A 10/11-23

Legislative Council

Agenda

Wednesday 6 April 2011 at 11:00 am and
Thursday 7 April 2011 at 9:00 am

I. Tabling of Papers

Subsidiary Legislation / Instrument	L.N. No.
Prevention of Bribery Ordinance (Amendment of Schedule 1) Order 2011	50/2011

Other Papers

1.	No. 85	-	Vocational Training Council Annual Report and Financial Report 2009/2010
(to be presented by the Secretary for Education)
2.	No. 86	-	Hong Kong Rotary Club Students' Loan Fund Audited financial statements together with the Report of the Director of Audit for the year ended 31 August 2010
(to be presented by the Secretary for Education)
3.	No. 87	-	Sing Tao Charitable Foundation Students' Loan Fund Audited financial statements together with the Report of the Director of Audit for the year ended 31 August 2010
(to be presented by the Secretary for Education)
4.	Report No. 18/10-11 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 units responsible for the management of information technology ("IT units") in the Office of the Telecommunications Authority, the Companies Registry, Hongkong Post and the Land Registry, will the Government inform this Council if it knows:

(a)	the respective estimated expenditures of the IT units in the aforesaid organizations/government departments in 2011-2012; how such expenditures compare with the actual expenditure in the preceding year; and the reasons for the change in such expenditures;
(b)	what specific work initiatives are involved in the estimated expenditures in (a); and among them, those which are ongoing and new initiatives; as well as the manpower, cost and implementation timetable involved in each of the new initiatives; and among the manpower involved, the respective numbers of civil servants, non-civil service contract staff and outsourced staff;
(c)	whether the aforesaid organizations/government departments have reserved funds for promoting computerized civic participation and access to public information in 2011-2012; if they have, of the specific details, including the titles and particulars of the initiatives, the manpower and cost involved as well as the implementation timetables; if not, the reasons for that and whether such organizations/government departments will consider introducing these initiatives in the future;
(d)	the respective permanent establishment and strength of, and the number of vacancies in, the IT units of the aforesaid organizations/government departments at present; whether the manpower concerned is expected to increase in 2012-2013; if so, the expected number of additional posts to be created, the ranks involved, whether they are permanent posts, and whether the staff concerned will be appointed on civil service terms; if the manpower concerned will not be increased, the reasons for that; and
(e)	whether the aforesaid organizations/government departments have carried out any comprehensive review of the effectiveness of their IT units; if they have, the outcome of the reviews and the specific improvement measures involved; if not, the reasons for that and whether they will conduct such reviews in the future?

Public Officer to reply : Secretary for Commerce and Economic Development

2. Dr Hon Margaret NG to ask: (Translation)

According to the Year Ender 2010 released earlier by the Office of the Privacy Commissioner for Personal Data ("PCPD"), 1 179 complaint cases related to suspected contravention of the Personal Data (Privacy) Ordinance (Cap. 486) ("the Ordinance") were received by PCPD in 2010, but only 12 of these cases were referred to the Police for consideration of prosecution. Among the cases referred to the Police, prosecution was instituted for only one case so far (the offender was convicted by the court), prosecution would not be instituted for seven cases, and the remaining four are still being followed up. There have been comments that the aforesaid rather low prosecution and conviction figures may give an impression to the public that "the law is laid aside and unused". In this connection, will the Government inform this Council:

(a)	whether it knows why PCPD did not make any referral to the Police for a great majority of these complaint cases, and why prosecution has not been instituted by the Police in a majority of the cases referred to them; and
(b)	whether the authorities will refine the prosecution policy relating to the Ordinance with a view to enhancing enforcement against contravention of the Ordinance; if they will, of the details?

Public Officer to reply : Secretary for Constitutional and Mainland Affairs

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

The Chief Executive announced in his 2010-2011 Policy Address the setting up of a Community Care Fund ("the Fund"), to which the Government and the business sector would each contribute $5 billion, to support people in need in areas not covered by the Comprehensive Social Security Assistance Scheme. It has been reported that a number of charity organizations reflected earlier that after the Government's announcement of the establishment of the Fund, some consortia had explicitly indicated that they might reduce their donations to these organizations as they had to contribute to the Fund. On the other hand, the Financial Secretary has recently proposed to inject additional money into the Fund (it has been reported that the amount earmarked for such purpose will be over $1 billion) to help those who are unable to benefit from his proposed disbursement of $6,000 to each permanent resident of Hong Kong but in need of financial assistance. Some members of the public worry that such a move may further reduce the consortia's desire to make donations to charity organizations, making fundraising more difficult for those charity organizations which mainly provide services to non-permanent residents in need. In this connection, will the Government inform this Council:

