A 09/10-18

Legislative Council

Agenda

Wednesday 24 February 2010 at 11:00 am

I. Tabling of Papers

Subsidiary Legislation / InstrumentsL.N. No.
1.Prisons (Amendment) Order 201013/2010
2.Immigration (Places of Detention) (Amendment) Order 201014/2010
3.Immigration (Treatment of Detainees) (Amendment) Order 201015/2010
4.Smoking (Public Health) Ordinance (Amendment of Schedule 2) Order 201016/2010
5.Occupational Deafness (Compensation) (Amendment) Ordinance 2010 (Commencement) Notice17/2010

Other Papers

1.No. 68-Education Scholarships Fund
Audited statement of accounts together with the Auditor's report and Trustee's report on the administration of the Fund for the year ended 31 August 2009
(to be presented by the Secretary for Education)

2.No. 69-Audited statement of accounts and report on activities of the Hong Kong Examinations and Assessment Authority for the year ended 31 August 2009
(to be presented by the Secretary for Education)

3.No. 70-Hong Kong Arts Development Council Annual Report 2008/09
(to be presented by the Secretary for Home Affairs)

4.No. 71-Li Po Chun Charitable Trust Fund
Signed and audited financial statements together with the Auditor's report and report by the Trustee on the Administration of the Fund for the year ended 31 August 2009
(to be presented by the Secretary for Home Affairs)

5.No. 72-Estimates
for the year ending 31 March 2011
Volume IA - General Revenue Account
Volume IB - General Revenue Account
(to be presented by the Financial Secretary)

6.No. 73-Estimates
for the year ending 31 March 2011
Volume II - Fund Accounts
(to be presented by the Financial Secretary)

7.Report No. 5/09-10 of the House Committee on Consideration of Subsidiary Legislation and Other Instruments
(to be presented by Hon Miriam LAU, Chairman of the House Committee)

II. Questions for Written Replies

1. Dr Hon Samson TAM to ask: (Translation)

Regarding the utilization of the Road Traffic Information Service and the Public Transport Enquiry Service of the Transport Information System which was developed by the Transport Department ("TD"), will the Government inform this Council:
    (a)whether the authorities have compiled statistics on the average monthly utilization rate of the aforesaid two services since their introduction; if they have, of the details; if not, the reasons for that;

    (b)whether the authorities have received complaints from members of the public about the aforesaid two services; if they have, of the number of complaints and the details of them; and

    (c)given that it has been reported that TD is currently unable to provide real-time traffic information for the public and the trades concerned, whether the authorities will expeditiously provide such real-time information services, so as to improve and promote the development of an intelligent transport system in Hong Kong; if they will, of the details; if not, the reasons for that?
Public Officer to reply : Secretary for Transport and Housing

2. Hon LEE Cheuk-yan to ask: (Translation)

Will the Government inform this Council of the appointment of individual Legislative Council Members of the current term to advisory and statutory bodies ("ASBs") as at the end of last year (including the names and types of ASBs, the tenure of their appointments, as well as their respective rates of attendance at meetings of such ASBs)?
    Public Officer to reply : Secretary for Home Affairs

    3. Hon TAM Yiu-chung to ask:     (Translation)

    A number of District Council ("DC") members have relayed to me that in their districts, many old buildings without owners' corporations ("OCs") were nominated by DCs as Category 2 target buildings under Operation Building Bright ("OBB") in May last year as these buildings had become dilapidated because of the lack of maintenance, but reply from the Government is still pending. In this connection, will the Government inform this Council:
      (a)of the respective numbers of nominations of Category 2 target buildings made by the five DCs of Yuen Long, Tsuen Wan, Kwai Tsing, Tuen Mun and Islands since the implementation of OBB last year; and among the buildings nominated, of the number of those that had been included as Category 2 target buildings; the reasons for not including some of the nominated buildings as Category 2 target buildings, together with the names of such buildings;

      (b)which buildings had been included as Category 2 target buildings respectively in the five DC districts in (a) to date;

      (c)given that some local people have pointed out that some of the old buildings which were not approved to be included as Category 2 target buildings are in an even poorer state of dilapidation than some of the Category 1 target buildings, whether the Government will set up a mechanism for residents of these old buildings to seek a review to enable them to obtain subsidies for carrying out repair works expeditiously, so as to enhance the safety of buildings; if so, of the specific measures; if not, the reasons for that; and

