LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ― 31 January 2018 6061

OFFICIAL RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS

Wednesday, 31 January 2018

The Council met at Eleven o'clock

MEMBERS PRESENT:

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

THE HONOURABLE KUN-SUN

THE HONOURABLE LEUNG YIU-CHUNG

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

6062 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ― 31 January 2018

THE HONOURABLE PAUL TSE WAI-CHUN, J.P.

THE HONOURABLE CLAUDIA MO

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

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

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

THE HONOURABLE WU CHI-WAI, M.H.

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

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

THE HONOURABLE CHARLES PETER MOK, J.P.

THE HONOURABLE CHAN CHI-CHUEN

THE HONOURABLE CHAN HAN-PAN, J.P.

THE HONOURABLE LEUNG CHE-CHEUNG, S.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, J.P.

THE HONOURABLE DENNIS KWOK WING-HANG

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

DR THE HONOURABLE FERNANDO CHEUNG CHIU-HUNG

LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ― 31 January 2018 6063

DR THE HONOURABLE PIK-WAN

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

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

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

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

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

THE HONOURABLE CHUNG KWOK-PAN

THE HONOURABLE ALVIN YEUNG

THE HONOURABLE SIU-KIN

THE HONOURABLE CHU HOI-DICK

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

DR THE HONOURABLE JUNIUS HO KWAN-YIU, J.P.

THE HONOURABLE HO KAI-MING

THE HONOURABLE LAM CHEUK-TING

THE HONOURABLE HOLDEN CHOW HO-DING

THE HONOURABLE SHIU KA-FAI

THE HONOURABLE SHIU KA-CHUN

THE HONOURABLE WILSON OR CHONG-SHING, M.H.

THE HONOURABLE YUNG HOI-YAN

6064 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ― 31 January 2018

DR THE HONOURABLE PIERRE CHAN

THE HONOURABLE CHAN CHUN-YING

THE HONOURABLE TANYA CHAN

THE HONOURABLE CHEUNG KWOK-KWAN, J.P.

THE HONOURABLE HUI CHI-FUNG

THE HONOURABLE LUK CHUNG-HUNG

THE HONOURABLE LAU KWOK-FAN, M.H.

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

DR THE HONOURABLE CHENG CHUNG-TAI

THE HONOURABLE KWONG CHUN-YU

THE HONOURABLE JEREMY TAM MAN-HO

MEMBERS ABSENT:

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

THE HONOURABLE IP KIN-YUEN

PUBLIC OFFICERS ATTENDING:

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

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

LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ― 31 January 2018 6065

THE HONOURABLE MS TERESA CHENG YEUK-WAH, G.B.S., S.C., J.P. SECRETARY FOR JUSTICE

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

THE HONOURABLE MICHAEL WONG WAI-LUN, J.P. SECRETARY FOR DEVELOPMENT

THE HONOURABLE YUN-HUNG, J.P. SECRETARY FOR EDUCATION

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

6066 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ― 31 January 2018

CLERK IN ATTENDANCE:

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

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

LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ― 31 January 2018 6067

THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE'S QUESTION TIME

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

(A number of Members repeatedly shouted slogans: "Oppose unreasonable 'DQ'; Shame on political persecution")

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Will Members please keep quiet.

(A number of Members continued to shout slogans when the Chief Executive entered the Chamber and walked towards the rostrum)

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

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Members who wish to ask questions please press the "Request to speak" button. This is the first Chief Executive's Question Time. Each Member will be given three minutes to put questions to and receive replies from the Chief Executive, and the question time of each Member should not exceed 1.5 minutes. When three minutes are up, the bell will ring as a reminder. In order to allow more Members to put questions, the Question Time should be conducted in a "short question, short answer" format.

MR CHAN HAN-PAN (in Cantonese): President, Chief Executive, welcome to the Legislative Council to answer our questions. In fact, many elderly people have said that the rate of increase of the Old Age Allowance (commonly known as "fruit grant") is meagre this year. Many elderly people are glad to see that the Treasury has been "overflowing with cash" recently and they hope that there can be a greater increase in the "fruit grant" in future. But some elderly people aged 65 said that they cannot receive the "fruit grant" because they are required to take a means test. They said that it hurts their feelings when they have to be subject to such thorough and detailed inquiry even on their retirement at the age of 65. May I ask the Chief Executive if it is possible to lower the age eligible for the non-means-tested "fruit grant" from 70 at present to 65 given that the Government is in such a robust financial position.

