Responsible Department (Translation)

Minutes of the 1st Meeting of the Housing Affairs Committee (2021) of Council

Date： 8 February 2021 Time: 10:00 a.m. – 12:10 p.m. Venue: K&T DO Conference Room

Attendee Time of Arrival Time of Departure

Mr CHOW Wai-hung, Rayman (Chairman) 10:38 a.m. End of Meeting Mr HON Chun-yin (Vice-chairman) Start of Meeting End of Meeting Mr CHEUNG Man-lung 10:14 a.m. End of Meeting Mr HUI Kei-cheung Start of Meeting End of Meeting Mr KWOK Tsz-kin 10:45 a.m. End of Meeting Mr LAU Chi-kit Start of Meeting End of Meeting Ms LAU Kwai-mui Start of Meeting End of Meeting Miss LEUNG Ching-shan Start of Meeting End of Meeting Mr LEUNG Kam-wai Start of Meeting End of Meeting Ms LEUNG Kar-ming Start of Meeting 10:48 a.m. Mr LEUNG Kwok-wah Start of Meeting End of Meeting Mr LEUNG Wing-kuen 10:05 a.m. End of Meeting Mr LEUNG Yiu-chung 10:38 a.m. End of Meeting Mr NG Kim-sing 10:21 a.m. End of Meeting Mr TAM Ka-chun, Warren Start of Meeting End of Meeting Mr TONG Ho-man Start of Meeting End of Meeting Mr TSUI Hiu-kit 11:17 a.m. 10:46 a.m. Mr WONG Bing-kuen Start of Meeting End of Meeting Mr WONG Tin-yan Start of Meeting End of Meeting Mr WONG Yun-tat, Ivan 10:10 a.m. End of Meeting

1 Responsible Department In Attendance

Mr SIN Chung-kai, SBS, JP Chairman of the Kwai Tsing District Council Mrs LAI CHAN Wai-fan, Clara Senior Housing Manager (), Ms Mak Siu-ling Senior Property Service Manager/Kwai Chung, Housing Department Mr WONG Wai-sing Professional Officer 2-4/Joint Office 2, Joint Office of Building Department and Food and Environmental Hygiene Department Ms LAW Yue-kwan Senior Health Inspector (Joint Office) Kwai Tsing, Food and Environmental Hygiene Department Mr HEUNG Man-ching, Paul Building Surveyor D4-4, Building Department Miss YIM Yik-huen, Bonnie Assistant District Officer (Kwai Tsing), Kwai Tsing District Office Miss CHANG Hiu-hung, Regin (Secretary) Executive Officer (District Council) 2, Kwai Tsing District Office

Absent with Apologies

Mr LAM Siu-fai (With prior notice) Miss LO Yuen-ting (With prior notice)

2 Responsible Department Opening Remarks

(Since the Chairman had not yet arrived at the conference room, the Vice Chairman presided over the meeting as the Temporary Chairman.)

The Temporary Chairman welcomed Members and representatives of government departments to the 1st meeting of the Housing Affairs Committee (HAC) (2021) of Kwai Tsing District Council (K&T DC).

2. The Temporary Chairman welcomed Mr HEUNG Man-ching, Paul, Building Surveyor/D4-4 of Building Department (BD) to attend the meeting as a department representative.

3. The Committee unanimously endorsed the application for absence by Mr LAM Siu-fai and Miss LO Yuen-ting.

Confirmation of Minutes of the 6th meeting held on 1 December 2020

4. Miss LEUNG Ching-shan moved a motion to confirm the minutes. The motion was seconded by Ms LAU Kwai-mui. The Committee endorsed the said minutes unanimously.

Discussion Items

The Problem of Adjoining and Connected Drainage Pipes and Virus Transmission in Units of Estate (Proposed by Mr WONG Bing-kuen) (HAC Paper No. 1, 1a/D/2021)

5. Mr WONG Bing-kuen introduced the Paper and hoped that the Housing Department (HD) would explain in details how it would solve the problem of virus transmission caused by the adjoining and connected drainage pipes in the old wing of Tai Wo Hau Estate.

6. Ms MAK Siu-ling, Senior Property Service Manager (Kwai Chung) of HD gave a consolidated response as follows:

(i) The designs of buildings under the Housing Authority (Housing Authority) were in accordance with the standard block design adopted for at the time of development, and met the 3 Responsible Department construction standard of the Housing Authority at the time.

(ii) The drainage system of Fu On House was a shared U-shaped water trap design which was in line with the construction standard of the Housing Authority at the time.

(iii) If public housing tenants suspected a problem with the unit pipes or that the pipes gave off bad odour, they should immediately notify the housing estate office so that staff could be sent to examine the pipes in the units and carry out required maintenance.

7. Mr HUI Kei-cheung put forth enquiries and opinions as follows:

(iv) HD stated in the written reply that the sewage pipes of a total of eight buildings in Tai Wo Hau Estate were connected to adjacent units. He enquired about the inspection done by HD since the outbreak of COVID-19 till now and hoped HD could provide detailed information after the meeting.

(Post-meeting note: HD indicated after the meeting that only six buildings in Tai Wo Hau Estate used shared U-shaped water traps design, including Fu Wing House, Fu Wah House, Fu Kwai House, Fu On House, Fu Man House and Fu Pong House.)