(a)	whether it knows the figures on the donations raised by the major charity organizations in Hong Kong in the past three years; whether the donations received by these organizations have dwindled after the Government's announcement of the establishment of the Fund; if so, of the details; if not, the reasons for that;
(b)	apart from the undertaking of the Chief Secretary for Administration that he would, as Chairman of the Steering Committee on the Community Care Fund, write to business corporations appealing to them that their contributions to the Fund should be made on top of their regular support for charities, how the authorities will encourage business corporations not to cut their donations to charity organizations for the reason that they have contributed to the Fund;
(c)	whether the authorities have established communication channels for charity organizations to relay to them their difficulties in fundraising and operations after the Government's announcement of the establishment of the Fund; if so, of the details; if not, the reasons for that; given that the fundraising performance of charity organizations have direct impact on the community services they provide, whether the authorities will offer relevant assistance or support to the seriously affected charity organizations; if they will, of the details; if not, the reasons for that; and
(d)	given that the authorities have proposed to inject $1 billion additional money into the Fund to help those in need, whether such a move will deviate from the original purpose of setting up the Fund; if not, of the reasons for that?

Public Officer to reply : Secretary for Home Affairs

4. Hon CHIM Pui-chung to ask: (Translation)

At present, the three road harbour crossings ("RHCs") in Hong Kong charge tolls of different levels, while the courts, in principle, do not charge the public for their major services apart from collecting specified fees in respect of legal proceedings. In this connection, will the Government inform this Council:

(a)	of the reasons for the aforesaid two different policies on fees collection; and
(b)	whether it has considered buying out the franchises of all RHCs and opening them for public use free of charge; if not, of the reasons for that and the principle involved?

Public Officer to reply : Secretary for Transport and Housing

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

In her reply to a question raised by a Member of this Council on 19 January 2011, the Secretary for Transport and Housing said that the Government and the MTR Corporation Limited ("MTRCL") had implemented certain measures to prevent sex crimes from occurring within the area of MTR stations. In this connection, will the Government inform this Council:

(a)	of the respective numbers of staff of the Railway District of the Police and of MTRCL who are responsible for security in the MTR network, with a breakdown by rail line and name of station as well as the working hours of the staff; given that there was an upward trend of the number of indecent assault cases which occurred in the railway premises over the past five years, whether it knows if MTRCL will consider providing more manpower to maintain law and order in railway network; if it will, of the details and the specific timetable; if not, the reasons for that;
(b)	regarding the preventive and enforcement measures taken to strengthen patrol at blackspots and encourage passengers not to remain silent but report crimes to the Police or station staff should they encounter such incidents, of the resources, manpower and amount of money allocated by the authorities in this regard in each of the past five years; whether they had reviewed the effectiveness of such measures and explored measures which are more effective;
(c)	of a breakdown of the number of indecent assault and "under skirt photo-taking" cases that occurred in the railway premises from 2006 to October 2010 by rail line, name of station, as well as the month in which and the hour at which such incidents occurred;
(d)	of the details of the joint anti-crime campaigns held regularly by the Railway District and MTRCL (including members of the campaigns, number of such members, time and agenda) over the past five years, as well as the respective progress of the joint anti-crime campaigns in reviewing and formulating measures to combat offences in the railway premises in each of the past five years;
(e)	whether it knows if the posters entitled "Don't be a Silent Victim, Report Indecent Assault", which were produced by the Police in collaboration with MTRCL, are at present displayed in each MTR station and train compartment; if not, of the reasons for that, and whether the Government or MTRCL will consider displaying such posters or other publicity materials at prominent locations in each MTR station (e.g. advertising boxes) and train compartment to encourage victims or witnesses of sex crimes not to remain silent but report crimes; if it will, of the details and the specific timetable; if not, the reasons for that; and
(f)	whether the Government or MTRCL will consider setting up a team dedicated to handling the sex crimes which occurred in railway premises; if it will, of the details and the specific timetable; if not, the reasons for that?

Public Officer to reply : Secretary for Security

6. Hon CHEUNG Hok-ming to ask: (Translation)

Regarding the provision of government subventions to statutory bodies, will the Government inform this Council:

(a)	of the number of statutory bodies receiving annual subventions from the Government at present, together with a list of the names of the statutory bodies concerned and the respective amounts of subventions received by individual statutory bodies in each of the past three years; and
(b)	whether an established mechanism is in place for determining and adjusting the amount of annual subventions that may be received by these statutory bodies; if so, of the details; if not, the criteria based on which the authorities determine the amount of annual subventions for statutory bodies and how the amounts are adjusted?

Public Officer to reply : Secretary for Financial Services and the Treasury

7. Hon Audrey EU to ask: (Translation)

Will the Government inform this Council of the respective route numbers of franchised bus routes which at present meet the following criteria set out in the Guidelines on Service Improvement and Reduction in Bus Route Development Programmes issued by the Transport Department ("TD"):

(a)	an average occupancy rate below 85% during the busiest half-hour of the peak period, or below 30% during the off-peak period (for TD to consider frequency reduction);
(b)	an occupancy rate of 100% during the busiest half-hour of the peak period and 85% during that one hour, or 60% during the busiest one hour of the off-peak period (for TD to consider frequency improvement);
(c)	an occupancy rate below 50% during the busiest hour although the headway has been maintained at an interval of 15 minutes during peak hours and 30 minutes during off-peak hours (for TD to consider route cancellation or amalgamation with other routes); and
(d)	an occupancy rate of not more than 20% to 30% at the proposed truncated section during the busiest hour (for TD to consider route truncation)?