6068 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ― 31 January 2018

CHIEF EXECUTIVE (in Cantonese): I thank Mr CHAN Han-pan for his question. Like Members, I am very much concerned about the well-being of the elderly in Hong Kong and this is why we have, over the past few years, substantially increased the provision of care for the elderly. For instance, in respect of social security, we have introduced the Old Age Living Allowance ("OALA") and we will implement the enhancement of OALA at a later time this year; and in respect of services, there is also enhancement in health care services and even nursing care services. However, as I said in the beginning of the part on the people's livelihood in the Policy Address, while we appreciate that there are many aspirations in society, this is not merely a matter of supply and demand but also an issue of resource allocation because after all, public resources are not without limits. Of course, just as Mr CHAN Han-pan said just now, what is before our eyes now is that the Treasury seems to be "overflowing with cash" but to the Government of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region ("SAR"), we have to look at whether public finance can ensure the sustainability of various schemes. Therefore, in respect of cash allowances for the elderly, we have adopted a multi-tiered approach in providing assistance to the elderly, and we will also relax the asset test on elderly recipients of the Comprehensive Social Security Assistance. We hope that through OALA and the enhancement of OALA, the elderly will live more at ease upon retirement. As regards the "overflowing" Treasury, Members have to be more patient while waiting for the release of the Budget by the Financial Secretary next month and see what relief measures will be announced.

MR CHAN HAN-PAN (in Cantonese): Chief Executive, elderly people aged 65 will have some savings anyway but this has prevented them from receiving any welfare benefit. While they may apply for OALA, they nevertheless have to take the means test. Therefore, I hope that the Chief Executive can consider lowering the age eligible for the non-means-tested "fruit grant" from 70 at present to 65 in order to help the elderly.

MR LEUNG YIU-CHUNG (in Cantonese): President, the Chief Executive stated in public yesterday that the disqualification of a person from candidacy in the Legislative Council by-election has nothing to do with politics. I wonder if the Chief Executive has read the reasons stated by the Returning Officer. The political affiliation of the candidate is mentioned in seven of the 11 paragraphs and in particular, it is mentioned in paragraph 9 that as the candidate's political LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ― 31 January 2018 6069 affiliation (Demosistō) has clearly shown that the candidate does not uphold the Basic Law sincerely and in good faith and so, it is said in paragraph 11 that she is disqualified from running in the election.

I would like to ask the Chief Executive if she has read this document. If she has not, why did she blindly make a defence for this case? If she has, did she purposely mislead the public in making an unreasonable defence?

Besides, in the fourth and eighth paragraphs it is said clearly that this candidate is disqualified because Demosistō advocates "democratic self-determination" and as the candidate advocates and supports this belief, it is, therefore, confirmed that she does not uphold the Basic Law and does not bear allegiance to the SAR Government.

I have this question for the Chief Executive. Will a person be disqualified on the ground of his political affiliation in future? For example, as the Hong Kong Alliance in Support of Patriotic Democratic Movements in ("the Alliance"), to which I am affiliated, opposes one-party dictatorship and advocates the building of a democratic China, will people participating in the Alliance be disqualified from running in elections because the Chief Executive has moved the goalposts?

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Mr LEUNG Yiu-chung, your question time is up. Please let the Chief Executive give a reply.

CHIEF EXECUTIVE (in Cantonese): The decision on whether a person is qualified for candidacy in an election does not rest with me, since Mr LEUNG Yiu-chung was asking what I would do in this circumstance. The decision does not rest with me. It is legally a decision made by the Returning Officer.

