposal has been rejected as it is considered frivolous. But why was the same proposal put forward in the past two years not 7718 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 20 April 2016 considered frivolous and thus deleted? As regards the amendment proposed to reduce the emoluments of the Director-General of Civil Aviation, in the Director of Audit's report …
DEPUTY CHAIRMAN (in Cantonese): Mr Albert CHAN, I have already reminded you that the President's ruling is not subject to debate. Please focus on the relevant question.
MR ALBERT CHAN (in Cantonese): Deputy Chairman, I am not criticizing the President's ruling. I merely wish to explain why my proposed amendments are not frivolous.
As regards the amendment proposed to reduce the emoluments of the Director-General of Civil Aviation, he was denounced by both the Director of Audit's report and the findings of the Public Accounts Committee for dereliction of duty. Furthermore, the navigation system, which involves tens of million dollars, has still not been put in place after a four-year trial. This proves that not only is he in dereliction of his duty, but he has also wasted public coffers, thereby putting the navigation safety of the people of Hong Kong at risk. So, should his emoluments not be reduced? This explains why this amendment is not frivolous.
I can also cite many other examples, particularly the one involving the Director of Highways, who was recently given the nickname "cost overrun Director" by me. As a government official, he has incurred the largest amount of cost overrun in Hong Kong's history of public administration. Since he assumed office as Director of Highways five years ago, he has made the most mistakes and fully exposed his ugliness this year. Not only have one after another projects been found to have run into cost overruns, but some of the cost overrun incurred have even run into billions or even tens of billion dollars, right …
DEPUTY CHAIRMAN (in Cantonese): Mr Albert CHAN, you have strayed away from the question. I have to remind you again that Committee is now dealing with a motion for adjournment under Rule 40(4) of the RoP. You may express other views of yours at the Committee stage.
LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 20 April 2016 7719
MR ALBERT CHAN (in Cantonese): Deputy Chairman, I am going to explain why I support the motion for adjournment. I cannot propose my amendments since they have been deleted by the President. Moreover, I have lost the opportunity to cast dissenting votes. This is why I think that the motion for adjournment should be passed to enable the President to turn back into a talent and stop behaving like a fool, so that he can reconsider whether our proposed amendments can be admitted. Meanwhile, more members of the public will know that, under the governance of Hong Kong communists, this Council has seen a talent turn into a fool, and a genius into a lackey. For these reasons, I support the motion for adjournment to let SHIU Sin-por see clearly whether the pro-Government Members, unlike Mr WONG Kwok-hing who pretends he is present at a meeting by displaying a "paper doll" in the Chamber, have made any improvements after being berated by him. Public interest will be at stake when an amendment proposed by a Member is vetoed unjustifiably. Given their right to know, members of the public should see clearly the relevant arrangements and the operation of the Council, right?
I have also proposed a significant amendment to reduce the expenditure of the Hong Kong-Zhuhai-Macao Bridge Hong Kong Project Management Office by $190 million. Can an amendment involving a reduction of $190 million be considered frivolous? Under the governance of Hong Kong communists, news like this is reported every day. The mistakes made and the poor quality can also be described as unprecedented. Therefore, this motion for adjournment can actually enable Members to pause, think and see. Many Members might not have read any of the 259 amendments proposed by me. They will simply oppose or turn a blind eye to all of these amendments, including the admissible ones, as a matter of routine. In the end, they will do nothing but press the button. Under the influence of the LOCPG or the Hong Kong communist regime, they will only press the button in opposition to the relevant amendments as if they are robots. Given the absurdity of this string of issues, Members can take a break if the Council is adjourned … actually, it was only five seconds. Had the two Members entered the Chamber five seconds late during the headcount, the meeting would have to be suspended until next week.
In fact, my proposed amendments cover proposals on many fronts, including reducing the estimated expenditure for the annual emoluments of the professionals recruited by the Civil Engineering and Development Department (CEDD) to take forward the strategic studies for artificial islands in the central waters. A similar amendment proposed in 2015 was admitted, too. 7720 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 20 April 2016
Furthermore, there are also some controversial issues, such as those involving the North East New Territories Development, reducing the expenditure of the CEDD … Deputy Chairman, I …
DEPUTY CHAIRMAN (in Cantonese): Mr Albert CHAN, I have reminded you many times, and now I reiterate once again that the RoP clearly stipulates that Members should not comment on the President's rulings in Council meetings. Should Members have any views on the relevant ruling, they may discuss it with the President after the meeting. Since your speeches, regardless of whether they are expressed in a direct or oblique manner, are all aimed at discussing the President's ruling, so you should stop making such comments. Instead, you should explain why you support or oppose the motion for adjournment moved under Rule 40(4) of the RoP.
MR ALBERT CHAN (in Cantonese): Deputy Chairman, you are really very clever. You can even see the oblique attempt. I really do not think that my speech is oblique in any sense. Moreover, being a straight man, I will only call a spade a spade.
Deputy Chairman, I will not comment on the President's ruling. I merely wish to let the public know what amendments I have proposed because I believe they have the right to know. Therefore, I will continue to cite the amendments proposed by me but rejected by the President. It is also for this reason that I consider adjournment the best solution. For instance, I have proposed an amendment to reduce the estimated expenditure for the annual emoluments of the professionals hired by the CEDD to undertake the design of the Kwu Tung North and Fanling North New Development Areas. A similar amendment proposed in 2015 was admitted by the President, though. Another amendment, which seeks to reduce the estimated expenditure for the annual emoluments of the staff establishment involved in processing applications related to Immigration Arrangements for Non-local Graduates, was admitted in 2014 and 2015 respectively but rejected this year.
Furthermore, I have proposed another amendment involving the Immigration Department ― it is absolutely justified since it has received great support from the "localists" as the principle of local struggle is at stake ― seeking to reduce an amount roughly equivalent to the estimated expenditure for the LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 20 April 2016 7721 annual emoluments of the staff of the Quality Migrants and Mainland Residents Section. Although similar amendments were admitted in both 2014 and 2015, they were not approved this year. Since these amendments will have a chance to be proposed afresh if Members support this motion for adjournment, I hope Members will support the motion proposed by Mr CHAN Chi-chuen.
MR WU CHI-WAI (in Cantonese): Deputy Chairman, during the period between January and June every year, the authorities will publish two very important policy papers, the Policy Address and the Budget, which are significant papers deciding the direction of governance of the Hong Kong community in the future. In fact, these papers should be discussed comprehensively and seriously. After all, the public will have some expectations for the two papers, hoping they can provide solutions to social problems and rectify some phenomena of the past.
One of the situations which the people of Hong Kong consider most unacceptable is the Chief Executive of the SAR Government, that is, "689" LEUNG Chun-ying, exhausting all means and abilities to tear society apart and bring unrest. We can hardly dismiss this impression, which is evident in the Policy Address. The flow, terms and diction used in the Policy Address demonstrate that it is a document used by the Chief Executive to report to the Mainland and the Central Authorities but no longer one speaks for the people of Hong Kong and conveys their aspirations. Indeed, the people of Hong Kong expect the principal officials of the Government to exert their utmost to mend the rupture in society. They should seriously gain an understanding of the worries of the people of Hong Kong and discuss with them solutions to these problems in their language. The Budget presented by the number-two man of the SAR has at least demonstrated that not every one among the many principal officials wants to tear the Hong Kong community apart and exercise powers to the fullest like LEUNG Chun-ying.
(THE CHAIRMAN'S DEPUTY, MR MA FUNG-KWOK, took the Chair)
In politics, the Democratic Party considers that the Budget merits approval. Since the Budget covers a vast scope, the function and effect of the Committee stage is to allow Members to comment on the inadequacies of the Budget at a microscopic level. This procedure will also allow all Members who are 7722 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 20 April 2016 responsible to examine the administration of the Government from a microscopic angle, so that Members may give detailed comments on individual policies or the performance of individual government officials and exchange views with the Government or Members at meetings, with a view to improving the administration of the Government.
Deputy Chairman, the Democratic Party has stated clearly that we will not filibuster during the debate of the Budget. We acknowledge the political meaning of the Budget presented by the Financial Secretary. We think the path of the Government and the Hong Kong community identifying ways to mend the cleavage should merit approval, and the fiscal strategy of reserving resources for welfare purposes marks the willingness of the Government to make long-term commitment to people's livelihood. These measures include setting aside $70 billion for housing construction and $200 billion as provision for long-term planning for the construction of hospitals. I certainly hope that this fiscal strategy of the Government will continue until universal retirement protection is introduced in future, making advance planning for the problem of an ageing populating in society.
However, we are extremely disturbed by the ruling of the President of the Legislative Council on the many amendments, where the number of amendments has been reduced from 2 000-odd to 400-odd. As I mentioned earlier, the discussion at the Committee stage seeks to allow Members to speak freely. In the past, the President of the Legislative Council used different approaches to deal with such scenarios, which included ruling whether or not to allow a Member to continue to speak by examining whether a Member's speech was repetitive, trivial or distracted, so as to control the duration of meetings. However, the ruling on this occasion has become more stringent, and the meeting is preset to end on 11 May. The approach adopted in this ruling will set a precedent for other Presidents in handling similar issues in future. We consider it absolutely unacceptable.
Therefore, I must make it very clear that I hope the President of the Legislative Council, after hearing the speeches of Members, will understand that various Honourable colleagues in the legislature hope to exert their best to protect the right to speak of every Member in the legislature and to make deliberations in reasonable space. The tightening of the procedures and ruling will only make us worry if Members will have adequate room to speak in future meetings. LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 20 April 2016 7723
Although the Democratic Party does not agree to seeking further discussion by means of this motion for adjournment, we still consider the ruling of the President of the Legislative Council unacceptable.
I so submit. Thank you, Deputy Chairman.
DEPUTY CHAIRMAN (in Cantonese): Does any other Member wish to speak?
MR LEUNG KWOK-HUNG (in Cantonese): Deputy Chairman, according to the provision of Article 75 of the Basic Law, I think a quorum is not present now.
DEPUTY CHAIRMAN (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 CHAIRMAN (in Cantonese): Does any other Member wish to speak?
MR LEUNG KWOK-HUNG (in Cantonese): Deputy Chairman, the President has fallen sick even before the filibusters start and the two Deputies of the President have to take turns to chair the meeting. I hope that he gets well because he is the one who started all this. Mr CHAN Chi-chuen proposed this motion for adjournment actually in the hope of giving him some time to consider clearly why the goalposts were moved farther and farther away and became increasingly smaller. In fact, I already told him face to face that this is not the right way to cut the filibuster. The right way is to keep on holding meetings for, say, 16 hours a day or round the clock. This way, the filibustering Members will be naturally burnt out or tired out to give up. That would be the best way to do it. Certainly, in other representative assemblies, there is the cloture motion to end a debate, similar to the motion under discussion now, but if the cloture motion is passed, the Budget will not be passed.
7724 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 20 April 2016
What is the problem? First, I have to respond to Mr WONG Kwok-hing. He said that a construction worker had relayed to him a poem by ZHENG Banqiao and he, therefore, cited this poem to rebuke us. But this poem was meant for officials. Am I an official? Therefore, this poem should be read to people sitting on the opposite side, such as Gregory SO, right? Do you get it? The term "Ya Zhai" (衙 齋) in the poem refers to "Ya Men" (衙 門), meaning a government office. Does he not even know this? Is this place a government office? It may be, or it may be not. But I think this place is not a government office. It is a place for discussion and deliberation, a place with few powers. So, frankly speaking, sometimes one has to be humble, and he often makes wrong analogies. Is he unhappy with SHIU Sin-por's comments about their absence from meetings? As for the malicious remarks made by SHIU Sin-por, I am not going to talk about them here.
He always says that the filibustering Members obstruct economic development and block the approval of funding applications. Sorry, this is not true. According to government statistics, this is far from the truth. According to the information on the approved funding for construction projects over the years published by the Government, the amount of funding has increased substantially since 2009 when filibusters had not yet started, which means that these provisions were approved. In fact, since 2012 when the filibuster battle was first waged, a huge amount of funding has been approved every year, and some $80 billion was approved last year. Deputy Chairman, we have approved funding in huge amounts, and the greater the amount of funding approved, the greater the amount of overruns incurred. I wish to ask Mr WONG Kwok-hing: Do you not feel distressed? When we approved $100 billion, the Government recorded a cost overrun of $15 billion; when we approved $200 billion, the Government recorded an overrun of $30 billion proportionally.
Deputy Chairman, I object to the approach adopted by the President. I hope that he gets well as soon as possible, so that he can come back to listen to our speeches. His approach is actually inappropriate …
DEPUTY CHAIRMAN (in Cantonese): Mr LEUNG Kwok-hung, I have to remind you that under Rule 44 of the Rules of Procedure (RoP), the ruling of the President shall be final. Members should not comment on the President's ruling at meetings of the Legislative Council.
LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 20 April 2016 7725
MR LEUNG KWOK-HUNG (in Cantonese): Can I not express support for his ruling?
DEPUTY CHAIRMAN (in Cantonese): Please continue with your speech.
MR LEUNG KWOK-HUNG (in Cantonese): I wish to raise this point of order. I support the approach taken by the President. The President has done a really good job. The President's approach has allowed flexibility in applying the rules of meeting. Take myself as an example. My amendments were axed the most in terms of number, for my 1 000-odd amendments were reduced to some 100 now. He is smart indeed! He can even concoct something out of nothing as he can see what I do not. What discerning eyes he has indeed!
My proof is this: I, a Member named LEUNG Kwok-hung, have proposed amendments which are the same as those proposed by other Members, but while other Members are allowed to propose their amendments, I am not allowed to propose mine. Honestly, Deputy Chairman, has Jasper TSANG lectured the three of you? Has he taught you some skills? This is treating different people in different ways. Frankly speaking, treating different people in different ways is also a …
DEPUTY CHAIRMAN (in Cantonese): Mr LEUNG Kwok-hung, let me remind you once again that you should speak on the question with relevance.
MR LEUNG KWOK-HUNG (in Cantonese): Can I not even express my support? Deputy Chairman, Mr MA Fung-kwok, I wish to seek your advice. Am I not allowed to make comments or am I not allowed to criticize the President's ruling? Can I not even talk about it?
