(Translation)

Minutes of the 1st Special Meeting of North District Council (2020-2023)

Date : 29 January 2020 Time : 2:38 p.m. Venue : North District Council Conference Room

Present

Chairman: Mr LAW Ting-tak*

Vice-chairman: Mr CHAN Yuk-ming*

Members: Ms LAM Tsz-king* Hon LAM Cheuk-ting* Ms LAM Shuk-ching* Mr CHOW Kam-ho* Mr YUEN Ho-lun* Mr CHAN Wai-tat* Mr KWOK Long-fung* Mr KO Wai-kei (2:38 p.m. – 5:11 p.m.) Mr CHEUNG Ching-ho, Franco* Mr CHEUNG Chun-wai* Mr WAN Wo-tat, Warwick (2:38 p.m. – 4:25 p.m.) Ms WONG Hoi-ying* Mr CHIANG Man-ching* Mr LAU Ki-fung*

Secretary: Ms CHU Wai-lin, Francoise Senior Executive Officer (District Council), North District Office

Remarks: * Members who attended the whole meeting ( ) Time of attendance of Members Action

In Attendance

Mr CHONG Wing-wun, JP District Officer (North), Home Affairs Department Ms KWONG Ting-lok, Maggie Assistant District Officer (North) 1, Home Affairs Department Miss LAM Tsz-yan, Gloria Assistant District Officer (North) 2, Home Affairs Department

Item 1 Dr WONG Ka-hing, JP Controller, Centre for Health Protection, Department of Health Miss LI Fung-yuk Senior Housing Manager/ Applications 2, Housing Department Mr CHAU Kim-hung, Andy Architect 79, Housing Department

Absent

Mr LEE Koon-hung, MH Mr LI Kwok-fung Mr HAU Chi-keung Mr HAU Fuk-tat, Simon Ms CHAN Yuet-ming Mr CHAN, Vincent Chi-fung

Opening Remarks

The Chairman welcomed the representatives from government departments, staff from the North District Office (“NDO”) and the Secretariat, as well as Members to the 1st special meeting of the North District Council (“NDC”). As the special work arrangement for government departments was implemented, he extended his gratitude to the Secretariat staff for their help in making possible the holding of today’s meeting as scheduled. He also thanked Members for their commitment to work and attending the meeting. He particularly welcomed Dr WONG Ka-hing, Controller of the Centre for Health Protection (“CHP”) of the Department of Health (“DH”), Miss LI Fung-yuk, Senior Housing

2 Action

Manager/Applications 2 of the Housing Department (“HD”), and Mr Andy CHAU, Architect 79 of the HD to the meeting to take part in the discussion and respond to Members’ questions.

2. The Chairman said that the Secretariat had received emails from 15 Members requesting the NDC to hold a special meeting today so as to discuss the following items … (When the Chairman was speaking, an observer of the meeting shouted loudly, and the Chairman’s speech was therefore interrupted.)

3. The Chairman said that according to Order 15(2) of the NDC Standing Orders (“Standing Orders”), if a person attending or observing a meeting of the Council acted in such a way as to disrupt the orderly conduct of business of the meeting, the Chairman might issue warnings to the person. The Chairman then issued a warning to that observer for the first time.

(The observer continued to shout loudly.)

4. The Chairman ordered the observer to leave the place of the meeting as the observer persisted with such acts after warning. The security guards then removed the observer from the conference room.

5. The Chairman continued that he believed the representatives from government departments and the observers in the room could feel the anger of the residents in North District. However, as required by the Standing Orders, he had the duty to ensure the orderly conduct of business of the meeting, so that the departments concerned could address their questions accordingly. He hoped that Members could show basic courtesy and the residents observing the meeting could behave in an orderly manner so that the meeting could be conducted smoothly.

6. The Chairman said that two items would be discussed at the meeting, including: (1) Department of Health’s proposal to use Fai Ming Estate as a temporary dormitory for quarantined frontline medical staff; and (2) Reports that two visitors from the Mainland with fever were not refused entry at Sha Tau Kok Control Point on “humanitarian grounds”. The Secretariat had served a notice of meeting to all NDC Members on 27 January. Besides, the Secretariat had received five impromptu motions on the day of the meeting for discussion. The motions had just been distributed to Members for perusal. The five impromptu motions were:

3 Action

(1) To request for making immediate arrangements for the NDC to inspect epidemic prevention work at the boundary control points in the district; (2) To request for curtailing the permitted period of stay of Mainland tourists in Hong Kong; (3) To request for complete closure of the borders; (4) To condemn the Government for its incompetence in epidemic prevention; and (5) To request for assurance that there were adequate supplies of face masks, disinfectants and protective equipment for use by the community. Combined discussion and voting on the motions would take place with regard to their type and nature. If there was no comment, he would seek approval from the meeting to include the five impromptu motions in the agenda.

7. Hon LAM Cheuk-ting said that he could not hear his impromptu motion “To condemn Carrie LAM for her incompetence and request for immediate closure of the borders” in the Chairman’s remarks. He asked the Chairman which of the motions quoted earlier was moved by him.

8. The Chairman responded that it was the motion “To condemn the Government for its incompetence in epidemic prevention”.

9. Hon LAM Cheuk-ting said that he would like to read out the impromptu motion moved by him.

10. The Chairman said that something might have gone wrong with the documents. He hoped that Members could show understanding to the Secretariat staff who needed to arrange for the meeting to take place during public holidays. He then rectified that the fourth impromptu motion moved by Hon LAM Cheuk-ting should be “To condemn Carrie LAM for her incompetence and request for immediate closure of the borders”.

11. The Chairman said that under Order 13(2) of the Standing Orders, subject to the consent of more than half of the members of the Council present at the meeting, the Chairman might approve the inclusion of an impromptu motion in the agenda. If there was no other comment or objection from Members, he would seek the approval from the meeting to include the above five impromptu motions in the agenda.

12. The meeting endorsed the inclusion of the above five impromptu motions in the agenda.

13. The Chairman said that after the discussion on the two agenda items

4 Action

as planned, the meeting would move on to discuss and vote on the impromptu motions. Given there was no representative from the Immigration Department (“ImmD”) in attendance, he suggested discussing Item 2 before the discussion of Item 1for the smooth running of the meeting.

14. The meeting agreed to the arrangements for the agenda items made by the Chairman.

Item 2 - Reports that Two Visitors from the Mainland with Fever Were Not Refused Entry at Sha Tau Kok Control Point on “Humanitarian Grounds”

15. The Chairman said that the ImmD and the DH had provided written responses regarding this agenda item. The written responses (set out in Annexes I and II) were placed on the table for Members’ perusal. He read out the responses briefly. The ImmD said that they were unable to send representatives to the meeting due to heavy commitments and workload. With regard to the said media report, the ImmD clarified in its written response that the department had not handled any case involving visitors from the Mainland with fever at Sha Tau Kok Control Point on 23 January.

16. Pointing out that there were a number of control points in North District including those at Lo Wu, Sha Tau Kok and Man Kam To, Mr LAU Ki-fung considered that the ImmD had the obligation to attend the meeting to give an account of the matter even it had provided the written response. It should not try to explain the incident away with a letter. He considered that it was very irresponsible of the ImmD to do so.

17. Mr CHOW Kam-ho agreed with Mr LAU Ki-fung’s comments. He said that in view of the gravity of the issue, it should not be the case that the ImmD did not send any representative to attend the meeting. Even though the incident might be a rumour, the ImmD had the obligation to give an account of the matter at an NDC meeting and to explain how it would handle the cross-boundary visitors at the control points who were presented with fever or suspected to be infected with the disease.

18. Mr CHIANG Man-ching said that the ImmD’s reply read that “If Members have any comments, the Secretariat is welcomed to relay the comments to us in writing”, which showed the arrogance of the department. He considered such approach questionable, and queried if no staff of the

5 Action

entire ImmD was available to attend the meeting. Present at the meeting were Members from political parties, political novices, pro-establishment camp and staff members from the Secretariat of the NDC, yet there was no representative from the ImmD. Besides, the ImmD stated in its letter that it “had not handled any case involving visitors from the Mainland with fever”, in which he drew Members’ attention to the wording “had not handled”. He cast doubt on whether the ImmD had exercised discretion in the case on “humanitarian grounds” without keeping a record of that, and whether specific data were available for giving an account to Members. He agreed with Mr LAU Ki-fung’s proposal of condemning the ImmD for not sending any representative to attend the meeting.

19. Mr YUEN Ho-lun wanted to question the ImmD whether the wording “had not handled” as in “had not handled any case involving visitors from the Mainland with fever” carried the meaning of allowing entry. He asked if the Secretariat could help check it out with the department.

20. Hon LAM Cheuk-ting said that while NDC Members and Secretariat staff of the NDO attended today’s urgent meeting during holiday time, the ImmD, as a large department, did not send any representative to the meeting and only a written response was provided. If that worked, they did not need to have meetings anymore as all government departments could simply provide written responses. Considering that North District was close to the border and the issue was of great importance, it was totally unacceptable to him that not even an official was sent by the ImmD to the meeting. He therefore agreed that the meeting should condemn the officials who did not attend the meeting, and formally write to the Chief Secretary for Administration (“CS”) with a request that he should stop allowing government departments to attend or not to attend meetings as they pleased, or to withdraw from a meeting when they were not happy with an agenda item. He emphasised that Members were representatives of public opinion and he queried if the department had respected the representative assembly.

21. Mr CHAN Yuk-ming said that the ImmD, the Customs and Excise Department (“C&ED”) and other departments were invited to attend the meeting of the Working Group on Novel Coronavirus held on 16 January 2020. However, the two departments claimed that epidemic prevention at boundary control points fell under the purview of the DH but not that of the ImmD and the C&ED. He considered that their claim was unreasonable. Some were saying that Wuhan pneumonia virus was transmitted by wild

6 Action

animals. Therefore, it was impossible that the matter was irrelevant to the C&ED which was in charge of import and export control of goods or the ImmD which was in charge of immigration matters. Since it was the second time the two departments had not sent representatives to attend NDC meetings, he considered that the meeting should formally condemn the two departments in writing for their disregard of North District. This was particularly necessary as the district was a hard-hit area close to the border.

22. Mr Franco CHEUNG said that while the incident at Sha Tau Kok Control Point might be a rumour and Members could do nothing except condemning the ImmD which did not send any representative to the meeting, he became furious after reading the department’s written response. Since members of the public might not be able to read the letter, he would read it out. It read something like this: the ImmD apologised for not being able to attend the meeting due to official commitments, and stated that different government departments and agencies played different roles at Sha Tau Kok Control Point. While the ImmD was responsible for immigration clearance of residents and visitors, hygiene and epidemic prevention at the control point fell within the purview of the DH. He considered that the statements showed that the ImmD adopted an indifferent attitude. He continued to read out the letter, which stated that according to the records, ImmD staff had not handled any case involving visitors from the Mainland with fever at Sha Tau Kok Control Point on 23 January. He suspected that some visitors might actually had a fever but ImmD staff just shut their eyes to them, and that there might be more than two fever cases but the ImmD simply did not take action as it considered that this was not their business. Since the ImmD had not been effective in performing its gate-keeping role, he considered that apart from requesting border closure, the meeting should also condemn the officials who failed to do their job.

23. Mr KO Wai-kei would like to know the details of the incident at Sha Tau Kok Control Point, as he had heard many rumours that the people with fever were not Mainland visitors but Hong Kong people. The ImmD should send a representative to attend this meeting to explain the incident and provide information about the health conditions of the visitors with fever, related updates, etc.

24. Mr CHEUNG Chun-wai said that the frontline staff of the ImmD were the first to have contacts with visitors with fever or those who were possibly infected. Since the virus was highly infectious, he wished to know if they had adequate protective gear. He learnt from news reports

7 Action

that some Mainland visitors lost their temper when they were refused entry, and they pulled down their face masks to cough which affected the staff and other visitors. He would like to know if the ImmD had any countermeasures in such circumstances, but it was disappointing that the ImmD was absent from the meeting.

25. The Chairman asked if Members had anything to add to this item. He said that an impromptu motion relating to control points would be discussed in the latter part of the meeting, and the representative of the CHP could then be invited to respond on epidemic prevention work at control points.

26. Noting that the ImmD stated in its written response that their staff had not handled any case involving Mainland visitors with fever at Sha Tau Kok Control Point on 23 January, Ms LAM Tsz-king queried that it would not be counted as a case if the ImmD did not put the incident on record, and members of the public would never know whether the ImmD had handled cases of Mainland visitors with fever. In addition, while the ImmD stated that they had not handled such case at Sha Tau Kok Control Point, it did not necessarily mean that there was no such case at other control points. She wondered how many suspectedly infected visitors who were issued temporary permits passed through the various control points in Hong Kong over the past week. As the ImmD did not join the meeting today, Members were unable to enquire about the situation.

27. Ms WONG Hoi-ying said that the ImmD was already absent from the meeting of the Working Group on Novel Coronavirus on 16 January, and now they were absent from this meeting. As mentioned in the written response from the ImmD that different government departments and agencies played different roles at the control point, the ImmD should have sent representatives to attend the meeting to brief Members on how different departments coordinated with each other on epidemic prevention. As they were absent from the meeting, Members were unable to ask questions about epidemic prevention work. Given that the ImmD had declined the NDC’s invitation to meeting for twice, it was reasonable to condemn the department.

28. Mr KWOK Long-fung said that as it was not the first time the ImmD did not send any representative to attend NDC meetings, he appealed to District Officer (North) or the Chairman to urge representatives of the ImmD to attend the NDC’s meeting to take questions from Members.

8 Action

Furthermore, he wished to know how the ImmD and the DH coordinated with each other on epidemic prevention at control points. He queried if the DH representative attending the meeting today could give a full account of the coordination efforts on epidemic prevention between the ImmD and the DH.

29. The Chairman said that as Members had strong views on the ImmD’s absence, he asked the Secretariat to prepare a letter to the ImmD, Secretariat stating that the department was haughty, and enquiring whether inbound visitors with fever would be allowed entry at Sha Tau Kok Control Point and whether they had not put fever cases on record and so they claimed that they had not handled such cases, and requesting the ImmD to send representatives to attend the NDC’s meetings, including meetings of the Working Group on Novel Coronavirus, to explain to Members the division of responsibilities between the ImmD and the DH.

(Post-meeting note: NDC Chairman wrote to the Director of Immigration on 18 March 2020 to condemn the department’s refusal to send representatives to attend the NDC’s meetings.)

30. Hon LAM Cheuk-ting said that, other than writing to the ImmD, he had also suggested writing to the CS.

31. The Chairman asked the Secretariat to note Hon LAM Cheuk-ting’s Secretariat supplementary remark.

(Post-meeting note: NDC Chairman wrote to the CS on 18 March 2020 requesting the CS to urge government departments to attend the NDC’s meetings when invited.)