(v) Although the design of the drainage system did not violate the standards of the time, the residents hoped that HD could improve the design of the drainage pipes in response to the outbreak of COVID-19 to block the horizontal transmission of virus.

(vi) HD stated that it would take the initiative to conduct regular inspections in public rental housing (PRH) and provide timely maintenance. He asked about the improvement measures taken by HD.

8. Mr LEUNG Kwok-wah put forth opinions and enquiries as follows:

(i) The standards at that time might not be in line with the current one.

(ii) He asked whether HD had reviewed if the design of old PRH could tie in with the current needs.

4 Responsible Department (iii) He took the PRH of Shek Lei as an example, after the SARS epidemic in 2003, HD had added U-shaped water traps in all units of that housing estate. At present, some PRH units shared the same drainage pipe. He believed that HD should take the initiative to review the design of all drainage pipes instead of handling the problem only when the residents suspected the problems and made enquiries.

(iv) HD should improve the design of drainage pipes in PRH so that each unit could have an independent drainage pipe.

9. Mr WONG Bing-kuen put forth enquiries and opinions as follows:

(i) He took Fu On House of Tai Wo Hau Estate, which was built in 1980s, as an example. Although the units of the old wing of the building did not have separate U-shaped water traps, HD adopted the improved design in the new wing buildings which were built subsequently and installed separate U-shaped water traps in those units. He asked why HD could keep abreast with the times in that case but turned a blind eye upon the safety of old units without separate U-shaped water traps under the current epidemic.

(ii) HD should explain to the residents whether the virus would spread in old estates with adjoining and connected drainage pipes like Fu On House.

10. Mr LAU Chi-kit put forth enquiries and opinions as follows:

(i) He asked HD whether they would only deal with the problems when problems arose.

(ii) The written reply of HD could not answer the questions of Mr WONG Bing-kuen so he hoped HD could explain in details.

11. Miss LEUNG Ching-shan put forth enquiries and opinions as follows:

(i) The progress of drainage inspection of HD was not satisfactory. She took Kwai Shing West Estate as an example, HD had promised to deploy additional manpower. However, after inspection of the two buildings, the manpower was deployed to Shek Yum Estate and the inspection of drainage pipes in Kwai Shing West Estate had stopped. She asked how HD would speed up the inspection of drainage pipes. 5 Responsible Department

(ii) She had asked the Environment Bureau about the testing results of the sewage samples of Kwai Shing West Estate, but did not receive a reply. She believed that HD had the responsibility to follow up and hoped that it would give an account of the inspection results of the drainage pipes.

12. Mr LEUNG Kam-wai put forth opinions as follows:

(i) If HD considered that the drainage pipes in PRH were in line with the current standard and would not further improve them, it meant HD had not fulfilled the responsibilities of a contractor.

(ii) There were concerns over similar pipes. HD should improve the design of pipes as soon as possible instead of taking actions only when there was an outbreak of epidemic.

13. Mr LEUNG Kar-ming put forth opinions as follows:

(i) When the epidemic broke out in Hong Mei House of Cheung Hong Estate, HD only sent staff to inspect the pipes in Hong Mei House. As for other buildings with the same type of pipe design, the inspection progress was slow. It was not until recently that HD made a provision for Cheung Hong Estate to set the schedule of pipes inspection.

(ii) To her understanding, HD had insufficient staff to inspect and repair pipes. She hoped that HD would deploy additional staff to speed up the inspection and repair process.

(iii) It was useless to check the pipes without follow-up actions. Therefore, upon completion of inspection, HD should repair the problematic locations as soon as possible to eliminate the hidden virus.

14. The Temporary Chairman said that some residents in the PRH had altered the pipes in their units. When residents wanted to repair the pipes, although “Total Maintenance Scheme” panel indicated that they could follow up on the repair, they might not be able to do that if they found during the inspection that the pipes had been altered. Under the epidemic, problems related to pipes should be dealt with urgently, so he suggested that HD adopt a special response plan.

15. Ms MAK Siu-ling gave a consolidated response as follows: 6 Responsible Department

(i) HD understood public housing tenants’ concerns over the pipes so they had actively carried out regular inspection and provided timely maintenance.

(ii) All along, when there were confirmed cases of COVID-19 in PRH, HD would take the initiative to check all the toilets in PRH units which shared the same drainage system with units with confirmed cases. In case any defect was found during the inspection such as pipe leakage, loosening of pipe bracket or connection accessories, HD would arrange repair as soon as possible. In case the tenants altered the pipes without permission, they would be held responsible for undertaking the rectification works required at their own expense.

(iii) Under the “Drainage Inspection Programme” (DIP) of Housing Authority, HD would take the initiative to inspect the drainage pipes of PRH estates. DIP would be carried out in stages and guidelines for prioritising the buildings had been introduced in the last meeting. The current inspection order was tentative. HD would timely review the order and arrangement of the estates in view of the development of epidemic, resources, staff and the actual situation of specific estates.

(iv) She took Yan Shek House of Shek Yum Estate as an example. Since there were many confirmed cases in the building, the Government had issued a quarantine order and compulsory testing notice. HD then sent inspectors to Shek Yum House for drainage pipe inspection. As such, inspection programme in other PRH estates might be postponed.