DEPUTY CHAIRMAN (in Cantonese): Members should not comment on the President's ruling at meetings of the Legislative Council. This is clearly stated in Rule 44 of the RoP.
(Mr CHAN Chi-chuen stood up)
7726 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 20 April 2016
MR CHAN CHI-CHUEN (in Cantonese): Deputy Chairman, point of order.
DEPUTY CHAIRMAN (in Cantonese): Mr CHAN Chi-chuen, what is your point?
MR CHAN CHI-CHUEN (in Cantonese): Rule 44 provides that "His decision on a point of order shall be final." It does not say that Members cannot raise questions, put forward views or make criticisms. Please cite another rule to justify your point.
DEPUTY CHAIRMAN (in Cantonese): I have already explained it very clearly.
MR CHAN CHI-CHUEN (in Cantonese): Now I would like to request a headcount under Rule 17(3) of the RoP, so as to give you, Deputy Chairman, some time to look for the relevant rule in the RoP.
DEPUTY CHAIRMAN (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 CHAIRMAN (in Cantonese): Mr LEUNG Kwok-hung, please continue with your speech.
MR LEUNG KWOK-HUNG (in Cantonese): Deputy Chairman with regard to the interpretation of Rule 44 of the RoP, have you thought about it clearly? I have a point of order for you …
LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 20 April 2016 7727
DEPUTY CHAIRMAN (in Cantonese): Mr LEUNG Kwok-hung, the RoP has a clear rule which stipulates that the President's ruling shall be final. Let me remind you once again that Members should not make comments on the President's ruling, and disregarding whether they support or oppose it or whether their views are positive or negative, Members should not put forward views on it. Please continue with your speech.
MR LEUNG KWOK-HUNG (in Cantonese): May I know on what basis you said that no comment can be made on the President's views? You told me to read Rule 44, that is, "Decision of Chair Final", which means …
DEPUTY CHAIRMAN (in Cantonese): Mr LEUNG Kwok-hung, I am in the Chair now and my ruling shall be final. Please continue with your speech.
MR LEUNG KWOK-HUNG (in Cantonese): I asked you on what basis you made your ruling.
DEPUTY CHAIRMAN (in Cantonese): I have already explained it.
MR LEUNG KWOK-HUNG (in Cantonese): OK, it means that you made your ruling without any basis and yet, this is still your final ruling. You said that at this moment I am not allowed to criticize President Jasper TSANG who, with regard to this Budget, arbitrarily …
DEPUTY CHAIRMAN (in Cantonese): Mr LEUNG Kwok-hung, I have time and again given you a reminder. Please speak on the motion for adjournment right now.
MR LEUNG KWOK-HUNG (in Cantonese): First, I will talk about the Government then. I can criticize the Government, can I not? The Government wrote to the President requesting him to expeditiously rule out those … I can criticize the Government, right? A person named Elizabeth TSE … is it 7728 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 20 April 2016
Elizabeth TSE? Yes, it is her. That was a letter written in English. My English is not very good but she wrote the letter in English and then the President gave me a letter in English. According to her, many of the amendments are not feasible. One of her arguments was that my amendments, which proposed deductions of salaries based on the starting or mid-point salaries, are not feasible, because the salaries of those people are increased according to the pay scales of the relevant grades and so, it is wrong to propose deductions of their salaries based on the starting or mid-point salaries.
In fact, this is related to the provisions of the Basic Law. Under the Basic Law, the executive authorities of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region shall exercise powers and functions which include being accountable to the Legislative Council, OK? I told her that I wish to propose deductions of the salaries of the relevant officials but then she did not utter a word, except saying that the sums would not tally and so, these deductions should not be proposed. Deputy Chairman, obviously she was evading her duties by refusing to provide relevant and accurate information to Members of the Legislative Council to enable Members of the Legislative Council to exercise their rights. I have never seen such a rascal, shameless government.
Deputy Chairman, when you sit next to me rather than in the Chair, that is, when you are a Member and not the President's Deputy, you would always put questions to government officials on various issues, right? If she said that the starting or mid-point salaries were not the most accurate figures and hence the amendments should not be proposed, she could have provided me with the figures of the salaries of the relevant officials as these are no secrets after all. But she provided these figures to me only on the last day, right? With regard to this handling approach, the President outrageously took it lying down and accepted her arguments. I think the Government is wrong.
Deputy Chairman, I wish to make one more point. I wonder if it was because Jasper TSANG could not sleep or whatever that he came up with this deadline of 11 May. Deputy Chairman, I could not figure it out initially. Mr Christopher CHEUNG, do you get it? I bet you do not. Some time ago ZHANG Dejiang ― "big mouth Jiang" …
(Mr WONG Kwok-hing stood up)
LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 20 April 2016 7729
MR WONG KWOK-HING (in Cantonese): Deputy Chairman, point of order.
DEPUTY CHAIRMAN (in Cantonese): Mr LEUNG Kwok-hung, please be seated first. Mr WONG Kwok-hing, what is your point?
MR WONG KWOK-HING (in Cantonese): Deputy Chairman, as you and the other Deputy Chairman who chaired the meeting earlier have made it clear, Members cannot comment on the President's ruling during the adjournment debate.
MR LEUNG KWOK-HUNG (in Cantonese): Deputy Chairman, the RoP of the Legislative Council of Hong Kong … In accordance with Article 75 of the Basic Law and listen, as Article 75 of the Basic Law provides that the quorum of the meeting of the Legislative Council shall be one half of all its Members, I now demand that you suspend the meeting and do a headcount in order not to violate the Basic Law.
DEPUTY CHAIRMAN (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 CHAIRMAN (in Cantonese): Let me remind Members once again that the question under debate is whether further proceedings of the Committee shall now be adjourned. Members please speak on the question. Members who question the President's ruling and hence consider that further proceedings of the Committee should be adjourned are taken to be violating Rule 44 of the RoP because the President's ruling shall be final and is neither questionable nor debatable.
Mr LEUNG Kwok-hung, I have repeatedly given you a reminder one after another. If you continue to question the President's ruling, I would consider your conduct grossly disorderly. Please continue with your speech.
7730 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 20 April 2016
MR LEUNG KWOK-HUNG (in Cantonese): Deputy Chairman, I support the President's decision because he is so smart as to know …
DEPUTY CHAIRMAN (in Cantonese): Mr LEUNG, let me remind you again that you should not comment on the President's ruling.
MR LEUNG KWOK-HUNG (in Cantonese): Can I not even support it? You are really kidding, but I do not care. It is unreasonable that I cannot even support it. You only said that no criticism should be made of the final decision.
I support the decision of the President. I think he has discerning eyes. First, why is it 11 May, but not 18 May? Because ZHANG Dejiang is coming to Hong Kong on 18 May and so, he has to remove all eyesores in their field of vision. After ZHANG Dejiang arrived, many people would have to keep him company and the meetings might probably be messed up. Second, he can envisage that if, after ZHANG Dejiang arrived, filibusters were still taking place in the Legislative Council, that would be unfavourable to LEUNG Chun-ying and so, LEUNG Chun-ying pressurize him and then the whole Government lost no time in writing to the Legislative Council right away, for LEUNG Chun-ying cannot bear one more straw because he will collapse with one more straw placed on his back. So, when ZHANG Dejiang arrived and found that this year, the Legislative Council has suddenly managed to save a lot of time in getting the Budget passed, would that not be a benevolent deed? They would say, "Look, LEUNG Chun-ying is brilliant indeed."
Deputy Chairman, the level of the President is really high, and I very much agree to his views indeed. How accurately he can read the minds of the upper echelons, and he can do it with good grace. Am I right, Mr WONG Ting-kwong? When ZHANG Dejiang is here asking about the situation this year, he can tell him that the scrutiny of the Budget this year has been completed ahead of schedule. Otherwise, why should he draw the deadline at 11 May? So, Deputy Chairman, this explains why you are the President's Deputy and he is the President. I think there is a difference, in that he is smart. He can fathom their wish, and he can find a way out for the abnormal majority in this Council, namely, the pro-establishment camp, and he has bulldozed his decision through for the sake of Chief Executive LEUNG Chun-ying who is giving evidence in court now ― he probably does not really wish to do it but he still takes into LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 20 April 2016 7731 account the overall situation. How would the Government bother to make so many comments before? How would they care about what Jasper TSANG was up to? But the current Government is different. As a common saying goes, "an official's horse claims the power of its owner and defecates wherever it wishes". ZHANG Dejiang's horse is so sturdy and powerful, and its dung must be awesome. Deputy Chairman, summing up, I think he is awesome.
Yet, I wish to refute Mr WONG Kwok-hing as I still have one minute of speaking time, but I will continue to refute him in the future. If he is so concerned about the grassroots, can he please take a look at this: Infrastructure projects, or the "white elephants", recorded an increase of more than two folds or 278% in total from 2007 to 2016, comparing to an increase of 53% for education, 131% for healthcare and 106% for social welfare. The situation is like turning money into bricks and mortar, just as what he has done, and then they complain that the bricks and mortar are not enough and ask for the provision of more of the same. Buddy, if he is so concerned about the well-being of the grassroots and as he often claims that he cares about the interest of the elderly, why would he support the Government in doing this?
Deputy Chairman, the social expenditure of Hong Kong accounts for 7.5% of the Gross Domestic Product, comparing to 10% in South Korea, 19% in Australia, 21% in the United Kingdom, 25% in Germany, 28% in Italy and 31% in France. The wealth gap in society and the plights of some veteran members of the Hong Kong Federation of Trade Unions who are almost unable to make ends meet are perpetrated by people like Mr WONG Kwok-hing who support the Government in carrying out these "white elephant" projects.
DEPUTY CHAIRMAN (in Cantonese): Dr Priscilla LEUNG, please speak.
(Mr CHAN Chi-chuen stood up)
DEPUTY CHAIRMAN (in Cantonese): Mr CHAN Chi-chuen, what is your point?
MR CHAN CHI-CHUEN (in Cantonese): Deputy Chairman, I request a headcount under Rule 17(3) of the RoP.
7732 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 20 April 2016
DEPUTY CHAIRMAN (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 CHAIRMAN (in Cantonese): Dr Priscilla LEUNG, please speak.
DR PRISCILLA LEUNG (in Cantonese): Deputy Chairman, I rise to speak against the adjournment motion. When members of the public turn on their television sets, they will notice that instead of having a debate, there is only a constant ringing of the quorum bell in the Legislative Council. In the past few years ― particularly this year ― whenever I participated in some community activities and talked with members of the public, asking them "What do you prefer the Legislative Council to do the most?", there was almost this unanimous response that they hoped the filibuster in the Legislative Council could be cut as soon as possible. They often clapped more loudly when you mentioned it again. In the end, there was still an enthusiastic applause when I mentioned "cutting off the filibuster" for the third time. Why? Members of the public not only hate filibustering but are actually fed up with it to such an extent that they are also fed up with the Legislative Council. They hate all Legislative Council Members regardless of their respective factions and wonder what the Legislative Council is doing right now. In the past, when we mentioned the Legislative Council, sometimes it would be referred to as the "rubbish council" mistakenly or jokingly. 1 Many members of the public simply have no idea what the Legislative Council is doing now, and the Legislative Council has literally become the "rubbish council".
I remember clearly that in 2012, several Members who were dissatisfied with the Legislative Council (Amendment) Bill 2012 staged a filibuster. During the course of filibuster by then, Members did not make frequent requests for headcount to substitute making speeches with the ringing of the quorum bell. Therefore, at that time, the Chinese term "拉 布" was translated as "filibuster",
1 The pronunciation of "Legislative Council" is similar to that of "rubbish council" in Cantonese. LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 20 April 2016 7733 which can be transliterated as "費力把事拉" 2 in Cantonese ― Members actually had to make an effort as they had to speak repeatedly ― when they discovered that the ringing of the quorum bell can be a substitute for making speeches, they replaced the tactic of filibuster by requesting headcounts since then.
However, I would like to tell the several Members concerned, particularly Mr LEUNG Kwok-hung who likes to apply for judicial reviews … I believe that if he adopts a more effective approach to express his dissatisfaction with the President of the Legislative Council … he did actually apply for a judicial review. In September 2014, the Court provided a clear guide to the Legislative Council regarding filibuster and stated that filibuster per se is not a constitutional right, although we agree that Legislative Council Members certainly enjoy the right to speak. However, as stipulated in Article 72(1) of the Basic Law and pointed out explicitly by the Court, the President of the Legislative Council has the power to impose restrictions on and close a debate. While Mr LEUNG Kwok-hung was not granted leave for that case, it is particularly stated in the judgment of the Court that the President of the Legislative Council actually has the inherent power to decide on how to preside over Legislative Council meetings, that is, he is given such power and responsibility to ensure the normal conduct of Legislative Council meetings.
I once heard Mr LEUNG Kwok-hung say that he is very much concerned about the welfare of the elderly. He even wished to express his dissatisfaction with this Budget by staging a filibuster. If that is the case, why should we waste time on ringing the bell? If Members are dissatisfied with the ruling of the President of the Legislative Council, we should actually made good use of the allocated time for debate so that Members can explain why some people may have concerns about universal retirement protection and, therefore, the implementation of measures in stages, such as allocating $200 billion to the public healthcare programme in the next 10 years, may serve as the first step. When discussing issues such as those concerning the "silver-haired generation", we should make better use of our time so that people with different views can present their arguments in a debate, which is the most valuable element, instead of only letting the public hear the ringing of bell. Frankly, it is not only torturing the pro-establishment camp but also the public. The public really hates
2 The transliteration of "filibuster" in Cantonese means "exerting great efforts to drag matters on". 7734 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 20 April 2016 you and they have complained about Members filibustering over livelihood issues as well as the Budget without saying much about their views on the related issues while some Members simply hurl objects unreasonably. The precious time of the Legislative Council was wasted in all aspects. Instead of exerting great efforts to drag matters on, you can devote less effort to filibustering now because you have substituted making speeches with the ringing of the bell.