Public Officer to reply : Secretary for Transport and Housing

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

Recently, I have received complaints from a group of staff from the Labour and Welfare Bureau ("LWB"), including contract staff, indicating that their supervisors or department heads had demanded them to undertake uncompensated overtime work for long hours over an extended period of time. The complainants also alleged that whether or not they had worked overtime had been used as one of the criteria for appraising their performance or considering their promotion. In this connection, will the Government inform this Council:

(a)	whether LWB as well as the Labour Department ("LD") and Social Welfare Department ("SWD") within its purview, including the various offices and service units of these departments, have fully implemented the five-day week arrangement at present; if they have, of the actual situation; and the average weekly standard working hours of staff (both in civil service grades and in non-civil service grades) under the five-day week arrangement, with a breakdown by rank;
(b)	whether LWB knows if it is common for LD and SWD staff to undertake uncompensated overtime work; of the average weekly hours of uncompensated overtime work undertaken by staff of various ranks; whether the department heads have issued related guidelines or instructions to the staff, indicating that uncompensated overtime work will be one of the criteria for appraising their performance and considering their promotion;
(c)	whether LWD, being the policy bureau responsible for the study on standard working hours, has taken the lead in supervising and regulating the working hours of the staff of LD and SWD within its purview, so as to ensure that their staff can benefit from the five-day week arrangement, and that they only need to work according to standard working hours; if it has not, of the reasons for that; and
(d)	whether LWD will focus on the problem of uncompensated overtime work undertaken by employees of various government departments or even those in different sectors in Hong Kong and conduct a dedicated survey, so as to obtain specific data for the forthcoming study on standard working hours; if it will, of the details; if not, the means through which LWD will obtain information on uncompensated overtime work undertaken by employees for the study concerned?

Public Officer to reply : Secretary for Labour and Welfare

9. Hon WONG Sing-chi to ask: (Translation)

As regards retrofitting platform screen doors ("PSDs") or automatic platform gates ("APGs") at stations along the East Rail Line ("EAL") and Ma On Shan Line ("MOSL") of the MTR Corporation Limited ("MTRCL"), will the Government inform this Council:

(a)	given that in its reply to a question raised by a Member of this Council on 9 June 2010, the Transport and Housing Bureau ("THB")indicated that "as there are platforms with relatively greater curvatures and wider platform gaps at some stations of the East Rail Line, the problem of wide platform gaps has to be properly resolved before APGs are installed at stations along the line in order to reduce the risk of passengers inadvertently stepping into the platform gaps because of sight line obstructions caused by the APGs", whether the authorities know:
	(i)	the definitions of "relatively greater curvatures" of the platforms and "wider platform gaps" referred to by THB, and whether there are objective measurement standards for such; if yes, of the details; if not, the reasons for that;
	(ii)	among the stations along EAL and MOSL, the names of those stations having platform(s) with relatively greater curvatures and wider platform gaps, as well as other stations (please list the stations by rail line); and
	(iii)	whether MTRCL will first retrofit PSDs or APGs at those stations with straight platforms only; if so, of the details and timetable; if not, the reasons for that;
(b)	concerning the numbers of passengers who fell onto tracks as set out in Annex I of THB's reply to my question on 19 January 2011, of the respective numbers of injuries and deaths among such cases, with a breakdown by station and year;
(c)	given that MTRCL indicated in its paper submitted to the Subcommittee on Matters Relating to Railways in January 2011 that "Synergy can be identified through integrating the APG and SCL (the Shatin to Central Link) projects while large amounts of redundancy and wastage would be incurred if the two were implemented separately", whether the authorities know the criteria and methods for evaluating the "synergy" and "large amounts of redundancy and wastage" referred to by MTRCL, as well as the details; if not, of the reasons for that, and when the Government can obtain such information; and
(d)	given that MTRCL also indicated in the paper mentioned in (c) that consideration must be given to the impact that APGs would have on the circulation of air on EAL platforms, and that studies showed that existing station ventilation would have to be improved to maintain a comparable environment as before the installation of APGs for passengers waiting for trains on platforms, whether the authorities know if MTRCL (or its predecessor, the MTRCL before the rail merger) had studied the issue of ventilation when it retrofitted PSDs or APGs at other underground stations in the past and if it has conducted such studies at present when retrofitting PSDs or APGs at the eight aboveground and at-grade stations; if so, of the respective details of such studies and the aforesaid studies on EAL; if not, the reasons for that?