(v) Even for premises of PRH estates which were built in the same period, the design would be different due to different construction and completion date and the changes of relevant construction standards.

(vi) The designs of public housing buildings under Housing Authority (including the drainage system and pipelines design) were all in accordance with the standard of public housing and in line with the construction standard of Housing Authority at that time.

(vii) To the understanding of HD, BD was revising the regulations relevant to drainage system. HD would pay attention to the announcement of BD and refer to the latest requirement for follow-up. 7 Responsible Department

16. Mr SIN Chung-kai put forth opinions as follows:

(i) There had been cracks in the pipelines in Wing Yiu House of Lai Yiu Estate. HD found that there was leakage after inspection and had blocked the leakage. He believed that in case the pipes were in good condition, the risk of virus transmission would be reduced. There would be no need to have massive compulsory testing and community lockdown.

(ii) HD mentioned the problem of manpower but the raid lockdown action conducted by the Government every night required much manpower and money. Since the epidemic had already broken out in the lockdown area, lockdowns failed to intercept the source. In case the Government could properly handle the pipe issues with internal resources, its effectiveness would outweigh the lockdown operations.

(iii) There were problems with pipes in many PRH estates. He hoped that HD could expedite the inspection scheme.

17. Mr WONG Bing-kuen hoped that HD would reply to the two issues as follows in writing after the meeting:

(i) Whether the old water drainage pipes in the floor of Fu On House definitely would not cause transmission of viruses.

(ii) There were old and new wings in Fu On House of Tai Wo Hau Estate, in which the old one did not have independent U-shaped water traps while the new one did. He hoped to know the reason why the engineers included the independent U-shaped water traps in the new wing at that time.

18. Mr HUI Kei-cheung put forth opinions as follows:

(i) He again asked HD to provide the inspection works done in the eight buildings of Tai Wo Hau Estate as listed in the written reply.

(ii) The inspection scheme was “perfunctory” since it was impossible for HD to finish inspecting all the pipes in all PRH estates in a short period of time. HD did not have enough manpower and had not explained the 8 Responsible Department improvement measures after inspection.

(iii) He hoped that HD could handle the pipe issues cautiously and make proper improvements.

19. Ms MAK Siu-ling responded that HD would provide a written reply after the meeting.

20. The Temporary Chairman received the following extempore motion:

(The Chairman arrived at the conference room and the rest of the meeting was presided over by the Chairman.)

Extempore motion: “Housing Affairs Committee of The Kwai Tsing District Council Requests the Installation of Independent U-shaped water traps in the Eight Buildings of Tai Wo Hau Estate which had old drain pipes” (Proposed by Mr WONG Bing-kuen and seconded by Mr HUI Kei-cheung)

21. The Chairman put the above extempore motion to the vote for acceptance. The Committee unanimously accepted the above extempore motion for discussion.

22. The Chairman put the above extempore motion to the vote. The Committee unanimously endorsed the extempore motion.

(Post-meeting note: The Secretariat sent HD’s reply to Members on 2 March 2021. Please refer to HAC Circulation Paper No. 7/2021.)

Motion: “The Kwai Tsing District Council Requests the Housing Department and the Housing Society to Examine the Safety Issue of Straight-down Refuse Chutes in Public Rental Housing (PRH) and (HOS) Courts Comprehensively, Including But Not Limited to Providing Safety Belts and Increasing the Height of Fencing for the Same Type of Refuse Chutes, and Requests Contractors to Provide Workers with Pre-employment Safety Training. In the long run, Straight-down Refuse Chutes Should Be Banned in Public Housing Like PRH and HOS Courts First and Other Safer Ways for Dumping Refuse Should Be Adopted Instead, and Gradually Extended This to Other Buildings in the Territory to Protect the Safety of Workers.” (Proposed by Mr LEUNG Kam-wai; seconded by Mr CHEUNG Man-lung, Mr LAU Chi-kit and Mr TAM Ka-chun, Warren)

9 Responsible Department (HAC Paper No. 2, 2a, 2b/D/2021)

23. Mr LEUNG Kam-wai introduced the Paper and put forth opinions and enquiries as follows:

(i) The reply of HD had not mentioned any improvement measures.

(ii) HD had the responsibility to manage the safety of refuse chutes, whether in PRH estates or estates under the Tenants Purchase Scheme (TPS).

24. Mr CHEUNG Man-lung put forth opinions as follows:

(i) He learned from the recent newspaper that the refuse chute which was below standard was still in use after the accident happened in Cheung On Estate.

(ii) Although HD had already sold the estates under TPS, Cheung On Estate was not designed for sale at the time of designing. It was difficult to find some parts for repairing the facilities in the estate and the drawings were also held by HD. HD had not considered the consequences, which caused the current chute problem.

(iii) He hoped HD could seriously handle the refuse chute issues of PRH estates and estates under TPS and suggested that HD improve the design of refuse chutes.

25. Mr KWOK Tsz-kin put forth opinions as follows:

(i) The amount of garbage had greatly increased during the epidemic. In addition to considering the safety of refuse chutes, the noise and blockage of refuse chutes should also be solved. To his understanding, the refuse chutes in some housing estates were blocked every two to three days and it was very difficult to repair the entire refuse chute system, which annoyed the residents.