Application for Absence

32. The Chairman said that the Secretariat had received the applications for absence from Ms CHAN Yuet-ming, Mr Simon HAU, Mr LI Kwok-fung, Mr HAU Chi-keung, Mr LEE Koon-hung and Mr Vincent CHAN.

33. The Chairman continued to say that Mr LI Kwok-fung and Mr LEE Koon-hung were absent as they had to attend a rural committee meeting. Ms CHAN Yuet-ming, Mr Simon HAU and Mr HAU Chi-keung could not join the meeting because they had to attend a Heung Yee Kuk meeting.

9 Action

Since the reasons for absence of the five Members were valid grounds under the Standing Orders, he asked the meeting to approve their applications for absence.

34. The Chairman continued that Mr Vincent CHAN was unable to join the meeting due to work commitments overseas. Since the reason for his absence did not fall within the circumstances set out in the Standing Orders, he asked the meeting to consider whether to approve his application or not. However, as this special meeting was arranged under a tight timeframe and Mr Vincent CHAN was still overseas when he decided to convene the meeting on 26 January, he hoped that Members would take this factor into consideration.

35. The meeting approved the applications for absence from Mr LEE Koon-hung, Mr LI Kwok-fung, Mr HAU Chi-keung, Mr Simon HAU, Ms CHAN Yuet-ming and Mr Vincent CHAN.

Item 1 - Department of Health’s Proposal to Use Fai Ming Estate as a Temporary Dormitory for Quarantined Frontline Medical Staff

36. The Chairman said that the Chief Executive (“CE”) Carrie LAM had stated in the press conference the day before that due to the arson in Fai Ming Estate, the Government had given up using Fai Ming Estate as a temporary dormitory for quarantined frontline medical staff. To facilitate the conduct of the meeting, he would briefly introduce the background of the proposal, and then the representative from the DH would give an account of the matter. He said that there were seven large housing estates in the neighbourhood of Fai Ming Estate in Fanling, with a total population of about 80 000. Moreover, there were a total of seven primary/secondary schools and four community centres near Fai Ming Estate. He believed that Members were most concerned with the Government’s criteria for selecting sites for setting up quarantine facilities: whether a site would be selected after considering its population density and the number of medical staff needed to be quarantined, or simply because the housing project at a particular location could fit the purpose. While he understood that quite a number of Members had their views on the belated explanation from the Food and Health Bureau (“FHB”) and the DH that triggered off the mass gathering activities, he would first invite the representative from the DH to explain the criteria for selecting the sites for quarantine facilities.

10 Action

37. Dr WONG Ka-hing expressed his good wishes to residents in North District, members of the media and their families, wishing them good health and peace in the new year. Before speaking on the criteria for selection of sites for setting up quarantine facilities, he would first talk about the developments of the novel coronavirus disease (“COVID-19”). His speech was as follows:

(a) To fight against COVID-19, the Government should adopt various infection prevention and control measures swiftly and comprehensively. So far there had been eight confirmed cases of COVID-19 in Hong Kong, and all of these patients had some close contacts. As preventive and control measures of infectious diseases, the Government had to conduct health assessments for close contacts who were asymptomatic and quarantine them. Close contacts of COVID-19 confirmed cases should be put under quarantine for 14 days;

(b) As in the fights with atypical pneumonia and other major infectious diseases thereafter, the Government had to provide quarantine camps which were principally set up in holiday camps. To cope with the current epidemic, the Government had planned to use Lady MacLehose Holiday Village and Lei Yue Mun Park and Holiday Village under the Leisure and Cultural Services Department (“LCSD”) as quarantine camps. The former had already been in use and the latter was ready for use when necessary. Persons sent to quarantine facilities were close contacts of confirmed cases. They were neither patients nor symptomatic. As close contacts might have chances of infection and developing symptoms, the Government had to make quarantine arrangements for them. Symptomatic close contacts would be sent to a hospital right away for isolation treatment;

(c) Apart from the above two quarantine facilities, on 26 January 2020, the Government prepared to use Po Leung Kuk Jockey Club Pak Tam Chung Holiday Camp as the third quarantine centre when necessary. With the development of the epidemic, increasing number of confirmed cases were reported on the Mainland (in particular Wuhan in Hubei Province), Hong Kong and other overseas countries. There might be chances that more close contacts had to be put under quarantine later. The Government was

11 Action

very concerned about the limited places available for close contacts (less than 100 in total) at the above three quarantine centres. As time was needed to identify sites for setting up quarantine camps and to make corresponding arrangements, early plannng was needed and the Government considered that the use of unoccupied public rental housing (“PRH”) flats as quarantine facilities would be an option. After communicating with the HD, the DH noted that Fai Ming Estate could be used as a quarantine facility;

(d) The Hospital Authority (“HA”) had been working actively to arrange isolated accommodation for healthcare staff. If Fai Ming Estate were to be used as a quarantine facility, it might accommodate both close contacts and medical staff;

(e) After considering various factors, the Government had now given up using Fai Ming Estate as a quarantine facility and would not consider using other unoccupied public housing estates as quarantine facilities;

(f) Regarding the criteria for selection of quarantine facilities, no matter the facilities were in quarantine camps, hotels or public housing estates, they should be self-contained, each with en-suite toilet and other support facilities, for use by an individual or a family. The quarantine facilities could only accommodate a small number of people if they were too small in size, and the situation would be unsatisfactory if members of a family were put under quarantine in different quarantine facilities; and

(g) The preparation time required for quarantine facilities to come into operation was also an important factor for consideration. Taking the three quarantine camps offered by the LCSD as an example, all of them could only be used as quarantine facilities after a period of time. As the epidemic was spreading quickly, the Government had to identify more quarantine facilities to cope with unpredictable demand.

38. The Chairman said that Dr WONG Ka-hing had yet to respond to whether the proximity of the quarantine facilities to residential areas would be taken into account when identifying the facilities. He asked whether the preparation time would override the proximity of the premises to residential areas. He also asked the representatives from the HD to respond whether

12 Action

they had taken into account the interests of the residents affected by Fanling North and Kwu Tung North New Development Areas projects and applicants on the PRH waiting list.

39. Miss LI Fung-yuk responded that as what Dr WONG Ka-hing had said, the HD had been cooperating with the arrangements of the Government. Fai Ming Estate was selected because it could be readily used as a quarantine facility, and therefore the department agreed with the arrangement.

(An observer was shouting.)

40. The Chairman asked the people in the conference room to keep quiet and allow the representatives of the HD to respond.

41. Miss LI Fung-yuk continued that the offer letters issued by the HD to PRH applicants in respect of Fai Ming Estate had stated clearly that the intake date of the units was yet to be confirmed, and the applicants were recommended not to make premature arrangements of switching jobs or schools. Amid the pandemic, the HD hoped that applicants could be understanding and cooperative.

42. The Chairman asked Dr WONG Ka-hing to respond to the question he raised just now.

43. Dr WONG Ka-hing responded that the Government had been building up knowledge about the novel coronavirus. It was similar to the atypical pneumonia virus in 2003 and Middle East Respiratory Syndrome (“MERS”) as they were all coronaviruses. Scientists pointed out that the novel coronavirus was more similar to the atypical pneumonia virus as they were members of the same family of viruses. Since these coronaviruses were transmitted through droplets, infection control measures should be carried out to prevent infections through contacts and droplets. There should be extra precaution especially in healthcare settings. Healthcare workers and other staff working in quarantine facilities should wear appropriate personal protective gear. While he understood that setting up quarantine facilities near residential areas would give rise to a negative perception and arouse concerns or even worries of local residents, he stressed that the confinees were not patients and had no symptoms. If they began to develop symptoms, they would immediately be sent to hospitals for medical investigation and confirmed patients would receive isolation

13 Action

treatment. Also, close contacts who developed symptoms within the quarantine period did not necessarily mean that they were infected with COVID-19. As it was currently in the winter surge of influenza, upper respiratory tract infections were common and the symptoms of other viral infections were similar to those of the novel coronavirus. From a scientific and objective perspective, members of the public did not need to worry about the possibility that residents living near quarantine facilities (whether they were quarantine camps, hotels or public housing estates) might get infected with the novel coronavirus.

44. The Chairman concluded the speeches of DH and HD representatives that the Government had considered the proximity of the quarantine facility to residential areas, but from a scientific and objective perspective, the Government held that there was no cause to be over-worried. The Government’s main considerations were the time needed to set up the quarantine facility and the necessary preparation work to be undertaken for Fai Ming Estate, and therefore decided to use Fai Ming Estate as a quarantine facility.

45. Mr CHIANG Man-ching said that although Carrie LAM indicated the day before that she decided to abandon the use of Fai Ming Estate as a quarantine facility, he doubted if she made the decision as she had met with Legislative Councillor Hon LAU Kwok-fan or because of the fact that Fai Ming Estate was no longer suitable to be used as a quarantine facility after the fire, or as a response to the demand of 300 000 residents in North District. He said that 11 residents were arrested on the day North District residents raised objection to the use of Fai Ming Estate as a quarantine facility. He opined that the Government and Carrie LAM owed North District residents an apology. Even though the incident at Fai Ming Estate had come to an end, he was most worried about the Government’s plans and the underlying conspiracy. With regard to the Government’s previous plan of providing accommodation for healthcare staff in Fai Ming Estate and the fact that healthcare staff in other districts would not travel a long distance to stay in there, he asked if the authority intended to convert North District Hospital into a quarantine centre. He said that North District residents had already been greatly plagued by parallel trading activities, and they should not be put under further pressure when fighting against the epidemic.

(An observer indicated his intention to raise questions.)

46. The Chairman responded that under the Standing Orders, observers

14 Action

were not allowed to speak. He believed that Members, being representatives of public opinion, would reflect the views of the residents. He would invite Members to ask questions first, and then ask Dr WONG Ka-hing to respond after they had finished.

47. Hon LAM Cheuk-ting pointed out that Members’ questions were mostly specific but many departmental representatives had only given consolidated responses after a number of questions were asked. He suggested that the meeting be conducted in a question-and-answer format.

48. The Chairman hoped that the meeting could be conducted smoothly. He accepted Hon LAM Cheuk-ting’s suggestion and would try using the question-and-answer format and see if it was effective or not. He invited Dr WONG Ka-hing to respond to the question relating to North District Hospital.

49. Dr WONG Ka-hing said that while there was no HA representatives at this meeting and he could not represent the HA, he would answer questions based on what he knew. He said that people suspected of being infected with COVID-19 would be sent to different hospitals. Most of them would be sent to acute hospitals for treatment, which included collection of samples for testing. Some time earlier, confirmed cases of COVID-19 were admitted to various hospitals such as Queen Elizabeth Hospital, North District Hospital and Tuen Mun Hospital. Currently, a maximum of 20 confirmed cases would be received by the Infectious Disease Centre at Princess Margaret Hospital (“PMH”) as arranged by the HA. Although PMH was equipped with sufficient facilities and manpower to deal with serious infectious diseases, it might not be able to cope with more than 20 confirmed patients at a time, and so new confirmed cases would be transferred to other hospitals within HA clusters. He had not heard of any changes in the above arrangements by the HA.

50. The Chairman said that as what Dr WONG Ka-hing said, the HA did not have any plan to use North District Hospital as a disease control centre for the time being.

51. Mr CHAN Yuk-ming said that he had great respect for healthcare staff. But Members and residents in North District who were observing the meeting were very upset by the criteria adopted by the DH and the HD for selection of sites for setting up quarantine facilities. There were two secondary schools, two primary schools and several kindergartens near Fai

15 Action

Ming Estate, together with elderly housing and a day activity centre. He queried whether the timing and urgency of the issue were deemed more important than the interests of tens of thousands of residents living near Fai Ming Estate as neither local residents nor the NDC were consulted on the proposed site. While the officials concerned might not be clear about the exact location of Fai Ming Estate, they should not in any way forcibly use the estate as a quarantine facility as this had caused great anxiety to the community. He criticised that the arrangement of using Fai Ming Estate as a quarantine facility was or perceived to be unsatisfactory. While the confinees living in such facilities would be close contacts and not patients, he believed that a backlash would also be provoked if the facilities were set up at police quarters or Shek Kong Barracks. Furthermore, Carrie LAM said that she gave up using Fai Ming Estate as a quarantine facility because it was set fire and vandalised by rioters, and she maintained that the decision had nothing to do with any comments. However, he and some other Members, being at the scene on the day when residents expressed opposition to the use of Fai Ming Estate as a quarantine facility, saw that people at the scene included ladies in casual wear. And as said by the owners’ corporation of Yung Shing Court, even volunteers from the Democratic Alliance for the Betterment and Progress of Hong Kong blocked the roads. All these showed that people at the scene were not rioters. The residents just wanted to do something to save themselves. He hoped that the Government would stop ruling Hong Kong with an obstinate attitude, otherwise it might face backlash from residents in various districts. Moreover, he considered that the Government should first consult District Councils before making similar decisions in future, and hoped that the DH and the HD would relay his message to the highest echelon of the Government that it would end up in resistance from people in response to the Government’s oppression if the Government insisted on acting arbitrarily, and that the Government had to bear the consequences. He added that he and other pan-democratic councillors were determined to defend the interests of residents in North District and would stand shoulder to shoulder with the public in future. He also thanked all the local residents who participated in the protest on that day and the prospective tenants of Fai Ming Estate who shared the view that the incident was a matter of the entire North District and did not mind moving in later.

52. Dr WONG Ka-hing admitted that the preparatory work for the use of Fai Ming Estate as a quarantine facility was inadequate, and there was room for improvement in communication with the NDC and local communities. The DH had been maintaining liaison with other departments concerned to

16 Action

study how best to take forward the proposal. Due to various reasons, the Government would neither use Fai Ming Estate as a quarantine facility nor consider the use of other unoccupied public housing estates as quarantine facilities. Members of society did not wish to see a surge in COVID-19 cases or a community outbreak. Therefore, the Government had to make adequate preparations for epidemic prevention and try their utmost to identify sites for quarantine facilities. In view of the limited capacity of the existing three quarantine camps, and should the number of close contacts exceed the capacity of the camps, the Government would have no choice but to impose home isolation for close contacts. He admitted that home isolation, which was imposed during the outbreak of atypical pneumonia, failed to produce satisfactory results.

53. Miss LI Fung-yuk agreed with Dr WONG Ka-hing that proper communication was very important, and that they could have done better in terms of communication this time. The HD hoped to enhance communication in future.