I have looked at the case as referred to by Mr LEUNG Yiu-chung just now. Insofar as the details are concerned, the Returning Officer stated at the time that having considered all issues and legal advice, she did not accept that the candidate has made a declaration that meets the requirement under section 40(1)(b)(i) of the Legislative Council Ordinance, which is not about political affiliation but requires a candidate to uphold the Basic Law and pledge allegiance to SAR. Therefore, insofar as this case is concerned, in the response 6070 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ― 31 January 2018 that I made whether at the airport on my return to Hong Kong from Switzerland or yesterday, I said that it is not merely a question of political affiliation, and Mr LEUNG Yiu-chung can refer to the transcript of my remarks again. I said that we do not decide on an individual's qualification for candidacy solely from his or her personal political affiliation, and Mr LEUNG, for instance, also has a certain political affiliation. But if an individual's political affiliation does not meet the requirement mentioned by me just now and makes it impossible for the Returning Officer to be satisfied that the person upholds the Basic Law and pledges allegiance to SAR sincerely and in good faith, then the person will be disqualified from candidacy in accordance with the law.

MS YUNG HOI-YAN (in Cantonese): President, e-sports has developed rapidly in Hong Kong in recent years. It is not as simple as playing video games as in the view of people in general. It actually embodies a diversity of elements, such as requirements on the e-sports players in terms of their physical conditions, skills, team organization, etc. E-sports has been formally incorporated into the sports industry in the Mainland and Taiwan. May I ask the Chief Executive how e-sports will be positioned this year and whether e-sports will be incorporated as a kind of sports.

CHIEF EXECUTIVE (in Cantonese): Thank you, Ms YUNG. E-sports is new to me and so, I specially visited the place where the E-sports Festival was held last year to learn and find out more about e-sports. I originally thought that it is no more than playing video games but then I realized that it is actually not easy at all, and I would say that it is very sophisticated. On the question of whether e-sports can be developed into an industry or incorporated as a kind of sports direct, my colleagues and I would be glad to look into it.

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Ms YUNG Hoi-yan indicated that she did not wish to ask a supplementary question. Mr Alvin YEUNG, you can ask your question.

MR ALVIN YEUNG (in Cantonese): President, regarding this incident of a candidate being disqualified from running in the by-election on 11 March, the Government has been saying that it is an independent decision made by the Returning Officer.

LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ― 31 January 2018 6071

Can I ask the Chief Executive if she can tell all the people of Hong Kong that she, being the Chief Executive, had not in the least taken part in the decision of the Returning Officer on the disqualification of this candidate?

CHIEF EXECUTIVE (in Cantonese): First of all, under the law, the Returning Officers have the power to decide whether a person is qualified for candidacy. Despite that this is clearly stated in law, it is still necessary to clearly examine the facts and therefore, the Returning Officers also have to consider the facts clearly. A Returning Officer who has doubts after considering the legal provisions and clearly examining the facts will seek legal advice. In this connection, the Department of Justice plays the role of providing legal advice for reference by the Returning Officer.

Regarding this specific case concerning that person being disqualified from candidacy under discussion now, I was not in Hong Kong when the decision was made. I was not in Hong Kong for the whole week as I was attending the World Economic Forum in Switzerland. So, I can tell Members that since there are clear provisions in law and the facts have provided a clear basis, it seems that involvement of other people (especially myself) was unnecessary.

Having said that, I can tell Members that I, being the Chief Executive, will not reject requests for my opinion on any issue. For example, when I was a Director of Bureau or the Chief Secretary for Administration, sometimes I would have to seek advice from the Secretary for Justice, and if I have views on the legal advice sought, I would express them. But disregarding what the legal advice was, the decision on a person's qualification for candidacy ultimately rests with the Returning Officers.

MR ALVIN YEUNG (in Cantonese): President, actually I need only a simple answer from the Chief Executive to all the people of Hong Kong. With regard to the disqualification of any person from candidacy in this election, did the Chief Executive personally take part in any discussion or the making of decisions? President, my question is just this simple.

6072 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ― 31 January 2018

CHIEF EXECUTIVE (in Cantonese): I thought I had given an answer to Mr YEUNG. So far, only one person was confirmed to be disqualified from running in the election. In the process of determination of the qualification of this person for candidacy and announcement of the decision, I was not in Hong Kong and did not play any part in it.