(ii) He hoped HD would improve the existing refuse chutes.

26. Mr Tam Ka-chun, Warren put forth opinions and enquiries as follows:

(i) The issue was about the number of PRH estates and Home Ownership 10 Responsible Department Scheme Flats (HOS) in Kwai Tsing District where refuse chutes were used. However, HD and Hong Kong Housing Society had not provided the relevant number in their written reply.

(ii) Even though HD did not own the property right, the housing estates were built by HD and HD had the drawings and knew which of the estates had adopted similar refuse chutes. In case HD could provide the relevant information, Members would know about the number of chutes that needed to be handled.

(iii) He had learned that recently, Labour Department (LD) had sent staff to inspect many refuse chutes in PRH estates and hoped the Secretariat would assist in enquiring LD about whether the inspections were for the entire territory or sample surveys.

(iv) Some buildings which received the “suspension notices” issued by LD were built in 1980s or late 1990s, including PRH estates and HOS courts. He believed that more than seven housing estates had problems regarding refuse chutes. He asked whether HD had cooperated with LD in inspections and opined that in case HD had kept the relevant information of refuse chutes, LD would not need to inspect all PRH estates in the territory but just the ones with needs based on the existing number.

(v) He did not hope to see departments solve the problem only after an accident had happened.

(vi) When HD sold TPS estates, it made an injection of a certain amount of money to the Maintenance Fund for each TPS estate. He asked whether HD would inject more to the Maintenance Fund. If HD did not have such a plan, he hoped that the representatives of HD could reflect the issue to HD headquarters.

27. Miss LEUNG Ching-shan put forth enquiries and opinions as follows:

(i) She asked HD what “most PRH estates” mentioned in the written reply referred to.

(ii) In the absence of figures, Members could not know whether the refuse chutes in old estates such as Kwai Shing West Estate and High Prosperity Terrace had potential risk. 11 Responsible Department

(iii) HD was responsible for ensuring the safety of facilities and should not put cleaners at risk of occupational injury.

(iv) She hoped that HD could provide a timetable for the inspection of refuse chutes.

28. Mr LEUNG Yiu-chung put forth opinions and enquiries as follows:

(i) In addition to occupational injuries, environmental hygiene issues were also worthy of attention. Some cleaning companies had told him that it was difficult to clean the pipes in the refuse chutes. Therefore, he worried that it was easy for bacteria to breed in refuse chutes.

(ii) To avoid industrial accidents, HD narrowed chute openings. However, cleaners could not dump the garbage in the chutes directly and could only do so piece by piece. It was not only a waste of time, but it also led to other industrial accidents.

(iii) HD did not pay attention to the problems encountered by cleaners in the workplace. For example, the cleaners needed to lift heavy trash high into the chutes, and therefore it was easy for them to suffer from a sprain. He hoped that HD could review the issues of garbage chutes comprehensively.

(iv) Since HD had no plan to abandon the use of refuse chutes to transport waste, he asked HD about the improvement measures it would take and asked them to explain in details afterwards.

29. Mr LAU Chi-kit put forth opinions and enquiries as follows:

(i) The written reply submitted by HD failed to answer Members’ enquiries. HD mentioned that “HOS courts and TPS estates were not different from private properties and were governed by the “Building Management Ordinance” (BMO), the Government leases and the Deeds of Mutual Covenant (DMCs)”. He believed that HD just passed the buck to the Owners’ Corporation (OCs). Although HD was one of the representatives in in the management committees (MCs), after reviewing relevant documents, he found that HD was not involved in the management of TPS estates. 12 Responsible Department

(ii) LD issued the Reminder on Safety and Health No. 02/2018 - “Safety of Working at Refuse Chutes” in 2018. He asked whether HD had taken the initiative to discuss how to redesign refuse chutes with the OCs of TPS estates.

(iii) Although HD replied that OCs could make their own decisions on the improvement of public facilities with reference to the DMC and relevant legal requirements, he believed that HD, being a member of the OCs and having the property ownership of TPS estates, should provide relevant information and opinions to OCs.

30. Mr WONG Yun-tat, Ivan put forth opinions and enquiries as follows:

(i) He hoped that HD could alleviate the problems of refuse chutes.

(ii) Most of the housing estates where garbage chute accidents had occurred were TPS estates. He believed that it was related to the construction time and failure to take improvement measures. Therefore, he agreed that HD should subsidise the OCs to implement improvement measures, such as narrowing the chute openings.

(iii) Before improvement measures were taken, he suggested that two cleaners be arranged to clean up the garbage at the same time, one on the floor and the other on the underground. In the event of an accident, they could use the walkie-talkie to ask for help.

(iv) HD had installed automatic garbage collection system in some housing estates in 1990s, but later such system was deactivated due to difficulties in maintenance. He believed that such system was convenient and safe so he asked whether an automatic garbage collection system could be used in new housing estates if waste separation was done well. He also hoped that HD could consider other methods of garbage collection.