54. Mr CHOW Kam-ho made the following comments and enquiries:

(a) During the outbreak of atypical pneumonia in 2003, individual households of a building were infected with the disease which eventually led to infection among other residents of the same building as home quarantine failed to yield satisfactory results. He pointed out that there were still quite a few problems to address in respect of home isolation;

(b) He enquired about the estimated number of confinees and the number of quarantine facilities required by the Government. He considered that the Government’s plan to use public housing estates as quarantine facilities indicated that the estimated demand for these facilities was great; and

(c) Noting that many members of the public (including residents in North District) were unable to acquire anti-epidemic items, he enquired about the stock levels of anti-epidemic items held by the Government and asked if the Government would do something to ensure stable supplies of anti-epidemic items and distribute such items to people who failed to get them.

55. The Chairman said that as Mr CHAN Wai-tat had moved an

17 Action

impromptu motion regarding the supply of face masks, Members might express their opinions in this regard when the motion was discussed.

56. Dr WONG Ka-hing responded that he would then give a consolidated response to the questions about the supply of face masks. He clarified that he did not mean that there was no problem with home isolation. On the contrary, there were big problems with home isolation which failed to yield satisfactory results, and so it would be imposed only when the Government was left with no choice. He reiterated that the three existing quarantine camps had a total of only 90 units and the number was insufficient. Although it was difficult for the Government to predict if there would be a substantial demand for quarantine facilities, adequate and reasonable preparation had to be made so that the arrangement of transferring close contacts to quarantine facilities could be made when there was a surge in demand.

57. The Chairman asked if Dr WONG Ka-hing could provide specific figures, including the number of units provided in the three quarantine camps, and he enquired at what level the estimated number of confirmed cases for this month would necessitate the use of Fai Ming Estate as a quarantine facility.

58. Dr WONG Ka-hing responded that there were only a total of 90 units in the three quarantine camps, and one of the camps had been in service while the other two were not yet in commission. However, he could not estimate the demand for quarantine facilities in Hong Kong, as he was not able to anticipate the number of daily new cases and the number of close contacts of each confirmed case.

59. Hon LAM Cheuk-ting said that Hong Kong people had an impression that the Government lagged behind in introducing measures to prevent the spread of the disease, and they found it totally unacceptable that only some of the boundary control points were closed. There was a great anxiety among the public, and many residents were worried about the proposal of using Fai Ming Estate in Fanling as a quarantine facility because of the proximity of North District to the Mainland border. Moreover, Dr WONG Ka-hing had just said that disease prevention measures had to be promptly and comprehensively implemented. He asked whether Dr WONG, being the Controller of the CHP, had advised the Government to close all border control points instead of closing only some of them and allowing Mainlanders to enter Hong Kong via the control points at Lo Wu,

18 Action

Shenzhen Bay and Lok Ma Chau which were with the greatest number of arrivals and departures. He said that Hong Kong people were entitled to return to Hong Kong under the Basic Law, and that a complete closure of the border control points would only restrict Mainlanders but not Hongkongers from entering Hong Kong. He opined that Hong Kong had no obligation to allow entry of Mainlanders at this sensitive and dangerous time.

60. The Chairman said that the closing of control points would be discussed at the meeting later on. He proposed to concentrate first on the issue of requisition of Fai Ming Estate for use as a quarantine facility.

61. Hon LAM Cheuk-ting said that if the Government continued not to implement a complete closure of the borders, even a quarantine facility which was 100 times as large as Fai Ming Estate would not suffice.

62. The Chairman understood Hon LAM Cheuk-ting’s opinion, but he hoped that the meeting would be conducted according to the agenda in a smooth manner.

63. Hon LAM Cheuk-ting said that anti-epidemic work was being discussed at the meeting, and the requisition of Fai Ming Estate for use as a quarantine facility was one of the anti-epidemic measures, but the measure had aroused great controversy in the community. Dr WONG Ka-hing just mentioned that close contacts of confirmed cases would have to be put under home quarantine if public housing estates such as Fai Ming Estate could not be used as quarantine facilities, and that it was difficult for the Government to identify sites for quarantine facilities. He asked whether Dr WONG would consider the Democratic Party’s suggestion of discussing with the People’s Liberation Army Garrison stationed in Hong Kong on setting up a quarantine facility in Shek Kong Barracks, or the suggestion of many people of converting the Hong Kong Central Hospital located next to the Government House, which had been left vacant for years, into a quarantine facility. In so doing, the Government did not have to set up quarantine facilities at sites close to residential areas. He also asked Dr WONG if he had made suggestions to the Government on a complete closure of the borders. If a complete closure of the borders could be implemented, Hong Kong could focus on local anti-epidemic work.

64. The Chairman understood Hon LAM Cheuk-ting’s concern, but was of the opinion that the issue of a complete closure of the borders could be

19 Action

discussed under the fourth impromptu motion. He invited Dr WONG Ka-hing to respond if the use of the Hong Kong Central Hospital and Shek Kong Barracks as quarantine facilities would be considered subsequent to the decision not to use Fai Ming Estate as a quarantine facility.

65. Dr WONG Ka-hing responded that the siting for quarantine facilities was not solely considered and decided by the DH. The Government would assess and consider any siting proposal which was suitable and viable. Since a number of policy bureaux and departments were involved in identifying sites for setting up quarantine facilities, he would follow up the siting proposals put forward by Hon LAM Cheuk-ting after the meeting.

66. Hon LAM Cheuk-ting pressed further on whether Dr WONG Ka-hing had advised the top echelons of the Government to close the borders completely. He said that not only did members of the public call for a closure, but many healthcare staff and medical experts also considered that it was necessary to tackle the disease at source, fearing that there would be an unpredictable number of virus carriers and infected patients in the territory as Mainland people were allowed entry freely.

67. The Chairman invited Dr WONG Ka-hing to give a brief response but asked Hon LAM Cheuk-ting not to ask further questions, saying that the issue of a complete closure of the borders would be handled at the meeting later.

68. Dr WONG Ka-hing responded that from the perspective of public health and the control and prevention of infectious diseases, to tackle the disease at source was of vital importance, and in doing so a number of measures had to be taken, including reducing the source of infection, early detection of sources of infection as far as possible, putting isolation arrangements in place and providing proper treatment. Meanwhile, the public should increase social distancing and avoid group activities and crowd gatherings. All these were what Hong Kong people were currently doing.

69. Hon LAM Cheuk-ting said that his question was simple, that was whether Dr WONG Ka-hing had advised the top echelons of the Government to close the borders completely.

70. Dr WONG Ka-hing responded that the measures he had just mentioned were very important.

20 Action

71. Hon LAM Cheuk-ting asked again if Dr WONG Ka-hing had advised the top echelons of the Government to close the borders completely.

72. The Chairman asked Dr WONG Ka-hing to give a brief response.

73. Dr WONG Ka-hing responded that from the perspective of public health, the Government needed to consider Hon LAM Cheuk-ting’s comments.

74. Hon LAM Cheuk-ting asked again if Dr WONG Ka-hing had advised the top echelons of the Government to close the borders completely  whether it was that Dr WONG had offered the advice on a complete closure of the borders but the advice was not adopted by the highest echelon of the Government, or it was that he had not made any proposal at all and so the Government had not considered it.

75. Dr WONG Ka-hing responded that the officials concerned had a hectic work schedule over the past few days, and they had had discussions at different meetings. He was not in a position to disclose the details of the meetings and so he had nothing further to add.

76. The Chairman said that according to the response from Dr WONG Ka-hing, Dr WONG had not advised the Government to close the borders completely.

77. Hon LAM Cheuk-ting said that Dr WONG Ka-hing gave no response to his question and was not admitting that he had not advised the Government to close the border completely.

78. The Chairman invited Dr WONG Ka-hing to respond briefly whether the Government had held detailed discussions on the complete closure of the borders, or if it was still considering it.

79. Dr WONG Ka-hing responded that he was not in a position to disclose the details of internal discussions.

80. The Chairman asked Dr WONG Ka-hing to add further comments when the complete closure of the borders was discussed at the meeting later on, and he said that they would continue with the discussion of the requisition of Fai Ming Estate for use as a quarantine facility.

21 Action

81. Mr KWOK Long-fung said that the two housing blocks of Fai Ming Estate had more than 900 units in total, while the three holiday camps which were designated sites for quarantine had a total of 90 units only. He believed that the DH had reasonably foreseen that there would be an outbreak of the epidemic in the community. Otherwise, there would be no need to requisition Fai Ming Estate which could provide a large number of units for quarantine purpose. He queried why the DH did not introduce exceptional measures in exceptional times by closing the borders completely to curb the spread of novel coronavirus. Besides, he requested the Government to apologise publicly for the requisition of Fai Ming Estate for quarantine purpose, and to undertake not to pursue the liability of the protestors arrested in North District. He requested Dr WONG Ka-hing to relay his request to the Government.

82. Dr WONG Ka-hing responded that different experts held different views towards the development of the epidemic situation in the Mainland and Hong Kong. Some were more pessimistic while some were more optimistic. For the time being, he would not say that there would certainly be an outbreak of the epidemic in the community. What he could do was to keep tracking the development of the epidemic situation. As for the disease prevention and control measures, he said he had given an account on that earlier. Regarding the quarantine camps, it was the Government’s plan to requisition some holiday camps for quarantine purpose.

83. The Chairman asked Dr WONG Ka-hing to respond whether the Government would make an apology for the requisition of Fai Ming Estate for use as a quarantine facility.

84. Dr WONG Ka-hing responded that he just attended the meeting as a representative of the DH, and so he could not give a response on behalf of the entire Government. He invited Mr CHONG Wing-wun, District Officer (North), to provide further comments.

85. The Chairman said that on the day of the protest held by residents of North District, he, together with Members from North Link HK, the Democratic Party and the Neo Democrats, were at the scene and very much hoped that representatives from the Government would come. However, the delay of the Government in giving an response provoked public anger. He said that the question raised by Mr KWOK Long-fung was very clear, which was whether the Government would apologise for the delay in giving

22 Action

an account of the matter that triggered off the mass gathering activities.

86. Mr CHONG Wing-wun responded that Dr WONG Ka-hing came to answer Members’ questions on behalf of the DH, but he was not in a position to respond on whether the entire Government should make an apology. He suggested that if there was such a call from Members, the Secretariat might prepare a letter after the meeting to relay Members’ comments to the CE or the CS.

87. The Chairman asked the Secretariat to write to the CE, the CS and Secretariat the Secretary for Home Affairs (“SHA”) in regard to the call of the NDC.

(Post-meeting note: NDC Chairman wrote to the CE on 21 February 2020 in respect of the Government’s requisition of Fai Ming Estate for use as a quarantine facility and sent a copy of it to the CS, the Secretary for Food and Health, the Secretary for Transport and Housing, and the SHA.)

88. Mr CHAN Wai-tat thanked Dr WONG Ka-hing for attending the meeting, and he made the following comments and enquiries:

(a) Dr WONG said that the DH had communicated with departments such as the HD and the Home Affairs Department (“HAD”) with regard to the requisition of Fai Ming Estate for use as a quarantine facility. However, subsequent to the press conference held by Dr Constance CHAN, the Director of Health, on 25 January 2020, online comments showed that people were unanimously critical of the department’s decision with intense emotions. He himself also received many phone calls and short messages commenting on the decision. He contacted District Officer (North), Mr CHONG Wing-wun, half an hour after the press conference, who said that he only learnt about the decision from the press conference. He asked which representative of the HAD the DH had communicated with, whether they had communicated with the SHA, Mr LAU Kong-wah, and who made the decision to requisition Fai Ming Estate for use as a quarantine facility. He criticised the Government for not communicating with District Officer (North) for setting up a quarantine facility in North District. He had great confidence in District Officer (North), believing that he would have advised the DH not to make such a decision if he had been consulted in advance; and

23 Action

(b) At the early stage of the epidemic, members of the public had proposed a complete closure of the borders, which, however, was not accepted by the Government. As the Government selected Fai Ming Estate for use as a quarantine facility, and people’s efforts to secure face masks remained in vain, fear was aroused among the public. Although professionals were appointed by the Government to prevent and control the epidemic, he asked how the Government and the DH would allay the fear of the public. He pointed out that even if the epidemic might not be fatal, fear and backlashes among the public could have far-reaching implications.

89. Dr WONG Ka-hing responded that the DH was unable to identify quarantine facilities on its own. As regards the requisition of Fai Ming Estate for use as a quarantine facility, the DH had communicated with the HD and the HAD. However, as he was not directly responsible for the matter and given the rapid development of the events, he was unable to give an account of the chronology and specific details of the discussions among the relevant departments. Yet, as he had briefly mentioned just now, the DH had communicated with the HD and the HAD on the preparation work of setting up quarantine facilities at Fai Ming Estate. In addition, he agreed with Mr CHAN Wai-tat that measures implemented by the Government against a new epidemic disease would unavoidably cause concern or even fear among the public. He believed that if people had better understanding of the matter, things would become better. Therefore, the DH would ensure timely and prompt dissemination of information of the new epidemic. The CHP had set up a website to provide background information about COVID-19, preventive measures and related guidelines, and updates on the latest epidemic situation in Hong Kong, the Mainland and overseas, with the aim of enhancing transparency. He welcomed Members’ suggestions for improvement in this regard.

90. Mr CHAN Wai-tat understood that the DH wished to identify quarantine sites for close contacts. Nevertheless, if there were no new confirmed COVID-19 cases in the coming few days, the Government might not need to arrange accommodation for anyone to undergo quarantine at Fai Ming Estate. Therefore, there was actually no need for the Government to act so hastily in announcing the arrangement of using Fai Ming Estate as a quarantine facility. After the Government had made the announcement at the press conference, people were discontented with the arrangement and that resulted in confrontations. In the afternoon when the Government held the press conference, some people gathered around Fai Ming Estate

24 Action

requesting the Government to respond. While the Government should have responded quickly, it chose to handle the matter in a tardy manner. He considered that the Government should not respond to the mass in such a manner and hoped that the Government could pay attention to that.

91. Dr WONG Ka-hing responded that he did not completely agree with Mr CHAN Wai-tat’s remarks that there was no need for the Government to act so quickly to requisition Fai Ming Estate for use as a quarantine facility. Although no new confirmed case was reported in the last two days, no one could predict the development of the epidemic situation which might worsen rapidly. Therefore, it was necessary for the Government to react quickly and make adequate preparations.

92. Mr CHONG Wing-wun responded that what Mr CHAN Wai-tat said was true. A number of Members did contact him regarding the Fai Ming Estate issue on 25 January 2020. He had already relayed Members’ comments to the policy bureau concerned, and the views collected on 25 and 26 January had also been relayed to the Government. As Dr WONG Ka-hing was not among the officials contacted by the NDO at that time, he did not know about the details of the communication process.

93. The Chairman considered that in regard to the requisition of Fai Ming Estate for use as a quarantine facility, the Government must stay cautious and alert. District Officer (North) and NDC Chairman, being respectively the top representative of the Government and residents in North District, were not informed of the relevant arrangements and he found this totally ridiculous.