Nonetheless, those staff of the Secretariat have to work till very late, which involved a considerable amount of public resources and time. In the course of the filibuster …
(Mr CHAN Chi-chuen stood up)
DEPUTY CHAIRMAN (in Cantonese): Dr Priscilla LEUNG, please hold on. Mr CHAN Chi-chuen, what is your point?
MR CHAN CHI-CHUEN (in Cantonese): Deputy Chairman, I request a headcount under Rule 17(3) of the RoP.
DEPUTY CHAIRMAN (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 CHAIRMAN (in Cantonese): Dr Priscilla LEUNG, please continue.
DR PRISCILLA LEUNG (in Cantonese): Deputy Chairman, abnormal phenomena such as filibusters or making requests for headcount were not found in the Legislative Council in the past but now we are often caught up in the frequent ringing of the bell. We are left with no choice but to play it by ear. With regard to such an unreasonable approach of making excessive requests for headcounts, we should definitely avoid encouraging this practice. I believe the LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 20 April 2016 7735 time spent on doing headcounts, adjournment motions and abortion of meetings should all be counted towards the allocated time for debate. They have not only exploited Members like us who wish to present our views to the public clearly but also deprived the public of the opportunity to understand the various political views of different political parties and groupings.
If Members keep on requesting headcounts in such a manner, they will not have time to speak either within the allocated time for debate. Therefore, the Committee on Rules of Procedure has discussed this issue as early as the beginning of the previous Session: first, the "allocation of time motion"; second, the "guillotine motion"; and third, the "cloture motion". At that time, Members believed that it would be best to use the "allocation of time motion", which is now known as the new convention. As the Committee on Rules of Procedure can hardly secure the support of the majority of Members for amendment of the RoP directly, now the President must exercise discretion in reasonable circumstances and establish new conventions to address and handle these unreasonable attempts of filibuster so that the Legislative Council can resume normal operation and conduct of debates.
Deputy Chairman, I so submit.
DEPUTY CHAIRMAN (in Cantonese): Does any other Member wish to speak?
(No Member indicated a wish to speak)
DEPUTY CHAIRMAN (in Cantonese): Mr CHAN Chi-chuen, do you wish to reply?
MR CHAN CHI-CHUEN (in Cantonese): Deputy Chairman, should you ask whether the public officers wish to speak before letting me speak in reply?
DEPUTY CHAIRMAN (in Cantonese): There are no responsible public officers present at this moment. Mr CHAN, please speak in reply.
7736 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 20 April 2016
MR CHAN CHI-CHUEN (in Cantonese): Yes, there is. As a matter of routine, you should ask him. But he will not speak anyway. Well then, let me continue to speak.
First of all, I would like to respond to the earlier speeches of Dr Priscilla LEUNG and Mr WONG Kwok-hing. Requesting headcounts is a right exercised in accordance with the provisions of Rule 17 (Quorum) of the Rules of Procedure (RoP), and this rule is based on the requirement of Article 75 of the Basic Law that "the quorum … shall be not less than one half of all its members". Therefore, a Member requesting a headcount is fulfilling the requirement of Article 75 of the Basic Law, thus implementing the Article in the proceedings. Moreover, a lengthy discussion was conducted in this connection. Even at an earlier time, holding the view that we should vote in accordance with Article 75 of the Basic Law instead of by feeling, Mr Paul TSE said he would also claim divisions in the future. Indeed, he was well-intentioned, being afraid that somebody would seek judicial review subsequently. In doing so, he will ensure the fulfilment of a quorum even if the Council has reached a consensus on certain important Bills which are not particularly controversial and nobody claims a division. However, I wish to make it clear again to everybody that a request for a headcount is not something that can be made at any juncture. When the number of Members in the Chamber meets the requirements of the Basic Law and the RoP, no Member can make this request. Therefore, regrettably enough, instead of criticizing those Members who requested a headcount for depriving the other Members of their speaking time, Dr Priscilla LEUNG should have said that it was those Members not sitting in the Chamber, thus resulting in the absence of a quorum and failing the requirement of Rule 17 of the RoP or Article 75 of the Basic Law, who made the bell ring. I could not make the bell ring. I have expressed this point many times. Even though nobody understood what I said on the first day, today many members of the public have indeed understood this argument. She said the headcounts had deprived Members of their speaking time. However, it was not my decision, but that of President Jasper TSANG. Her earlier remarks actually criticized the decision of President Jasper TSANG, with which I do not agree, certainly.
By the same token, regarding aborted meetings, given that there are 27 Members in total from the minority and democratic camps, even if all of them are absent, they cannot cause the Committee to abort.
LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 20 April 2016 7737
Let us come back to the issues of filibustering and cutting off of filibusters. I pointed out in my speech moving the motion that the issue of cutting off a filibuster does not exist at all. It "does not exist", as LEUNG Chun-ying's pet phrase goes. Therefore, as Members can all see, Mr WONG Kwok-hing has not displayed any scissors today because there is no need to cut off any filibuster. In the past he would have displayed a pair of scissors to exert pressure on President Jasper TSANG, and Dr CHIANG Lai-wan would have stood up to ask the President when and how the filibuster would be cut off. Now there is no such thing as cutting off a filibuster. Why? Because, in the light of the circumstances, the President has already issued to us this notice on the allocation of 94.5 hours. This debate on the Appropriation Bill 2016 has to be completed within 94.5 hours. Of course, I do not agree to this arrangement. One of my purposes in moving an adjournment motion today is to express this very point.
I thank Dr Priscilla LEUNG for mentioning earlier that the Committee on RoP had discussed the issue of limiting the time for debates and fixing a date for voting but, finding it difficult for the Council to make a decision under the separate voting system, decided to let the President exercise his power so as to ― allow me to quote Dr Priscilla LEUNG's earlier words ― "create a new convention". This is how things stood. Indeed, the Committee on RoP is redundant, because the "new convention" has already been "created". Then the President would say that, according to Rule 44 of the RoP, the decision made cannot be queried, and then the President of the next term would further invoke this practice, describing it as a well-established convention.
To start off, I would like to rectify some of Mr WONG Kwok-hing's arguments. He said that if proceedings of the Committee are now adjourned, that means we do not need to attend the meeting and can go home to sleep. Excuse me, it strikes me as surprising that Mr WONG Kwok-hing, such a veteran legislator, does not understand the RoP. Even if this adjournment motion of mine is passed today and thus the proceedings of the Committee are now adjourned, the Council will resume. There are still other motions on the Agenda of the Council to be scrutinized and the meeting will continue until 1 pm on Friday. This is the fact. He should not put words into others' mouths and issue confusing messages by alleging that those Members who moved an adjournment motion just wanted to go home to sleep instead of attending the meeting. Moreover, there is no question of wasting the Council's meeting time either. If the adjournment is successful, we will skip to the next Agenda item. Then we 7738 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 20 April 2016 have to make use of the meeting time to deal with the remaining items. The Government can place this item on our Agenda again next week, subject to a seven days' notice according to the RoP. In addition, the President has the power to dispense with this seven-day notice. This is the fact. According to the so-called decision of President Jasper TSANG, voting will be conducted at the meeting of 11 May. Even if the adjournment debate is concluded, or even the motion is passed, this situation will not be affected. Therefore, even earlier in the Financial Secretary's reply, I did not hear any reference to the so-called filibuster. He just described the objective situation: Members proposed a certain number of amendments, the President gave permission to 407 of them, and he hoped that the Bill could be voted on in mid-May because the Government would have no money by the end of May. I do not mean to sing praises of Mr John TSANG. I am only pointing out that he is fair in this regard. This year he has not publicly yelled in fear that filibustering will lead to a fiscal cliff, nor accused this bunch us of ignoring the public's well-being, and so forth. He just described the situation, without talking about "wage default", "fiscal cliff" or whatever as Mr WONG Kwok-hing did.
Mr WONG's earlier speech was just trying to create a bogus crisis and reiterate his remarks already made; that is, as the decision made by President Jasper TSANG shall be final according to Rule 44 of the RoP, and even discussion thereof is not allowed, it means in other words that voting at the meeting of 11 May is the final decision. How would it be changed? Even in the event of the meeting being aborted, or that the Black Rainstorm Signal or Typhoon Signal No. 8 is in force, we just need to come back to take care of business and vote on that day. Therefore, we can all see that today the pro-establishment Members are treating this Bill very differently from the Copyright (Amendment) Bill 2014. During the scrutiny of the latter, the pro-establishment camp would arrange something like 45-minute shifts and 15-minute breaks. We all see that it is not the case this time. Everybody returned to the Chamber in 14-odd minutes at the latest. Why? Because they saw the bottom line and the finish point. The finish point obliges voting at the meeting of 11 May, regardless of whether or not you are willing to submit.
(THE CHAIRMAN'S DEPUTY, MR ANDREW LEUNG, took the Chair)
LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 20 April 2016 7739
Well, why did I still need to propose an adjournment motion then? I would like to extend my special thanks to the pro-democracy Members as well, including Dr KWOK Ka-ki and Mr WU Chi-wai. Of course, "Long Hair" has also spoken on this motion. It is because we are not discussing the issue of whether a filibuster is underway, or whether the Committee stage debate on this Bill can be concluded early, but rather the issue of principle. If limiting the time for debates and fixing a day for voting can become the "new convention" described by Dr Priscilla LEUNG earlier, then very serious problems will emerge in the future.
As a deadline (for example, the end of May, according to the Government) has been set for the current Agenda item, the Budget, due to its time-critical nature, it seems that the proposition of limiting the time for debates and fixing a date for voting is well founded, but why is the meeting time not lengthened? Why can the meeting not be extended to 10 pm or even 12.00 midnight on each day? Of course it is unnecessary to do so, because the President has taken complementary action this time and thus fixing a date for voting will get things over and done with. Therefore, even in the event of the meeting being aborted … I know some Members think ― when they were passing by just now, I overheard what they said, only they had not mentioned those words ― it is not a bad thing to abort the meeting because the only consequence is to keep deducting the hours from the 94.5-hour debate time.
Indeed, this arrangement must not become a new convention because, as we all know, the conventions of Council meetings may also be adopted by the Finance Committee, or even the Public Works Subcommittee and the Establishment Subcommittee. Otherwise, given that the Hong Kong Section of the Guangzhou-Shenzhen-Hong Kong Express Rail Link and the Hong Kong-Zhuhai-Macao Bridge are also time-critical, if the current arrangement becomes a new convention, can the Finance Committee, Public Works Subcommittee and Establishment Subcommittee also limit the time for debates and fix a date for voting? If such a practice can indeed be put in place, we will lose everything.
Besides, I believe the next-term Legislative Council will be increasingly strict. Notably, both Chairman Jasper TSANG and Deputy Chairman Andrew LEUNG were absent earlier on. Earlier on, Deputy Chairman Andrew LEUNG still let me explain why I did not agree with the decision of President Jasper TSANG, so as to convince other Members to accept the adjournment motion 7740 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 20 April 2016 moved by me, but subsequently a Member pointed out that even discussion was not allowed under Rule 44 of the RoP. Then I said I was not criticizing the decision. I just wished to raise questions or even give some views.
I think it is really most unfair to Secretary Gregory SO, because had it been known that it was possible to limit the time for debates and fix a date for voting, we should have limited the time for debates and fixed a date for voting on the Copyright (Amendment) Bill 2014, thus obviating the need for so much effort, and this convention would apply to any Bill in future provided that its time-critical nature is proven. Of course, it is more difficult to prove the urgency of the Copyright (Amendment) Bill 2014 than that of the Appropriation Bill 2016, but the funding from the Finance Committee can prove it. Have we created a new convention in doing so?
Therefore, I am a bit disappointed that only two pro-democracy Members have spoken. If they eventually do not support my adjournment motion, I will not blame them. I do not blame them for not supporting the motion, not casting any vote or leaving the Chamber, because they are afraid of being accused of filibustering by those who do not distinguish right from wrong. In fact, I have pointed out that there is no filibuster, but rather a date fixed for voting, which is Wednesday, 11 May. Deputy Chairman, actually a quorum is now absent in the Chamber. I request a headcount in accordance with Rule 17(3) of the RoP.
DEPUTY CHAIRMAN (in Cantonese): Will the Clerk please ring the bell to summon Members back to the Chamber.
(While the summoning bell was ringing, some Members returned to the Chamber but not their seats yet)
DEPUTY CHAIRMAN (in Cantonese): Will Members please return to their seats.
(After the summoning bell had been rung, a number of Members returned to the Chamber)
LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 20 April 2016 7741
DEPUTY CHAIRMAN (in Cantonese): Mr CHAN Chi-chuen, please continue with your reply.
MR CHAN CHI-CHUEN (in Cantonese): Deputy Chairman, one of the practices adopted for the Budgets of the past two years has drawn much criticism from Members, that is, certain items were bundled up with the Budget as a whole. If Members wish to oppose those items, they must oppose the Budget as a whole. Worse still, we have no way to achieve this goal, for even if we vote against the Budget, the Budget will not be negatived. For this reason, Members from the Labour Party in particular have proposed amendments to those items.
The Financial Secretary pointed out in his speech this morning that his justification was to enhance efficiency, and Members might put forth their views at the special meetings of the Finance Committee if they had any. However, I would like to raise one point. I think not only Members from the democratic camp have this impression, even Members from the pro-establishment camp should also feel that, that is, the quality of the replies given by the Government to questions asked by Members at the special meetings of the Finance Committee, be they oral or written questions, was poorer than those in the past, displaying a slipshod attitude.
I would like to raise another point, that is, the failure of the Government to provide written replies to all the questions raised by us in the first round. Actually, we hope to consider the amendments to be proposed based on the written replies provided. As for the second round of written replies, they were provided after the deadline for submitting amendments to the Budget, thus undermining the opportunity for Members to consider proposing amendments or depriving Members of such opportunity and also curtailing the materials available to Members. As for their performance in giving replies, there is nothing to write home about. I will draw a comparison with the question on the same Policy Bureau, the same item and the same topic to illustrate my point. Take the question about the overseas visits made by Eddie NG as an example. In the past, the replies were organized and matched neatly with the items requested by me. But for this year, only one figure was provided and the answer for various items were grouped under one reply, which is evident that they are not being co-operative and do not want to be monitored by Members.