31. The Chairman said that the Government had advocated environmental protection and intended to implement waste levy in recent years. He asked HD whether it would include food waste recycling system when designing refuse chutes to allow residents to put the food refuse to designated locations on their residential floors. The rest that could not be reused could be disposed of at another location to solve the problem of rubbish amount. At the same time, it could provide an incentive for HD to comprehensively 13 Responsible Department review the design of refuse chutes.

32. Mrs LAI CHAN Wai-fan, Clara, Senior Housing Manager (Kwai Chung) of HD, gave a consolidated response as follows:

(i) HD briefed about the refuse chutes in PRH estates and TPS estates in the written reply submitted. HD would consider Members’ concerns and enquiries and provide supplementary information after the meeting.

(ii) HD was very concerned about the design of refuse chutes and the safety of cleaners. Therefore, HD would continue to communicate with the industry to examine how to provide a safer workplace for cleaners in terms of building design, including refuse room and its equipment.

(iii) The PRH estates in Kwai Tsing District which were under Housing Authority adopted refuse chutes, but for some adjourning buildings in some estates (such as Kwai Shing West Estate), there were only garbage chutes in the main building.

(iv) The cleaning contractors of the public housing under Housing Authority should be those admitted to the Counterparty Lists. The contractors must have sufficient manpower, resources and funding to be listed. HD would keep contact with the contractors and have meetings with them to discuss occupational safety and other issues.

(v) HD would arrange site visits for the cleaning contractors who were interested bidders. The service contracts also required the contractors to hire a safety officer to supervise the safety of the cleaning work and provide on-the-job training for cleaners.

(vi) In terms of contract supervision, HD always paid attention to the number and causes of occupational injury of contractors’ employers. According to the statistics of HD, in the past three years, except the case in which a cleaner’s fingers were hurt by the chute valve in October 2020, no injury accidents related to refuse chutes in PRH estates were received.

(vii) In case a cleaning contractor had records of occupational injury in the PRH estate it is providing cleaning services, HD would deduct points from the quarterly scores of the relevant contractor. The scores attained by contractors would affect their contract extension and tender 14 Responsible Department opportunities.

(viii) HD had been organising seminars from time to time to explain the construction and property management site safety to service contractors. HD had invited the contractors with good performance in workplace safety to share their experience with the industry at seminars for many times.

(ix) As for improvement works targeting refuse chutes opening, OCs of TPS estates might consider using the Maintenance Fund for project expenses but it should be in line with the DMC regulations.

(Post-meeting note: HD stated that the use of the Maintenance Fund must be in line with the terms, provisions and purposes of DMC regulations, such as complying with the “BMO” and the code of practice of such ordinance. The maintenance projects must be preceded only after the endorsement by owners at the general meeting of the OC with more than half of the votes supporting the projects.)

(x) Regarding the property management and maintenance of TPS estates, HD had produced practical guidelines and CDs to share experience in property management and maintenance with members of OCs. In addition, as the owners of unsold units, HD had sent representatives (usually housing estate managers) to be OC members to understand the operation of the OC by attending management committee meetings and timely reflecting the opinions of HD.

(xi) Regarding property management, HD would provide suggestions to OCs from time to time, such as reminding OCs in writing of matters to be noted. In January that year, HD had reminded all OCs of TPS estates to pay attention to the safety of engineering staff and cleaners who worked at height, including the use of refuse chutes, through the representatives of the Housing Authority.

(xii) Some members mentioned refuse chutes accidents which involved TPS estates might be related to the age of the buildings. She responded that the TPS estates sold by the Housing Authority were not the oldest ones, and she therefore believed that the age of buildings might not be the cause of industrial accidents.

15 Responsible Department (xiii) HD regularly held meetings with representatives of different government departments and agencies, including LD, Occupational Safety and Health Council, different unions and organisations (including representatives from the construction and cleaning services sectors) to exchange views on site safety.

33. Mr LEUNG Kam-wai put forth opinions and enquiries as follows:

(i) He would like to amend the Paper submitted by him (namely HAC Paper No. 2/D/2021), where the estate with recent accident mentioned in the background information was “Shan King Estate”, instead of “Sam Shing Estate”.

(ii) He asked whether HD would take some short-term measures, such as installation of safety belts and heightening hoardings on the refuse chutes. He noticed that the materials near the old refuse chutes were all concrete. In case the ground was slippery, the cleaners could easily slip and fall. After heightening the hoardings, even if the cleaners fell, they would not fall into the refuse chutes.

(iii) In the long run, instead of using a central waste system, he proposed the establishment of a lift in the building dedicated for cleaning up garbage or delivery of goods. Although it might increase costs, it could replace the refuse chute system, providing the cleaners with a convenient and safe way to handle garbage.

(iv) Even if the central garbage system was adopted or hoardings were heightened, cleaners would still find cleaning up garbage difficult. The central system seemed advanced, but it required more manpower to dispose of the waste.

(v) He hoped HD would re-examine the refuse chute system, including the central garbage system and drop-off refuse chutes and suggested that HD use goods lifts to deliver garbage.

34. Mr TAM Ka-chun, Warren put forth opinions and enquiries as follows:

(i) The Government was about to implement garbage levy. He believed that HD must review whether the old concept of garbage disposal was appropriate. 16 Responsible Department

(ii) According to the response from HD, all housing estates in Kwai Tsing District had adopted refuse chutes and it had conducted improvement programme. He asked whether HD had kept the number of TPS estates and HOS flats adopting refuse chutes. In addition, he hoped that HD would cooperate with LD in reviewing whether the design of refuse chutes in existing TPS estates and HOS flats had been improved.