94. Mr Franco CHEUNG made the following comments and enquiries:

(a) Dr WONG Ka-hing repeatedly mentioned that only 90-odd units were provided at the existing quarantine facilities which had very limited capacity. However, there was also a capacity limitation of hospitals, wards and the community. As the timid Government failed to provide fallback options after deciding not to pursue the option of using Fai Ming Estate as a quarantine facility, members of the public had such a strong reaction;

(b) As the Government refused a complete closure of the borders, the increase in confirmed COVID-19 cases would become never-ending and it would be impossible to estimate the number of new cases. However, he understood that it was not Dr WONG who could decide whether to completely close the borders or not, and so he would not

25 Action

demand a response from Dr WONG on the matter;

(c) Since Dr WONG did not respond on whether the Government would completely close the borders, he believed that the Government would not do so. With the virus streaming into Hong Kong, there would be a growing number of infected cases in Hong Kong. Therefore, it was necessary for the Government to identify another quarantine site as accommodation for possibly infected persons. He was worried that the Government would, on the grounds that residents living near Fai Ming Estate would be worried and panic and people were in opposition to the setting up of quarantine facilities, refuse to identify another quarantine site and change to arrange home isolation for close contacts. He pointed out that during the atypical pneumonia epidemic some people were put under home isolation at Amoy Gardens, ending up that there were fatal cases in the housing estate. This showed that home isolation did not work. Therefore, he requested the Government not to implement home isolation measures. He said that Members did not oppose the setting up of any quarantine facility, nor did they oppose the setting up of quarantine facilities at other public housing estates. They just considered that it was not appropriate to set up the facility at Fai Ming Estate, and that the Government should identify a suitable site. He asked the Government about the fallback options for quarantine sites, and the criteria for choosing sites for setting up quarantine facilities;

(d) The HD stated that the decision of using Fai Ming Estate as a quarantine facility was mainly based on the consideration of timing. He criticised that the Government only cared about identifying unoccupied public housing estates for use as quarantine facilities but gave no attention to whether there were other buildings, hospitals and schools near the sites. The Government claimed that they were aware of the concerns and worries of members of the public, but in fact the public was in panic. He said that quarantine camps were set up to separate the possibly infected from the non-infected, but not to arrange for the possibly infected to stay in places next to residential buildings;

(e) No matter whether doctors held optimistic or pessimistic views towards the epidemic prevention and control work, they should provide objective advice;

26 Action

(f) Dr WONG claimed that the DH had a high degree of transparency and provided a lot of information and guidelines. However, Dr WONG’s refusal to respond to questions from a number of Members and to explain the details about the selection of sites for quarantine facilities showed that the DH only selectively provided information which was public knowledge; and

(g) He was concerned about the sufficiency of protective gear for residents and healthcare staff. While Dr WONG reminded the public to be vigilant and to wear suitable protective gear, people had to went here and there to scramble for face masks. He asked Dr WONG from where he acquired the mask he was wearing, and the price and origin of his mask.

95. Dr WONG Ka-hing responded that the Government had yet to identify the fourth site for quarantine facilities. The officers concerned would strive to identify any potential site options, including holiday villages under different non-governmental organisations. The Government would not rule out the possibility of setting up quarantine facilities in cruises, hotels and vacant hospitals, and would study the feasibility and suitability of the sites concerned. In addition, as people infected with COVID-19 might be asymptomatic during the incubation period, the Government had to arrange for close contacts to stay in quarantine facilities with individual sanitary facilities during the incubation period of 14 days so as to prevent exposure to and transmission of the virus. Since the incubation period of different patients varied (from two to 14 days), it was quite difficult to tackle the disease.

96. Ms LAM Shuk-ching considered that the reason for the strong reactions of residents of Yung Shing Court, Cheong Shing Court and Wah Ming Estate which were located near Fai Ming Estate was that the Government’s decision came too sudden. The residents nearby asked her many questions after receiving the news. If there was adequate consultation, residents would not be gripped by fear on the first day of the Lunar New Year which should be a joyful day. She pointed out that there was much information online that would give rise to panic among the public, and she enquired about the probability of the coronavirus being transmitted human-to-human and through air. Fai Ming Estate was located in a valley, and wind would blow towards the residential buildings in the vicinity. Even if blowing wind did not reach far, residents knew nothing about the quarantine arrangements, say, whether the confines were allowed to go out to buy food or visit other places by public transport, and they could not

27 Action

obtain such information on the internet. She quoted the case where the Government granted $4,000 to members of the public who were required to download a form online. However, many local residents did not have a printer at home and had to seek Members’ assistance to print and fill in the form for them. This reflected the poor publicity work of the Government. In her view, the Government should not expect that many people could get access to the information available online as not everyone knew how to use the internet and had a computer. She said that the DH should step up their efforts in the dissemination of information and publicity. She pointed out that the NDO had maintained adequate communication with Members. It was surprising to learn that the NDO, being a government department, was unaware of the requisition of Fai Ming Estate for use as a quarantine facility. The current arrangement showed a complete disregard for the government department, representatives of the community and all members of the public. Soon after the CE’s announcement of the arrangement at the press conference in the afternoon, the supplies had been delivered to Fai Ming Estate that night. With the lack of clear information, the swift action had created a strong sense of fear among the public. She considered that it was unfair to ask healthcare staff to stay in “unadorned flats” where the smell of paint still remained. There were many campsites and well-equipped activity centres near North District (such as Tai Po) that could be used for accommodation and allow cooking. On the contrary, flats at Fai Ming Estate had bare walls only and it was not known whether fresh water supply was available. In addition, she received complaints in the past few weeks about rodent problems in Yung Shing Court which was said to emerge since the commencement of the construction works of Fai Ming Estate. The problems were very serious as rodents got into the flats. She was going to have a site inspection at Fai Ming Estate together with staff from the Food and Environmental Hygiene Department, hoping that the department would follow up on whether Fai Ming Estate was hygienic enough to be used as accommodation for healthcare staff. Moreover, the incident of Fai Ming Estate was caused by of the lack of information which caused panic among residents. Residents gathered at Fai Ming Estate in the morning of the second day of the Lunar New Year and over 1 000 signatures were collected in less than two hours, and then people gathered again in the afternoon. Nevertheless, the Government did not understand the fear of the residents. In fact, the situation might be different if residents were consulted and briefed beforehand. The current situation had become irreversible. She was very sorry to see that residents were put under pressure and fear. As a District Councillor, what she could do was to stand with the residents and called for a meeting with the Government and asked for an undertaking.

28 Action

Furthermore, with regard to the HD’s claim that it had told residents who had been offered a unit at Fai Ming Estate not to arrange transfer of schools for their children for the time being, she heard that some residents had already arranged transfer of schools and that the existing tenancies for some others would expire in coming March. She hoped that the Government would repair the damaged facilities in Fai Ming Estate as soon as possible so that prospective tenants could move in quickly. She did not wish to see any delay to tenant intake due to political factors.

97. The Chairman concluded that Ms LAM Shuk-ching had talked about the identification of quarantine sites and rodent problems in her speech. He considered that the rodent problems could be discussed in detail at the next meeting. Regarding the identification of quarantine sites, Dr WONG Ka-hing had just mentioned that he did not rule out the option of choosing other sites which would be subject to further discussion. Ms LAM Shuk-ching had just made three points. Firstly, the public panic during the Fai Ming Estate incident was caused by people’s concern about the possible modes of virus transmission. Secondly, she mentioned about the transparency of the government department’s administrative processes, remarking that while Dr WONG Ka-hing said that much information had been posted online, the Government’s disbursement of $4,000 showed that members of the public very often were not aware of the information online. Thirdly, the repairs to the facilities of Fai Ming Estate. He asked Dr WONG Ka-hing to respond to the first two points and invited the HD to respond to the third point.

98. Dr WONG Ka-hing responded by admitting that there were inadequacies in the preparation work for using Fai Ming Estate as a quarantine facility. As for the information concerning the disease, the DH had been disseminating the information to the public through social media and TV/radio announcements of public interest as well as via the dedicated website. Nevertheless, he considered that the efforts were still not enough. Given the effective and close communication between District Councillors and residents, he hoped that Members could assist local residents in getting more information about the disease. As regards quarantine facilities, they could not be set up in general areas as quarantine facilities must be equipped with individual sanitary facilities for use by confinees or their family members. During the outbreak of SARS, some of the patients developed diarrhoea and the virus was detected in their stools. Although it was uncommon for COVID-19 patients to have diarrhoea, a small number of the patients did have the symptom and that might result in a situation similar to

29 Action

the case of SARS. As for the possibility of human-to-human transmission, despite the World Health Organization’s earlier claim that there was no clear evidence of human-to-human transmission of the virus, it had become more certain now that the possibility of human-to-human transmission of the disease could not be undermined. The risk of infection for household contacts of confirmed cases was particularly high. Given current knowledge, scientists believed that COVID-19 was not an airborne disease like tuberculosis and measles. He also responded that confinees were not allowed to leave their quarantine units.

99. Miss LI Fung-yuk explained the arrangements under the Modified Advance Allocation Scheme. Under general circumstances, the HD would attach an enclosure to the offer letters reminding the applicants that the exact intake date of the housing estate concerned was yet to be confirmed, and that the applicants should not arrange transfer of schools for their children until the intake date was confirmed. She understood that some applicants might prefer making the arrangements in advance. In the case of Fai Ming Estate, the HD was working out a feasible plan to make special arrangements for the applicants, and would inform them of the arrangements as soon as possible.

100. The Chairman asked whether the prospective tenants of Fai Ming Estate who had accepted the advance allocation offers were informed by the HD of the arrangement that the estate would be used as a quarantine facility after the press conference.

101. Miss LI Fung-yuk clarified that the offer letters she had just mentioned were issued by the HD at an earlier time.

102. The Chairman sought clarification from Miss LI whether the residents who had been allocated with the units at Fai Ming Estate had not been informed of the requisition of the estate.

103. Miss LI Fung-yuk responded in the negative, adding that as Members had pointed out, it was imperative that the repair works be carried out as soon as possible.

104. Ms LAM Shuk-ching said a resident told her that he and other prospective tenants were informed that they could collect the flat keys at the end of February. If on one hand, the offer letters stated that the intake date had yet to be confirmed and on the other hand, residents were informed to

30 Action

collect the keys at the end of February, she queried if there was a time gap between the two notifications. She considered that the Government was in such a rush to set up quarantine facilities because it had not alerted members of the public of the serious epidemic situation on the Mainland before the Lunar New Year holidays, resulting in more than 300 000 residents having travelled to the Mainland to visit relatives or for sightseeing. She queried whether the Government had identified Fai Ming Estate for use as a quarantine facility because of its large capacity to accommodate these returnees to Hong Kong. She also queried why the Government did not advise residents not to travel to the Mainland in view of the severe epidemic situation.

105. The Chairman asked the HD representative to respond on the housing arrangements for the residents at present.

106. Miss LI Fung-yuk responded that at the time when the HD issued the offer letters, no occupation permit had been issued in respect of Fai Ming Estate and so the applicants had yet to be informed of the exact intake date. The department was actively considering whether and how to make special arrangements for the affected prospective tenants, and would inform them as soon as a decision was made.

107. The Chairman requested the HD to inform the District Councillors, including Ms LAM Shuk-ching who was the District Councillor of the constituency concerned, in addition to the prospective tenants of the decision so that Members could give an account of the matter to residents to prevent the recurrence of mass gathering activities. The Chairman said that due to time constraints, he invited comments from at most two Members on the Fai Ming Estate incident.

108. Mr LAU Ki-fung said that in the incident the Government had not held any consultation, had not conducted any inspection, had not given any explanation and had not imposed border closure. He hoped that the department could answer four questions. Firstly, while the departmental representative had just mentioned that assessment had been made of the arrangement of using Fai Ming Estate as a quarantine facility, he would like to know how the department arrived at a conclusion after the assessment that the residents nearby would not get infected, and whether the department had taken into consideration the feelings of North District residents. Secondly, he noted that the departmental representative had just tendered an apology for the incident and wondered if the department would handle

31 Action

similar incidents in the same way next time. Thirdly, he asked whether Fanling Family Medicine Centre would be used as a designated clinic for COVID-19 cases. Lastly, noting that the CE had withdrawn the decision to requisition Fai Ming Estate, he hoped that the department could arrange to remove all the supplies at Fai Ming Estate on the following day as per request of the residents.

109. Dr WONG Ka-hing responded that whether a facility was suitable for quarantine purpose would be determined based on medical and infection control assessment results. In actual operation, the department would deploy staff to inspect the site and check whether the facilities provided individual units with sanitary facilities, and explore in what way confinees could be sent to the hospital in case they developed symptoms. When considering other quarantine sites in future, the department would strengthen communication with the community concerned. As for the arrangement of designated clinics, he was not certain if Fanling Family Medicine Centre had been included as the plan was formulated by the HA. As regards the supplies at Fai Ming Estate, the department would take follow-up action accordingly.

(Mr Warwick WAN left the meeting at this juncture.)

110. Mr Andy CHAU responded that as many supplies had been placed inside the units and it was found during preliminary inspection that the fixtures and fittings of the estate were seriously damaged, among which five lifts in the high block and two lifts in the low block were damaged, it would be difficult to have the supplies in the units removed on the following day. The department would arrange for early removal of the supplies not yet placed in the units.

111. The Chairman hoped that the removal of the supplies could start on the following day so as to allay the residents’ concerns. He believed that the department could arrange for the removal promptly as it had managed to place the supplies inside the units quickly.

112. Mr LAU Ki-fung agreed with the Chairman and considered that there was a need to remove the supplies as soon as possible as the residents had become totally distrustful of the Government and were worried that the Government would change its decision to requisition Fai Ming Estate again.

113. Mr Andy CHAU responded that they would arrange for the removal

32 Action

of the supplies as soon as possible.

114. Mr CHAN Yuk-ming said that on the day when the residents blocked roads, many Members at the construction site of Fai Ming Estate wished to liaise with the relevant departments. However, only the contractor’s staff were at the scene and they did not know about the contact persons of the DH and the HD. He suggested that the departments should consider giving the information of their contact persons to the contractor to facilitate Members in making enquiries on residents’ behalf. Meanwhile, the Government should take a sincere step forward. As they had managed to place the supplies inside the 900-odd units, they should be able to remove them on the following day immediately.

115. Mr Andy CHAU responded that the site supervisor was at the scene on that day, adding that only 100-odd units of the estate were requisitioned so far. He would find out whether all the supplies had been moved into the units. He continued that Members might contact him, or contact the HD through the contractor.

116. The Chairman asked Mr Andy CHAU to contact Ms LAM HD Shuk-ching and to arrange for the removal of the supplies as soon as possible.