7742 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 20 April 2016
Lastly, I hope Members will support the motion for adjournment proposed by me. Although we cannot comment on the ruling of the President, I have to say that the ruling of the President this time around is extremely ridiculous. If this is made a precedent, it will bring endless troubles and there is no turning back. Therefore, I implore Members to support my motion for adjournment. I so submit.
DEPUTY CHAIRMAN (in Cantonese): Before I put the question on the motion for adjournment, I wish to remind Members that if the motion is passed, the Council will resume under Rule 40(4) of the RoP to proceed to the next item. If the motion is negatived, the Committee will continue with its proceedings.
I now put the question to you and that is: That the motion moved by Mr CHAN Chi-chuen under Rule 40(4) of the RoP be passed. Will those in favour please raise their hands?
(Members raised their hands)
Mr CHAN Chi-chuen rose to claim a division.
DEPUTY CHAIRMAN (in Cantonese): Mr CHAN Chi-chuen has claimed a division. The division bell will ring for five minutes.
(While the division bell was ringing, Mr LEUNG Kwok-hung spoke loudly)
DEPUTY CHAIRMAN (in Cantonese): Mr LEUNG Kwok-hung, the meeting is still in progress, please keep quiet.
(Mr LEUNG Kwok-hung continued to spoke loudly)
DEPUTY CHAIRMAN (in Cantonese): Mr LEUNG Kwok-hung, I warn you once again that if you continue to speak without my permission, I will regard your conduct as grossly disorderly.
LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 20 April 2016 7743
DEPUTY CHAIRMAN (in Cantonese): Will Members please proceed to vote.
DEPUTY CHAIRMAN (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 Tommy CHEUNG, Mr Frederick FUNG, Mr Jeffrey LAM, Mr WONG Ting-kwong, Ms Starry 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 KWOK Wai-keung, Mr Christopher CHEUNG, Mr IP Kin-yuen, Mr Martin LIAO, Mr POON Siu-ping, Ir Dr LO Wai-kwok, Mr CHUNG Kwok-pan and Mr Tony TSE voted against the motion.
Geographical Constituencies:
Mr LEUNG Kwok-hung, Mr WONG Yuk-man and Mr CHAN Chi-chuen voted for the motion.
Mr CHAN Kam-lam, Ms Emily LAU, Mr TAM Yiu-chung, Mr WONG Kwok-hing, Mr CHAN Hak-kan, Dr Priscilla LEUNG, Mr WONG Kwok-kin, Mrs Regina IP, Mr Michael TIEN, Mr WU Chi-wai, Mr CHAN Han-pan, Mr LEUNG Che-cheung, Miss Alice MAK, Mr SIN Chung-kai, Dr Helena WONG, Dr Elizabeth QUAT, Dr CHIANG Lai-wan and Mr Christopher CHUNG voted against the motion.
Dr KWOK Ka-ki abstained.
THE DEPUTY CHAIRMAN, Mr Andrew LEUNG, did not cast any vote.
7744 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 20 April 2016
THE DEPUTY CHAIRMAN announced that among the Members returned by functional constituencies, 22 were present and 21 were against the motion; while among the Members returned by geographical constituencies through direct elections, 22 were present, three were in favour of the motion, 18 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 motion was negatived.
DEPUTY CHAIRMAN (in Cantonese): The proceedings of the Committee now continue.
Does any other Member wish to speak?
MS EMILY LAU (in Cantonese): Deputy Chairman, I would like to follow up the problem of the Leisure and Cultural Services Department (LCSD) because so far it has not given us any reply. The LCSD deleted the word "National" from the name of Taipei National University of the Arts without any reason. What is wrong with it? This absolutely injures the relationship between Hong Kong and Taiwan. I have noticed the immediate protest from the representative of the Taiwanese Government in Hong Kong. Even the Taiwanese authorities wondered why the situation in Hong Kong was so outrageous. I do not know why Secretary LAU Kong-wah still does not promptly provide an explanation. Does he lack money to conduct an inquiry? Such things are unacceptable. On what grounds did the LCSD censor those leaflets and alter the names of the people and performing arts groups participating in the show? It even turns out that such a practice of changing names has been adopted for years. I really hope the people of Hong Kong, regardless of whether they belong to the art and cultural sector or whichever sector, will not remain silent out of fear. In particular, if their names have been altered without any reason and yet they dare not say anything, is this still Hong Kong? We have freedoms and systems in Hong Kong. We cannot allow any arbitrary practice of the officials. For this reason, I hope Secretary LAU Kong-wah and the Director will give an explanation to society as soon as possible. Deputy Chairman, they also need to promise that they will not allow such things to ever happen again.
LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 20 April 2016 7745
Just now Mr HO also mentioned that Falun Gong or certain organizations have been unable to find any meeting or performance venue. Similarly, is there freedom in Hong Kong? Why is there the need to drive a group which can legally operate in Hong Kong to the dead end? They once made a reservation with a hotel or some other place to hold an event, but everything had to be cancelled because it was alleged that there was a bomb or some other reasons. Deputy Chairman, I think this is really ridiculous. Why do we consider that "one country, two systems" is now in a precarious state? Because such incidents have taken place one after another, seriously interfering with the operations of lawful groups and organizations, not to mention the incident of the dismissal of the Executive Chief Editor of Ming Pao Daily News which broke out today. Deputy Chairman, these incidents have become international news. Sooner or later, they will become the headlines of newspapers. Thanks to what they did! If things go on in this way, no wonder Members often express the worry that people are unwilling to travel to Hong Kong because everyone are asking why Hong Kong has got into such a mess.
Hence, Deputy Chairman, I hope people responsible for affairs of various portfolios especially those involving Hongkongers' freedoms, systems, rule of law and justice, please do not stir up any incident to challenge the fundamental core values of Hong Kong every day. Hong Kong owes them all this, thanks!
I so submit.
DEPUTY CHAIRMAN (in Cantonese): I would like to remind Members that the time allocated by the President of the Legislative Council to the first debate in Committee is eight hours. This debate started at about 12 noon today and will end at about 8 pm. Then the question that the sums for the relevant heads stand part of the Schedule together will be put to vote immediately.
Will Members who intend to speak, especially those who have not yet spoken, please press the "Request to speak" button as soon as possible.
MR WU CHI-WAI (in Cantonese): Deputy Chairman, in this session we come to the discussion of the head of the Leisure and Cultural Services Department (LCSD), and I will comment on the library services provided by the LCSD in 7746 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 20 April 2016 particular. Although we have not proposed any amendment to this head, I would still like to objectively point out that the LCSD has not done a good job seriously in making overall improvement to its library services over the past 10 years or so.
In 2002, the LCSD commissioned a consultancy study on the "Future Development of Hong Kong Public Libraries", and the consultants suggested revising the planning guidelines for libraries, including lowering the existing proportion of population served by a district library from 1:200 000 to 1:150 000, and reviewing the existing distribution of libraries and ratio of population served ― for a district library measuring 2 900 sq m and serving 150 000 people, if the population exceeds 150 000, there will be a need to build a new library or expand an existing one in order to maintain the floor area ratio of 19.3 sq m per 1 000 population; if the existing library cannot be expanded due to space constraints, the floor area of a neighbouring library with room for expansion should be kept at the above ratio.
In fact, these several issues regarding the proportion of population served by libraries have not been seriously reviewed and adjusted over the years. Before the Urban Council was scrapped, we had actually passed a proposal for lowering the proportion of population served by a district library to 1:150 000 from 1:200 000 as prescribed in the planning guidelines with a view to coping with the then prevalent trend of continuing education, thus enabling members of the public to pursue lifelong learning in a knowledge-based city and realizing the idea of developing libraries into a community hub of knowledge and resources.
However, both during the era of the Urban Council when it was still functioning and after its scrapping by the Government, surely no relevant effort had been made. Despite the suggestion in the 2002 consultancy study that the aforesaid ratio be lowered, it has remained not implemented. As a result, our community is still left with the ratio of 1:200 000, rendering many of the demands for district library development in the community not in any way met.
Nevertheless, back during the time of the Urban Council, we once conceived "a vision on the use of libraries", that is, in a community of 30 000 to 50 000 people, there should be a small library run by the LCSD with a collection of about 50 000 books and offering normal lending services. However, first of all, the LCSD does not recognize the planning standard in this regard, claiming that there is no need to have regard for the initiative raised in the time of the LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 20 April 2016 7747
Urban Council after its dissolution; and second, they have all along claimed to the public that the "community library" initiative is being implemented in attempt to address the community's call for additional library services through such a masquerading arrangement.
What is the "community library" initiative about? This is a small space set up by many voluntary organizations on their own, where as many as 500 or 1 000 books may be borrowed from libraries in one go for members of the public to borrow them within the space. However, this is a far cry from the commonly held concept of a small library and fails to enable a small library to play the role of "point of convergence" in the community. In fact, library services are highly cost-efficient, so I very much hope that the LCSD can increase the resources to deal with the relevant issues in the days to come.
Why are library services highly cost-efficient? Come to think about this. The establishment of a small library consists of six people, whose salaries coupled with other expenses cost about $300,000 to $500,000 monthly. According to all the records, about 1 000 people will go to a library to borrow or read books or read newspapers every day. From this perspective, library services are highly cost-efficient. Yet, why does the Government not reconsider allocating more resources to such cost-efficient community services to turn a small library into an item worth considering in the course of planning for each of the districts? In particular, if a large library cannot be set up in a community of 30 000 to 50 000 people, a small library can link up with its district and central counterparts to form a large community library network. Why does the Government not do so?
Apart from not doing these things, the Government has instead proceeded to introducing a mobile library van initiative to serve the remote areas. Of course, we acknowledge the demand for mobile library van services in the remote areas. Yet, if mobile library van services are also available in Wong Tai Sin covering Chuk Yuen and Fung Tak Estate, does it mean that the demand in such areas is not met? Let me cite an example. Boasting a population of more than 100 000, Chuk Yuen coupled with Tsui Chuk and Tin Ma is an area comprising four District Council seats, so it is a highly populous area from this point of view. However, in the negotiation over the compensation arrangements relating to the Shatin to Central Link, the authorities proposed developing a new indoor sports centre while rejecting our suggestion of adding a small library, and now it resorts 7748 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 20 April 2016 to the "community library" initiative as a form of compensation and a trial. In fact, this obviously falls enormously short of the public expectation for library services provided by the Government.
Therefore, as the Government encourages members of the public to pursue continuing education and lifelong learning in a community known as a knowledge-based city, I also hope that the Government can provide us the resources to turn libraries into a community hub of knowledge and resources. In the overall planning for libraries, should the Government be bolder and more serious in considering our service arrangements? Otherwise, how will the knowledge-based economy and community that we advocate be given adequate support to enable members of the public to acquire new knowledge persistently through the libraries and enjoy access to lifelong learning?
I have one more point to make finally. Given the increasing popularity of the Internet and the application of information technology, I very much hope that libraries can keep abreast of the times with regard to their lending services. In fact, telephone booking services are currently available at libraries, yet can they go further by including more drop-off and pick-up points for books for the more effective delivery of books to borrowers? In this case, in terms of input of resources, the Government may be able to build less libraries. Therefore, I hold that the LCSD should study and consider afresh the future development strategies and arrangements for public libraries from this perspective, such that public library services are compatible with the requirements of continuing education and lifelong learning. In this way, ample resources can be provided to our knowledge-based community and room as well as resources offered to members of the public in acquiring knowledge effectively in the community of the future.
Thank you, Deputy Chairman.
DR KWOK KA-KI (in Cantonese): Deputy Chairman, the Leisure and Cultural Services Department (LCSD) scarcely does a good job of its duties. From two of the recent incidents, for example, we hold that they have absolutely let the public down. The first one is the "denationalization" incident which we feel ashamed of among the Chinese and global communities alike, where the LCSD tampered with the booklet published by local art group The Nonsensemakers by requiring the deletion of "National" from the name "Taipei National University of the Arts" in the introduction of one of its members.
LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 20 April 2016 7749
The LCSD as a manager of leisure and cultural services ― Deputy Chairman, as regards the term "cultural", in what culture is one allowed to tamper with facts, defame a university and turn a blind eye to facts? The incident has happened and brewed for such a long time, but it is still under review by the LCSD or Secretary for Home Affairs LAU Kong-wah, and they are dealing with it in a perfunctory manner. Not only does such a department fail to play its own role to allow genuine leisure and cultural activities to be held in Hong Kong. It conversely does something critically detrimental to Hong Kong as Asia's World City, namely political censorship.
Deputy Chairman, Hong Kong may have already reached a state where one has to take side or get a political touch in every issue. Even some simple facts, such as the name "Taipei National University of the Arts", are not allowed, and the one who does it will not be held accountable. What kind of Government or department is it? News reports had it that the decision was made by one of the assistant directors at the LCSD, but everyone knows it is an instance of the Rashomon effect. No one knows if that assistant director could wield the power single-handedly or was subject to layers and layers of pressure, or if it was out of the political directive of LAU Kong-wah to delete "national" from the name. This kind of attitude and approach have brought us into disrepute. How are we going to face up to other arts group, especially those from Taiwan?
The practice has not only prompted President of the Taipei National University of the Arts to criticize the ignorance of Hong Kong officials but also invited attacks by graduates from Taiwanese universities in Hong Kong, and most of the people in Hong Kong even shake their heads in lament. A government department led by civil servants is now learning to pursue the Mainland Chinese way and adopt their practice of political censorship. How improper conduct is that?
Deputy Chairman, there is actually a reason for us not to propose reducing the expenditure on the salaries of the responsible public officers today, because we do not want to victimize the innocent before the Government really rejects reviewing the outcome of this incident or taking up the responsibility, since the decision might have been made by LEUNG Chun-ying or such political appointees as LAU Kong-wah, and there is no point making officials in the upper, middle or lower tier scapegoats. Therefore, we may not take the approach of 7750 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 20 April 2016 requesting a salary reduction here to show that they are not worthy of being paid, as in the case of other political appointees. Yet, this is definitely a big issue that cannot be condoned in Hong Kong.