(iii) The Maintenance Fund was a policy introduced when the TPS flats were sold. However, LD issued the Reminder on Safety and Health No. 02/2018 in 2018 - “Safety of Working at Refuse Chutes” and as a result, refuse chutes had to be repaired. Such repair projects did not exist when the TPS estates were introduced for sale so he believed that HD should subsidise OCs. Even if HD would not provide subsidies, it should explain the latest requirements of the Labour Ordinance and how to repair refuse chutes for the safety of cleaners to all OCs of TPS estates and HOS courts.

35. Mr LAU Chi-kit put forth opinions and enquiries as follows:

(i) Since Members might not have professional knowledge in housing estate management, he hoped HD could provide booklets and CDs on building management produced by them for Members’ reference.

(ii) The election of OCs was held every two years. Some new OC members might have never received the relevant information from HD.

(iii) HD mentioned that they had reminded OCs of TPS estates of the refuse chute issues in January that year. He asked that as a member of the OCs, whether HD would encourage OCs to improve the chutes or set a deadline for them within that year.

36. Mr LEUNG Wing-kuen put forth opinions as follows:

(i) Regarding the increased amount of waste, Environmental Protection Department (EPD) might adopt other means to handle garbage in the future, such as implementation of municipal solid waste (MSW) charging.

(ii) He had received a lot of complaints about some residents disposing of 17 Responsible Department bulky waste beside the trash bins in On Yam Estate. He hoped HD would allocate resources to solve that problem as soon as possible.

37. Mrs LAI CHAN Wai-fan gave a consolidated response as follows:

(i) The opinions raised by the Members would be reflected to the HD headquarters (including the installation of safety belts in the chutes, heightening hoardings and the installation of a lift).

(ii) As for the addition of a lift in the completed buildings for waste clean-up, it was technically difficult to perform.

(iii) EPD, HD and the cleaning services sector would continue to exchange views on MSW charging, such as waste disposal and prosecution arrangements.

(iv) HD would send the relevant booklets to Members through the Secretariat afterwards.

(Post-meeting note: The Secretariat sent the supplementary information to Members on 11 February 2021. Please refer to HAC Circulation Paper No. 3/2021 for details.)

(v) As for the issue of waste disposal, HD had been paying attention to the waste amount of each housing estate and had also kept contact with Food and Environmental Hygiene Department (FEHD). Where necessary, HD would increase the number of trucks for waste clean-up. HD also cooperated with Kwai Tsing District Office (K&T DO). When K&T DO had the resources, HD and K&T DO would provide trucks services for PRH estates.

(vi) Members who had found any issue on waste disposal in any PRH estate could contact the estate office.

(vii) The information of TPS estates and HOS courts with refuse chutes would be sent to the Secretariat after the meeting.

(Post-meeting note: HD stated that refuse chutes were used in all the TPS estates and HOS courts in Kwai Tsing District.)

18 Responsible Department 38. Mr LEUNG Kam-wai hoped that HD could provide relevant information on occupational injury after the meeting.

(Post-meeting note: HD stated that in the past three years, apart from one accident in which a cleaner hurt his/her fingers by the chute valve, there was no other occupational injury report related to the refuse chutes in public housing estates.)

39. The Chairman put the motion to the vote. The Committee endorsed the motion unanimously.

(Post-meeting note: The Secretariat sent HD’s and the Hong Kong Housing Society’s replies to Members on 23 February 2021. Please refer to HAC Circulation Papers No. 4/2021 and No. 5/2021 respectively for details.)

Information Paper

Housing Department’s Statistical Returns and Progress Reports on Housing Affairs in the District (October to November 2020) (HAC Circulation Paper No. 2/2021 (Revision))

40. Mr HUI Kei-cheung opined that the situation of lift malfunction in Tai Wo Hau Estate was getting worse, so he hoped that HD would supervise the lift contractor to fulfill its responsibilities to ensure residents’ safety when using the lifts.

41. Mr KWOK Tsz-kin put forth enquiries and opinions as follows:

(i) Regarding the prosecution number of illegal gambling and illegal smoking, HD once stated that in case the housing estate office failed to deal with the offenders, they would resort to the Police. He asked about the number of cases reported to the Police due to such situation.

(ii) He hoped that HD would try to deal with the security and hygiene issues under its purview instead of referring them to the Police or other departments for follow-up. He believed that the practice of passing over to other departments was not ideal.

42. Mr LEUNG Kam-wai put forth enquiries and opinions as follows:

(i) The suspension of salt water supply in Kwai Chung Estate was serious. It would be suspended for more than one day, or even two to three days.

19 Responsible Department He hoped that HD could make improvement. To his understanding, HD usually only repaired the salt water switch. He asked HD whether the salt water switch could be completely replaced, and he also hoped that HD could find out the cause of the problem.