117. With regard to Dr WONG Ka-hing’s remark made just now that the setting up of designated clinics was arranged by the HA, Mr CHOW Kam-ho pointed out that Fanling Family Medicine Centre was a DH facility and asked why the decision of setting up designated clinics rested with the HA.

118. Dr WONG Ka-hing responded that regarding the activation of designated clinics in response to major infectious diseases, general out-patient clinics would be open to members of the public in general circumstances. Among the 70-odd general out-patient clinics, more than 10 of them had already been assigned as designated clinics. As he did not have the information at hand, he was not certain which clinic in North District had been assigned as a designated clinic. As far as he knew, the HA would activate designated clinics on need basis, instead of activating all of them in one go. He continued that while some of the clinics were HA facilities, DH services were also provided for them. He believed that the same arrangement would apply to some of the designated clinics. The DH would provide support for the designated clinics under the management of

33 Action

the HA.

119. Mr LAU Ki-fung asked whether designated clinics would be set up solely according to the HA’s arrangements without consulting residents.

120. Dr WONG Ka-hing said that he could not give a response as the responsibility for making arrangements for designated clinics rested with the HA.

121. The Chairman asked the Secretariat to check with the HA in writing Secretariat whether Fanling Family Medicine Centre would be used as a designated clinic.

(Post-meeting note: The HA announced the list of the 18 designated clinics over the territory on 6 February 2020, in which Fanling Family Medicine Centre was included.)

122. Quoting Dr WONG Ka-hing’s remark that the Fai Ming Estate incident led to a loss-loss situation for both the Government and the public, Mr YUEN Ho-lun considered that the remark made no sense as it was the Government who suppressed members of the public first, and then suppressed them again and arrested 11 people when the public fought back. He said that the departmental representative had just admitted that they had not done good enough to communicate with the public, and he considered that the fact that District Officer (North) and NDC Chairman had no knowledge of the matter showed that the Government had not communicated with the stakeholders at all. The precondition for improving future communication was having communication first. He hoped that the department would undertake to keep the NDC informed and to hold discussions with the NDC in future. Secondly, he believed that local residents understood the need of setting up quarantine facilities, enquiring whether the department would consult the NDC on the identification of sites. Thirdly, he asked if Dr WONG Ka-hing agreed with the saying that “Prevention is better than cure”; if so, the reason for the refusal for border closure.

123. Dr WONG Ka-hing responded to the first point, saying that with a view to safeguarding public health, it was necessary to identify adequate quarantine facilities and the department would make continuous efforts to search for other sites for setting up the facilities. If a suitable site was identified at the initial stage, they would definitely communicate with the

34 Action

community first by approaching the District Council concerned and local residents. He then responded that the saying “Prevention is better than cure” was always true.

124. The Chairman invited the departmental representative to add further comments on the issue of border closure later on.

125. Noting that the Government did not have plans for a complete closure of the borders for the time being, Ms LAM Tsz-king asked whether there was a target number of quarantine facilities to be set up in the territory. Secondly, with respect to the remark that the setting up of isolation facilities in the community was a fallback option, she considered that more time should be allowed for discussion. As the CE stated that “no limits would be imposed on the resources to be used”, the Government should be well placed to take a multi-pronged approach when devising anti-epidemic measures, and should consider providing container housing units at idle sites which were far away from residential areas, such as places near hospitals, for accommodating healthcare staff who were worried that staying at home might cause community outbreaks. She suggested the Government consider using vacant school premises or idle modular housing units as temporary dormitories for healthcare staff.

126. The Chairman said that regarding the number of the quarantine facilities to be set up, Dr WONG Ka-hing had already responded that he was unable to estimate the number of such facilities given the volatility of the epidemic.

127. Dr WONG Ka-hing responded that site inspection conducted by medical professionals and staff from the Electrical and Mechanical Services Department and the HD would be needed to ascertain the suitability of using container housing units as quarantine facilities.

128 The Chairman said that the department might inform the NDC of potential sites, if any.

Item 3 - Impromptu Motions

(a) Motion: To Request for Making Immediate Arrangements for the NDC to Inspect Epidemic Prevention Work at the Boundary Control Point in the District

35 Action

129. The Chairman referred Members to the document concerned to save time. The impromptu motion was set out at Annex III. He said that he had made the above request to the DH and the FHB in writing on Members’ behalf on 22 January, but the DH rejected the request unequivocally in its reply on the day on grounds of “manpower shortage”. He immediately made a reply on behalf of the NDC, reprimanding the department for considering themselves part of a ruling elite and only attaching importance to their own work while turning down Members’ request for a visit to the boundary control point to inspect the department’s gate-keeping work so as to allay public panic. He invited Dr WONG Ka-hing to explain the reasons for not allowing an inspection of the epidemic prevention work at Lo Wu Control Point.

130. Dr WONG Ka-hing said that it was absolutely not true that the relevant units of the DH were not unwilling to arrange an inspection at the control point for the NDC. They understood that the NDC had the obligation to learn about district affairs and to be a watchdog of the Government. The DH also attached great importance to the communication and cooperation with the NDC. However, staff members of the Port Health Division, being on the COVID-19 frontline, were facing huge stresses and strains of their job. Therefore, he hoped Members would show understanding for their situation. He continued that the disease prevention and control measures at the airport and boundary control points had been enhanced following the changes in the epidemic. For instance, the health declaration system was imposed, in addition to temperature screening implemented, for all the flights from Wuhan and at the high speed rail station. Lo Wu Control Point was very crowded with high visitor flow at present. Whether the visitor flow between the Mainland and Hong Kong would increase, or decrease following the implementation of the relevant measures, would depend on the development of the situation. Given the fast spreading of the epidemic, all inbound travellers by air from the Mainland had to make health declaration starting from the day of the meeting. He hoped that the measure would be implemented at other control points in a progressive manner. In view of the above, the workload of the DH was extremely heavy … (Dr WONG Ka-hing’s speech was interrupted by an observer of the meeting who shouted loudly.)

131. The Chairman asked the observer to keep quiet so that Dr WONG could continue to respond to the comments.

36 Action

(The observer continued to shout loudly.)

132. The Chairman said he understood the observer’s demand and knew that residents in North District were furious. He hoped that Dr WONG Ka-hing could give a to-the-point response to the observer’s demand.

133. Dr WONG Ka-hing acknowledged that they should not do the work through a top-down approach. Instead, they had to discuss and figure out together how to get the work done properly. He promised to discuss with his colleagues about the NDC’s request. He said that some DH staff were responsible for handling district council affairs and they could arrange to meet with the NDC to discuss the matter.

134. The Chairman asked Dr WONG Ka-hing whether he agreed in principle to allow the NDC to inspect the epidemic prevention work at Lo Wu Control Point.

135. Dr WONG Ka-hing said he had an open mind on the request.

136. The Chairman asked Dr WONG Ka-hing again whether he agreed in principle to carry out the inspection mentioned above.

137. Dr WONG Ka-hing said that as he was not responsible for most of the frontline operations and the colleagues on the frontline were under immense pressure at present, he could not accede to the request on behalf of them. Moreover, the matter involved more than one control point, and other district councils and control points were also involved.

138. The Chairman said that the NDC only requested an inspection at Lo Wu Control Point, adding that Lok Ma Chau Control Point was located at Yuen Long District.

139. Dr WONG Ka-hing acknowledged what the Chairman said. He promised to discuss the matter with his colleagues proactively and would give the NDC a reply as soon as possible.

140. The Chairman remarked that Dr WONG Ka-hing had reservation about the proposed inspection. He invited other Members to give their comments.

141. Hon LAM Cheuk-ting said that he understood the difficulties of Dr

37 Action

WONG Ka-hing since he was not in a position to determine whether Members could conduct an inspection at the control point. It would be good if Dr WONG could relay Members’ request to his colleagues. Members proposed to inspect the control point because they were worried that the disease would spread from the Mainland to Hong Kong. He had asked just now if Dr WONG had advised the top echelons of the Government to close the borders, but Dr WONG responded that he could not disclose the details of internal discussions. Therefore he would like to ask Dr WONG from another perspective that as a doctor and the head of the CHP, and from his professional point of view, whether he believed that a complete border closure could help prevent and mitigate the outbreak.

142. Dr WONG Ka-hing responded that many experts and university professors (including Professor YUEN Kwok-yung) had mentioned that it was most important to reduce or cut the sources of infection for prevention and control of infectious diseases at source. If sources of imported cases were identified, isolation measures should be put in place as soon as possible. So far all cases in Hong Kong were imported cases. It could be said that early identification and early isolation had been achieved for most of the eight confirmed cases. Some of them were detected at control points, and some had returned home because they had not yet developed fever or other symptoms upon their entry into Hong Kong, yet they were not very active in their community. So he believed that the risk of community transmission was relatively low for the time being … (Hon LAM Cheuk-ting suddenly interrupted Dr WONG Ka-hing’s speech)

143. Hon LAM Cheuk-ting said that just now he heard Dr WONG Ka-hing mention that it was important to prevent the epidemic at source. To his understanding, Dr WONG agreed that a complete closure of the borders would be effective in preventing the epidemic from worsening. He asked Dr WONG if his understanding was correct.

144. Dr WONG Ka-hing said that it could definitely help prevent the spread of the epidemic or community outbreak if importation risks could be reduced.

145. Hon LAM Cheuk-ting persisted in asking Dr WONG Ka-hing that from his professional point of view, whether he agreed with a complete closure of the borders.

146. Dr WONG Ka-hing said that the decision on border closure or how

38 Action

to implement the closure would not be made just based on public health considerations.

147. Hon LAM Cheuk-ting expressed his understanding and said that he just wanted to ask Dr WONG Ka-hing whether he, based on public health considerations and by exercising his professional judgement without having regard to political factors, agreed that a complete closure of the borders could help avoid spreading of the disease.

148. Dr WONG Ka-hing stated that he would not talk about political factors and he had nothing to add.

149. The Chairman suggested that the discussion should first focus on the inspection of the epidemic prevention work at Lo Wu Control Point. He considered the proposed inspection pragmatic. Given the vast size of Lo Wu Control Point, Members were concerned if there were sufficient temperature screening machines, how manpower was deployed for fear that the staff would be just like those at the airport who fell asleep at temperature screening counters, and how suspected cases would be dealt with once identified. Therefore, he hoped that Dr WONG Ka-hing could grant approval in principle and implement the proposed arrangement.

150. Mr Franco CHEUNG noted Dr WONG Ka-hing’s remarks that Lo Wu Control Point was very crowded, and that the development of the epidemic situation was not yet known and it would take time to ascertain the severity of the situation. However, there might be deaths if they just kept waiting till the situation got worse. He had done some research and learnt that Dr WONG was an AIDS expert and had reminded the public of proper use of condoms in 2016. While the public at least had the knowledge that AIDS could be prevented with the use of condoms, they had no idea of how to tackle the virus. He wondered why the authority still needed time to figure out what measures should be taken.

151. The Chairman asked Mr Franco CHEUNG to mind his words.

152. Mr Franco CHEUNG apologised for his improper choice of words. He explained that Members were very worried as CE Carrie LAM only agreed to a partial closure of the border for the time being. People with a need to come to Hong Kong would not be deterred from coming despite that some control points were closed. Worse still, a partial closure would lead to concentration of visitor flows at other control points. Therefore, Members were very concerned about the hygiene conditions of the control

39 Action

points.

153. In response to Dr WONG Ka-hing’s appeal to Members to get across to the public the message that there was no need to be panic, Mr Franco CHEUNG said that the panic buying of face masks during these days showed that panic had been spreading. He hoped that Dr WONG could provide more specific details about the counter measures and manpower deployment, so that Members could provide help as requested. Dr WONG Ka-hing said that he needed to discuss with his colleagues before reporting to the NDC and arranging further meetings, but diseases did not wait for anyone and there was no time to hold patient discussions. He doubted whether no meeting would be convened until the situation was getting worse. He remarked that the request of Members was reasonable. They just wanted to inspect Lo Wu Control Point and have a close look at the epidemic prevention work performed by the staff of the Port Health Division. After ensuring that serious gate-keeping efforts had been put in place, Members would tell residents in North District that the government department had been working hard to implement counter measures.

154. Dr WONG Ka-hing clarified that he had not said that the authority would wait until the epidemic got worse, and he believed that no one would wish to see that happen. He said that some of the control points were closed at present while some other remained in operation. Some measures had been taken to reduce the number of Mainland visitors to Hong Kong, such as the suspension of the high-speed rail service and reduction in the number of flights and ferry trips, and it remained uncertain as to what impact or the extent of the impact the measures would have on the cross-border visitor flow (both from the Mainland to Hong Kong and from Hong Kong to the Mainland) in the coming few days. Since some control points were closed, it was possible that the overcrowded Lo Wu Control Point would become even more crowded. But if the measures for reducing visitor flow turned out to be effective, the control point would probably become less crowded over a period of time. As regards the inspection proposed by the Chairman just now of the epidemic prevention work of the DH (or other agencies) at Lo Wu Control Point, the DH approved it in principle and arrangements could only be made after discussions had been held among the NDC, the DH and the NDO. He hoped that Members could show understanding for the staff at the frontline or other positions who needed to return to work during the Lunar New Year holidays and had insufficient rest. He hoped that prompt action would be taken to follow up the matter.

40 Action

155. The Chairman thanked Dr WONG Ka-hing for his sincerity. He said that to ease public panic, particularly when there was an increase in visitor flow at Lo Wu Control Point due to closure of other control points, he hoped that the details of the inspection of epidemic prevention work could be finalised promptly.

156. Mr LAU Ki-fung added that Members insisted on inspecting the control point because as at the day of the meeting the Government had yet to close the boundary control points at Lo Wu, Lok Ma Chau and Shenzhen Bay. The biggest concern was that there were rumours that the border would be closed on the day of the meeting, resulting in a large number of Hong Kong people returning from the Mainland. As people returning from the Mainland had a higher risk of infection, the situation was worrying. He asked whether the DH had put in place adequate measures (such as maintaining a contact tracing list) to cope with the situation. Besides, he asked Dr WONG Ka-hing how DH staff would handle suspected infection cases identified at control points (in particular imported cases from the Mainland) in which the patients threw tantrums and refused to have medical treatment. He said that some patients had a strange mentality, for some of them believed that they could deceive the department by taking anti-fever medicine while some others would throw tantrums and refuse to have medical treatment, leaving Hong Kong people feeling helpless and worried. He hoped that Dr WONG could understand that one of the reasons for the proposed inspection at the control point was to ensure whether the department’s measures were effective or futile.

157. The Chairman said that as Dr WONG Ka-hing had approved in principle the NDC’s request for an inspection, he suggested that Members should first be given the opportunity to ask questions and then Dr WONG could briefly respond to Members’ comments before putting the motion to the vote.