Public Officer to reply : Secretary for Transport and Housing

10. Hon Emily LAU to ask: (Translation)

The Hong Kong Bill of Rights Ordinance (Cap. 383) ("HKBORO"), enacted in June 1991 by the former Legislative Council, has been implemented for nearly 20 years. Regarding the implementation of HKBORO, will the Executive Authorities inform this Council:

(a)	since HKBORO came into operation, of the contents of the provisions in HKBORO which had been amended or repealed, the parties that put forward the proposals of amending or repealing such provisions, and the reasons for amending or repealing such provisions (set out each item by the year in which the provisions were amended or repealed);
(b)	of the statutory provisions, policies, measures and professional codes which had been ruled by the courts to be in contravention of HKBORO in the past 20 years, and list in table form the name and case number of each case, as well as the dates on which the relevant judgments were delivered by the court; and
(c)	of the statutory provisions, policies, measures and professional codes which were amended by the authorities in response to the court rulings in (b) (set out each of the cases); if amendments have not been made in response to some of the court rulings, of the reasons for that?

Public Officer to reply : Secretary for Constitutional and Mainland Affairs

11. Hon Albert CHAN to ask: (Translation)

On 6 May 2009, I raised a question in this Council regarding the issue that most of the trips of the bus routes to and from Tin Shui Wai were not serviced by wheelchair-accessible low-platform buses. It has been learnt that as most of these trips are at present still not serviced by low-platform buses, wheelchair users often have to wait for more than 30 minutes for such buses. In this connection, will the Government inform this Council:

(a)	of the respective numbers of low-platform buses added to the fleet of each franchised bus company and the respective percentages of such addition during the two periods from May 2009 to May 2010 and from June 2010 to the present;
(b)	of the daily number of trips of the bus routes to and from Tin Shui Wai which are run by low-platform buses at present, and the percentage of such number in the total number of relevant bus trips, and how such figures compare with the relevant figures in May 2009; and
(c)	whether it will reconsider adding a clause to the future franchise agreements with the franchised bus companies, requiring them to retrofit facilities to all in-service non-low-platform buses to make it convenient for wheel-chaired users to board and alight buses; if it will, of the details; if not, the reasons for that?

Public Officer to reply : Secretary for Transport and Housing

12. Hon LEUNG Kwok-hung to ask: (Translation)

On 22 March this year, the Employers' Federation of Hong Kong ("EFHK") placed an advertisement in the press, providing an example to illustrate that after the implementation of statutory minimum wage legislation, the salary of an employee who works nine hours per day for 23 days in a month and is currently paid $5,796 monthly will reach $8,456 per month, if rest days and meal breaks are included in the calculation of monthly wages. As a result, the employer has to increase that employee's monthly salary by $2,660. EFHK suggested that employers should, before 1 May this year, examine and revise the employment contracts of their monthly paid employees, and it might be necessary to state that meal breaks and rest days "should not be treated as if they are paid". Quite a number of members of the public have relayed to me their worries that employers will, by "exploiting loopholes in the law", revise contracts to deduct employees' wages in respect of meal breaks and rest days. In this connection, will the Government inform this Council:

(a)	whether it has assessed if the deduction of employees' wages in respect of meal breaks and rest days is the legislative intent of the Minimum Wage Ordinance (Cap. 608); if it is, of the Government's stance on paid meal breaks and paid rest days; if not, whether the Government will publicly reprimand EFHK so as to safeguard the interests of employees in Hong Kong;
(b)	whether it has assessed if the content of the aforesaid advertisement has violated the reference guidelines on statutory minimum wage made by the Government; if it has violated those guidelines, how the Government will follow up this; if not, whether the Government has assessed if there are inadequacies in the Minimum Wage Ordinance;
(c)	whether it has assessed if EFHK's advertisement has abetted employers to revise employment contracts, so that they will not violate the Minimum Wage Ordinance even if employees' meal breaks and rest days are excluded from the computation of statutory minimum wage;
(d)	whether there is any effective legislation to impose severe punishment on such employers who are "unscrupulous" and deliberately deduct employees' wages in respect of meal breaks and rest days; if so, of the legislation and the penalty concerned, and which government departments are responsible for enforcing the legislation; if not, whether the Government will enact emergency legislation to safeguard the interests of the employees in Hong Kong; and
(e)	before the enactment of the Minimum Wage Ordinance, whether the Government has consulted Members of various political parties/groupings or independent Members of the Legislative Council on whether the deduction of employees' wages in respect of meal breaks and rest days is reasonable; if it has, which political parties/groupings or independent Members have concurred with such practice; if not, whether the Government will promptly "bring order out of chaos" with regard to EFHK's suggestion?