MR ALVIN YEUNG (in Cantonese): President, did the Chief Executive mean that in the disqualification of any person from candidacy, the Chief Executive had stayed aloof throughout the process? Does the Chief Executive agree to this remark?

CHIEF EXECUTIVE (in Cantonese): I do not know what it means by "staying aloof". As I am the Chief Executive of SAR, there seems to be nothing from which I can stay aloof. However, I will definitely act in accordance with the law, and with regard to issues on which the Chief Executive has no decision-making power, I will not intervene in those decisions.

MR HO KAI-MING (in Cantonese): Chief Executive, when you assumed office you categorically vowed to abolish the offsetting mechanism of the Mandatory Provident Fund ("MPF") System for the wage earners, in order to enhance retirement protection for the public but you have yet put forward a definite proposal so far. May I ask the Chief Executive when the Government will put forward a proposal, so that the people can connect with you with hope and happiness and share the fruits of economic development?

CHIEF EXECUTIVE (in Cantonese): Mr HO or Members representing the labour sector can rest assured. My position on the abolition of the MPF offsetting mechanism has all along been firm. In other words, it is necessary to abolish the MPF offsetting mechanism in order for the retirees to be protected by comparatively sound and proper arrangements for retirement. We did put forward a definite proposal before but regrettably it was not accepted by Members. Therefore, we are still working hard on it, hoping to put forward a proposal acceptable to Members. I can promise Mr HO that the Secretary for Labour and Welfare and I will work very hard for it in the hope that we can LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ― 31 January 2018 6073 explain to the community as soon as possible the details of a proposal with enhanced government involvement or with the Government "stepping in", so to speak, for abolishing the MPF offsetting arrangement.

MR HO KAI-MING (in Cantonese): President, Chief Executive, a government official already replied last year that a proposal would be put forward at the end of 2017, but it is already 2018 now and the Lunar New Year is just around the corner. When will the new proposal be made available? Does the Government have a timetable, so that all the wage earners in Hong Kong can have hope and know when the offsetting mechanism will be truly abolished?

CHIEF EXECUTIVE (in Cantonese): Mr HO, considering what happened to the previous proposal, we hope to put forward a proposal after it has gained the broad consent and support by employers and employees. Otherwise, even if we put forward a proposal again, it could be overturned and everything would have to start all over again. So, please give us a little more time. We are working hard on it.

MR HO KAI-MING (in Cantonese): Can the Chief Executive give us a timetable, so that the public can have some idea about the time of its abolition, rather than saying all the time that this would be done as soon as possible? I think the public do not consider such an answer satisfactory.

CHIEF EXECUTIVE (in Cantonese): I think doing it as soon as possible, which includes carrying out work expeditiously under the supervision of the Chief Executive, is already the best timetable. As far as I understand it, the abolition of the MPF offsetting mechanism involves some legislative amendments which are very complicated. We will strive to bring it to fruition as soon as possible and we hope to complete this task within my term, which means that we have some four years. In other words, this is more than just putting forward a proposal and seeking Members' consent for it, because we also have to complete the entire legislative amendment exercise.

6074 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ― 31 January 2018

MR SHIU KA-CHUN (in Cantonese): Chief Executive, as busy people tend to have short memories, you probably do not recall what happened around this time last year. On this day of last year, the Education Bureau reinstated TSA (Territory-wide System Assessment) in the name of BCA (Basic Competency Assessment), triggering a boycott of TSA-related homework and even the test itself by parents' groups and education organizations.

Chief Executive, in your manifesto you clearly said that you would suspend the Primary Three TSA before the comprehensive review is completed. The Education Bureau also stated that the results would be made available in December last year. Today is 31 January and yet, no results have been presented. May I ask you if you will state clearly to us today whether the Primary Three TSA will be suspended across the board? Please give us a straightforward answer. If you have the guts to do it, you should have the guts to admit it.