What does the deletion of "National" represent? It represents that the bureaucratic culture and political censorship practised on the Mainland as well as the political censorship prevalent in Hong Kong's media sector have already spread to government departments. This is not a trend that should persist. In fact, if we allow government departments supposed to be politically neutral to exercise any form of censorship, there will be no future for Hong Kong, and the younger generation will find the community greatly disappointing.
On the other hand, the second thing done by the LCSD to the disappointment of the public is the Avenue of Stars incident. Amid opposition by community groups and many a member of the public, the redevelopment plan for the Avenue of Stars, which will bring apparent benefits to a single real estate developer, has now been called to a halt, but we find the development of the incident most objectionable. With no public consultation, no consensus within the community and no empirical evidence, the new plan was proposed for the apparent benefits of a real estate developer, namely New World Development Company Limited, which has managed the project for years. How can the Government do that? How can it turn a tourist facility supposedly open for access to the public and tourists into one owned by a real estate developer as its money spinner? This is the approach taken by the LCSD.
Of course, the incident has yet to evolve into a tragedy, but there is no way for the public to have any control. In fact, some other real estate developers have pursued or claimed to pursue judicial review; perhaps the Government was left with no choice except withdrawing the plan in the wake of the scrambling among the developers caused by the uneven distribution of loots. However, in making the decision, the LCSD has both let the public down and failed to take any responsibility, and such an approach will only make a further mess of Hong Kong. Despite the Government boasting repeatedly that Hong Kong is a fantastic tourist city which has to attract more tourists, all this can be put aside for the apparent benefits of some "LEUNG's fans" or other people, since it is of paramount importance to distribute enough benefits among their numbers. The approach taken by the LCSD, which puts itself into a dilemma, is actually unnecessary. As long as they act fairly to address the actual needs rather than LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 20 April 2016 7751 engage in other business, the Avenue of Stars saga or the "denationalization" incident should not have happened. Nevertheless, a more terrible point is that such incidents will happen more often and in a more outrageous manner.
Meanwhile, the LCSD has really failed to attend to its proper business. They are supposed to take proper care of the leisure and cultural facilities for the convenience of the public. Let me cite several examples in this regard. First, many members of the public may recall the long slide and the children facilities at Hong Kong Park. Yet, the facilities used by several generations of children over the years have either been removed or altered without any advance notification or consultation, and even the District Council was not informed. In fact, the children playgrounds under the LCSD nowadays no longer appeal to children. The swings, slides and steely frames played by many children of our generation are now nearly extinct. The LCSD refuses to make progress in order not to make any mistakes, and it never considers the issues from the perspective of users, thus leaving Hong Kong with substandard leisure and cultural facilities, in stark contrast to the Government's claim of it being a top-class city.
In fact, many of the leisure facilities are subject to the bondage of the Government itself. Districts mostly inhibited by the grassroots, such as Tuen Mun, Yuen Long and Tin Shui Wai in western New Territories, as well as Tung Chung, and so on, are subject to the planning standards set down by the Government, which do not contain any sports ground, swimming pool whether heated or not, football pitch, basketball court, and so on. The Government's reply in this respect is that they have to follow the planning closely to provide no more than required. How can a people-oriented department refuse to make progress? How do they not seek ways to improve the leisure facilities all along by raising the ratio of such facilities, but continue to deny progress by quoting the old figures?
We can see that when those above behave unworthily, those below will follow. In fact, this Government has perhaps become increasingly incompetent. In the light of the never-ending scandals among senior government officials, including the flat-swapping incident as well as the Bureau Directors for whom we do not have much expectation, we do not dare hold much expectation for the LCSD's work as a whole. However, when many of those highly paid officials fail to fight for some leisure facilities for the public, it amounts to dereliction of duty on their part.
7752 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 20 April 2016
Furthermore, some of the LCSD policies are weird as well. A few days ago, some kaifongs told us what happened at the Cafeteria Old Beach, which as we all know is a beach in Tuen Mun frequented by members of the public. Suddenly, a row of railings was erected there to block access to the beach, citing the fear that people may rush into the sea. This is really the first time for me to hear that railings are erected to prevent people from rushing into the sea. They might as well close all the beaches in Hong Kong. Why does one take such an approach, which is like trimming the toes to fit the shoes? Why are they so foolish that a beach supposedly open and accessible to the public is blocked with railings? The LCSD managed to do so because they do not need to have any regard for others and make consideration from the perspective of the public or users. They even fear that people on the beach may rush into the sea. If this holds water, then all the roads should not exist because people may be hit by vehicles, and vehicles or planes should not exist either due to the possibility of accidents.
How can a department be so foolish as to walk backward and take a reverse course in order to avoid accidents? In the future, children playgrounds under the LCSD will only have mats on the floor but nothing else. There will be no swing or slide out of the fear that children may fall down from them, and users are required to wear helmets before entry to avoid tripping. How can a department be so foolish as to work in this way?
We are not sure if such a flawed approach stems from individual policy officials, or if the entire bureau, like LAU Kong-wah, is so busy with political work rather than its proper business that it puts the practical work of improving leisure and cultural facilities aside. Such a department may be a sheer reflection of the administration philosophy of the Government as a whole, that is, it is unnecessary to do much solid work, but shoe-shining is indispensible, since one is going to be rewarded not for the merit of the amount of work done, but for whether enough "shoe polish" has been used, whether one can win the favour of his boss, and whether the political work done is deemed adequate by LEUNG Chun-ying.
I so submit.
LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 20 April 2016 7753
MR ALBERT CHAN (in Cantonese): Deputy Chairman, although we made numerous requests for headcounts earlier today, it does not mean that we have nothing more to say and so we have to adopt a delaying tactic. Our sole purpose of requesting headcounts is to let the pro-Government Members know that they have to pay a price for supporting the Government. As SHIU Sin-por once said, they cannot merely mind their own business without bearing their basic responsibility. Deputy Chairman, we might therefore continue to request headcounts at suitable junctures. However, we will spare some time for our speeches, too.
As regards items without any amendment, it does not really mean that the relevant item requires no amendment. Actually, the amendments proposed by some Members to quite many of these items have been rejected. Therefore, we will continue to comment on the relevant items and voice objections. One of these items is related to "Head 79 ― Invest Hong Kong". Although Mr LEUNG Kwok-hung has proposed seven amendments to it, all of them have been rejected.
Invest Hong Kong is set up to attract and assist overseas, Mainland and Taiwan companies to set up and expand their operations in Hong Kong. Its expenditure estimate of $128.2 million represents a 10% or so increase over last year. Of the duties performed by Invest Hong Kong, the People Power is most dissatisfied with its duty of making efforts related to the Belt and Road Initiative as proposed by LEUNG Chun-ying, or "689". Actually, Invest Hong Kong should be renamed as "Invest Belt and Road", as it is set up merely to serve political purposes. It is simply not serving the interest and well-being of local people. In order to please the Central Authorities and shine their boots, it exploits the money and resources of the people of Hong Kong, but the benefit thus brought to Hong Kong by its efforts may probably be zero.
One of the purposes of increasing its overall expenditure estimate by 10.6%, or $12.3 million, is to enhance investment promotion activities in relation to the Belt and Road Initiative. But specifically, how can the Belt and Road Initiative help the people of Hong Kong? There is a complete lack of relevant information.
Let us take a look at the programme proposed in respect of the Belt and Road Initiative. The relevant initiatives to be promoted in 2016-2017 in relation to the Belt and Road initiative include: enhancing the overseas consultancy services provided for certain markets along the Belt and Road; enhancing the 7754 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 20 April 2016 investment promotion services provided by the Economic and Trade Office of the Government of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region in Wuhan; increasing the number of duty visits to developing economies and making arrangements for the hosting of more investment promotion seminars in these economies; strengthening manpower for the head office of Invest Hong Kong and assisting in the hosting of promotion activities on the Mainland; participating in various major international shipping conventions/exhibitions; and enhancing investment promotion efforts of Invest Hong Kong in major shipping hubs by, for instance, organizing social activities. But do we have to foot the bills for organizing these activities? Are the efforts made in relation to the Belt and Road Initiative confined to boot shining or drinking Muotai with them? In fact, the Mainland bureaucrats have already started cutting down on these so-called social activities. On the contrary, Invest Hong Kong has chosen to flagrantly effect generosity at the expense of others by spending our money on boosting its own investment promotion efforts in major shipping hubs by, for instance, organizing social activities, and so on. Deputy Chairman, all the pro-Government Members have already left. Please do a headcount. There is no reason that not a single Member is willing to stay here to listen to my speech. I hope you can do a headcount. A vacuum is present here now.
DEPUTY CHAIRMAN (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 CHAIRMAN (in Cantonese): Mr Albert CHAN, please continue.
MR ALBERT CHAN (in Cantonese): As regards the problems concerning the Belt and Road Initiative, the designated countries or regions might be unable to tie in with Hong Kong in economic development on many fronts. Moreover, we can also see that Invest Hong Kong completely lacks a focus or a plan in economic development. As if trying its luck, it will merely set up an office to socialize with them and see what development can be pursued. This is definitely not a proper way of using the public coffers. If the Government is to seek development in certain regions, it should come up with a plan, a system and a LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 20 April 2016 7755 focus, rather than shining boots indiscriminately merely on the basis of the remarks made by the Central Authorities. In the end, it will only run into a wall, thereby making the public coffers suffer unnecessary losses.
As regards the Belt and Road Initiative, LEUNG Chun-ying has actually been criticized by many for "shining the wrong boots" and his "misunderstanding". In the press conference held after the conclusion of the National People's Congress sessions on 16 March, LI Keqiang said nothing about the Belt and Road Initiative. It was in stark contrast to the mention of the Initiative for scores of times by LEUNG Chun-ying. During an interview by the media, Prof WANG Fuzhong, a renowned economics academic from the Central University of Finance and Economics, said that some people in Hong Kong ― I think he was implying "689" ― had misunderstanding about the Belt and Road Initiative because it was actually a political idea rather than a path of economic development. Owing to this misunderstanding, Hong Kong has shined the wrong boots, which can actually be seen as a laughing stock. Prof WANG has also pointed out that the Central Authorities will cool down the Belt and Road Initiative progressively. Even the Central Authorities will shift its focus of economic development back to the Mainland, not the Belt and Road Initiative.
When it comes to economic development, as Members must be aware, some regions which have earlier borrowed from the Central Government have turned their debts into shares. For instance, Sri Lanka has earlier turned its $68 billion debts owed to the Central Authorities into shares. This is truly an intriguing case, right? Therefore, should Hong Kong follow the direction of the Belt and Road Initiative owing to its political development needs, it will only run into a wall in the end, thereby causing the public coffers to suffer losses on many fronts. It is utterly absurd that the education-related fund alone amounts to billions of dollars, and money is not dished out to meet the financial needs in Hong Kong. Therefore, I will voice objection to the funds allocated under "Head 79 ― Invest Hong Kong".
Another item, head 95, is related to the Leisure and Cultural Services Department (LCSD). I believe Mr LEUNG Kwok-hung will make more comments later on. Insofar as the LCSD is concerned, I only wish to raise a key point. Certainly, I have a lot of information indicating its inadequacies. Moreover, I have repeatedly pointed out in the past that there are quite a number of problems with the renting of venues in particular. Members should know that I enjoy playing soccer. Currently, the touting of soccer pitch bookings can still 7756 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 20 April 2016 be found. Through certain relations, some people have managed to use certain methods to rent venues for touting, with the booking fees raised from $300 originally to $800. Such a situation is, however, still prevalent. Therefore, the LCSD has let quite a number of people reap profits in its management of public facilities.
I think the LCSD has another serious problem, too. In an earlier meeting with the Falun Gong in Hong Kong, I was told that it had intended to rent the LCSD venues on many occasions in the past few years but failed to do so on every occasion. In other words, it has failed to rent the venues in the past few years, not just one, two or three years. It can be said that it can never rent any venue. Recently, the Student Union of Hong Kong Shue Yan University sought to hold seminars for discussing local protests, but the University started banning and driving away such activities. Meanwhile, the Falun Gong has repeatedly liaised and enquired with the LCSD when vacant venues are available, so that bookings can be made for the holding of some purely arts and cultural activities. However, the answers to its enquiries are always "no". Such absurd political discrimination must be condemned and halted. Therefore, I will oppose "Head 95 ― Leisure and Cultural Services Department" to indicate that political discrimination is unacceptable. In this connection, I will cast a dissenting vote.
Furthermore, in respect of "Head 184 ― Transfers to Funds", which involves $41.6 billion, I must take this opportunity to make a point.
Deputy Chairman, it is very difficult to delete this item because other subheads and funds are involved as well. In other words, the scope is extensive and the impacts are huge. I would like to point out that the 13-fold increase of the expenditure estimate of this head this year over the previous one is alarming. With the expenditure estimate of this head standing at approximately $3.1 billion last year, it has soared by $41.6 billion this year. However, the explanation in the document is so sloppy that it is hardly acceptable. What does the document say? Regarding such a large increase, only one sentence is offered as an explanation: Provision for 2016-2017 is $41.684 billion (13 times) higher than the revised estimate for 2015-2016. This is mainly due to the transfers of $25 billion to the Capital Works Reserve Fund, $9 billion to the Capital Investment Fund and $5 billion to the Innovation and Technology Fund, and the increase in transfer of $3.7 billion to the Civil Service Pension Reserve Fund."
LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 20 April 2016 7757
I certainly understand that every one of the items is essential but, given the sudden transfer of such a large sum, a more detailed explanation should be given in the document in accordance with the procedure to elaborate on the justifications and purposes, rather than explaining the transfers of tens of billion dollars in just one sentence. It is because there is widespread concern that these transfers might involve the apportionment and transfers of benefits or private arrangements among the rich and powerful, which can hardly be estimated. Currently, the people of Hong Kong have absolutely no faith in the Government, though their impression of the Financial Secretary is slightly better. However, there is grave concern about the operation of overseas hidden or front companies by some of the Bureau Directors. Insofar as matters involving the exercise of public powers and personal interests are concerned, any transfers will lead to suspicions and doubts if a specific, reasonable and transparent mechanism is not in place. In particular, the monitoring of funds is really extremely weak because, very often, the use of funds and relevant figures can actually be hidden in some items.