Public Officer to reply : Secretary for Labour and Welfare

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

Recently, some residents of public rental housing ("PRH") estates and Home Ownership Scheme ("HOS") courts in quite a number of districts have indicated that The Link Management Limited ("The Link") has suddenly ceased to lease the parking spaces in its car parks to them recently. In reply to my enquiry, The Link said that such cessation was made in order to comply with the lease conditions of the car parks (including restrictions on the status of the tenants and the numbers of various types of parking spaces, etc). On the other hand, should The Link wish to lease the parking spaces in its car parks to non-residents of the PRH estates concerned ("non-residents"), it has to apply to the authorities for waiver of the relevant government lease conditions and pay waiver fees. In this connection, will the Government inform this Council:

(a)	whether it has assessed if the current mismatch in the demand and supply of parking spaces (e.g. the absence of parking spaces for motorcycles and goods vehicles in some districts while the residents are not allowed to use the nearby car parks of The Link) is caused by the actual needs not having been considered in the first place during the planning of the number of parking spaces in various districts;
(b)	if the planning blunder in (a) is proved to be true which has caused members of the public with parking needs to suffer, why the authorities have not, for the convenience of the public, rectified such planning blunder proactively, and whether the authorities attach importance to the income of waiver fee payable by The Link; how the waiver fees are calculated, and whether reference will be made to the operating expenses of similar car parks (such as those managed by the Hong Kong Housing Authority ("HA"));
(c)	regarding the 178 car parks in public housing estates/HOS courts that HA sold to The Link Real Estate Investment Trust, of the respective numbers of parking spaces for private cars, motorcycles, light goods vehicles and heavy goods vehicles in these car parks, the respective numbers of the various types of parking spaces currently leased to eligible persons specified in the government leases and to non-residents, the number of vacant spaces, the occupancy rate, and, where applicable, the ceilings of the various types of parking spaces to which permanent waivers of planning permissions have been granted, the expiry dates of temporary waivers of planning permissions which are still valid at present, and the expiry dates of temporary waivers of planning permissions which have become invalid, with a breakdown of the figures and information by the following categories, 18 District Council ("DC") districts, and the names of the car parks:
	(i)	the car parks to which permanent waivers of planning permissions have been granted, thus allowing surplus parking spaces to be leased to non-residents;
	(ii)	the car parks to which the temporary waivers of planning permissions (allowing surplus parking spaces to be leased to non-residents) granted are still valid;
	(iii)	the car parks to which the temporary waivers of planning permissions (allowing surplus parking spaces to be leased to non-residents) granted have become invalid; and
	(iv)	the car parks to which both permanent and temporary waivers of planning permissions have not been granted;
(d)	of the present number of waiver applications which the authorities have received from The Link, the names of the car parks involved, the numbers of the various types of parking spaces, the estimated rental value under the existing leases, the estimated new rental value after the granting of the waivers, for how long such applications have been submitted, and among the various types of parking spaces of The Link, the estimated number of surplus parking spaces available for leasing to non-residents, together with a breakdown by 18 DC districts;
(e)	given that in reply to an enquiry from a Member of this Council in January 2010, the authorities indicated that The Link had applied to the Lands Department for short-term waivers in respect of the car parks in 15 housing estates, of the latest progress of these applications; the current progress of the Government's follow-up on, as well as the vetting and approving of, other waiver applications submitted by The Link;
(f)	given that The Link told the Kwai Tsing and Tai Po DC that the Lands Department "has set the waiver fee at a level equivalent to 85% of the income at full occupancy within the waiver period", how the rate of 85% is determined; why the waiver fee is calculated on the basis of "full occupancy within the waiver period", instead of the actual occupancy rate;
(g)	whether it knows the number of special purpose vehicles, such as school buses, school private light buses and rehabuses, etc. parked at the parking spaces for goods vehicles in the car parks of The Link at present, and whether these vehicles are not permitted to park at the parking spaces for goods vehicles of The Link under the relevant lease conditions;
(h)	how the authorities plan to deal with the problem that "some drivers are unable to find parking spaces for their vehicles while some parking spaces are left vacant", and how the authorities will make arrangements regarding the parking of the vehicles in (g); and
(i)	whether the authorities will consider dealing with the relevant land lease problems in one go and amend afresh the land leases of the relevant car parks according to the demand for parking spaces in various districts, so that The Link is not required to submit waiver applications on a regular basis?

Public Officer to reply : Secretary for Transport and Housing

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

Regarding the taxation problems faced by Hong Kong enterprises engaged in processing operations, will the Government inform this Council:

(a)	given the judgment in the High Court case HCAL49/2009 has revealed that the Commissioner of Inland Revenue ("Commissioner") demanded a certain enterprise to purchase Tax Reserve Certificates ("TRCs") for a total value of $430 million, upon the objections lodged by the enterprise against the tax assessments, which stood at approximately $1.4 billion in relation to the years from 1997-1998 to 2002-2003 as assessed by the Inland Revenue Department ("IRD"), and the enterprise disclosed subsequently in its annual report that its tax disputes with IRD relating to the years from 1997-1998 to 2008-2009 were settled by paying a sum of less than $200 million, what criteria are adopted by the Commissioner in determining the amount of TRCs which a taxpayer is required to purchase, as well as what mechanism is in place for monitoring the Commissioner's exercise of the statutory power to issue the "Conditional Standover Order";
(b)	given the provision of the Inland Revenue Ordinance (Cap. 112) ("Ordinance") that upon the lodging of an objection or appeal against tax assessments by an enterprise, interest shall be payable on the tax held over at the "Judgment Interest Rate" (8% per annum at present) if the enterprise concerned fails the case eventually, whereas interest shall be payable on the TRCs it purchased at the interest rate on TRCs (0.0433% per annum at present) if the case is successful, whether the authorities have examined the reason for the substantial difference between the two interest rates; since the low interest rate on TRCs will lead to the relatively small amount of interest payable by the Government even when it fails the case, whether, as a result, the Commissioner will be inclined to casually require enterprises to purchase huge amount of TRCs as cost risks are low; given that the authorities have prescribed that the interest payable on tax payment in unsuccessful cases is to be calculated at the "Judgment Interest Rate" which is a relatively high interest rate, whether it is meant to deter enterprises from exercising the right to lodge objections or appeals against tax assessments by charging a penal rate of interest; whether the authorities have assessed if such a practice is unfair to the enterprises;
(c)	whether it has assessed if IRD's demanding enterprises to purchase huge amounts of TRCs or furnish bankers' undertakings before their tax disputes are settled will deal a severe blow to their cash flow and increase their expenditure on loan interests, thus imposing heavy cost and psychological burdens on them and putting them in a disadvantaged position in tax disputes;
(d)	of the legal basis for IRD to adopt the current arrangement of "Assess First Audit Later"; whether there is any case to which this practice is not applicable; if so, of the cases and the reasons for that;
(e)	given that under the existing "Assess First Audit Later" arrangement, the subsequent one-off recovery by IRD from enterprises of unpaid taxes accumulated over the past years without promptly informing them of the errors in their tax returns in the first place will create an unaffordable snow-ball effect on their tax burden, even though their errors are just a result of the differences in the views between them and IRD on tax legislation, whether the authorities have assessed if the arrangement of "Assess First Audit Later" can be replaced by that of "Audit First Assess Later" for controversial cases such as those concerning section 39E of the Ordinance ("section 39E") and the assessment of Hong Kong profits tax on a 50:50 basis of apportionment; if they have not, of the reasons for that;
(f)	given that at present, IRD grants special depreciation allowances for machinery outside Hong Kong for cases engaged in "contract processing", whether the authorities will grant the same special allowances for cases engaged in "import processing"; if they will not, of the reasons for that;
(g)	given that in the case of Davies & Anor, R v HM Revenue & Customs (2010) in Britain, the Judge pointed out that the taxation authorities' published guidance was legally enforceable, whereas in the Departmental Interpretation and Practice Notes ("DIPN") No. 21 issued by IRD in 1998, it does not stipulate that the 50:50 basis of apportionment of profit tax applies only to enterprises engaged in "contract processing" but not to enterprises engaged in "import processing", whether the authorities have assessed if it is a fair and reasonable practice for IRD to impose penalty on those local enterprises that have made arrangements according to DIPN No. 21; if they have, of the details; if not, the reasons for that;
(h)	given that some members of the commercial and industrial sectors have relayed to me that some assessors have told the enterprises which had raised objections or lodged appeals to tax assessments that if the enterprises do not comply with IRD's request of purchasing TRCs and compromise with IRD, they would pass their cases to the Field Audit and Investigation Unit of IRD for thorough investigations, whether the authorities have assessed if such a practice is appropriate and whether this will make the enterprises concerned feel uneasy, thereby affecting them in exercising their legal rights of lodging appeals or raising objections to tax assessments;
(i)	given that the authorities invited the Joint Liaison Committee on Taxation ("JLCT") in March 2010 to review the implementation of section 39E, and then they announced in November of the same year that they refused to accept all the recommendations made by JLCT, whether the authorities will assess the functions of JLCT and consider dismissing it;
(j)	given that the authorities have refused to accept the recommendations of JLCT on the ground that it has not proposed effective measures to plug possible tax avoidance loopholes, whether they have conducted studies on their own on this subject; if they have, whether the report and information of the study can be disclosed to the public; if not, of the reasons for that; and
(k)	given that the purposive approach, which has been recognized by the courts, and section 19 of the Interpretation and General Clauses Ordinance (Cap.1) both require that in interpreting law, the legislative intent must be established, and that in Medical Council of Hong Kong v Chow Siu Shek David, the Court of Final Appeal states, "When the true position under a statute is to be ascertained by interpretation, it is necessary to read all of the relevant provisions together and in the context of the whole statute as a purposive unity in its appropriate legal and social setting", and that the Commissioner also holds the same view in the case of CIR v. Sawhney (HCIA1/2006), whether the authorities have assessed if the decision made by the Board of Review on the case D61/08, which contains the comments that "From the provision (of section 39E) itself, it does not require an intention to avoid tax for its application", is a correct one; if they have assessed, of the details; if not, the reasons for that?