158. Mr CHOW Kam-ho thanked Dr WONG Ka-hing for approving in principle the NDC’s request for an inspection. He said that with the closure of some of the control points, the number of arrivals at Lo Wu Control Point would undoubtedly increase. He asked Dr WONG Ka-hing if the coverage of health declaration measure and temperature screening could be extended. In view that the epidemic had been spreading from Hubei Province to other provinces in the country, there would be a serious threat to the anti-epidemic work in Hong Kong if the quarantine measures in

41 Action

Hong Kong only targeted at Hubei Province. Besides, visitors entering Hong Kong via Lo Wu Control Point would take the East Rail Line of MTR. If Lo Wu Control Point failed to guard against the epidemic, the entire North District, together with the core urban areas of Hong Kong such as Kowloon Tong and Mong Kok, would be under the threat of spread of the epidemic. As the East Rail Line was the main means of transportation for many commuters and students in Hong Kong, in particular those living in North district, Tai Wai and Shatin, the control point must hold up against the virus. That was why Members wished to conduct an inspection of the quarantine work at Lo Wu Control Point. Notwithstanding Dr WONG’s approval of the inspection in principle, he hoped that Dr WONG could respond whether the coverage of the quarantine and testing measures could be extended. Besides, noting that only eight confirmed cases were recorded so far despite that a large number of suspected cases had been reported, he asked Dr WONG whether some of the suspected cases turned out to be other diseases, and he would like to know if the DH would provide more figures in this regard.

159. The Chairman said that as Dr WONG Ka-hing had approved in principle the request for an inspection, he hoped that Members would focus their comments on the inspection.

160. Mr CHEUNG Chun-wai asked whether the DH had provided protective gear for frontline staff at boundary control points, remarking that one customs officer less would mean a decrease in manpower and that inadequate gate-keeping would most directly affect North District. Besides, pointing out that the health declaration just mentioned by Mr CHOW Kam-ho was merely voluntary in nature, he asked how the department would preclude people from making perfunctory declaration. He also asked how the department would handle arrivals from Wuhan as the Government was unable to use Fai Ming Estate as a quarantine facility at present. As it was very likely that bush meat was a source of transmission of the virus, he asked the department if the quarantine efforts were adequate, and whether sufficient advice had been provided in this regard. In view that the department had lost public confidence due to its attempt to requisition Fai Ming Estate for use as a quarantine facility, he considered that the department should do something as soon as possible to rebuild public confidence. While the Mainland authority had previously said that the epidemic was “preventable and controllable”, the epidemic had spread swiftly across the country except Tibet. He noted that there had already been eight confirmed cases in Hong Kong and he did not want to see any

42 Action

more confirmed cases. Pointing out that lockdown had been imposed in some of the Mainland cities, he queried whether the department would take no action until North District imposed a lockdown on itself.

161. Mr KWOK Long-fung noted that when Hon LAM Cheuk-ting asked Dr WONG Ka-hing repeatedly if he agreed to a complete closure of the borders, Dr WONG remained reluctant to express his stance and only said that staff in different positions were dedicated to their duties. It was known that healthcare staff had to draw fortune sticks to decide who would join the dedicated medical team to take care of confirmed patients, and he did not understand why Dr WONG was reluctant to express his stance. Dr WONG did not have to worry about his livelihood even if he was sacked by Carrie LAM. He considered that Dr WONG’s refusal to express his stance and to give further comments was tantamount to putting Hong Kong people and healthcare staff in Hong Kong in peril. Moreover, he considered health declaration useless, pointing out that the young tenant of Tin Ping Estate who, with poor self-discipline, wandered around after returning to Hong Kong from Wuhan was believed to have made health declaration. If the young man was an asymptomatic patient, the audience who watched movie with him at the same cinema might get infected with Wuhan pneumonia.

162. Ms WONG Hoi-ying said that staff working at the boundary control points, including staff members of the ImmD and the C&ED, security guards and cleaning workers might only have a face mask to protect themselves. However, they were meeting face to face with hundreds of thousands of cross-boundary visitors every day. Since they had close contact with visitors, it was particularly important that they had sufficient protective gear. Otherwise, they might become “cryptic patients” after getting infected and spread the virus into the community, resulting in a local community outbreak. Therefore, Members requested for an inspection of the control point for a reason and were not putting up a show. Furthermore, she asked the DH about the coverage of the quarantine arrangements and how the department would handle cases where people were unwilling to undergo quarantine. She believed that these questions could not be answered by the DH alone and therefore hoped that the ImmD and other departments could work together in this regard. In addition, it was said earlier that there were more than 300 000 outbound visitors from Hong Kong during the Lunar New Year period, among which mostly were returning to their home towns to visit relatives and would be back to Hong Kong soon. She enquired whether the department had ensured that

43 Action

adequate publicity was given at the control points so that those returning to Hong Kong were aware that they had to undergo self-isolation after returning home to protect themselves, their families, neighbours and the whole community. Noting the recent panic buying of goods such as masks, alcohol hand rubs, wet wipes, household cleaners by members of the public, she considered that public confidence could be rebuilt only if senior officials (including Dr WONG and the spokespersons at the regular press conferences held by the Government) could address the pressing needs of the public and conduct district visits in person to gauge public opinion rather than turning a blind eye to the public’s panic buying of the daily necessities everywhere.

163. The Chairman concluded that as Members’ speeches partly overlapped with the fourth censure motion moved by Hon LAM Cheuk-ting and Mr CHAN Wai-tat’s proposal to ensure the availability of supplies (i.e. the fifth impromptu motion), he advised Dr WONG to respond to those parts later. He invited Dr WONG to first respond to the questions raised by Mr LAU Ki-fung and Ms WONG Hoi-ying regarding the anti-epidemic measures at boundary control points, specifically whether a contact tracing list or mechanism had been set up concerning Mainland people or Hong Kong residents returning to Hong Kong, and the coordinated efforts made by the DH together with the ImmD, the C&ED and the MTR Corporation Limited (“MTRCL”) and how the department avoided the emergence of “cryptic patients”. As regards issues relating to health declaration, protective gear, consumption of wild animals, household cleaners and the declaration of stance as mentioned by Mr KWOK Long-fung, he asked Dr WONG to respond later. He invited Dr WONG to first respond to the matters concerning the coordinated efforts among different agencies and the contact tracing list.

164. Dr WONG Ka-hing said that apart from colleagues of the DH’s Port Health Division, staff from the ImmD and the C&ED were also involved in the implementation of port health measures, and the departments would work in coordination with each other. He asked the Chairman what else they expected his specific response.

165. The Chairman said that Members would like to know more about the coordination between the DH and departments/organisations such as the ImmD, the C&ED and the MTRCL, so that they could examine the division of responsibilities on the quarantine front among the departments/organisations when conducting the inspection.

44 Action

166. Dr WONG Ka-hing said that in this regard, further discussions were needed with Members after the meeting about the places to be inspected. If places included were not solely under the purview of the DH, cooperation of other departments would be needed.

167. The Chairman invited Dr WONG Ka-hing to give an account of the contact tracing list.

168. Dr WONG Ka-hing said that as mentioned by many Members earlier, the health declaration system had a number of limitations and its effectiveness was questionable. The DH also noted the point. From the day of the meeting, the measure had started to be implemented at the airport and the DH was actively preparing for the extension of the measure to other control points. On the reason why the measure was of questionable effectiveness, he considered that firstly it was because the information declared might be inaccurate and secondly, people would be asymptomatic if they were within the incubation period. If a suspected case as mentioned by Members (such as a person who was feverish and met the epidemiological criteria) was identified, staff members would certainly arrange for the admission of the person to hospital for isolation and a COVID-19 test, and the person should not refuse the arrangement.

169. Dr WONG Ka-hing continued that the DH had not maintained a contact tracing list as the visitor traffic was extremely heavy. The DH would request the inbound visitors from Hubei Province to wear face masks and isolate themselves as far as possible. Moreover, the department would arrange medical surveillance for them. As for the inbound visitors from places other than Hubei Province, the DH would advise them to stay at home as far as possible and wear masks.

170. The Chairman asked Members whether they had anything to add in respect of the explanation provided by Dr WONG Ka-hing and Members’ inspection at Lo Wu Control Point. If not, the motion would be put to vote.

171. The Chairman announced that a vote would be taken on the first impromptu motion. The voting result was that 15 Members were in favour of the motion (Mr LAW Ting-tak, Mr CHAN Yuk-ming, Ms LAM Tsz-king, Hon LAM Cheuk-ting, Ms LAM Shuk-ching, Mr CHOW Kam-ho, Mr YUEN Ho-lun, Mr CHAN Wai-tat, Mr KWOK Long-fung, Mr KO Wai-kei,

45 Action

Mr Franco CHEUNG, Mr CHEUNG Chun-wai, Ms WONG Hoi-ying, Mr CHIANG Man-ching and Mr LAU Ki-fung), none against and none abstained. The impromptu motion was passed by an absolute majority of votes.

(Mr KO Wai-kei left the meeting at this juncture.)

(b) Motion: To Request the Government to Curtail the Permitted Period of Stay of Approved Visit Visas

172. The Chairman said that the second impromptu motion, which was proposed by Ms LAM Tsz-king, requested the Government to curtail the permitted period of stay of approved visit visas. However, he noted that there were no representatives of the ImmD at the meeting. He therefore enquired whether Members had anything to add, and said that the motion would be put to vote if Members had nothing to add.

173. Ms LAM Tsz-king proposed that she be allowed to read out her motion before putting the motion to vote.

174. The Chairman invited Ms LAM Tsz-king to read out her motion.

175. Ms LAM Tsz-king read out the impromptu motion put forward by her which was attached at Annex IV.

176. The Chairman announced that a vote would be taken on the second impromptu motion. The voting result was that 14 Members were in favour of the motion (Mr LAW Ting-tak, Mr CHAN Yuk-ming, Ms LAM Tsz-king, Hon LAM Cheuk-ting, Ms LAM Shuk-ching, Mr CHOW Kam-ho, Mr YUEN Ho-lun, Mr CHAN Wai-tat, Mr KWOK Long-fung, Mr Franco CHEUNG, Mr CHEUNG Chun-ho, Ms WONG Hoi-ying, Mr CHIANG Man-ching and Mr LAU Ki-fung), none against and none abstained. The impromptu motion was passed by an absolute majority of votes.

(c) Motion: The NDC Urges the Government of the Special Administrative Region to Immediately Close All Boundary Control Points and to Prohibit Persons Other Than Local Residents from Entering Hong Kong Until the Epidemic Has

46 Action

Been Brought Under Control

(d) Motion: To Condemn Carrie LAM for Her Incompetence and Request for Immediate Closure of the Borders

(e) Motion: The NDC Urges the Government of the Special Administrative Region to Immediately Disclose the Number of Face Masks in the Government’s Stock, and to Ensure that there are Adequate Supplies of Face Masks, Disinfectants and Protective Equipment for Use by the Community

177. Given that there were some overlaps among the third to the fifth impromptu motions, the Chairman said that the motions would be discussed together and then be voted one by one.

178. Mr CHAN Wai-tat presented the third and the fifth impromptu motions and provided supplementary information on the latter. He said that the request as set out in the fifth impromptu motion was not initiated by the NDC. As a matter of fact, such request had been put forward by district councillors in all the 18 districts, but so far he had not seen any action from the Government to stabilise the supply of face masks and sanitising products. TVB news reported that many Mainlanders bought masks in Shek Wu Hui and brought them back to the Mainland. He enquired whether the Government would implement measures to secure the supply of masks and address the shortage of masks, and whether it would follow Taiwan’s practice to impose a “mask export ban” or leave the market to operate freely. The impromptu motions concerned were attached at Annex V and Annex VI.

179. Hon LAM Cheuk-ting presented the fourth impromptu motion which was at Annex VII. Regarding the fourth point as set out in the motion, he added that such widespread public resentment would not have aroused if the Government had not ignored public opinion and bypassed local consultation (which involved District Officer (North), NDC Chairman and district councillors of the relevant constituency). The Government just turned a blind eye to the demand of the public and district councillors who attempted to communicate with relevant officials. As a result, more people were forced to take to the streets and even express their discontent in a violent manner. He held that the Government had been intransigent in implementing seriously erroneous policies that undermined the interests and health of the public. It revoked the measures of using PRH as quarantine

47 Action

camps simply for fear of public opinion. Members of the public staged the protest just to protect their lives and safeguard the health and safety of their families. It was actually the Government who started the protest and so it should not hold the protestors accountable. The Prosecution Code stipulated that apart from sufficiency of evidence, the Government should consider whether it was in the public interest to prosecute. It was in the public interest if members of the public were guiltless for protesting against erroneous policies introduced by the Government in order to safeguard the health of themselves and their families. He reiterated that the Government should not hold the persons arrested responsible in any way. He asked District Officer (North) to relay the comments to the Administration.

180. Dr WONG Ka-hing gave a consolidated response to the third to fifth impromptu motions and the comments of Mr CHAN Wai-tat and Hon LAM Cheuk-ting as follows:

(a) The responses made by him on behalf of the DH might not satisfy the councillors, but they were all hard facts;

(b) The Government had announced the day before the meeting that it was sourcing face masks globally;

(c) He did not have data on the Government’s stock of face masks at hand;

(d) Despite that the health declaration system had inadequacies, the Government was going to implement the health declaration measure at various boundary control points and request Hong Kong residents returning from Hubei Province to contact staff of the Port Health Division for health assessment. The staff would also provide returnees with health advice and conduct medical surveillance on them;

(e) Adequate protective equipment was available for use by staff at the boundary control points, especially quarantine officers. The Government cared about the safety of the staff and would strive to protect their health;

(f) Regarding the proposal of using Fai Ming Estate as a quarantine camp, he had made responses at the early part of the meeting; and

(g) As issues like complete closure of the borders and restriction on the purchase of face masks were related to matters at a policy level, the

48 Action

relevant comments would be relayed to the FHB for its consideration.

181. Mr CHIANG Man-ching put forward the following comments and suggestions:

(a) Recently, there were cases at MTR stations where passengers vomited or collapsed suddenly, causing panic among the public. Many residents approached and asked him about the purchase of face masks. There were masks available for sale in individual supermarkets, but customers had to queue up to make purchases. That was very dangerous as large crowds were formed when queuing, especially for the elderly in the queues;

(b) Some people had attempted to purchase masks online but their orders were cancelled;

(c) While the C&ED had clarified that there was no import restrictions on face masks in Hong Kong, there were cases where masks imported via the Mainland had been detained by the Mainland Customs. He hoped that the authority could look into the matter;

(d) The Post Office had suspended some of its postal services except the Speedpost service. As many Hong Kong people wished to place mail orders of masks, he hoped that the Post Office could make arrangements accordingly;

(e) He agreed with Mr CHAN Wai-tat that there were still many people who bought a large number of masks in Hong Kong and brought them back to the Mainland;

(f) A “mask export ban” should not mean restrictions on the purchase of masks, as interpreted by Dr WONG Ka-hing, but restrictions on the quantity of masks people leaving Hong Kong might carry with them. In other words, people should be forbidden to bring a large quantity of masks to the Mainland from Hong Kong; and

(g) Some members of the public claimed that they witnessed some people picking used masks from litter bins and putting them on sale after simple processing. He suggested that prosecution should be instituted against persons who were found picking or processing second-hand masks, with a view to preventing such an absurd situation from happening in Hong Kong.