(ii) The problem of lift failures was serious. Lift failures in Chun Kwai House and Ha Kwai House which lasted for more than one day had been recorded twice or thrice. In addition, several lifts in Chin Kwai House had such problem for many times. He noticed that the situation described in the report was similar to that in the previous report. He hoped to know about the reason why lifts in Chin Kwai Building failed regularly and the failures lasted for a long time.

43. Miss LEUNG Ching-shan put forth opinions as follows:

(i) The information paper showed that HD had received 22 complaints related to the environment of Kwai Shing West Estate in total. However, most of the complaints she had received were about objects being thrown from a height or noise. Regarding objects being thrown from a height, HD said that they could find the involved units only when the CCTVs had taken relevant photos. Since CCTVs were not installed in some locations in Kwai Shing West Estate, HD had to rely on the Special Squads to inspect such situations. He hoped that HD could send more staff to find out the involved residents to solve the problem.

(ii) Some residents banged objects or made noise in the midnight from time to time. She hoped HD could follow up the issues.

44. Mr LEUNG Yiu-chung put forth opinions as follows:

(i) Frequent failures of lifts in various housing estates brought impacts on residents.

(ii) A resident of Kwai Fong Estate got injured when stepping out of the lift since he did not notice the gap between the lift and the ground. Since the incident was not recorded by the CCTV, that resident could not pursue the obligations. The insurance company of HD also indicated that emergencies were not covered.

(iii) HD bought the most basic insurance. To make a compensation claim, 20 Responsible Department the claimant must prove that the accident was caused by the negligence of HD. Therefore, many residents could not claim the compensation. He believed that HD should review the insurance they had bought to protect the residents.

(iv) In addition to the problem of lift failures, the situation of residents being trapped in a lift was also very serious. He hoped HD and lift maintenance contractors would strengthen communication so as to solve the problem.

45. Mr LAU Chi-kit put forth opinions and enquiries as follows:

(i) There was a vehicle road under the purview of HD near Hong Cheung House of Cheung Hong Estate Phase II and the No.2 Market of Hong Mei House. The information paper showed that HD took measures such as detaining the vehicles that violated the regulations and issued fixed penalty notices. However, from his observation, there were still many vehicles parking illegally on the road at night, so he questioned the effectiveness of the measures.

(ii) The problem of illegal parking on Chung Mei Road was also very serious. In case there was any emergency, it would block the access of fire trucks. Although HD had already taken measures (such as prosecuting persons concerned), he hoped HD could take special actions for illegal parking during Chinese New Year. He also asked HD about the feasible actions for road regulation.

46. Mr WONG Yun-tat, Ivan put forth enquiries and opinions as follows:

(i) The problem of lift failures in Chin Kwai House in Kwai Chung Estate was serious. Almost all lifts had similar failures. Other buildings in Kwai Chung Estate were also facing similar situation. He asked whether HD had changed another lift maintenance contractor.

(ii) The electricity problem happened in Chin Kwai House last week caused power supply interruption in some units and public facilities. He asked whether there was a problem with the electrical installations and whether HD would conduct a comprehensive inspection of the electrical installations.

21 Responsible Department (iii) In case HD could not respond immediately, they could also provide the information afterwards.

47. Mr HON Chun-yin said that there had been complaints that some residents had hung salted fish and dried meat on the drying racks. The oil stains therefore polluted the drying racks at lower levels. However, the Marking Scheme for Tenancy Enforcement in Public Housing Estates (the Marking Scheme) of HD only dealt with dripping water, dripping oil from exhaust fans and so on. In case of such situation and residents had photos as proofs, HD should take actions to deter the black sheep that damaged the environment, but he could not find the number of relevant complaints in the Paper. He believed that HD should keep up with the times.

48. The Chairman put forth opinions and enquiries as follows:

(i) In some PRH estates, there were many lift failures which lasted for more than one hour, revealing that the equipment had failed to function or was aging seriously. HD should consider replacing the entire lift or carrying out major repairs.

(ii) He asked whether the failure of equipment or the insufficient skills of maintenance contractors was the reason causing residents being trapped in the lifts.

(iii) The prolonged leakage of sewage eroded the fresh water and gas pipes, causing gas leakage, but the relevant information was not shown in the information paper. He asked HD if it could include sewage pipe and gas pipe incidents in the next report.

49. Ms MAK Siu-ling gave a consolidated response as follows:

(i) From the report, the number of lift failures at Tai Wo Hau Estate was the highest and failures mainly happened at the upper estate. She had once discussed with HD engineers and senior engineers and was told that each failure was caused by different parts. In response to the performance of the lift contractor, HD had interviewed the contractor and issued a warning letter, requesting a comprehensive review on the lift operation. If any component was not damaged but was not in good condition, HD would request the contractor to replace it in advance whenever feasible. In fact, some lifts had been included in the “Lift Modernisation Programme” and the preliminary work was undergoing. The 22 Responsible Department installation project for relevant buildings was expected to start in 2022 the earliest. HD had asked contractors to ensure the lifts in the relevant buildings were in good condition, thereby avoiding disturbing the residents during the project. She said that the figures of January that year showed that the times of lift failures had decreased, meaning that the contractors had shown improvement. HD would keep an eye on the situation, keep contact with contractors and supervise contractors’ performance.

(ii) Regarding the opinions from the Members on insurance coverage of the insurance bought by Housing Authority, she would relay them to the relevant sections.

