A 11/12-11

Legislative Council

Agenda

Wednesday 14 December 2011 at 11:00 am

I. Tabling of Papers

Subsidiary Legislation / InstrumentsL.N. No.
1.Harmful Substances in Food (Amendment) Regulation 2011173/2011
2.Pilotage (Dues) (Amendment) Order 2011174/2011
3.Port Control (Public Cargo Working Area) Order 2011175/2011

Other Papers

1.No. 40-The Board of Governors of the Prince Philip Dental Hospital Annual Report 2010/11
(to be presented by the Secretary for Food and Health)

2.No. 41-Hong Kong Council for Accreditation of Academic and Vocational Qualifications Annual Report 2010-2011
(to be presented by the Secretary for Education)

3.No. 42-The Accounts of the Lotteries Fund 2010-11
(to be presented by the Secretary for Financial Services and the Treasury)

4.No. 43-Annual Report of the Equal Opportunities Commission 2010/11
(to be presented by the Secretary for Constitutional and Mainland Affairs)

5.No. 44-The Government Minute in response to the 23rd Annual Report of The Ombudsman 2011
(to be presented by the Chief Secretary for Administration, who will address the Council)

6.No. 45-Independent Police Complaints Council Report 2010/11
(to be presented by Dr Hon Joseph LEE, who will address the Council)

7.No. 46-Ocean Park Hong Kong Annual Report 2010-2011
(to be presented by the Secretary for Commerce and Economic Development)

8.Report No. 6/11-12 of the House Committee on Consideration of Subsidiary Legislation and Other Instruments
(to be presented by Hon Miriam LAU, Chairman of the House Committee)

9.Report of the Bills Committee on Road Traffic (Amendment) Bill 2011
(to be presented by Hon Miriam LAU, Chairman of the Bills Committee)

II. Questions

1. Hon WONG Kwok-hing to ask: (Translation)

The Occupational Safety and Health Ordinance ("OSHO") requires employers to provide a safe working environment for employees. Yet, under the existing OSHO, the definition of "workplace" does not include the vehicles operated by professional drivers and the cabs of these vehicles, hence they are not within the scope of protection of OSHO. Although employers are required, under the Employees' Compensation Ordinance ("ECO"), to take out employees' compensation insurance so that if employees are injured or killed at work, they or their families will be entitled to compensation under ECO, vehicle owners may not take out insurance policies for the professional drivers and some of these drivers are self-employed and thus are not protected by ECO. In this connection, will the Government inform this Council:
    (a)among the traffic accidents in the past five years which involved professional drivers, of the number of cases in which the professional drivers were granted compensation under employees' compensation insurance, and the number of cases in which the professional drivers were not protected by employees' compensation insurance; whether the authorities have assessed if the exclusion of "the seat or position occupied by the driver of a land vehicle located in a public place" from the scope of protection under OSHO is an act of discrimination against the occupational safety needs and rights of professional drivers; whether the authorities will consider conducting a comprehensive review of and a study on amending OSHO; if they will, of the details and the timetable; if not, the justifications and reasons for that;

    (b)whether the authorities had, in the past five years, monitored as well as carried out investigation and inspection regarding the occupational safety of the working environment of professional drivers; if they had, of the outcome; if not, the reasons for that; and

    (c)regarding the prevalence of occupational diseases among professional drivers and the causes of such diseases, whether the authorities have carried out relevant surveys, studies and analyses so as to formulate specific measures and plans for improving the work safety and health of professional drivers; if they have, of the details and the specific work done in the past five years; if not, the reasons for that?
Public Officer to reply : Secretary for Labour and Welfare

2. Hon Tanya CHAN to ask: (Translation)

Some members of private clubs have relayed to me that most of the private recreational leases ("PRLs") will expire by the end of this year, but so far the Government has not announced any renewal arrangement or specific arrangement relating to the policy that regulates PRLs. Regarding the latest development of the policy on PRLs, will the Government inform this Council:
    (a)whether the Government has conducted a review of the policy on PRLs; if it has, of the progress, methodology and outcome of the review; whether it can provide the review report and related information; whether it has amended the relevant policy in the light of the review outcome; if it has, of the details; whether such amendments apply to all private recreational venues ("PRVs"), particularly in respect of the renewal of those PRLs which will expire between the end of this year and early next year; if it has not amended the policy, of the reasons for that; in the process of reviewing the policy, how it ensures that PRVs are put to optimal use, and that the interests of the members of private clubs are fully protected while encouraging other organizations to borrow and use the venues; if it has not conducted any review so far, of the reasons for that;