      (d)given that OCs were formed in the past six months for some of the old buildings which were not approved to be included as Category 2 target buildings, whether the Government will allow these OCs to submit applications for their buildings to be included as Category 1 target buildings; if so, of the specific measures; if not, the reasons for that?
    Public Officer to reply : Secretary for Development

    4. Hon CHAN Kin-por to ask:     (Translation)

    Under the Motor Vehicles Insurance (Third Party Risks) Ordinance (Cap. 272), the Government is not required to take out third party risks insurance for its vehicles. At present, the Government itself takes on the compensation liability in traffic accidents involving government vehicles. In this connection, will the Government inform this Council:
      (a)of the total number and types of government vehicles as at the end of December last year; and

      (b)of the total amount of compensation paid by the Government to third parties (including compensation for personal injuries and property damages) in relation to traffic accident claims involving government vehicles in each of the past five years, the number of claims to which the Government did not make compensation and the reasons for that, as well as the administration costs and remuneration expenses of government officials involved in handling such claims?
    Public Officer to reply : Secretary for Financial Services and the Treasury

    5. Hon CHEUNG Man-kwong to ask:     (Translation)

    Recently, I have received complaints from surplus teachers that even though they are "registered teachers" who have undergone teacher training and have ample teaching experience, they have encountered great difficulties in securing a teaching post as classes are being reduced in both primary and secondary schools due to the dwindling number of school-aged children in recent years; yet, the Education Bureau ("EDB") has, at the same time, permitted university graduates without any teacher training to be employed as "permitted teachers" by schools. Such surplus teachers are of the view that at a time when the number of classes is being reduced, the authorities' arrangement of leaving trained teachers unemployed and allowing teachers without training to take up teaching posts is wasting the resources used on teacher training. In this connection, will the Government inform this Council:
      (a)of the respective numbers of applications received by EDB for teacher registration in respect of employment of "permitted teachers" in primary and secondary schools in each of the school years from 2007-2008 to 2009-2010, the reasons for such applications, as well as the numbers of applications granted and the reasons therefor;

      (b)whether the authorities will inform the schools that priority shall be given to "registered teachers" when recruiting teachers in the new school year, so as to ensure a steady development of the teaching profession; and

      (c)whether the authorities will review the existing policy, so as to ensure that the authorities will not approve, except for very special reasons, the employment of "permitted teachers" by schools during the difficult period of the number of classes being reduced, in order not to waste the resources used on teacher training?
    Public Officer to reply : Secretary for Education

    6. Hon WONG Ting-kwong to ask:     (Translation)

    Recently, some members of the courier service industry have relayed to me that the new Postal Law of the Mainland stipulates that from 1 October 2009 onwards, foreign companies are prohibited from investing in courier service business involving delivery of letters on the Mainland. As Hong Kong courier companies operating the business concerned on the Mainland are regarded as foreign companies, their business on the Mainland has suffered a heavy blow, and quite a number of companies are under the threat of closure. Such members have indicated that quite a number of Hong Kong enterprises operating on the Mainland often use the courier service provided by such companies to facilitate their "front shop and back plant" mode of operation in the two places, and closure of the courier business concerned will have enormous economic impact. Such members have also indicated that they hope the Hong Kong SAR Government could expeditiously discuss with the Mainland under the Hong Kong Closer Economic Partnership Arrangement ("CEPA") the inclusion of courier service in the scope of CEPA. In this connection, will the Government inform this Council:
      (a)whether the authorities will follow up the aforesaid situation; and

      (b)given that under CEPA at present, meetings of the Joint Steering Committee are held annually between the Mainland and the Hong Kong SAR Government to discuss the implementation of various liberalization measures under CEPA, whether the authorities will consider taking the initiative to propose including courier service in the scope of CEPA, with a view to allowing service providers from Hong Kong to operate the related business on preferential terms on the Mainland; if they will, of the details; if not, the reasons for that?
    Public Officer to reply : Secretary for Commerce and Economic Development