Public Officer to reply : Secretary for Financial Services and the Treasury

15. Hon Frederick FUNG to ask: (Translation)

It has been reported that the incident of radiation leak in Japan has sent consumers scrambling for infant formulas in Hong Kong recently, thus further tightening the supply. Some members of the public criticized that some shops had increased the price excessively, and some even bundled the sale of infant formulas with other goods. As revealed by the CHOICE magazine published by the Consumer Council ("CC") in March 2011, of the 33 items of the major brands of infant formulas surveyed, 24 had had their average retail prices increased from 4% to 12% (comparing the prices for April 2009 to February 2010 with those for the same period from 2010 to 2011), registering an increase in price higher than the food price inflation rate (3.6%) for the corresponding period. The survey also shows that the out-of-stock rate of infant formulas of some popular brands was as high as 64%, and it is believed that the scrambling for these products by non-local people is one of the causes of the heightened out-of-stock rate. In this connection, will the Government inform this Council:

(a)	whether the authorities have looked into the reasons why the increase in retail prices of infant formulas is much higher than the food price inflation rate; and whether there is stockpiling and hoarding for speculation; given that CC has urged formula suppliers to consider setting up an industry code of practice to ensure adequate supply to local consumers, will the Government consider facilitating the trade in drawing up a code of practice, including ensuring adequate supply to local consumers and adopting the means of suspending supply to retail shops which raise the price of infant formulas unreasonably;
(b)	given the recent situation of intense scrambling for infant formulas, of the authorities' concrete measures to ensure adequate supply and stablize the prices of infant formulas, so as to avoid speculative surge of prices; and what measures are in place to ensure that the grassroots need not bear huge expenses on infant formulas; and
(c)	whether the authorities will grasp this opportunity to promote the benefits of breastfeeding to the public and step up public education, so as to eliminate the misconception of the public that infant formulas are richer and more comprehensive in nutrient components than breastmilk, and to address parents' concern that switching to other brands of infant formulas may affect the health of their babies, so that they will consider choosing other brands with relatively stable supply, and to change the current situation of the blind worship of famous brands by parents; if they will, of the specific details; if not, the reasons for that?

Public Officer to reply : Secretary for Food and Health

16. Hon Paul TSE to ask: (Translation)

A great majority of the airlines operating in Hong Kong are members of the International Air Transport Association ("the Association"). Earlier, the Association has unilaterally notified all registered travel agents in Hong Kong that the payment period for the Billing and Settlement Plan in respect of the purchase of air tickets (i.e., the period within which travel agents are required to effect payment to airlines after purchase of air tickets) will be shortened from the original 15 days to seven days. Some members of the trade have pointed out that such an arrangement has seriously impacted the cash flow of travel agents, and some of them may possibly be closed down as a result. In this connection, will the Government inform this Council:

(a)

as some members of the trade have pointed out that given the enactment of anti-trust laws by a number of countries, airlines generally avoid, as far as possible, entering into any negotiation or agreement in respect of their operation mode, yet they often manipulate the operation mode of the market and implement measures for such purpose through the Association, whether the authorities have assessed if the act concerned is anti-competitive conduct which is proposed to be regulated under the Competition Bill; whether the Government can undertake that, after the passage of the Bill, it will examine immediately if the relevant arrangement between the Association and the airlines concerned have violated the principle of fair competition; and

(b)

whether the Government has, before the Competition Ordinance comes into operation, any other policies or means to monitor if the airlines have acted in collusion to manipulate the market, so as to uphold the principle of fair competition?

Public Officer to reply : Secretary for Transport and Housing

17. Hon Abraham SHEK to ask:

It has been reported that although the market capitalization of the securities traded in the stock exchange of Hong Kong is the world's seventh-largest, and the financial services industry in Hong Kong accounts for about 16% of the gross domestic products, the securities turnover of Hong Kong in recent years has never reached the top 10 because of the high trading costs. It has also been reported that the securities trading costs in Hong Kong are 35% and 25% higher than those in the United States ("US") and the United Kingdom respectively, which discourages institutional investors from trading frequently and thus impacts on the overall trading volume. In this connection, will the Government inform this Council:

(a)	whether it has considered implementing any measure to lower the securities transaction costs so that the competitiveness of Hong Kong's stock exchange may be maintained; if so, of the details regarding its timetable for public consultation;
(b)	given that dark pools which help keep trading costs down have already been established in the US, Europe and Japan, whether the Government will consider encouraging the development of dark pools in Hong Kong to boost trading; if so, of the details; if not, the reasons for that; and
(c)	as it was reported that the Hong Kong Exchanges and Clearing Limited would spend $1 billion to build a lightning-fast data and processing centre over the next three years to increase the liquidity in the market, whether it knows if any measure will be taken to lessen market volatility which may be caused by such high-speed automated trading, so that incidents similar to the "Flash Crash" in the US last year, which had resulted in the Dow Jones Industrial Average plunging 700 points in a matter of minutes, will not occur in Hong Kong?