    (b)given that most of the PRLs will expire this year or next year, of the latest development of the renewal arrangements for the various PRLs at present, including the respective numbers and details of those PRLs which are under negotiation for renewal, those PRLs of which renewal negotiation has not yet started and those PRLs which have already been renewed upon completion of negotiation; whether the Government will renew the PRLs in accordance with the policy which has been reviewed; if it will, of the details; if not, the reasons for that; whether the Government will modify the terms (including general and special terms) of the PRLs upon renewal; if it will, of the details of the modifications (including the content of and justification for the modifications); whether the Government will adopt different renewal arrangements in the light of the nature of the PRVs or their operators (e.g. private clubs or uniformed groups, etc.); if it will, of the details; and

    (c)whether it knows the details of the cases of outside organizations borrowing PRVs from private clubs for organizing activities in accordance with PRLs in the past five years (including the names of borrowers, details and nature of activities, facilities borrowed, borrowing duration in hours and borrowing dates, and the authorities which arranged the borrowing of PRVs), together with a table setting out such information in detail?
Public Officer to reply : Secretary for Home Affairs

3. Hon Paul CHAN to ask: (Translation)

The Government has made provisions in its policy address or budget to set up a number of funds for specific purposes, some of which are segregated from the public account, and it has often earmarked funding in the budget for injection into such funds, with a view to providing subsidies to different targets, projects or pilot schemes through such funds. The revenue and expenditure of some of these funds are not listed under the annual account of the Government, making it difficult for members of the public to fully understand the actual financial situation of these funds as well as their uses in public expenditure. In this connection, will the Government inform this Council:
    (a)in respect of the aforesaid funds which are still in operation at present, of the dates, purposes and modes of setting up the funds (e.g. set up under the law or the relevant trust legislation, etc.), the amounts of start-up funding and donations from various sectors at the time of the establishment of the fund, the audited net assets as at 1 July 1997 and 31 March this year respectively, and the total amounts of audited revenue and expenditure in each financial year during this period (broken down by government funding account and non-government funding account), together with a breakdown in table form listing the names of the funds and itemized figures by policy bureau responsible for managing the funds;

    (b)since the setting up of the funds in (a), of the respective numbers of times and justifications for government injections into individual funds; the respective names and numbers of projects that had received allocations from such funds in the past five years, together with the amounts involved; and

    (c)whether the authorities have conducted regular reviews on the effectiveness of the aforesaid funds (e.g. formulation of indicators for assessing whether the purposes for setting up the funds are met, as well as timetables for accomplishing such indicators, etc.), and whether they have updated the purposes for setting up the funds, the indicators for assessing whether the purposes for setting up the funds are met, as well as the timetables for accomplishing such indicators; if they have, of the time when they have conducted the reviews as well as the latest positions; if not, the reasons for that?
Public Officer to reply : Secretary for Financial Services and the Treasury

4. Hon Fred LI to ask: (Translation)

The contracts of two current affairs programme hosts, Robert CHOW Yung and NG Chi-sum, of the Radio Television of Hong Kong will not be renewed by the Government next year, giving rise to extensive discussions in the community and some views query that the Government's decision has political considerations, which aim to remove programme hosts who have independent viewpoints and criticize the Government and also to suppress the freedom of speech. Some views also query that the Government's explanation, which states that the reason for the removal of the two hosts is to tie in with programme reforms, is illogical. In this connection, will the Government inform this Council:
    (a)who made the decision not to renew the contracts of Robert CHOW Yung and NG Chi-sum; of the respective listener ratings of the programmes hosted by Robert CHOW Yung and NG Chi-sum in the past five years; whether it knows, how the listener ratings of such programmes compare with those of the current affairs programmes of Commercial Radio aired in the same time slots;

    (b)of the respective numbers of written complaints against Robert CHOW Yung and NG Chi-sum in hosting programmes received by the authorities in the past three years and the contents of such complaints; and

    (c)whether the two hosts are removed for the sake of allowing more time for the public to express their opinions in the programmes; whether the two hosts are removed because of their style of hosting the programmes and their personal viewpoints; whether it will redeploy programme hosts in the light of listener ratings and public views after the implementation of programme reforms?
Public Officer to reply : Secretary for Commerce and Economic Development