    7. Dr Hon David LI to ask:

    The Administration advised at the meeting of the Public Works Subcommittee on 4 November 2009 that all high-priority government man-made slopes would be stabilized upon completion of the 10-year Extended Landslip Preventive Measures ("LPM") programme by 2010. It has been learnt that some two-thirds of the man-made slopes in Hong Kong are government slopes, and some 18 000 man-made slopes are privately owned. As part of the Extended LPM programme, safety-screening studies were carried out on private slopes, and the number of Dangerous Hillside Orders served on owners of private slopes each year had increased sharply in the past decade. In this connection, will the Government inform this Council:
      (a)of the number of Dangerous Hillside Orders served each year since the implementation of the Extended LPM programme in 2000 and, among them, the number of orders which had been fully complied with, the number of persons convicted of non-compliance and the main reasons for non-compliance;

      (b)of the respective numbers of professional personnel and works personnel employed in the Government and in the private sector for slope maintenance work in Hong Kong at present;

      (c)of the transferability of the geotechnical and other skills learned during the Extended LPM programme to other engineering and construction work for use;

      (d)whether it has assessed if the major infrastructure projects being undertaken by the Government will result in a significant increase in demand for geotechnical, slope stabilization and maintenance expertise from the private sector; and

      (e)whether it knows if Hong Kong has developed any export capability in slope stabilization and maintenance services; if so, of the value of such services being exported each year during which the Extended LPM programme was being implemented?
    Public Officer to reply : Secretary for Development

    8. Hon CHAN Hak-kan to ask:     (Translation)

    Recently, there were several traffic accidents allegedly caused by drivers who have taken drugs, but the existing legislation has not empowered the Police to require such drivers to provide body fluid specimens for drug testing. In this connection, will the Government inform this Council:
      (a)of the total number of traffic accidents in the past 12 months which involved drivers who have taken medicines or drugs; among such accidents, the number of cases in which the drivers involved were convicted, as well as the highest penalty imposed;

      (b)according to the existing guidelines of the Police, whether the Police has the authority to require drivers who are suspected of driving after taking medicines or drugs to stop driving immediately;

      (c)what short-term measures the authorities have put in place to combat the situation of drivers driving after taking medicines or drugs;

      (d)whether it will consider amending the legislation to empower the Police to require drivers involved in traffic accidents to provide body fluid specimens for drug testing; if so, when the relevant work will commence and the specific procedure of drug testing; if not, the reasons for that; and

      (e)whether the authorities will consider including the behaviour of drug driving in the scope of the study and consultation to be conducted on the compulsory drug testing scheme; if so, of the details; if not, the reasons for that?
    Public Officer to reply : Secretary for Transport and Housing

    9. Hon IP Wai-ming to ask:     (Translation)

    According to the figures of the Construction Industry Council, among the fatal industrial accidents which occurred between January and November 2009, 18 belong to the category of "Fall of Person from Height", representing 81.8% of the total number of such accidents. Quite a number of members of the trade have pointed out that work-at-height activities in the construction industry is dangerous with high mortality rate in accidents, but the Factories and Industrial Undertakings Ordinance ("FIUO") (Cap. 59) and the Construction Sites (Safety) Regulations (Cap. 59, sub. leg. I) only stipulate that proprietors and contractors of construction sites have "general duties" to ensure the safety of employees and should take "adequate steps" to prevent any person on the construction sites from falling from a height of two metres or more, with no provision regulating work-at-height safety. In this connection, will the Government inform this Council:
      (a)of the respective numbers of inspections conducted by the Labour Department on procedures and safety measures for work-at-height activities in each of the past five years, as well as the number of cases of non-compliance uncovered;

      (b)of the number of improvement notices involving work-at-height activities issued to proprietors or contractors of construction sites by the authorities in each of the past five years, and whether it knows the average number of days they took to take improvement measures upon receipt of the notices;

      (c)of the number of suspension notices involving work-at-height activities issued to proprietors or contractors of construction sites in each of the past five years, as well as the average number of days for which the proprietors or contractors were required to suspend the works, and whether it knows the average number of days they took to take improvement measures upon receipt of the notices;

      (d)of the number of prosecutions instituted under section 6A of FIUO against proprietors or contractors of construction sites in each of the past five years, the nature of such cases as well as the number of convictions; and

      (e)whether the authorities will consider making reference to the practice of the United Kingdom and enacting dedicated legislation on work-at-height safety (including work procedures and safety measures), so as to safeguard the safety of workers; if they will not, of the reasons for that?
    Public Officer to reply : Secretary for Labour and Welfare