Therefore, granting the opportunity, I will follow up on and deal with these issues in the relevant panels. Through this debate, I would like to express my concern about this matter and dissatisfaction with the transfer arrangements, too.
Furthermore, insofar as "Head 136 ― Public Service Commission Secretariat" is concerned, I have to raise questions about and express my dissatisfaction with issues related to promotions, renewals of contracts, and so on, because it has been reported that some of these issues warrant attention. I will raise these issues again and point out the crux of such issues.
Thank you, Deputy Chairman.
MS CYD HO (in Cantonese): Deputy Chairman, I wish to speak on the provisions for the expenditure of two departments under two heads. The first one is "Head 26 ― Census and Statistics Department" and the second one is "Head 169 ― Secretariat, Commissioner on Interception of Communications and Surveillance".
I will first talk about the Census and Statistics Department (C&SD). There is a substantial increase in the expenditure of C&SD this year. Why? It is because the C&SD will conduct a by-census in mid-2016 and under its plan, 7758 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 20 April 2016 one out of 10 households will be selected for survey. It will interview at least 300 000 households and study their conditions. In respect of the increase in expenditure, Programme (2) Social Statistics alone has increased by 66.1%, amounting to $98.1 million, covering 6 500 mobile tablets for conducting electronic surveys introduced for the first time. When we scrutinized the subsidiary legislation, the Government could not tell us how much these 6 500 mobile tablets cost. It only indicated that they cost about $1,000 to $2,000 each, meaning that the total sum might be $13 million, accounting for almost one seventh or one sixth of the sum of $98 million. On the one hand, we agree that the Government should digitize its governance and process certain complicated data with the help of information technology by all means. Given that there are as many as 65 questions in a population census, if the answers are recorded by electronic means, computation of statistics can be done right after the input of data. It will certainly save a lot of manpower in the subsequent procedures. For this reason, we approve of the direction of using tablets as a trial. Nevertheless, we have to ask this question: When the census is completed, how should the 6 500 tablets be disposed of? Even if they do not cost much, the total sum is nearly $13 million. If they are not put to any use, they will become 6 500 pieces of electronic waste. We have also made enquiries with officials of the C&SD, and the latter replied that under the normal procedure, they will be first handed to the Government Property Agency (GPA). As we know, be it a small piece of furniture or other assets of the Government, once it is handed over to the GPA, it will be like "entering a royal family in which one can never be set free". Wooden furniture will become mouldy, and as a result, they have to be disposed of at landfills. Nowadays, with the rapid development in technologies, those mobile tablets can become completely obsolete after being laid idle for two years under the normal procedure of the C&SD. In fact, can we work out a solution in advance? After the completion of the by-census, the 6 500 mobile tablets worth almost $13 million should be donated to grass-roots families, primary schools or social service organizations as soon as possible when they are still good value for money. They should never be handed over to the GPA under the normal procedures as per the officials told us in reply because in that case, I believe it is highly likely that this batch of tablets will become electronic waste after being laid idle for one or two years. For this reason, I really have to put this on record here and tell the C&SD in advance that if it fails to work out a good solution, we will surely ask the Audit Commission to follow up on the use of these 6 500 mobile tablets in the future.
LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 20 April 2016 7759
In addition, in respect of manpower training of the C&SD, the reason for the increase in such expenditure by some $98 million is that it will recruit several thousand enumerators. These enumerators are certainly short-term staff, and most of them are post-secondary students. But they will have to handle sensitive information of a population census. Hence, the relevant training must be thorough. And one of the areas which is even more sensitive is the issue of same-sex partnership or marriage registered overseas.
It can be traced back to early 2013 when the LEUNG Chun-ying Administration was still open-minded towards equal rights for people of different sexual orientations. At that time, the C&SD took the initiative to come to the Legislative Council and tell us that there would be an additional question in the by-census this year about the sexual orientation of Hong Kong residents and how many of them were registered partners. Let me declare in the first place that it was them who took the initiative to tell us about this, and back then, we were also worried about whether the Department could obtain such sensitive information. If they are able to do so, we will certainly welcome it as it will enable us to gather data of the profile of population, and only with actual data can appropriate policies be formulated. We subscribe to this point, but we have also put ourselves in the Department's shoes to see whether such questions are too sensitive. Who could have thought that the Government would subsequently make an about turn? It did not support the Equal Opportunities Commission to continue to promote equal rights for sex minorities, and apart from that, the C&SD even went back on its word and told the Legislative Council that this question had to be withdrawn. Certainly, they used all sorts of excuses in the course, indicating that it involved sensitive information, and that if the relevant question left the respondents with no choice but to provide false information, they would contravene the law in relation to population census because furnishing false information was prohibited by the law. Did C&SD not expect that such circumstances would arise? Pressed and urged by Members, the C&SD eventually introduced an additional item in one of the questions relating to a member's relationship to the household head. That is, when conducting a household interview, the C&SD has to enquire about the marital status of the household head first, followed by the number of family members. If there is more than one household member, the respondent has to state the relationship of the second, third and fourth member to the household head. The household head is supposed to answer a question on marital status. We suggest the C&SD make reference to overseas legislation, allowing the household head to answer whether it is a registered same-sex partnership. But the Government has refused to do 7760 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 20 April 2016 so, pointing out that Hong Kong has no such legislation in place, and has yet to establish such status. Consequently, which part does the Government agree to work on? That is "others" of the 15th option under "member's relationship to household head" of "Demographic and Social Characteristics". Members can imagine how discriminatory it is. Regarding the "others" option, the Commissioner for Census and Statistics has advised us that when training census officers, the Department will tell them that they should accept partners or spouses registered overseas and specify in the "others" option that they are spouses registered overseas. And what are the options other than "others"? Live-in domestic helpers, chauffeurs and gardeners are given an established status. Even such employment relationships are given an established role and status, while same-sex partners registered overseas can only be specified in the "others" option without being granted such status. But there is indeed no other alternative. We have to pocket it first all the same as it is better than none. I also hope those homosexuals aware of this message, if selected for a survey by then, can drum up the courage to disclose that they are engaged in this kind of relationship so as to enable the Government to have a good grasp of such data.
But on the other hand, such data are certainly sensitive. If we answer the questions in the survey by mobile tablets or electronic means and fill up the details of the household head and members, how can we avoid intrusion by hackers stealing such data of the overall profile of population? The Government has yet to give us a reply. As to how much of this sum of $98.1 million will be used for prevention of cyber hacking as well as privacy and data protection, the C&SD has yet to give us a reply. In addition, I have to tell officials of the C&SD that as I do not know whether this sum of $98.1 million is enough, we have not moved any amendment to reduce this item of expenditure. But there must be adequate resources to protect against hackers attempting to attack and paralyse the system of the Department or steal its data. The authorities must earmark additional resources for the C&SD to carry out data protection work effectively.
Next, Deputy Chairman, I wish to talk about the expenditure under another head which is related to privacy, namely "Head 169 ― Secretariat, Commissioner on Interception of Communications and Surveillance". In 2016-2017, the expenditure of the Secretariat, Commissioner on Interception of Communications and Surveillance (the Secretariat for the Commissioner) is reduced by 2%. When compared with the original estimate of 2015-2016, it has even been reduced by 6.5%, which is actually a rather drastic cut. There are altogether 24 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 20 April 2016 7761 people in the Secretariat. In addition to the Commissioner, there are one directorate and 22 non-directorate positions. With a total of 24 people only, it is actually a small department. I do not understand why the expenditure can be reduced by as much as 6.5% when compared with the original estimate in 2015-2016.
The Secretariat for the Commissioner has another item relating to a legislative amendment worthy of Members' attention this year, which is now awaiting scrutiny by the Legislative Council. The legislative amendment concerns the request for extension of powers made to the Government by Mr Justice WOO Kwok-hing when he was the Commissioner, so that he might listen to intercept recordings and product. He must be given such powers. Otherwise, how can he detect non-compliance and overrun, or listen to information involving legal and journalistic professional privilege? If the Commissioner is not empowered to listen to the original recordings, actually most cases of non-compliance cannot be uncovered, and monitoring by the Commissioner will not be possible.
In a certain year back then, Mr Justice WOO Kwok-hing wished to listen to some audio recordings, but the enforcement agency arrogantly stated that he did not have such powers. Ambrose LEE, the then Secretary for Security, even sought legal advice from the Department of Justice, citing the Canadian example to prove that the Canadian Commissioner was not granted such powers either. But he just cited it out of context. It is not until now that the Government has reluctantly introduced an amendment to this legislation. We certainly hope that it will be passed, but we will propose amendments for debate. The Government should never think that we from the democratic camp will only filibuster every time we speak because all these are serious debates, just like head 169 about which I am talking now and head 26 relating to the C&SD discussed earlier. They are all some reminders to the Government.
If we extend the powers of the Commissioner so that he has the statutory power to listen to such recordings and require that persons authorized by the Commissioner may listen to such recordings together, will it take more time? Will the workload increase as a result of compiling reports or comparing the reports prepared by the law-enforcement agency after listing to the recordings? Why do we not see any increase in manpower? Why do we see a reduction by 2% instead of an increase in the expenditure? When compared with 2015-2016, 7762 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 20 April 2016 the expenditure has even been reduced by 6.5%. Deputy Chairman, there are three essential elements for an independent body responsible for monitoring the Government. First, there should be an independent candidate. But this requirement is not met because we can see that recently, LEUNG Chun-ying has appointed "LEUNG's fans" to hold positions in those bodies responsible for monitoring the Government. There are new faces in the Independent Police Complaints Council, and the councils of universities are also filled with "LEUNG's fans".
What are the other two elements? One of them is statutory power. The statutory power of the Commissioner has indeed been extended this year, but still, it has to be supported by the third element, that is, an adequate financial source, with which it can recruit sufficient manpower to make sufficient efforts in exercising such statutory power. Now the Government has agreed to extending the statutory power of the Commissioner, but it has not offered sufficient funds. So what does it imply? In fact, without sufficient manpower, the Commissioner cannot perform his statutory functions properly.
Deputy Chairman, we certainly will not move an amendment to reduce the expenditure of the Secretariat for the Commissioner again because we think that it is already insufficient. But the Government owes us an explanation. The Commissioner's power has already been extended so that in addition to listening to the intercept product, he may also listen to such procedures as changes in application forms and rulings of panel judges, with a view to perfecting the monitoring system. Such work requires additional manpower. But instead of increasing the manpower, why is the number of staff kept at 24 and why are the wages and expenditure even reduced this year? The Government owes us an explanation. Thank you, Deputy Chairman.
MR LEUNG KWOK-HUNG (in Cantonese): Deputy Chairman, we are now having a debate on heads without any Committee stage amendments (CSAs). In fact, had the President not arbitrarily ruled out some CSAs, there should be CSAs to a lot more heads, including the heads of Invest Hong Kong, the Leisure and Cultural Services Department (LCSD) and the Office of The Ombudsman. However, these are not the thrust of the point I am trying to make. What I wish to talk about the most is transfers to funds.
LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 20 April 2016 7763
Deputy Chairman, though the Government has a readily available reserve of over $800 billion, "Head 184 ― Transfer to Funds" shows a remarkable growth. Let me read out the numbers to illustrate the importance of and the cause for concern about this problem. In 2012-2013, the actual expenditure of "Transfer to Funds" was $52 million; in 2013-2014, the Government increased the provision to $10,893 million; in 2014-2015 or 2015-2016, the provision dropped to $2.5 billion and $3.1 billion respectively ― I am leaving out the remainders. However, the estimate for 2016-2017 is exceptionally high and unprecedentedly big. Let me read out the figure. It is $44.864 billion. In other words, the head "Transfer to Funds", one that escapes our attention and does not invite much of an amendment, indicates an unusual increase. What is the reason? It is due to the transfer of $25 billion to the Capital Works Reserve Fund, the additional transfer of $3.8 billion to the Civil Service Pension Reserve Fund and the transfer of $5 billion to the Innovation and Technology Fund. Altogether they are 13 times higher than the transfers to funds approved last year, representing an astonishing surge.
Deputy Chairman, the crux of the matter is that the Legislative Council will have no say once the transfers are made to those funds, meaning there will be no more room for discussion and we have already lost our power to monitor how the Government uses the funds. Deputy Chairman, another issue I would like to raise for discussion is the Future Fund. Two years ago during the filibusters on the Budget debate, we had some heated exchanges about this Fund. It was established as a result of John TSANG's manipulation of financial skills and has to date accumulated $229.8 billion, leaving out the remainder. In comparison, the General Revenue Account only contains some $500 billion (though we still have $860 billion in reserve). In this connection, do all Honourable colleagues consider that the Legislative Council still has the power to monitor government expenditures? This Council has indeed been sidelined from exercising its major power. Through making constant transfers to funds, the Legislative Council's role of monitoring the Government through the Budget debate is in effect diminishing.
Deputy Chairman, the evil of this problem lies in that when we are debating the numbers it is no different from John TSANG manipulating his financial skills. Last December a transfer of several billion dollars to the housing fund was already made, rendering the difference caused by his wrong estimation smaller, as a huge sum had already been transferred elsewhere. Such kind of financial skills are commonplace in the financial sector, which we find 7764 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 20 April 2016 understandable. But when it comes to public finance and the Legislative Council, such manipulation leaves us rather puzzled and prevents us from really monitoring the Government. The consequence is when we discuss the provisions of the entire Budget, the Government often claims that it does not have money to make ends meet and needs to set aside sums for use by various departments. But once we separate the funds from the General Revenue Account, the practice is the amounts already transferred to funds are not subject to re-transfer, pending decisions by the Government. Therefore, in this regard, I think it is rather undesirable. There is another issue. The Government has made provisions for decreased dividends from the Airport Authority. We have been informed of it but we lack the power to monitor this. I will discuss in other debate sessions how transfers to funds would affect other government expenditures.