49 Action

182. Dr WONG Ka-hing gave a response to Mr CHIANG Man-ching’s comments and suggestions as follows:

(a) He was aware of the tight supply of face masks;

(b) The C&ED had coordinated efforts and supports with the parties concerned to facilitate the clearance of some imported masks from the Mainland;

(c) He was not clear about the arrangements made by the Post Office for mail orders of masks;

(d) The decision on whether to impose restrictions on export of masks rested with the C&ED; and

(e) Noting that there were some photos of second-hand masks circulating online, the DH had explored with the Drug Office on possible actions to be taken but it seemed that not much action could be taken for the time being. If someone was found selling second-hand masks, the C&ED should be responsible for studying whether such act was illegal under the Trade Descriptions Ordinance.

183. The Chairman enquired about the DH’s strategy for combating the epidemic, such as the progress and timetable of procurement of face masks. He pointed out that the outbreak of the epidemic did not take place today. In fact, there were already three confirmed cases as early as 3 January 2020. Therefore, he held that it was unreasonable for the Government to say that procurement of masks was still in progress as he believed that the Government did not just start global sourcing the day before, or it would arouse much suspicion.

184. Dr WONG Ka-hing responded that the Government did not just start to procure face masks today. He hoped that Hong Kong could have a continuous and steady supply of masks, and global sourcing was one of the ways to achieve that. He was not able to provide information on the progress and timetable of the procurement work as the anti-epidemic work involved many departments, including the Government Logistics Department (“GLD”) which was responsible for procurement matters.

185. Mr CHAN Yuk-ming expressed his support to the third to fifth

50 Action

impromptu motions and raised the following comments and questions:

(a) Although Dr WONG Ka-hing said that he was not clear about the Government’s stock level of face masks, various rumours had been circulating online including that the Government maintained a stock of 38 million or even over 100 million masks, and that the masks produced by the Correctional Services Department had entered the market, possibly involving putting government-manufactured masks on sale privately by public officers. Under such circumstances, it was unreasonable for the Government to remain ignorant of its stock levels to date;

(b) Noting that the Government was securing a bulk purchase of masks, it was suggested that the Government should consider whether some of the masks in stock could be distributed to members of the public to address their urgent needs;

(c) He totally agreed with the request for a complete closure of the borders as set out in the fourth impromptu motion. As mentioned by Dr WONG Ka-hing, staff of the ImmD and those stationed at the boundary control points were being under high work pressure. If the Government closed the borders completely, the stress problem could be completely resolved;

(d) Although the Mainland authorities had ceased issuing the Individual Visit Endorsements (“IVEs”) to Mainland visitors, Mainland visitors could still travel to Hong Kong with other entry permits. Therefore, the authorities concerned should stop issuing all kinds of permits for entry into Hong Kong for Mainland visitors; and

(e) The incident happened at Fai Ming Estate in Fanling reminded people of the “721 incident”. While the white-clad men, who claimed that what they did was to protect their homeland, were untouchable, the ten protestors in Fai Ming Estate incident who truly tried to protect their homeland were arrested. Some of them were being on bail and some were required to attend call-over hearings immediately (i.e. their cases were referred to higher courts). Dr WONG and HD representatives had admitted just now that the incident was a result of communication problems between the Government and the public that caused public panic. It meant that the protest was triggered by the Government and he queried

51 Action

the justification for the Government to hold the protestors responsible. He asked District Officer (North) to actively relay to the Government the fourth point as set out in the fourth impromptu motion and requested the Government to apologise for the arrangement of setting up a quarantine camp at Fai Ming Estate.

186. Dr WONG Ka-hing responded that government medical agencies had all along maintained a certain stock level of face masks, including the DH which provided patient service and the HA which had the largest stock. To cope with unforeseen and novel infectious diseases, the DH and the HA had been maintaining a stockpile of masks which were adequate for three months’ consumption and would conduct procurement exercises in due course to ensure adequate stock in place as the consumption of masks would increase under such circumstances. Generally speaking, there was no need for other government departments to stock up on masks. It was observed that COVID-19 was similar to SARS and MERS and had a high risk of transmission in healthcare settings, and there were already cases of infection among medical staff on the Mainland. Therefore, it was necessary to use masks and so on to prevent infection. For matters concerning visas, they were under the purview of the Security Bureau and were outside the ambit of the DH.

187. Mr CHONG Wing-wun said he would relay to the Government the impromptu motions which were approved by the NDC at the meeting.

188. Mr CHOW Kam-ho had the following comments and questions:

(a) Dr WONG Ka-hing initially said that he was not clear about the Government’s stock of face masks, but later on said that there was a stock sufficient for three months’ consumption. It was worrying to see that the CHP, which had played a part in leading the anti-epidemic work, failed to give a clear account of the stock level of protective equipment for use by frontline healthcare staff, quarantine officers and staff stationed at boundary control points;

(b) With the infections getting out of control on the Mainland, some people started to suggest the closure of the borders. Nevertheless, the Government insisted that it was unnecessary to close the borders, and there were even some officials who remarked that only symptomatic persons needed to wear masks (the officials apologised for such remarks afterwards). He queried that the

52 Action

Government was slow to react to the epidemic; and

(c) He queried the reason for the Government to change its policy to close some of the boundary control points less than 24 hours after insisting that a complete closure of the borders was unnecessary. Many medical experts and medical groups had commented that the risk of having “cryptic patients” was very high. He asked why the Government suddenly realised the risk and changed its policy. He enquired how the Government came up with the decision and under what circumstances it would agree to close all boundary control points.

189. Dr WONG Ka-hing responded that according to his understanding, the first question raised by the Member was about the current stock of face masks held by the Government, but what he mentioned afterwards was the standard stock level maintained by the DH and the HA which was equivalent to three months’ consumption. He reiterated that he did not have the exact data on the existing stockpile of masks and the masks consumed in combating the epidemic. The epidemic was evolving rapidly and there was an upsurge in the number of confirmed and suspected cases on the Mainland recently. From the experience of treating COVID-19 patients and relevant scientific research, the Mainland medical sector found that the transmission rate of the novel coronavirus was higher than what they thought in the initial phase of the outbreak. Local experts had assessed the epidemic situation on the Mainland, and the University of Hong Kong had made projections about the epidemic (e.g. the number of infections in Wuhan, the number of exported cases and future development of the infection). All the factors mentioned above played a part in determining the anti-epidemic measures to be taken. Therefore, he personally held that the DH was not slow to react to the epidemic most of the time, especially in the initial phase of the outbreak where proactive actions had been taken by the department. As the epidemic situation had been changing more and more rapidly over the past few days, the measures to be taken had gone beyond the purview of the DH and the CHP. With the response level raised to “Emergency”, relevant bureaux and departments also took part actively in the anti-epidemic work.

190. Noting that the CE announced the day before the meeting that postal services would be suspended, Mr KWOK Long-fung said that some young people had purchased a large quantity of face masks online before the Lunar New Year which were to be delivered by the Post Office. In that regard, he asked District Officer (North) to provide assistance or request the

53 Action

Post Office on behalf of the NDC to arrange delivery services as soon as practicable. The DH representative claimed that the department was not slow to react to the epidemic, but Dr Hon Helena WONG Pik-wan, a Legislative Councillor from the Democratic Party, had suggested on 23 January the suspension of all the high-speed rail, ferry and through train services plying between Hong Kong and the Mainland. It was not until the fourth Day of the Lunar New Year that the CE announced the suspension of some of the control point services. He did not know whether the decision was an example of being slow in response, saying that he would leave it for the North District residents in the public gallery to judge.

191. Mr CHONG Wing-wun said he would relay Mr KWOK’s comments to the Post Office.

192. Mr LAU Ki-fung supported the third to fifth impromptu motions and commented on the used and fake masks (i.e. masks that were very flimsy) sold on the market. As one of the duties of the CHP was to monitor the development of the epidemic, it was also in the CHP’s area of concern if people contracted pneumonia after using used or fake masks unknowingly. Noting that no response was made so far by the Government in that regard, he enquired about the measures the CHP had implemented to assist members of the public. It was not until now that the Government said it would source masks globally, but many supplies were already out of stock due to panic buying. People quarrelled with each another as they scrambled for masks and some shops were even besieged by people. He held that the crux of the problem was the Government’s failure to perform its gate-keeping role effectively and its inaction.

193. Dr WONG Ka-hing pointed out that the act of selling used or fake masks was unacceptable. He said that it should be considered whether actions could be taken under the Trade Descriptions Ordinance if there were suspected cases of selling used masks. The public had not been alerted to the situation as incidents of this kind had never happened in the past in Hong Kong. However, publicity efforts should now be stepped up to inform the public of the proper way to wear masks, and to remind the public to be cautious if they suspected that they had bought used masks (masks which had folds, stains or with unnatural colours) and to consider making a complaint or report. He reiterated that the DH would perform its duties actively and other departments might also have their part to play, such as the Consumer Council which could give advice on the purchase of masks.

54 Action

However, he would not meddle with the work of other departments.

194. The Chairman asked the CHP about the role it played in this regard.

195. Dr WONG Ka-hing responded that the CHP had all along been working to educate the public to protect themselves by wearing face masks properly. It would also explore ways to educate the public on identification of used masks.

196. Mr LAU Ki-fung asked Dr Wong Ka-hing whether publicity would be carried out through various channels to teach the public how to identify fake and second-hand masks. He also enquired whether the C&ED should be responsible for taking enforcement actions if there were suspected cases of sale of used or fake masks on the market.

197. Dr WONG Ka-hing responded that used masks were found on the market only recently, and there was no established way to identify such masks like counterfeit notes. The CHP needed to explore possible ways to educate the public on how to distinguish authentic masks from fake ones. Besides, he believed that the administration could see if the Trade Descriptions Ordinance could be invoked to regulate the sale of used and fake masks.

198. Mr CHEUNG Chun-wai asked whether the GLD would source children’s masks globally in addition to N95 masks and surgical masks as many people found it difficult to secure children’s masks. Besides, there were rumours that the Government had previously blocked some sources of masks due to the implementation of the anti-mask law. Now that the Government had to source masks globally and the two measures were self-contradictory. He asked the DH representative to explain whether the Government had blocked imported masks. If the rumours were true, he enquired if the Government would consider resume the import of the masks.

199. Dr WONG Ka-hing said that the face masks procured by the Government were mainly adult masks. However, children’s masks would probably be included in the Government’s procurement exercises as children needed to wear masks that fit over their faces.

200. Mr CHONG Wing-wun said that the anti-mask law and related policy issues were issues with wider implications and were not suitable to

55 Action

be discussed at the meeting.

201. Ms LAM Shuk-ching made the following comments:

(a) Although Dr WONG Ka-hing had explained that it was the responsibility of other departments to combat the sale of second-hand or fake face masks on the market, she hoped that the DH could perform a gate-keeping role for the public. In cases where problems relayed by Members could hardly be addressed by one single department, the department should take the lead to co-ordinate inter-departmental efforts and refer the problems to the department(s) concerned for follow up;

(b) Some people did bad things outrageously as they had no consequences to bear due to the lack of penalties with deterrent effect. There were some photos on the internet showing a person washing and hang-drying face masks brazenly, and the person was not afraid of being discovered at all. This made people thought that there was no regulation by the Government. Fake masks could take lives. A deterrent effect could be achieved only if sellers of second-hand masks would be subject to arrest;

(c) As regards the incident at Fai Ming Estate in Fanling, she pointed out that residents in the district were good citizens who worked hard day by day. On the second day of this Lunar New Year, which was supposed to be a day for celebration, tenants of the several public housing estates near Fai Ming Estate joined the protest. Although there were only some residents in ordinary clothes at the scene, a large number of anti-riot police officers arrived and they simply ignored security guards’ advice that the estate was private premises. She was at the scene that night, trying to lobby the residents to retreat. However, the residents responded that they were just staying in their own housing estate, and they questioned what crime they had committed. When anti-riot police officers issued warnings at Wah Ming Estate and appealed to people at the scene to leave, protestors left gradually with the assistance of some District Councillors. However, some police officers alleged that some of the residents moved too slowly and besieged the District Councillors and the residents, accusing them of being unwilling to leave. She questioned how could the Government not apologise for the Fai Ming Estate incident. Therefore, she supported the fourth proposal and demanded an apology from the Government;

56 Action

(d) The estates concerned might organise lion dance activities in the future and surely more than three persons would gather for the activities. She worried that such activities would be defined as unlawful assemblies; and

(e) Bacteria did not wait for anyone. Exceptional measures should be taken in response to the unprecedented situation. If the authority did not close the boundary control points, problems such as quarantine camps and face masks would remain unsolved. Therefore, complete closure of all control points was the only option at present.

202. Dr WONG Ka-hing responded that as a professional department, the DH had the responsibility to perform the gate-keeping role and would do its utmost to safeguard the public’s health. The DH had been working to get across the message that surgical masks were disposable and should not be used repeatedly. The photos on the internet showing a person washing and hang-drying face masks might reflect that some people did not know that masks should only be used once. Therefore, there was a need to step up publicity efforts. The NDO might relay the suggestion about inter-departmental cooperation to the departments concerned.

203. The Chairman said that the NDC was going to cooperate with the NDO in producing promotional leaflets and banners. He considered that information on how to identify substandard face masks could be added.

204. Ms LAM Shuk-ching supplemented that swift action must be taken to combat the sale of second-hand or fake masks as many elderly persons or members of the public were unable to identify fake masks. She said that some people had previously reported to her on an unscrupulous shop in Fanling which sold second-hand masks. She asked whether there was any dedicated hotline or other rapid means to report such unscrupulous shops to help combat the unlawful practices and to alert other shops. At present, people who discovered such irregularities would probably contact District Councillors who would then refer the cases to the departments concerned. It was hoped that this would be of help to members of the public.