    10. Dr Hon David LI to ask:

    In connection with the irrigation needs of golf courses in Hong Kong, will the Government inform this Council whether:
      (a)it knows if the existing man-made features (including the reservoir, the irrigation lake and desalination plant) at the Jockey Club Kau Sai Chau Public Golf Course in Sai Kung met all the irrigation needs of the golf course in the past two years; if not, whether the Water Supplies Department ("WSD") supplied water to the golf course for irrigation purposes; if so, of the total amount of water supplied in each of the past two years, and the rate at which such supply was charged;

      (b)it knows if other golf courses in Hong Kong have alternative or dedicated sources of water supply which significantly reduce or eliminate the need of drawing water from WSD; and

      (c)it has formulated any policy or entered into any agreement to encourage the development and continued use of alternative or dedicated sources of water supply for irrigation of golf courses; if so, of the details?
    Public Officer to reply : Secretary for Development

    11. Dr Hon LAM Tai-fai to ask:     (Translation)

    At the meeting of this Council on 3 February of this year, I raised a written question regarding the Arrangement between the Mainland of China and the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region for the Avoidance of Double Taxation and the Prevention of Fiscal Evasion with respect to Taxes on Income ("Arrangement") signed by the authorities of the Mainland and Hong Kong on 21 August 2006. In connection with the reply given by the Secretary for Financial Services and the Treasury, will the Government inform this Council:
      (a)given that the Inland Revenue Department ("IRD") relayed to the State Administration of Taxation ("SAT") the proposal of the trade to relax the 183-day threshold only in October 2009, whether the authorities will relay the proposal of the trade to the SAT again within this year; if they will, of the specific arrangement; if not, the reasons for that;

      (b)given that quite a number of members of the trade have relayed to me that, with the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region coming directly under the Central People's Government and the close connection between the two places, the Mainland's relation with Hong Kong in areas of politics, economy and geographical location, etc. is different from that with other tax jurisdictions, and therefore it is not necessary to adopt across the board the 183-day threshold, whether the Hong Kong SAR Government will relay the view of the trade to the mainland authorities; if it will, of the details; if not, the reasons for that;

      (c)why the authorities allow IRD not to record the numbers of default cases or holdover applications involving mainland residents; whether Hong Kong's revenue from salaries tax will decrease because IRD does not record the number of such cases; if it will not, of the reasons for that;

      (d)whether the Government has assessed the amount of salaries tax forgone each year as a result of the 183-day threshold, and whether this will have an impact on the operation of the existing Mandatory Provident Fund;

      (e)given that the Government said in its reply that Hong Kong residents may present their cases to IRD if they consider that the way the mainland tax authority has taxed them is not in accordance with the Arrangement and, if necessary, IRD may invoke the mutual agreement procedures, of the details of the mutual agreement procedures; whether the Government has conducted any publicity to enable the public to know the details of such procedures; whether Hong Kong residents have requested IRD to invoke the mutual agreement procedures to resolve the double taxation issue since the implementation of the Arrangement; if they have, of the details; if not, the reasons for that;

      (f)how the authorities at present ascertain if mainland residents are staying in Hong Kong for work, so as to determine whether such persons have worked in Hong Kong for more than 183 days and therefore are subject to salaries tax;

      (g)whether it has collected data in the past three years to reflect how the 183-day threshold under the Arrangement is conducive to the integration and economic development between the two places; if it has, of the details; if not, the reasons for that;

      (h)whether it has assessed if the relaxation of the threshold concerned under the Arrangement to 183 days is already sufficient to facilitate integration and economic development between the two places; if it has, of the details; if not, the reasons for that;

      (i)whether it has assessed how the 183-day threshold will affect the income and patronage of the Guangzhou-Shenzhen-Hong Kong Express Rail Link upon its commissioning;

      (j)given that the Government said in its reply that it had received two suggestions proposing to relax the threshold to 260 and 270 days respectively, of the name of the persons or organizations who made these two proposals; why the Government did not keep records of similar proposals made by individual business associations, and when it will start keeping records; and

      (k)of the detailed justifications for the Government's view that a total removal of the 183-day threshold is not reasonable?
    Public Officer to reply : Secretary for Financial Services and the Treasury