CHIEF EXECUTIVE (in Cantonese): First of all, I thank Mr SHIU for giving me an opportunity to make a clarification as it is now very common to urge people to "repay their debts". The Chief Executive Election was conducted from February to March last year before the resumption of TSA (which is called BCA now). I wrote this in my manifesto back then: Before the comprehensive review is completed, I shall suspend the Primary Three Territory-wide System Assessment. We are in the course of conducting a comprehensive review which, I think, will be completed soon. If, after the review, we can come up with a proper view which is also acceptable to the community, it would be unnecessary to suspend BCA. Is it that this review has taken a longer time than expected? Yes, I am afraid so. But it is because the review has to be conducted in a stringent, judicious manner. I promise that I will attend to this matter personally.

However, I cannot give a straightforward answer here because in the part on education in my manifesto, I have undertaken to adopt a professional-led approach and ensure active listening and therefore, it must be for the professionals, namely, professionals in the Education Bureau and education professionals in the committees, to make suggestions. If necessary, the Secretary for Education will actively listen to the views of frontline members of the education sector and make recommendations for my consideration.

LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ― 31 January 2018 6075

MR SHIU KA-CHUN (in Cantonese): Chief Executive, you did not answer my question properly. In you manifesto you made this vow categorically but you simply got away after you were elected. You expressly said that you would suspend TSA but now you said that you would let the professionals take on a steering role. It is a lie. It is default on your undertaking.

CHIEF EXECUTIVE (in Cantonese): Why do Members always criticize us in such a way now? As I already explained, I was the one who wrote my manifesto and I remember each and every line of it. It is stated in the manifesto that the Primary Three Territory-wide System Assessment shall be suspended before the comprehensive review is completed. The comprehensive review has been carried out for some time and will be completed soon. After its completion there will be a direction and views on BCA. If there is the view that BCA can be conducted but with some amendments made to it, then I would not need to suspend it. So, there is no question of default on my undertaking or a lie.

MR CHAN CHUN-YING (in Cantonese): Chief Executive, the Hong Kong Association of Banks announced on November 24 last year that it would work together with the EPS Company (Hong Kong) Limited and a chain convenience store to launch in early March this year a pilot project in such districts as Cheung Chau, Lantau and Tin Shiu Wai to provide cash withdrawal service to the elderly at designated convenience stores without the need to make purchases. This will enable elderly people living in the remote areas to withdraw cash in their neighbourhood. There are now in Hong Kong over 120 post offices scattered across the territory, and EPS is also used as a tool for transaction in the post offices. Will the Government consider borrowing a page from the book of companies in the community by expanding the items of public services provided by the post offices to enable the elderly to withdraw cash via EPS at designated post offices without having to purchase postal products, so that the elderly will have an additional channel for cash withdrawal in various districts; and will other government departments engaging in cash transactions consider doing the same?

CHIEF EXECUTIVE (in Cantonese): I thank Mr CHAN for this question. It is a style of governance of the current-term Government to be people-oriented. Therefore, we are glad to take into consideration any measure that can provide convenience to Hong Kong citizens in their daily living, especially to the elderly or elderly living in the remote areas.

6076 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ― 31 January 2018

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Mr CHAN, do you wish to ask a supplementary question?

MR CHAN CHUN-YING (in Cantonese): While the Chief Executive will take this into consideration, I hope a timetable can be provided for each study. Can the Chief Executive tell us specifically how long it will take before the results of the study can be made available, so that we can know that we should not simply rely on non-governmental organizations to take forward these initiatives for financial inclusion?

CHIEF EXECUTIVE (in Cantonese): My answer is still this: We will do it as soon as possible, alright? Mr CHAN, we will do it as soon as possible. But honestly, before you asked this question, I had not considered this proposal; nor had I heard of it before. I do not know how complicated it will be to bring it into practice but from this day onwards, we will look into it―Secretary Edward YAU is nodding―and we will consider the results of the study thoroughly with an attitude which is "people-oriented" as I mentioned just now and which aims to provide convenience to the elderly.