As a matter of fact, there is a pretty subtle change in the proportions of public expenditures. Let me cite a very simple example. Education expenditure accounted for 22% of the total public expenditure in 2007; now it has dropped to 16%, notwithstanding Secretary Eddie NG's remark that education has become a major component in the budgets of the last several years. How about expenditure on infrastructure? In 2007 it accounted for 9% of total public expenditure and in 2016 it was 16%. Honourable colleagues, day in day out we say we serve the people, that Hong Kong needs to build a knowledge-based economy and that Hong Kong has to create values. Deputy Chairman, the consequence of continued transfers of reserve to funds is a dwindling education expenditure, in turn causing its failure to contribute to society of Hong Kong just as what Mr WONG Kwok-hing has suggested. I just want to give an overview so I will say no more on this topic.
Let me return to "Head 95 ― Leisure and Cultural Services Department". The LCSD of course is closely connected to people's daily life as it uses public coffers to provide leisure and cultural services. Honestly, under the so-called "three eights" system ― eight hours of work, eight hours of rest and eight hours of leisure ― in a highly urbanized society, services provided by the Government are critically important. Nonetheless, what services has the LCSD provided? First, one can tell by looking at the swimming pools and beaches under its management. Deputy Chairman, LCSD lifeguards are still not on speaking terms with the management, leading to a high turnover and thus jeopardizing swimmers' safety. It is based on valid evidence that I propose CSAs to reduce their salaries.
LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 20 April 2016 7765
Second, one who fails trifling matters excels at important affairs, for example, gatekeeping ― no point in mentioning the word "national". Has the LCSD not attended to its own duties in this incident? It only needs to examine if the activities hosted in the venue by the organizations hiring the venue or the guests invited could further the leisure and cultural services in Hong Kong. Putting it bluntly, what does one's name have anything to do with the Department? Moreover, the LCSD has even tightened its political censorship, snagging Falun Gong or other unwelcomed organizations when they tried to book venues. Deputy Chairman, it has done an exceedingly adequate job in this respect. Once it sees the name, it will make an automatic association, just like the auto-complete function for searching on the Internet, and fill out the related words: input "fa" and "Falun Gong" will show up; input "tai" and "Taiwan" will show up.
Deputy Chairman, I am not sure if you play ball games. But if you make an attempt to book a venue, the success rate is simply notorious. The hire charge of a venue is pushed up from $800 to $1,600 because of speculation. The LCSD has tried many ways to solve this problem, including launching a computerized booking system, but to no avail. Deputy Chairman, every year I would raise this question on this occasion. Has it made any progress however small? No. Hence I believe it is appropriate to cut their salaries.
And then there is the issue with Invest Hong Kong. Its very own establishment was ritualistic in nature. Frankly, it acts like an etiquette expert who makes speeches here and there or take people around to meet other people. However, in the Budget the expenditure for Invest Hong Kong has increased by 10%. What is the reason? Because "a piece of horse dung comes to power with the help of the officials". LEUNG Chun-ying, trying to foul his own nest, made proposals in connection with the Belt and Road Initiative, prompting Invest Hong Kong to ask for provisions specifically for work related to the Belt and Road Initiative.
Deputy Chairman, I really do not see any reason for Invest Hong Kong to do so. Why? When even the owner of the Belt and Road Initiative has started to run up against the wall and gradually refrains from mentioning it, our Chief Executive, in an attempt to flatter his boss, put on a show about it. However, the Financial Secretary took the show seriously and went on to provide 10% additional provision to Invest Hong Kong for activities of socialization. Deputy Chairman, in this regard, it is only fair and just to cut its expenditure. If Invest 7766 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 20 April 2016
Hong Kong really wants to do something, will it please help solve the problem of parallel traders? The problem of parallel traders in Hong Kong is that a syndicate is set up on the Mainland, which, in collaboration with another local syndicate, sells goods to evade tax. If Invest Hong Kong is competent, of course it is its job. One thing it can do is to invite local businessmen to open the Luo Hu Commercial "Reverse" City. Without taxation concerns, it is a viable option.
The second way is to propose a discounted tax rate on dutiable goods in Hong Kong to the Mainland through negotiations while allowing the shipment of goods to the Mainland. But my speaking time is up. I will continue in the next session.
MR LEE CHEUK-YAN (in Cantonese): Deputy Chairman, I would also like to talk about several issues in my speech. The first issue, which was also mentioned by Mr LEUNG Kwok-hung just now, is related to the Capital Works Reserve Fund. If Members look at the relevant figures, they will find that this year, the Government has ― I have to first make it clear that the Government did not do so last year and previously or it was just a rare practice but at least it was not the case last year ― transferred $25 billion from the General Revenue Account to the Capital Works Reserve Fund.
Currently, the Capital Works Reserve Fund is the proceeds from land sales. The estimated land sale revenue in 2016-2017 is $69.2 billion but the estimated expenditure is $84.5 billion, resulting in a deficit of $15.3 billion. The Government has therefore transferred $25 billion to eliminate the deficit. However, the question is what is to be done next year and the year after next if the Government transfers $25 billion from the General Revenue Account to the Capital Works Reserve Fund this year? Let us consider the situation next year and the year after next. Based on the current estimation, the capital expenditure (including capital works expenditure) nearly reaches some $100 billion per annum. This amount does not entirely belong to capital works expenditure but the cost of capital works does account for over $80 billion of the capital expenditure. If such expenditure amounts to over $100 billion every year, the annual revenue from land sales may be insufficient to meet the expenditure. In future, we may have to … since it has been emphasized these days that we should strengthen infrastructure development and if this situation persists, we may need to transfer $25 billion or some $20 billion from the General Revenue Account to LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 20 April 2016 7767 the Capital Works Reserve Fund every year. In short, the general revenue of the Government will be kept in another drawer to finance the expenditure on capital works.
Let us examine the related circumstances if such a practice continues every year. The general revenue of the Government should, in fact, also be spent on recurrent expenditure, such as education, healthcare, social welfare, and so on. The Labour Party has been stating that actually the current amount of recurrent expenditure is absolutely inadequate and there should be a substantial increase in the annual recurrent expenditure if we wish to resolve the social conflicts and problems in Hong Kong. We believe it should be increased by $20 billion because there was a surplus of nearly $60 billion every year in the past and Hong Kong is therefore completely capable of allocating an additional $20 billion to recurrent expenditure. Many measures will become feasible if there is an additional $20 billion in recurrent expenditure. It is always said that young people are burdened with debts arising from their pursuit of further studies. If there is an additional $20 billion ― I am not saying that this $20 billion should be entirely spent on that aspect and it is unnecessary to do so ― the allocation of a few billions can provide many subsidized university places and help the young people. However, the Government did not do so and only focuses on one thing instead, that is, the development of infrastructure.
I do not oppose the development of infrastructure as I certainly support those with a practical need. Yet, I oppose those "white elephant" projects. It is evident to us that previously, the project of the Guangzhou-Shenzhen-Hong Kong Express Rail Link alone involved over $80 billion and the Hong Kong-Zhuhai-Macao Bridge involved over $15 billion. The total cost of these two projects amounted to a substantial amount of money while the expenditure on the three-runway system has yet to be included. The dividends to be received by the Government will decrease by over $50 billion as a result of the three-runway system and the Government will eventually suffer a loss. Therefore, I think the whole fiscal planning is a total mess. If the Government transfers over $20 billion from the General Revenue Account to the Capital Works Reserve Fund every year and if such a practice continues, it will definitely affect the resources available in the General Revenue Account that can be spent on recurrent expenditure and, as a result, the whole fiscal planning will be tilted to capital works.
7768 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 20 April 2016
If the Government states that there is a need to launch capital works while a consensus has also been reached in society that those projects are necessary, the Government may allocate money from the fiscal reserves to carry out those projects instead of using the general revenue and transferring funds from the General Revenue Account to the Capital Works Reserve Fund so that money in the General Revenue Account will only be spent on recurrent expenditure. It will be alright if the Government adopts such an approach but that is not the case now. We now feel concerned that if the Government transfers over $20 billion to the Capital Works Reserve Fund every year, it will eventually affect the operating expenditure and the resources available for other aspects. Therefore, I think the Government should clearly explain ― they, however, will not answer any question so what I said will only be put on record ― but I believe the Government will not tell us what is their long-term plan and whether they will transfer over $20 billion from the General Revenue Account to the Capital Works Reserve Fund every year. If that is the case, in terms of public finances, will the transfer of funds from recurrent revenue to capital works affect the planning of recurrent expenditure or the preparation of annual budgets in a way that it will be tilted to capital works without considering the current situation of education, healthcare and welfare? I think the Government should answer these questions but as I said just now, the Government will not answer any question now and has simply adopted a sloppy manner. Therefore, I dare not say we can get an answer eventually.
As for the second issue, I would like to particularly point out the problems of the Leisure and Cultural Services Department (LCSD) in this session. Quite a number of Members have already mentioned the issue concerning "National" earlier so I will not further comment on that. However, the incident has reflected the absurdity of the whole problem that they tried to fathom the preference of the Mainland and acted without reasonable consideration. However, I am not sure how did the Director perform the role of a gatekeeper. She failed entirely to carry out the duties of a gatekeeper and her subordinates suddenly made such a decision. Apart from this incident, I think there are many other things that the Director has failed to do. While I was attending a special meeting of the Finance Committee the other day, I asked the Director whether she was concerned about the wages of outsourced workers but she was not concerned about that. It is a serious problem. Of course, she said, "We have outsourced the services so it is the business of their employers." However, let us not forget that the Government itself is the one who procures the services and can therefore set out requirements. As the Housing Department and the Government Property LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 20 April 2016 7769
Agency have also laid down requirements, why did the LCSD not set out any? Why did the LCSD not require that outsourced workers are entitled to a pay raise every year?
The LCSD can certainly retort that the Government does not have any uniform guideline. And again, it is the problem of the Government. Why did the Government fail to provide any uniform guideline? This is the first point. Second, even if the Government does not provide any uniform guideline, the Director of Leisure and Cultural Services actually has the power to make the decision. Since other departments can do that, why can the LCSD not do the same? Is it because the LCSD is particularly apathetic to the problem of working poverty and wants to create poverty? Is it the case that you want those who work for you to remain in poverty? The LCSD will not answer these questions. I have no idea when we can receive a formal reply or see any improvement, that is, when it will be possible for outsourced workers to enjoy a pay raise every year.
The Financial Services and the Treasury Bureau refused to address the issue while other departments also refused to make any effort in this regard, passing the buck to one another. As a result, nothing is achieved while workers are the one who suffer. Senior officials are paid high salaries and they simply do not care about those low-income people. Is it the case that they enjoy high salaries with a pay raise every year so they simply do not care whether those earning low wages have any pay raise and just turn a blind eye to their livelihood? How can you adopt such a heartless manner while serving as government officials? Or is it the problem of the Secretary? As the Director of Leisure and Cultural Services refused to address the problem, the Secretary for Home Affairs should then bear the responsibilities. However, in terms of the Government as a whole, the Financial Services and the Treasury Bureau should, as the party who procures the services, set out the requirements. Therefore, the fact is that the whole Government refuses to address the problem and, as a result, outsourced workers are suffering from in-work poverty.
Another long-standing problem of the LCSD is that labour disputes between the LCSD and the trade union will occur every year. Very often the number of lifeguards employed by the LCSD is basically insufficient and, as a result, the workloads of lifeguards are very heavy but they are paid only low wages. Why are their wages low? There is nothing they can do about that. Their salaries cannot be increased because the Government has restricted their 7770 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 20 April 2016 grade to the artisan grade. They have requested the Government to cease restricting their grade to the artisan grade so that they can be re-graded as a professional grade and determine their own salaries. However, when their grade is restricted to the artisan grade, their pay points will remain unchanged and since they belong to the artisan grade, there will not be any pay raise even if there is a lack of manpower or the Government wants to increase their salary.
They demand to be detached from the artisan grade and wish that a separate grade can be established for them, just like the arrangement for the ambulancemen. Why is it not possible? Lifeguards also serve to rescue people and are required to obtain various licences and badges as well as administering first aid. Yet, the LCSD is still turning a deaf ear to their demands now. It seems that the lifeguards are planning to jump into the sea again on 1 May and I have to jump with them as well. In dealing with this Government, I find it most distressing when nothing is achieved even though we jump into the sea every year. Although the demand of turning the grade of lifeguards into a professional grade is most humble, such a demand remains not met today and no progress has been made. We are extremely disappointed at the LCSD in this regard. Every year, the Government states that it would employ additional staff but the increase in manpower is made only little by little in a manner similar to "squeezing a tube of toothpaste" and, therefore, there is still a lack of manpower. Come to think about this. With such a huge population in Hong Kong, there is a large demand for the use of swimming pools and beaches in summer so lifeguards have to ensure the safety of a large number of people. Why can we not employ additional staff?
Deputy Chairman, I am not going to make any further comment in this session but I think the attitude of the whole Government has basically indicated an entire lack of sincerity in dealing with the problems. It seems that now the whole Government will simply respond perfunctorily regardless of what questions you have raised, including my earlier questions about the problems concerning the LCSD and why it is necessary to transfer $25 billion to the Capital Works Reserve Fund in the Budget every year. The Government will not answer these questions anyway and I can predict that they will continue to work arbitrarily and adopt a perfunctory manner, which is utterly disappointing.
Thank you, Deputy Chairman.
LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 20 April 2016 7771
MR CHAN CHI-CHUEN (in Cantonese): Deputy Chairman, I rise to speak for the first time in this debate on the 10 heads with no amendments. However, as we have heard, all the Members speaking before me earlier, including Mr James TO, Mr Albert HO, Ms Emily LAU, Dr KWOK Ka-ki, Mr WU Chi-wai, Mr Albert CHAN, Ms Cyd HO, Mr LEUNG Kwok-hung and Mr LEE Cheuk-yan, made a lot of criticisms of the same government department, which is the Leisure and Cultural Services Department (LCSD).
Members must be wondering, they have raised so many criticisms without proposing any amendment to reduce its expenditure. Actually that is not the case. Members have proposed amendments to eight of these 10 heads. In respect of "Head 95 ― Leisure and Cultural Services Department", Mr LEUNG Kwok-hung has proposed 16 amendments. Certainly, they cannot be moved because they have been ruled as frivolous. However, all the Members who have spoken today have aired criticisms on this subject. Why were the amendments ruled out in the end? Actually the reduction of amendments does not have any great impact on the joint debate because this is a time-limited debate. Only the final voting results will be affected. As a matter of fact, among the other 10 items, only "Office of The Ombudsman" and "Transfers to Funds" are not subject to any proposed amendment from Members.