(Post-meeting note: HD stated that they had passed Members’ opinions to the relevant sections.)

(iii) Regarding maintenance, the requirement of HD was more stringent than the Law. The number of lift inspections conducted was higher than the number required by the Law. However, it might be due to the high population density in PRH estates. Since lift usage was relatively high, the lifts had to be repaired more frequently.

50. Mrs LAI CHAN Wai-fan, Clara gave a consolidated response as follows:

(i) Since lift failures involved different equipment parts, it took time for maintenance contractors to conduct inspections and preparation.

(ii) The lifts in PRH estates were maintained by the original contractors so as to minimise the time of material preparation and maintenance.

(iii) Housing Authority would review the items covered by the Marking Scheme from time to time and include additional misdeed items when necessary.

(iv) Regarding the noise nuisance complaints, HD staff would collect evidence and take proper follow-up actions.

(v) Concerning illegal parking issues, HD would impound the vehicles involved and carry out prosecution depending on the actual situation. They would also consider towing those vehicles where necessary. HD 23 Responsible Department staff would keep combating the problem of illegal parking during Chinese New Year.

(vi) She would consider including the relevant number of occupational injuries in relation to refuse chutes and gas incidents in the public area in PRH estates under HD’s purview.

51. Mr KWOK Tsz-kin hoped HD could include the number of incidents related to refuse chutes and other garbage systems.

Report Items

Reports of Working Groups

Public Housing Affairs Working Group (HAC Paper No. 3/R/2021)

52. The Chairman introduced the Paper and put forth opinions as follows:

(i) Once there was an organisation which was willing to organise an activity under the working group. The organisation had already written the proposal. However, since Home Affairs Department did not support the organisation to be the partner of the working group, the working group had to recruit a partner again. He expressed regret and dissatisfaction towards that.

(ii) He hoped that K&T DO could provide clear and reasonable guidelines in the coming year so that Members could recruit appropriate partners.

(Post-meeting note: K&T DO stated that the working group suggested organising seminars and producing pamphlets related to public housing affairs in Kwai Tsing District. The Secretary of the relevant working group had reminded the Chairman of the working group during the process of selecting the “project partner” that the mission listed by the organisation was not in compliance with the purpose of the activity.)

Private Housing Affairs Working Group (HAC Paper No. 4/R/2021)

53. Mr HON Chun-yin introduced the Paper. 24 Responsible Department

Interim and Sub-divided Housing Affairs Working Group (HAC Paper No. 5/R/2021)

54. The Secretary introduced the Paper.

Any Other Business

55. Mr TAM Ka-chun, Warren put forth enquiries as follows:

(i) Whether the Joint Office (JO) of BD/FEHD would submit a report for water seepage regularly.

(ii) Why the HD did not include the existing relevant information of garbage chutes in the written reply.

56. Professional Officer 2-4 / JO 2 of JO of BD and FEHD Mr WONG Wai-shing replied that JO would submit the report of 2020 for water seepage before the next meeting. The report would indicate the number of reports received, report of cases in which seepage had stopped during the investigation, reports of cases in which the source of seepage was successfully found, the number of “nuisance notices” issued and the total number of prosecuted cases of violations of “nuisance notices.”

57. Mrs LAI CHAN Wai-fan, Clara responded as follows:

(i) The time given to respond to the issue (three days) was shorter than usual.

(ii) Since it took time to collect relevant information, HD would first introduce the issues of concern to Members in the written reply and would submit post-meeting supplementary information about the comments/motions raised by Members.

58. Mr TAM Ka-chun, Warren opined that all government departments should accurately respond to Members’ enquiries in the written reply submitted.

59. The Chairman said that in case the replies from departments were not ideal, Members could ask for follow-up.

60. The Secretary responded that after receiving motions from Members, the 25 Responsible Department Secretariat would pass the motions to relevant departments for follow-up and the written reply would be sent to Members for reference before the meeting.

61. The Chairman put forth opinions as follows:

(i) It was difficult for the Secretariat to question the replies submitted by the departments. He asked all departments to take answering questions raised by Committee Members serious and make adequate preparations.

(ii) HD and Electrical and Mechanical Services Department (EMSD) would install equipment parts for some housing estates so those lifts shall be suspended for two to three months. More lifts would be suspended during the garbage clean-up time or other replacement works, which would disturb the residents. Therefore, he asked HD to speed up the installation and avoid arranging all projects that would suspend the lifts at the same time.

62. Mr LEUNG Kwok-wah said that the escalator at Shek Hing House would be out of service for more than one month in late February to install safety devices. Although the time for installation of safety devices was not long, it could only be resumed after EMSD’s inspection, testing and issuance of use permit. He hoped HD could assist in urging the works section and EMSD to approve the project as soon as possible so as to shorten the service suspension time of the escalator.

63. Mr NG Kim-sing said he could not use the searching function in the meeting papers and he hoped searching function could be provided in future’s HAC papers.

64. The Chairman hoped that the Secretariat would review the feasibility of the suggestion.

Date of Next Meeting

65. The next meeting was scheduled to be held on 7 April 2021 (Wednesday).

Kwai Tsing District Council Secretariat March 2021

26