MR WU CHI-WAI (in Cantonese): In her response to colleagues' questions earlier, the Chief Executive, like Teresa CHENG, completely shifted the responsibility for "DQ" or disqualification to the Returning Officer. She really should not deceive people. When she ran in the election, she was also required to sign a confirmation form. Does anyone believe that a Returning Officer would have the guts to "DQ" or disqualify her from running in the election? We now realize that in Hong Kong, the greatest authority lies neither in the Western District nor Central but in the hands of the Returning Officers, and I think nobody would believe it. Yet, I wish to ask the Chief Executive a question now. They asserted that Agnes CHOW advocates democratic self-determination and so they deprived her of her political rights and banned her from running in the election. May I ask the Chief Executive whether this ban will last for a lifetime? Under what circumstances can she and her colleagues or fellow members of Demosistō run in elections? Do they have to write confessions like the practice in the Mainland before their due right to stand for elections can be protected?

LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ― 31 January 2018 6077

CHIEF EXECUTIVE (in Cantonese): Mr WU, each election is an independent election and therefore, nobody, whether it be myself or the Returning Officers with powers conferred on them by the law, can tell Members today who will be qualified for candidacy and who will not in future elections. So, he is kind of making us do something which is extremely difficult to do.

MR WU CHI-WAI (in Cantonese): Is she saying that the goalposts can be moved arbitrarily by the Government? The right to stand for elections of the public or citizens is stipulated in the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and this right is protected. If the Government can keep on moving the "red line" in its arrangements for "DQ" or disqualification, this is obviously a violation of the basic provision that the right to stand for elections and the right to be elected of the citizens should be protected as stated in this international covenant.

CHIEF EXECUTIVE (in Cantonese): Whether in the international covenant or the Basic Law, protection is given to the citizens in that they have the right to vote and the right to stand for elections, but it has to be in accordance with the law. Article 26 of the Basic Law also provides that the people have these rights in accordance with the law …

MR WU CHI-WAI (in Cantonese): The Basic Law …

CHIEF EXECUTIVE (in Cantonese): Please let me finish my reply. So, the decisions made in relation to each election are subject to the legal requirements at the time as well as the facts and evidence laid before our eyes. I cannot guarantee that the law will remain unchanged for a lifetime; nor can I guarantee that there will be changes in the facts.

MR WU CHI-WAI (in Cantonese): With regard to the so-called facts as referred to by the Chief Executive, what we have seen is conviction of a person because of his speeches and thoughts. It is because we have seen that Agnes CHOW, who intended to run in the election, did not personally make any remark advocating Hong Kong independence, so to speak, and as for democratic 6078 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ― 31 January 2018 self-determination that she has been talking about, she only means to work with members of the public to find a way out for Hong Kong after 2047 in accordance with the Basic Law and yet, she was still "DQ" or disqualified by the Government. I think their arguments amount to conviction of a person because of his thoughts and speeches.

CHIEF EXECUTIVE (in Cantonese): The reasons for the decision that the nomination of Agnes CHOW as a candidate is invalid are set out in detail in the nomination form. The person concerned can initiate judicial proceedings if she is, in any way, dissatisfied with the decision.

IR DR LO WAI-KWOK (in Cantonese): Chief Executive, the Secretary for Transport and Housing of the last term, Prof Anthony CHEUNG, announced in 2014 that after rounds of public consultation and consultancy studies, seven new railway projects would be introduced, including inter-district projects and some improvement or extension works of a smaller scale. The East Kowloon Line project originally was not included in the consultation but the Government appreciated the concern of the public and various political parties about the serious transport problems in East Kowloon and therefore, the East Kowloon Line, which was a relatively new proposal, was made among the seven projects.

The public and various political parties basically support these seven projects which nevertheless have remained all words but no action and so far, we have yet seen any specific plan and proposal put forward by the Government on these seven projects. Other railway projects in Hong Kong, such as the Hong Kong section of the Express Rail Link and the Shatin to Central Link, will be completed one after another but these seven projects have not been implemented right away and their progress remains stagnant. The industry is gravely concerned about this.

In this connection, I wish to take this opportunity to ask the Chief Executive this question: Does the Government have a concrete plan for implementing these seven new railway projects?

LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ― 31 January 2018 6079

CHIEF EXECUTIVE (in Cantonese): President, the inclusion of these projects in the new round of railway strategy by us back then actually indicated that we agreed to the need for these projects. These projects are currently at the stage of confirmation and will be taken forward in a gradual and orderly manner. If Ir Dr LO is interested in finding out the details, I can give an account of the progress of each project in the new round of railway strategy to Ir Dr LO and Members later.

IR DR LO WAI-KWOK (in Cantonese): Chief Executive, to address the territory-wide transport problems, apart from railway projects, it is imperative to make planning and put forth forward-looking proposals on the future development of the transport network as a whole. In retrospect, the Government has conducted three comprehensive transport studies before and each of these studies has led to a quantum leap in transport in Hong Kong, but why is it that the authorities have yet undertaken to conduct a fourth Comprehensive Transport Study?

CHIEF EXECUTIVE (in Cantonese): In this regard, please allow me to digress a bit. Some time ago I inspected the situation of land in Hong Kong by helicopter and then I said on Facebook that this trip had given me some inspirations. Subsequently in an interview with the media, I mentioned that I was inspired in that I can see there is still land in Hong Kong, just that whenever I asked my colleagues responsible for planning matters, their response to me was that there is no transport infrastructure.

Therefore, I was inspired in that―as Dr Ir LO has said―the layout of transport infrastructure should be forward-looking. Here, I am giving a more positive response to Ir Dr LO's question.

MR FRANKIE YICK (in Cantonese): Chief Executive, given a low birth rate and the ageing of population, the overall workforce in Hong Kong has decreased. Many trades and industries, such as health care, catering, public transport, logistics and transport, sea-based operations, etc. are presented an acute manpower shortage. This manpower shortage affects not only the development of the trades and industries but also the long-term economic development of Hong Kong and will even lead to road safety problems. Take the transport 6080 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ― 31 January 2018 industry as an example. Recently, a newspaper carried the news title of "Serious ageing of professional drivers Government clearance of road bombs brooks no delay". It shows that the ageing of drivers has given cause for public concern.

At present, the average age of professional drivers are 58 for taxi drivers, and 68 for green minibus drivers, and quite a large number of them are aged above 70. Without new drivers joining the industry, it will be difficult to maintain the provision of public transport services and this will also lead to problems with road safety.

With regard to the problem of labour shortage, may I ask the Chief Executive whether the Government will make the utmost effort to study the improvement of the Supplementary Labour Scheme by, for instance, considering to include in the scheme professional drivers and in particular, green minibus drivers, and also warehouse workers as well as workers engaging in sea-based operations, while importing more foreign workers in a target-specific manner, just as what is being done now to address the acute shortage of care workers?

CHIEF EXECUTIVE (in Cantonese): It is most obvious that labour supply has been tight in Hong Kong, as also indicated by the latest quarterly unemployment rate, which is as low as 2.9%, the lowest for the past two decades. While this, on the one hand, reflects full employment which the Government is certainly happy to see, it also reflects a shortage of labour at the same time. In this connection, Mr YICK called on us to conduct studies at full steam and this is what we have to do. The Chief Secretary for Administration will later chair a committee on human resources to conduct in-depth studies on a number of issues raised by Mr YICK just now. But in the course of the studies, we will also take into consideration the reaction of the labour sector.

I also wish to take this opportunity to state that the application of technology can, in fact, mitigate the manpower problem. For instance, over the last two days I saw that a container terminal in Kwai Chung had switched to remote crane operation as a means to cut down on manpower. So, I encourage the industries to―if we can provide the industries with more incentives in other ways―reduce their demand for manpower more by application of technology.

LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ― 31 January 2018 6081

Put simply, we will adopt a two-pronged approach. On the one hand, we will look into the shortage of labour to see if the measures can be slightly relaxed where it is acceptable to all sides, so that certain industries can have a replenishment of foreign workers, while work will be carried out on the technology front on the other.

MR FRANKIE YICK (in Cantonese): Chief Executive, I certainly agree to the use of technology to alleviate the shortage of labour, just that in some industries, it is impossible to replace manpower by technology. For instance, workers engaging in sea-based operations have to pass the tests and obtain 10-odd licences before they are qualified to perform their duties and so, technology does not have a part to play at all. I hope that the Government can address this situation expeditiously.