    12. Hon KAM Nai-wai to ask:     (Translation)

    At the Traffic and Transport Committee meeting of the Southern District Council on 23 November last year, some operators of green minibus ("GMB") indicated that due to the restrictions imposed by the Octopus system on the number of interchange routes, they found it difficult to introduce Octopus concessionary interchange schemes for GMB routes in the Southern District on schedule. In this connection, will the Government inform this Council:
      (a)whether it knows the reasons for the aforesaid problem of the Octopus system and whether there are other restrictions imposed on the interchange schemes (for example, a cap on the daily person-times using the schemes);

      (b)of the total number of GMB routes offering Octopus concessionary interchange schemes in Hong Kong at present; whether it knows if any GMB operator has aborted the plan to introduce interchange schemes due to the aforesaid reason in the past three years, and if the Octopus Cards Limited ("OCL") has, in preparation for launching bus-bus, GMB-GMB, bus-rail and GMB-rail concessionary interchange schemes, carried out improvement work on its software and hardware so as to increase the number of interchange routes which can be supported by the Octopus system; if so, of the details; and

      (c)given that the Government has all along encouraged public transport operators to introduce more concessionary interchange schemes, whether the Government will discuss with OCL and ask the company to solve the aforesaid problem, so as to tie in with the introduction of various concessionary interchange schemes by GMB operators?
    Public Officer to reply : Secretary for Transport and Housing

    13. Hon LEE Wing-tat to ask:     (Translation)

    Some public hospital patients have relayed to me that at present, medical reports issued by the Hospital Authority ("HA") on patients' requests are written in English, but many patients cannot read English and when they need medical services while residing or working on the Mainland, it is also often difficult for the healthcare personnel there to trace their medical histories and treatments received in the past on the basis of such medical reports. In this connection, will the Government inform this Council:
      (a)whether it knows the reasons why HA provides medical reports only in English to patients;

      (b)given that the majority of the population in Hong Kong are Chinese, some of whom can read Chinese only, and when they request for medical reports, no Chinese version of the reports is provided by HA, whether the authorities have assessed if HA has violated the section on safeguarding patients' right to information under the Patients' Charter; if they have, of the assessment results; and

      (c)given that when Chinese was initially made an official language in Hong Kong, it was specified in some legal documents and contracts prepared in English that the English version should prevail in case ambiguity arose between the Chinese and English versions, whether HA will make reference to this practice and provide Chinese medical reports on patients' requests?
    Public Officer to reply : Secretary for Food and Health

    14. Hon Starry LEE to ask:     (Translation)

    Regarding some Legislative Council ("LegCo") Members of individual political parties in Hong Kong launching the so-called "five geographical constituencies referendum campaign" by way of resigning from offices and then standing for the by-elections, the Hong Kong and Macao Affairs Office of the State Council released a statement on 15 January this year, pointing out that the Basic Law of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region ("HKSAR") does not provide for a "referendum" mechanism, and HKSAR does not have the authority to create such. It stressed that conducting such so-called "referendum" does not conform with the legal status of HKSAR. It is a fundamental contravention of the Basic Law and the relevant decision of the Standing Committee of the National People's Congress. At the Question and Answer Session of this Council on 14 January, the Chief Executive also said that conducting any form of so-called "referendum" in Hong Kong would have no legal basis or effect whatsoever and would not be recognized by the SAR Government. As the Members concerned have formally resigned from offices, will the Government inform this Council:
      (a)of the contingency measures the Government has put in place to handle the situation of LegCo voting down the application for funds needed for the by-elections;

      (b)whether the SAR Government will review the publicity arrangements for the by-elections so as to prevent members of the public from mistaking that the SAR Government endorses the statement that the by-elections are a "referendum"; if it will, of the details; if not, the reasons for that; whether it will consider not to make any arrangement for senior officials to vote and call on electors to vote before the media on the polling day; and

      (c)whether the authorities will consider amending the law to impose certain restrictions on Members who resign from offices and then stand for the by-elections; if it will, of the details; if not, the reasons for that?
    Public Officer to reply : Secretary for Constitutional and Mainland Affairs