Earlier many Members expressed their views on the LCSD. Given the time constraint, I will express my views on the LCSD later because actually, regarding the problem for which Members have criticized the LCSD today, if we make a careful analysis, we will find that a lot of things might not be decided by the LCSD itself. In fact, the Home Affairs Bureau above the LCSD should bear a greater responsibility. For example, to date, Secretary LAU Kong-wah still has not given any explanation to the Legislative Council and society for the "National" incident which every Member has mentioned.
Actually it is not that he has not tried to give an explanation. At the last regular meeting of the Panel on Home Affairs, he wished to give an account of the "National" incident in the last agenda item (that is, "Any other business"). At that time Members immediately objected, accusing him of not arranging it on the agenda in advance with the intention of dropping the matter by just casually saying a couple of words. Moreover, only a few Members were still present at the meeting. No Members were there to raise questions. How can that be? If only the Secretary had given an account at that time and let Members raise questions until the end of the meeting, and if Members still wished to raise any 7772 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 20 April 2016 questions, they could continue to do so in the next meeting. What did LAU Kong-wah say at that time? He said to this effect, "In that case, I will not talk about it. I will leave it until next month." That was all. At the beginning, the Policy Bureau dared not reply or respond to this furore and scandal, thinking that everything would be fine after the incident faded out. Actually, if the Policy Bureau has got an answer, it should give an account to the public and the Legislative Council in the first place. Yet it has evaded this responsibility. Hence, if Members wish to settle scores with the LCSD, actually they can follow it up in the sixth joint debate regarding the Home Affairs Bureau later.
I will first express my views on "Head 26 ― Census and Statistics Department" (C&SD). Members had proposed nine amendments to this head, but they were not accepted. Deputy Chairman, according to "Programme (2): Social Statistics" of "Head 26 ― Census and Statistics Department" in the Budget, in the coming financial year, since the C&SD will continue to conduct the population censuses/by-censuses which are carried out at five-year intervals, this year's expenditure will be particularly high. All along, I have paid attention to this issue in both the panel and the Bills Committee.
Earlier on, the C&SD has launched the preparatory work for the 2016 Population By-census, in which the most controversial question is: Should elements of different sexual orientations and gender identity be included in the questionnaire, with a view to obtaining more detailed statistics for the formulation of government policies? At the meeting for the Census and Statistics (2016 Population Census) Order, we expressed our support for the inclusion of "same-sex partnership" or "same-sex cohabitation" in the 2016 Population By-census. We hoped the Department would provide separate answer options for data collection and add a third option for another important item, namely, sex, apart from the two options of "male" and "female", so as to show respect for transgender or intersex persons.
However, on the grounds of sensitivity of the issues involved in the data topics on sexual minorities, reluctance of quite a number of respondents to be interviewed and possible embarrassment of the respondents in disclosing such information in the presence of their family members, thus leading to under-estimation in the statistics, at that time the C&SD upheld its original decision and would not compile statistics on same-sex partnership for the item of marital status. The Department also indicated that the relevant data should not be included in the 2016 Population By-census. However, at an earlier meeting LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 20 April 2016 7773 of the Panel on Financial Affairs, the C&SD had stated that it would consider collecting information on transgender persons, intersex persons and same-sex cohabitation relationship in the 2016 Population By-census, but after the change of Director, it said it would not do so and rejected our request.
Actually, the purpose of a population census is to collect data for the Government for formulation of policies. It is conducive to the provision of equal opportunities if sexual minorities can be given due attention under the system in Hong Kong. Moreover, the data derived from the records of same-sex cohabitation relationship can assist the Government in formulating policies, especially with regard to the Domestic and Cohabitation Relationships Violence Ordinance. At present, this Ordinance also provides protection for same-sex cohabitation relationship, but the Social Welfare Department has failed to reflect the actual situation. The Government will lag behind if it does not collect the relevant data.
On the other hand, regarding the third option on sex, we consider it unfair to transgender persons if this option is not included. Many overseas countries, for example, Germany and Indonesia, have already included a third option on sex in their questionnaires of population censuses. The authorities remain unwilling to improve the approach, making sexual minorities continue to stay out of sight in society and depriving them of their right to provide true answers in population censuses. Sexual minorities have no opportunity to present their identity, and transgender persons cannot state their sex either. This is what the C&SD neglects or refuses to face.
Besides, I cannot agree with the C&SD's reason for rejecting the inclusion of a third option in the questionnaire of the by-census, because the family members of intersex persons ― intersex persons are different from transsexual persons. I hope the officials and Members know the difference ― have known their status since their birth. For this reason, the question of whether they are willing to disclose it before their family members constitutes no ground. Furthermore, the absence of a third option will render the data inaccurate.
Moreover, the last and the most outrageous point is, a number of same-sex partners have registered their same-sex marriage in jurisdictions outside Hong Kong, but how should they answer the question about their marital status in the 2016 Population By-census? An official said at our meeting that they should answer by choosing the option "never married". Yet they have indeed registered 7774 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 20 April 2016 their marriage overseas. Is such an answer against their wish? In fact, the Administration should not work in this way. Now it is not a question about whether it recognizes their marriage or whether it will provide any welfare benefits. During the course of the census, the C&SD should not exclude people who have registered same-sex marriage in other jurisdictions. Marital information is not any secret. As a matter of fact, in Hong Kong, one can find out at any time whether someone is married. That is also the case overseas.
However, the C&SD said that it might not be appropriate to collect data about sexual minorities in such a large-scale population census, and it undertook to collect the relevant data in other types of surveys. I hope the C&SD will really walk its talk. Certainly, it pointed out that other Policy Bureaux would also need to provide resources and roll out measures. I will continue to elaborate on this part in the debate session on the Constitutional and Mainland Affairs Bureau.
Besides, regarding "Head 79 ― Invest Hong Kong" (InvestHK), this department is really muddle-headed. Let me cite an example. In August last year, the Police arrested in a high profile five drivers of Uber for providing illegal car hire service and then arrested three employees in its Cheung Sha Wan office. Later, some netizens found out that in May last year, InvestHK had cited Uber as a "success story", claiming that Uber could "open up more possibilities for riders and more business for drivers". Yet the mess was uncovered. After the arrest of Uber drivers and employees, the Department removed the relevant article overnight. It is really a big joke.
InvestHK is supposed to help overseas companies promote business in Hong Kong. Before the article mentioned just now was removed from the website of the department, it said Uber had launched its trial services in Hong Kong and would start full-scale operation in July 2014. It also introduced how many staff members the company had and highly commended that "by connecting riders to drivers through a mobile app, Uber aims to make cities more accessible and safer and open up more possibilities for riders and more business for drivers".
However, after the Police had made the arrests, the department removed the article hastily. It has to give an account to the public after all. How did the spokesman respond? He said, "There are legal ways in Hong Kong for companies to offer car rental services via mobile applications, but not all mobile LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 20 April 2016 7775 car booking applications can meet the legal requirements in Hong Kong ―" Van-type light goods vehicles are certainly okay ― "As Uber is now being investigated for allegedly operating outside of the legal ambit, as a standard procedure InvestHK has removed the case study from its website." It shows that the department still does not admit having made any mistake. It is only that the company concerned broke the law subsequently that the department had to remove the case study.
The spokesman added, "We aim to ensure that the companies we support are aware of the regulatory regime for their particular business. It is then the responsibility of the company concerned to ensure regulatory compliance." In other words, the "success story" commended by InvestHK back then turned out to be illegal. It actually did not explain the relevant laws to the investors clearly. Before the department uploaded Uber's information onto its website and recommended it as a "success story", it should first find out whether its mode of operation was in compliance with the law. By introducing a company in such a way, the department obviously consented to its business promotion in Hong Kong, but in the end, it does not have to take any responsibility at all. This is most outrageous.
As regards the LCSD, just now I heard a number of Members mention the "denationalization" incident. I hope Secretary LAU Kong-wah will expeditiously give an account to the public … I know he has already got an answer. He should not leave it until the panel meeting next month. If Members do not request reduction in the provision for the LCSD, they may share the same view with me. That means it might not be the officials at the middle level attempting to be smart. If that is the case, the Government should be able to clarify this matter quickly. According to some information or news reports, what is uncovered this time, that means the deletion of the word "National" from the name of "Taipei National University of the Arts" in the programme, did not happen for the first time. We did not know about it until someone mentioned it after this incident had occurred. How many times had it actually happened before? Does the Government keep a list of sensitive words which should be avoided by all means under its internal policy, or are there really some officials at the middle level who attempted to be smart? I do not believe we will get a perfect answer to this question in the debate on head 95. So I will continue to follow it up in the debate concerning the Home Affairs Bureau.
7776 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 20 April 2016
Another issue about the LCSD is also a scandal, which is the LCDS's plan of revitalizing the waterfront of Tsim Sha Tsui and the Avenue of Stars with New World Development Company Limited (NWD) under a partnership approach. This is also very outrageous. Members said our discussion of the matter in the Finance Committee should not be too detailed, and we should leave it to the panel for discussion. Sorry, from its start to its demise, this matter was never officially made a discussion item in the panel. Now the Government says it will heed the public opinion and withdraw this project. It will not conduct any large-scale revitalization of the waterfront of Tsim Sha Tsui East and the Avenue of Stars. Neither will it allow NWD to solely take up the project. Frankly, this is not heeding public opinion. Actually the Government has found itself in the wrong. The two major real estate developers in Tsim Sha Tsui East were also furious at this matter and thus filed a judicial review. I believe this is not the responsibility of the Director of Leisure and Cultural Services alone. Back then, was TSANG Tak-sing dismissed because he was unwilling to yield? I will continue to follow it up in our discussion about reducing the expenditure of the Home Affairs Bureau.
Owing to the time constraint and given this unreasonable time-limited debate arrangement, although there are still a number of heads on which I would like to speak, I cannot present my views on the heads of "Office For Film, Newspaper And Article Administration", "Secretariat, Commissioner On Interception Of Communications And Surveillance" and "Transfers to Funds" one by one. If there is any speaking time left in the other sessions, I hope the Deputy Chairman will exercise his discretion and allow us to speak on these heads again.
DEPUTY CHAIRMAN (in Cantonese): Time is up for the first debate. Does any public officer wish to speak?
SECRETARY FOR COMMERCE AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT (in Cantonese): Deputy Chairman, I do not intend to speak.
DEPUTY CHAIRMAN (in Cantonese): I now put the question to you and that is: That the sums for heads 26, 27, 79, 95, 114, 136, 169, 174, 180 and 184 stand part of the Schedule. Will those in favour please raise their hands?
(Members raised their hands)
LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 20 April 2016 7777
Mr CHAN Chi-chuen rose to claim a division.
MR CHAN CHI-CHUEN (in Cantonese): Deputy Chairman, I claim a division.
(Dr Helena WONG stood up)
DEPUTY CHAIRMAN (in Cantonese): Dr Helena WONG, what is your point?
DR HELENA WONG (in Cantonese): Deputy Chairman, I had pressed the "Request to speak" button earlier on, but why did you not call upon me to speak?
DEPUTY CHAIRMAN (in Cantonese): The President has already specified that the time limit for this debate is eight hours. I already informed Members two hours ago that Committee would proceed to voting at 8 pm, and Members who intended to speak for the first time but had yet to indicate a wish to speak were then invited to press the "Request to speak" button as soon as possible. Dr Helena WONG, you did not return to the Chamber until it was very late. Had you pressed the "Request to speak" button earlier, I would have allowed you but not Mr CHAN Chi-chuen to speak just now. Since I have already declared that the debate has come to a close, voting will now begin.
DEPUTY CHAIRMAN (in Cantonese): Mr CHAN Chi-chuen has claimed a division. The division bell will ring for five minutes.
DEPUTY CHAIRMAN (in Cantonese): Will Members please proceed to vote.
DEPUTY CHAIRMAN (in Cantonese): Will Members please check their votes. If there are no queries, voting shall now stop and the result will be displayed.
7778 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 20 April 2016
Mr CHAN Kam-lam, Mr TAM Yiu-chung, Mr Vincent FANG, Mr WONG Kwok-hing, Mr Jeffrey LAM, Mr WONG Ting-kwong, Ms Starry LEE, Mr CHAN Hak-kan, Mr CHAN Kin-por, Dr Priscilla LEUNG, Mr WONG Kwok-kin, Mrs Regina IP, Mr Michael TIEN, Mr NG Leung-sing, Mr Steven HO, Mr Frankie YICK, Mr YIU Si-wing, Mr MA Fung-kwok, Mr Charles Peter MOK, Mr CHAN Han-pan, Mr LEUNG Che-cheung, Miss Alice MAK, Mr KWOK Wai-keung, Mr Christopher CHEUNG, 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 Christopher CHUNG voted for the motion.
Mr Frederick FUNG, Mr CHEUNG Kwok-che, Mr CHAN Chi-chuen and Dr Fernando CHEUNG voted against the motion.
THE DEPUTY CHAIRMAN, Mr Andrew LEUNG did not cast any vote.
THE DEPUTY CHAIRMAN announced that there were 37 Members present, 32 were in favour of the motion and four against it. Since the question was agreed by a majority of the Members present, he therefore declared that the motion was passed.
DEPUTY CHAIRMAN (in Cantonese): Sixteen Members have respectively given notice to move a total of 407 amendments, which seek to reduce the different sums under 74 heads.
DEPUTY CHAIRMAN (in Cantonese): Committee will proceed to each of the debates in the order set out in Appendices 1A to 1E to the Script.
Upon conclusion of all the aforesaid debates, Committee will vote on each of the amendments in the order of the heads as set out in the Bill. After voting on all amendments, Committee shall put to vote one by one in the order of the heads that the sum for each of the 74 heads with amendments stand part of the Schedule.
LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 20 April 2016 7779
SUSPENSION OF MEETING
DEPUTY CHAIRMAN (in Cantonese): I now suspend the meeting until 9 am tomorrow.
Suspended accordingly at 7.57 pm.