CHIEF EXECUTIVE (in Cantonese): Alright.

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): I will allow one more Member to ask a question. The last Member to ask a question is Mr CHAN Chi-chuen.

MR CHAN CHI-CHUEN (in Cantonese): President, I wish to ask two simple true or false questions. I hope that the Chief Executive can give a direct answer, rather than saying things like "if it is the fact, then it is the fact".

First, do you believe that Teresa CHENG knew of the existence of unauthorized building works ("UBWs") at her properties only after inspections by authorized persons or she had not thought about or suspected at all possible existence of UBWs at her properties in Tuen Mun, the Repulse Bay, Shatin and Fo Tan? Do you believe it or not?

CHIEF EXECUTIVE (in Cantonese): The Secretary for Justice is one of my most important partners and my legal adviser, too. Had I have any suspicion as that suggested by Mr CHAN just now about a candidate for the office of the Secretary for Justice, I definitely would not have recommended her appointment as the Secretary for Justice. So, to put it in simple terms, I certainly believe Ms CHENG.

6082 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ― 31 January 2018

MR CHAN CHI-CHUEN (in Cantonese): You are different from the ordinary people. You are so special.

The second true or false question is this: According to the mortgage and assignment documents of Teresa CHENG, it is written clearly in the documents relating to Villa De Mer that there was no basement, and that the person who signed these documents had inspected the property. However, there was a basement at the residence of Teresa CHENG upon her purchase, and Teresa CHENG said repeatedly at the meeting on Monday that she had not inspected that property when she purchased it. I have this question for . If a person signed these documents knowing that he or she had not inspected the property but claimed that he or she had inspected the purchased property and that there was no basement, did this person knowingly make a false statement?

CHIEF EXECUTIVE (in Cantonese): I cannot possibly answer this question because everyone knows that I am a "snail without a shell", and I have no experience in the sale and purchase of properties in Hong Kong. But I can tell Members that as I said in the last Question and Answer Session, insofar as this incident is concerned, the person in question already said that she had indeed been negligent, that she had not paid attention to it, that she had been careless, that she had been very busy and even so overwhelmed by work that her personal affairs were put at the back of her mind. Members may consider these remarks inconceivable but I personally shared her feelings. I am always busy with my public duties to the neglect of my personal affairs. I am also very busy and do not have the time to deal with my personal affairs. So, all I can say is that I hope Members can look at this incident with a more understanding, tolerant attitude.

MR CHAN CHI-CHUEN (in Cantonese): Chief Executive, if this is how you treat Teresa CHENG, then all the legislation and criminal cases relating to UBWs can be written off once and for all because the person in question can be absolved of all criminal liabilities so long as he claims that he was busy, that he did not do it intentionally and that it was all due to negligence on his part. Is that the case? Is it necessary to amend the legislation then?

LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ― 31 January 2018 6083

CHIEF EXECUTIVE (in Cantonese): No, that is not the case. Mr CHAN, as I pointed out earlier, apart from the law, there has to be investigations and evidence. So, if an investigation is conducted and evidence found, enforcement actions can be taken in accordance with the law.

MR CHAN CHI-CHUEN (in Cantonese): Then if prosecution is brought against Teresa CHENG, do you think she would need to be suspended from duty? She said last week that it would not be necessary.

CHIEF EXECUTIVE (in Cantonese): President, I will not reply to a series of hypothetic questions from Mr CHAN.

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): The Chief Executive's Question Time ends here. After the Chief Executive has left the Chamber, this Council will hold its regular meeting immediately.

The Chief Executive will now leave the Chamber. Members will please stand up.

(A number of Members repeatedly shouted slogans: "Oppose unreasonable 'DQ'; Shame on political persecution")

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Will Members please keep quiet.

(As the Chief Executive walked away from the Chamber, a number of Members continued to shout slogans)

ADJOURNMENT OF MEETING

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): I now adjourn the Council.

Adjourned accordingly at 11:33 am.