    15. Hon Frederick FUNG to ask:     (Translation)

    It has been learnt that some concern groups pointed out that although the funding proposals for the project of the Hong Kong Section of Guangzhou-Shenzhen-Hong Kong Express Rail Link ("the XRL project") had been approved by the Finance Committee of this Council amid controversies, some villagers of Choi Yuen Tsuen ("CYT") in Shek Kong, who are affected by land resumption and clearance of sites required under the XRL project, have still expressed their dissatisfaction over the arrangements for compensation for land resumption and clearance of sites, rehousing and continuing farming activities, etc. proposed by the authorities, and some villagers even maintain their objection to land resumption and clearance. In this connection, will the Government inform this Council:
      (a)of the latest progress of the negotiation between the authorities and CYT villagers affected by the XRL project on the aforesaid compensation and rehousing arrangements, etc.; of the current number of households which have formally registered with the Government for accepting the compensation package, and the percentage of such number in the total number of households in CYT; and

      (b)whether it has estimated the number of households which would still refuse to accept the compensation package upon the expiry of the registration period at the end of February this year; what solutions the authorities have regarding the households' refusal to accept the compensation package, whether the authorities will introduce more flexible arrangements for rehousing and continuing farming activities, etc., so as to meet the requests of the villagers; and whether the Government has formulated measures to avoid any conflict that may arise from land resumption and prevent the villagers from sustaining any injury?
    Public Officer to reply : Secretary for Transport and Housing

    16. Dr Hon Joseph LEE to ask:     (Translation)

    On 8, 15 and 16 January 2010, the Finance Committee of this Council held meetings to consider the funding proposals for the project of the Hong Kong Section of Guangzhou-Shenzhen-Hong Kong Express Rail Link ("the XRL project"). In respect of the aforesaid meetings held on the three days, will the Government inform this Council of:
      (a)the total amount of resources deployed by the authorities for handling the XRL project, as well as the number of staff involved, their ranks and number of hours worked (listed out in table form); and

      (b)the manpower used by the Police to maintain order, including the number of officers involved, their ranks and number of hours worked (listed out in table form)?
    Public Officer to reply : Secretary for Transport and Housing

    17. Hon Paul TSE to ask:     (Translation)

    It has been learnt that at present, local one-day tours are not required to be operated by licensed travel agents, and most of them are not escorted by guides holding tourist guide passes issued by the Travel Industry Council of Hong Kong. Besides, appropriate travel insurance is not taken out for such tours in general, and such tours do not fall within the scope of the Travel Industry Protection Fund. Quite a number of members of the trade have relayed to me that the aforesaid tours not only affect the livelihood of licensed travel agents and guides holding tourist guide passes, but also pose serious risks to the safety of travellers, as such tours fail to provide adequate professional services and protection. In this connection, will the Government inform this Council whether:
      (a)it knows the number of local one-day tours organized in Hong Kong in each of the past three years and, the total number of travellers joining such tours; if it does not know, whether it will compile such statistics expeditiously;

      (b)it has considered monitoring the aforesaid tours and requiring that they must be serviced by tourist guides holding tourist guide passes; if it has, of the progress; if not, whether it will consider doing so expeditiously; and

      (c)it will require that the aforesaid tours must be operated by licensed travel agents and that appropriate travel insurance must be taken out, and whether it will include this kind of tours in the scope of the Travel Industry Protection Fund, so as to enhance protection for travellers?
    Public Officer to reply : Secretary for Commerce and Economic Development

    18. Hon Audrey EU to ask:     (Translation)

    It has been learnt that at present, quite a number of non-franchised buses carry foreign travellers via the Cross Harbour Tunnel ("CHT") every day to areas with high air pollution index such as Central, Wai Chai and Causeway Bay for sightseeing. In this connection, will the Government inform this Council:
      (a)whether it knows the average daily number of trips run by non-franchised buses carrying overseas visitors via CHT last year, and the average number of such trips run during peak hours;

      (b)of percentage of respirable suspended particulate and nitrogen oxide emissions from non-franchised buses in the total amount of the emissions concerned from all vehicles in Hong Kong last year; and

      (c)what new measures will be put in place by the authorities to reduce the air pollutants emitted by non-franchised buses?
    Public Officer to reply : Secretary for the Environment