205. Ms LAM Tsz-king asked District Officer (North) to relay to the Security Bureau the request for withdrawing the visas issued to Mainlanders. She said that just an hour ago, two persons coming from Wuhan and

57 Action

entering Hong Kong via Shenzhen on 22 January had tested positive for COVID-19. Subsequent to the announcement by the CE on the day before the meeting that the Mainland authority would cease issuing IVEs, there was a news report saying that in some first and second-tier cities of Guangdong province which was hard-hit by the disease, Mainlanders could still obtain the visas by using 24-hour self-service facilities. All they needed to do was to bring their identity card and to pay 30 Yuan Renminbi, and successful applicants could visit Hong Kong twice within three months or one year. That was why people could still obtain the visas in Foshan city. Besides, she enquired how the issued IVEs would be handled, as Mainlanders holding valid IVEs could come to Hong Kong within specified period. She considered that the Government should simply bar Mainland arrivals. If the Government closed all the boundary control points at once, it would not have to bother about a number of trivial issues. Now that only some of the boundary control points were closed, Mainland visitors could still enter Hong Kong by different means. They could even enter Hong Kong by getting an e-ticket itinerary at Taobao.com at a fee of 150 Yuan Renminbi. If the Government failed to block entry to Hong Kong by Mainlanders through various means, there would not be adequate quarantine facilities even if more were built.

206. The Chairman asked District Officer (North) to relay the comments of Ms LAM Tsz-king to the Government.

207. Mr Franco CHEUNG made the following comments:

(a) He respected Dr WONG Ka-hing and understood that even people like Dr WONG, a doctor and an AIDS expert, might not be able to convince the self-willed Government to close the borders. That said, he appealed to Dr WONG to strive for a complete closure of the borders for the sake of the healthcare sector so as to assist them in coping with the current situation. He pointed out that not many people would listen to District Councillors, but many people would listen to the views of Dr WONG. At least Dr WONG could express his views to the CE whereas District Councillors did not have a chance to do so;

(b) So far all the confirmed cases in Hong Kong were imported cases. If he was asked to take care of a patient from Wuhan, he would discriminate against the patient and drive him away. But healthcare workers were so selfless that they were willing to risk their lives to treat these patients;

58 Action

(c) Healthcare workers were currently only provided with face masks which complied with Level 1 standard, and no high-level masks (i.e. those reached Level 2 standard) were provided for them. He was not a healthcare worker and so he was not sure about the effectiveness of Level 1 masks. But he knew that they were inferior to those of higher level. He urged Dr WONG to strive for better equipment for healthcare workers who sacrificed for the public and the whole society;

(d) Dr WONG said just now that he did not agree that the Government was slow to react. But he himself considered that the Government was “quick to react” in the incident at Fai Ming Estate as it tried to turn Fai Ming Estate into a quarantine camp without any consultation; and

(e) He hoped that Dr WONG, being the Controller of the CHP, would try his best to relay to the CE the requests of the public, i.e. a complete closure of the borders, provision of adequate protective equipment, mandatory submission of health declaration forms and an apology on the incident at Fai Ming Estate. All these requests did not involve political considerations. He hoped that Dr WONG would relay the views of the NDC to the Government.

208. Dr WONG Ka-hing responded that he had heard Members’ comments concerning complete closure of the borders. He thanked Members for their views and promised that he would relay their comments to the FHB. He pointed out that it would be more appropriate for District Officer (North) to relay the comments to other government departments. He further said that COVID-19 patients mainly received treatment in the HA at present, and as far as he knew, the masks currently used by the HA fulfilled the infection control standard.

209. Mr CHOW Kam-ho said he just learnt that the HA had announced the activation of the emergency response level, and visiting arrangements were suspended at all public hospitals. He pointed out that many elderly or chronic patients still had to go to public hospitals for follow-up consultations and drug refills, but they were the most vulnerable group who needed to be protected. As hospitals had become infected areas, patients visiting hospitals would have a much higher risk of getting infected by the virus. Therefore, he suggested that drug delivery services be provided for such patients by the HA so that patients did not need to go to hospitals during this high-risk period and their risk of infection could be lowered.

59 Action

210. Dr WONG Ka-hing reiterated that he could not respond on behalf of the HA, but he understood that the HA might have to consider reducing non-emergency services in the light of the epidemic. Action would possibly be taken by the HA to reduce the number of visits to hospitals by chronic patients who were in stable condition, and the manpower spared could be devoted to the fight against the epidemic. He believed the HA would keep the situation in view and adopt appropriate measures in a timely manner.

211. Mr CHAN Wai-tat said he was just verbally abused over the phone by a person who failed to secure face masks. As there was pressing need for masks among the public, he hoped the Government could disclose the arrangements for its global sourcing of masks, such as the quantity to be procured, the target stock level that could allow the distribution of masks to the public and the estimated time of arrival of the masks. Such information would bring hopes to the public and allow them to estimate the number of masks needed to be purchased for long-term use. The public so far knew little about the Government’s procurement exercises, and they were not sure about the quantity of masks they had to stockpile. Moreover, people were unable to obtain relevant information from the Government and they could only ask district councillors as to how they could secure masks. But there was little he could do to ensure that public demand for masks was met. He considered that the Government needed to manage expectations and inform the public as soon as possible when and how the Government would distribute face masks to them. The Government should avoid giving people the feeling that it just did not care about them and leaving them in a state of panic. Some citizens had asked him whether masks would be distributed by the NDC. He could only respond that the NDC prepared to distribute masks which, however, would be few in number and maybe only three to five masks would be provided for each person. He said that was the least they should do to manage expectations.

212. Mr CHOW Kam-ho further said that the suspension of healthcare services for chronic patients would pose great risks to them. Moreover, patients taking medication prescribed by public hospitals were mainly grassroots people and they could hardly afford to buy drugs by themselves. Therefore, he suggested that the HA should provide drug delivery services and he asked Dr WONG Ka-hing to relay his proposal to the HA, so that the patients could enjoy basic safeguards for their health without having to visit high-risk places such as hospitals.

213. Dr WONG Ka-hing clarified that he did not say that the HA would

60 Action

suspend the medication services for chronic patients who needed drug refills. Stable patients who had all along been taking certain drugs only needed medication refills but not follow-up consultations at the HA, and the doctors released could be deployed to more urgent services.

214. The Chairman reiterated the question raised by Mr CHAN Wai-tat, saying that he himself also wished to know more about the Government’s procurement of face masks.

215. Dr WONG Ka-hing said the procurement of face masks was not under the purview of the DH and it might involve various departments. He suggested that the NDO should invite responses from the departments concerned.

216. The Chairman said votes would then be taken on the third to fifth impromptu motions separately.

217. The voting result of the third impromptu motion was: 14 Members were in favour of it (Mr LAW Ting-tak, Mr CHAN Yuk-ming, Ms LAM Tsz-king, Hon LAM Cheuk-ting, Ms LAM Shuk-ching, Mr CHOW Kam-ho, Mr Yuen Ho-lun, Mr CHAN Wai-tat, Mr KWOK Long-fung, Mr Franco CHEUNG, Mr CHEUNG Chun-wai, Ms WONG Hoi-ying, Mr CHIANG Man-ching and Mr LAU Ki-fung), none against and none abstained. The impromptu motion was passed by an absolute majority of votes.

218. The voting result of the fourth impromptu motion was: 14 Members were in favour of it (Mr LAW Ting-tak, Mr CHAN Yuk-ming, Ms LAM Tsz-king, Hon LAM Cheuk-ting, Ms LAM Shuk-ching, Mr CHOW Kam-ho, Mr Yuen Ho-lun, Mr CHAN Wai-tat, Mr KWOK Long-fung, Mr Franco CHEUNG, Mr CHEUNG Chun-wai, Ms WONG Hoi-ying, Mr CHIANG Man-ching and Mr LAU Ki-fung), none against and none abstained. The impromptu motion was passed by an absolute majority of votes.

219. The voting result of the fifth impromptu motion was: 14 Members were in favour of it (Mr LAW Ting-tak, Mr CHAN Yuk-ming, Ms LAM Tsz-king, Hon LAM Cheuk-ting, Ms LAM Shuk-ching, Mr CHOW Kam-ho, Mr Yuen Ho-lun, Mr CHAN Wai-tat, Mr KWOK Long-fung, Mr Franco CHEUNG, Mr CHEUNG Chun-wai, Ms WONG Hoi-ying, Mr CHIANG Man-ching and Mr LAU Ki-fung), none against and none abstained. The

61 Action

impromptu motion was passed by an absolute majority of votes.

220. The Chairman said members of the public were extremely concerned about the procurement of face masks and he hoped that District Officer (North) would keep a close watch on the issue. He also thanked Dr WONG Ka-hing for attending the meeting.

Item 4 - Any Other Business

221. The Chairman wished to follow up the procurement of anti-epidemic packs and face masks with NDC funds and he invited Miss Gloria LAM, Assistant District Officer (North) 2 (“ADO(N)2”), to report on the matter.

222. Miss Gloria LAM said she had received enquiries from many Members who wished to learn about the progress of the NDO’s procurement of face masks. She said that the NDO had started the procurement process, but some of the suppliers still could not be reached as they were on Lunar New Year holidays. The NDO contacted some suppliers which had resumed business and enquired about the amount of stock available and the earliest delivery date. The actual number of masks to be delivered and the delivery date would depend on the market supply of masks. The NDO would update Members on that in due course. As for the procurement of anti-epidemic packs, it was known that the supplier had to meet large orders. The NDO hoped that the first batch of 20 000 anti-epidemic packs could be distributed to North District residents in the second half of February, and another 18 000 anti-epidemic packs would be distributed later.

223. Mr CHAN Wai-tat proposed that the NDO should not use the established practice of procurement through tender. He pointed out that currently mask suppliers might jack up prices of face masks and they would not respond to invitations for quotations. Moreover, payments would not be made instantly by the Government for the goods procured in general, and such practice would affect the cash flow of suppliers. So it would be impossible to secure masks by using conventional procurement approach.

224. Mr CHAN Yuk-ming enquired about the place of manufacture of

62 Action

the face masks concerned.

225. Hon LAM Cheuk-ting pointed out that there were currently 300 000 residents in North District, and the distribution of 20 000 anti-epidemic packs would mean that each person could only get 0.06 pack and that each of the district councillors would only be allocated about 1 000 anti-epidemic packs for distribution to North District residents.

226. The Chairman said that the anti-epidemic packs procured by the NDO were originally meant to be used for general promotional purpose to raise public awareness of personal hygiene in influenza season.

227. Ms LAM Tsz-king said many residents had complained that they failed to purchase disinfecting hand rubs and alcohol. She hoped that more anti-epidemic packs could be purchased and that face masks manufactured in Mainland China would not be procured.

228. Mr CHOW Kam-ho was shocked by the number of anti-epidemic packs to be purchased, remarking that it would be unable to allay public panic if each North District resident could only get 0.06 anti-epidemic pack. He had received many enquiries from the public about where to buy face masks. The NDO might purchase more masks if it had ways to do so. Pointing out that the public felt panic and helpless because of the surging prices of masks and difficulties to buy masks, he considered that it would not be ideal if only 20 000 anti-epidemic packs would be provided by the NDO which had resources.

229. Mr LAU Ki-fung noticed that additional funds were allocated by other District Councils for procurement of anti-epidemic items, and he asked if there was a problem with the budget for North district. He said the said number of anti-epidemic packs was definitely not enough for distribution in the community, and residents might end up being in uproar. He suggested that more funds be allocated by the NDC to procure more anti-epidemic packs to reduce disputes in the community.

230. Mr CHONG Wing-wun said he understood Members’ concerns. He responded that the 38 000 anti-epidemic packs were ordered before the outbreak of the epidemic for the yearly publicity programme under the

63 Action

District-led Actions Scheme, and so they were not ordered to tackle the COVID-19 outbreak which started in January. Subsequent to the relevant discussions at the meeting of the Working Group on Novel Coronavirus held on 16 January, ADO(N)2 had been actively contacting suppliers for the procurement exercise and had maintained close liaison with the Chairman of the working group. It was now a matter of supply but not a problem of order quantity or budget. At present a choice had to be made between the delivery date and the order quantity, and ADO(N)2 was handling the quotations. Moreover, the NDO would consider Members’ comments on the place of manufacture of masks. He said that the budget of the NDO or the NDC was sufficient at present, and it was just that there was an inadequate supply of the item. The NDO planned to take a pragmatic approach and order the quantity that the supplier could offer as mentioned in its quotation, and would request delivery by stages to avoid long waiting time.

231. Mr Franco CHEUNG said it took time to proceed with the procurement process, and he knew that there were not much funds left for the NDC. Given that many government venues had been closed and many New Year celebrations were cancelled, he enquired whether the NDC could take the initiative to check with successful applicant organisations whether they had cancelled their activities so that the NDC funds released could be used for buying face masks to tackle the epidemic.

232. Mr CHONG Wing-wun responded that they could contact the organisations and check the situation out. In fact, funds were also available under the NDO’s District-led Actions Scheme. The crux of the current problem was not insufficient funds but insufficient supply. As regards NDC funds, the NDC could indeed request the applicant organisations to surrender their unspent funds.

233. Mr YUEN Ho-lun enquired whether it would take less time to place orders for face masks instead of anti-epidemic packs.

234. The Chairman responded that orders had already been placed on anti-epidemic packs which would be delivered in the second half of February.

64 Action

235. Mr CHAN Yuk-ming hoped to cancel the feast for the elderly scheduled for late February. Moreover, he said that some comments were received from an ambulanceman who asked Members to take a look at the protective equipment of ambulancemen when they conducted the inspection at the border control point. The ambulanceman wished that the protective equipment for ambulancemen would be comparable to medical personnel because there were some cases in which people made ambulance calls upon entry to Hong Kong. As the protective equipment of ambulancemen was less good than those of medical personnel, ambulancemen had a fear of getting infected when providing services for residents.

236. Mr CHOW Kam-ho agreed that the feast for the elderly should be cancelled to reduce the need to attend crowded occasions by the elderly and to protect them from threats to their health. Moreover, he enquired if allocation of additional resources could be requested from the Government to support the anti-epidemic work in North District if the funds were used up.

237. Mr CHONG Wing-wun responded that additional funds would be requested if there was such a need.

238. The Chairman said that he had discussed with ADO(N)2 about the display of promotional banners to relay anti-epidemic messages at spots originally assigned for Members’ use. The draft of the banner was sent to Members and the Secretariat. If Members had no objections against the draft, arrangements would be made to produce and display the banners as soon as possible. He enquired if information about disposable masks should be included onto the banner.

239. Mr CHAN Yuk-ming responded that there was no need to include information about disposable masks so that the production process of banners could be speeded up.

240. The Chairman indicated that as there were no further comments from Members, banners would be produced based on the draft and distributed to Members for display.

65 Action

Item 5 - Date of Next Meeting

241. The Chairman announced that the next meeting would be held at 9:30 a.m. on 11 February 2020 (Tuesday) in the NDC Conference Room.

242. The meeting was adjourned at 6:27 p.m.

North District Council Secretariat

April 2020

66