Public Officer to reply : Secretary for Financial Services and the Treasury

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

At present, foreign domestic helper ("FDH") employment agencies are the major channel through which Hong Kong people employ FDHs, and the employment agencies, in order to attract business, usually claim that the FDHs referred by them have received training in domestic work and/or baby care offered by FDHs' local employment agencies. However, some members of the public have relayed to me from time to time that the qualifications of the FDHs employed through employment agencies are inconsistent with what the agencies have claimed. Under such circumstances, even if the agency concerned is willing to provide the employer with a replacement FDH, the employer still has to pay for expenses such as the visa fee and medical examination fee for the replacement FDH, and also give the dismissed FDH one month's wages in lieu of notice and provide the FDH free passage to return to his/her place of origin. In this connection, will the Government inform this Council:

(a)

whether any legislation or measure is in place at present to regulate the making of misleading and false claims by FDH employment agencies; if so, of the details; and

(b)

in view of the fact that at present, in case an employer find his newly employed FDH incompetent, the employer may only dismiss the FDH in accordance with the Standard Employment Contract ("SEC") provided by the Government, and there is no other more convenient way for the employers, whether the Government will consider providing a probation period in SEC; if it will, of the timetable; if not, the reasons for that?

Public Officer to reply : Secretary for Labour and Welfare

19. Hon CHEUNG Kwok-che to ask: (Translation)

At present, mainland people may apply to the mainland authorities for a Permit for Proceeding to Hong Kong and Macao ("One-way Permit" or "OWP") to settle in Hong Kong on grounds of "family reunion". The current daily OWP quota is 150. Recently, it has been reported that quite a number of Hong Kong people are worried that the fiscal reserves of Hong Kong may be exhausted by the people who have arrived and settled in Hong Kong ("new immigrants") continuously receiving welfare benefits in Hong Kong. In this connection, will the Government inform this Council:

(a)	of the current number of new immigrants who have resided in Hong Kong for less than seven years;
(b)	among the new immigrants who have resided in Hong Kong for less than seven years at present, of the respective numbers of those who have been granted Comprehensive Social Security Assistance ("CSSA") at the discretion of the Director of Social Welfare ("DSW"), and those who have been allocated public rental housing flats through compassionate rehousing by DSW; the percentage of such numbers in the total number of new immigrants who have resided in Hong Kong for less than seven years at present;
(c)	of the average monthly standard rate for each recipient in (b) who has been granted CSSA at DSW's discretion; and among these CSSA recipients, the respective numbers and percentages of those who have and those who do not have paid jobs; and
(d)	of the total expenditure incurred in each of the past three years on granting CSSA payments to new immigrants who had resided in Hong Kong for less than seven years; the percentages of such payments in relation to the fiscal reserves in the respective years; whether the authorities have estimated if the relevant expenditure will exhaust our fiscal reserves; if the fiscal reserves will be exhausted, in how many years this will happen?

Public Officer to reply : Secretary for Labour and Welfare

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

The Government will make reference to the Hong Kong Planning Standards and Guidelines ("HKPSG") when it plans for the use of various land sites and the construction of community facilities. HKPSG recommend the provision of 760 half-day and 210 full-day places of nursery classes and kindergartens for every 1 000 children in the age group of three to under six, one whole-day primary school classroom for every 25.5 children in the six to 11 age group, one whole-day secondary school classroom for every 40 young persons in the 12 to 17 age group; and also, one Integrated Children and Youth Services Centre should be provided for every 12 000 children/young persons in the six to 24 age group, one Integrated Family Service Centre for every 100 000 to 150 000 persons and one General Clinic/Health Centre for every 100 000 persons. In this connection, will the Government inform this Council:

(a)	whether the authorities have considered the relevant principles of gender mainstreaming in formulating HKPSG; if they have, of the principles considered and the relevant standards formulated; if not, the reasons for that;
(b)	regarding Maternal and Child Health Centres and Woman Health Centres, which provide services to women, as well as Child Care Centres which provide occasional child care service, of the number of these types of community facilities and the respective service quotas available for women and children in each of the 18 local administrative districts;
(c)	whether the authorities have formulated any planning guidelines and standards in respect of the community facilities mentioned in (b), e.g. the ratio of Maternal and Child Health Centres as well as Woman Health Centres to the female population; if they have, of the relevant planning guidelines and standards; if not, the reasons for that; whether the authorities are aware of the relevant guidelines and standards adopted by the Mainland and overseas countries when planning for these community facilities;
(d)	of the current number of women aged 25 or above in each of the 18 local administrative district (broken down by age group each covering five years);
(e)	of the current number of married women aged 25 or above in each of the 18 local administrative district (broken down by age group each covering five years);
(f)	of the current number of infants and children aged zero to three years in each of the 18 local administrative districts;
(g)	of the current number of households, in each of the 18 local administrative districts, with household income less than the median household income of the corresponding household size; among them, the number of households with infants and children aged below three; whether the authorities will consider setting up more Child Care Centres to provide occasional child care service in districts with a larger number of poor families and a greater need for such service, or enhancing the provision of occasional child care service in these districts; and
(h)	whether the existing facilities meet the standard of providing one Integrated Family Service Centre for every 100 000 to 150 000 persons, and the respective numbers of persons served by the Integrated Family Service Centres in various districts at present?

Public Officer to reply : Secretary for Labour and Welfare

III. Bills

Second Reading (Debate to resume)

Appropriation Bill 2011 : The Financial Secretary

Clerk to the Legislative Council