    19. Hon Mrs Regina IP to ask:     (Translation)

    The index system of Hang Seng Indexes Company Limited ("HSIL") failed to disseminate the various Hang Seng indexes ("HSI") through the trading and information systems of The Hong Kong Exchanges and Clearing Limited between about 10:00 am and 10:32 am on 22 January this year. There have been comments that apart from affecting the operation of the Hong Kong stock market that day, the incident had tainted Hong Kong's esteemed reputation as an international financial centre. Moreover, HSIL publicly pointed out after the incident that it was caused by data sequence errors, which was rare, and HSIL also indicated that all necessary changes and comprehensive testing with regard to the problem had been carried out and considered that there would not be any problem. The comments have also pointed out that HSIL's remarks are unconvincing and have aroused concern about the reliability of the HSI system. In this connection, will the Government inform this Council:
      (a)whether it has ascertained from HSIL:

      (i)the reasons for overlooking the possibility of occurrence of the aforesaid incident during the analysis and designing stages of the index system; whether the software engineers had conducted a thorough testing on the index system at its development stage; if not, of the reasons for that; how HSIL ensures that the aforesaid comprehensive testing conducted on the index system had not missed out any part of the system; and

      (ii)whether HSIL's analysts and designers have sufficient domain knowledge to perform their duties; and

      (b)whether it knows if the aforesaid incident occurred because the continuous expansion of the trading market had given rise to information transmission situations, which were not expected when the index system was designed and, as a result, the system has become overloaded; if so, whether it has requested HSIL to conduct regular information technology audits so as to find out the weaknesses of the system and conduct system upgrade in a timely manner?
    Public Officer to reply : Secretary for Financial Services and the Treasury

    20. Hon Emily LAU to ask:     (Translation)

    In 2005, after consideration of the report of the Hong Kong SAR under the Convention on the Rights of the Child ("the Convention"), the United Nations Committee on the Rights of the Child ("the Committee") announced its concluding observations with a number of recommendations. Paragraphs 72 and 74 of the concluding observations pointed out that "the Committee remains concerned at the existence of child poverty among vulnerable populations such as the unemployed, immigrants and single parent families", and recommended the Hong Kong SAR to "establish a poverty line and develop appropriate policies to combat child poverty which addresses widening income disparities while expanding access to social welfare benefits to all vulnerable populations including new immigrants". Regarding the implementation of the Convention and the recommendations in the concluding observations, will the Executive Authorities inform this Council:
      (a)of the recommendations in the concluding observations which have still not been accepted or implemented by the authorities to date; the reasons for such recommendations not being accepted or implemented; whether the authorities will give an account in this respect in their next report to be submitted to the Committee; and

      (b)of the respective numbers of children (i.e. persons aged below 18, as defined in the Convention) living in poor families and receiving Comprehensive Social Security Assistance payments between 2005 and 2009; given that the Commission on Poverty had made various recommendations on child and youth poverty problems, which of such recommendations have still not been implemented to date?
    Public Officer to reply : Secretary for Labour and Welfare

    III. Bills

    First Reading

    Appropriation Bill 2010

    Second Reading (Debate to be adjourned)

    Appropriation Bill 2010 : The Financial Secretary

    IV. Members' Motions

    1. Proposed resolution under the Interpretation and General Clauses Ordinance

      Hon CHAN Kam-lam to move the following motion:

      RESOLVED that in relation to the Land (Compulsory Sale for Redevelopment) (Specification of Lower Percentage) Notice, published in the Gazette as Legal Notice No. 6 of 2010 and laid on the table of the Legislative Council on 27 January 2010, the period for amending subsidiary legislation referred to in section 34(2) of the Interpretation and General Clauses Ordinance (Cap. 1) be extended under section 34(4) of that Ordinance to the meeting of 17 March 2010.

    2. Proposed resolution under the Interpretation and General Clauses Ordinance

      Hon LI Fung-ying to move the following motion:

      RESOLVED that in relation to the Census and Statistics (Annual Earnings and Hours Survey) Order, published in the Gazette as Legal Notice No. 7 of 2010 and laid on the table of the Legislative Council on 27 January 2010, the period for amending subsidiary legislation referred to in section 34(2) of the Interpretation and General Clauses Ordinance (Cap. 1) be extended under section 34(4) of that Ordinance to the meeting of 17 March 2010.

    Clerk to the Legislative Council