5. Hon Albert HO to ask: (Translation)

Recently, there has been widespread media coverage that there were quite a number of suspected vote-rigging cases in the District Council ("DC") Election held on 6th of last month. The Audit Commission stated in the Report No. 47 of the Director of Audit published in October 2006 that "without verifying the residential addresses of electors, there is insufficient evidence to ensure the accuracy of the GC [geographical constituencies] final registers. In extreme cases, the fairness of an election may be impaired due to possible vote planting", and recommended that the Registration and Electoral Office ("REO") should implement a checking system to verify the residential addresses of registered electors recorded in the electoral register on a sampling basis. REO responded that a checking system would have resource implications, and that assessment would be made before deciding on the appropriate way to take forward the audit recommendation. Further, REO would match the elector records with the information kept by the Immigration Department and the Housing Department for address updating purpose, and it had approached quite a number of government departments to explore the feasibility of concerted efforts in data matching. Those government departments had expressed concerns that the transfer of personal data might contravene the privacy law and other legal provisions, but REO would continue to study such possibilities in data matching. In this connection, will the Executive Authorities inform this Council:
    (a)of the number of complaints on suspected vote-rigging received since the DC Election last month; the number of written enquiries issued by REO; the respective numbers of investigations made by the Police and the Independent Commission Against Corruption, as well as the progress of such investigations;

    (b)whether it has implemented the recommendation made by the Audit Commission five years ago to verify the residential addresses of registered electors on a sampling basis; if it has, of the details and resources involved; if not, the reasons for that; and

    (c)whether it has assessed how REO and other government departments could avoid contravening the privacy law and other legal provisions in matching the data of electors; of the progress of the assessment; whether it has conducted the aforesaid data matching exercise; if not, the reasons for that?
Public Officer to reply : Secretary for Constitutional and Mainland Affairs

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

Under the impact of the debt crises in Europe and the economic downturn in the United States, the external trade of Hong Kong bears the brunt and its performance deteriorated substantially. The Financial Secretary has also predicted that Hong Kong's export in the fourth quarter will continue to decrease and further hamper economic growth; there is little sign of optimism from exports to overall economic performance of Hong Kong early next year, and considerable uncertainties still cloud over economic performance in the latter half of the year. Indeed, many operators of small and medium enterprises ("SMEs") have relayed to me that they are facing a series of problems in operations such as drastic decreases in orders, difficulties in financing, arrears from clients in payments for goods, high risks, high costs and high inflation, etc. and that the crisis at present is even more acute than that during the financial tsunami. In this connection, will the Government inform this Council:
    (a)given that the Special Loan Guarantee Scheme ("the Scheme") launched during the financial tsunami had effectively mitigated the financing difficulties of SMEs, and the sector has strongly requested the Government to relaunch the Scheme, but the Government has so far not agreed to respond to their request, of the situation of Hong Kong's overall economic performance which the Government expects to prevail before it is prepared to relaunch the Scheme;

    (b)whether it will consider allowing more SMEs to defer prepayment of profits tax and offering concessionary tax rates to SMEs with turnovers or profits below a certain threshold, so as to facilitate their capital flow and assist them in dealing with the economic difficulties at present; if it will, of the details; if not, the reasons for that; and

    (c)given that the authorities indicated in their reply to a question raised by me on 9 November this year that they had already proposed six amendments to the Competition Bill to give practical responses to the major concerns of various sectors, especially SMEs, but some SMEs have reflected that the six amendments still fail to alleviate the worries of SMEs and effectively resolve the numerous contentions, resulting in SMEs having to face even more uncertainties, whether the Government will, in response to the continuous deterioration of the global economic environment, consider afresh not to insist on completing the legislative exercise for the Bill within the current legislative session; if it will, of the details; if not, the reasons for that?
Public Officers to reply: Secretary for Commerce and Economic Development
Secretary for Financial Services and the Treasury

*7. Hon James TO to ask: (Translation)

Will the Government inform this Council:
    (a)given that the Government has earlier indicated that the pilot scheme for promoting the use of cleaner fuels for local ferries has been completed, of the expected time when it will submit the outcome of the pilot scheme to this Council and for public consultation; moreover, given that the Government has indicated that it has completed the consultation on regulating emissions from non-road mobile machinery which is widely used in places such as container terminals, etc. and it plans to commence the work of enacting legislation in 2012, when the related legislative procedures are expected to complete; of the anticipated improvement in air quality of various districts across the territory upon implementation of the aforesaid scheme/plan;

    (b)given that the Chief Executive has proposed in his Policy Address of this year that the Government will explore with the Governments of Guangdong, Shenzhen and Macao proposals for requiring ocean-going vessels in Pearl River Delta ("PRD") waters to switch to low-sulphur diesel, and setting up an Emission Control Area in PRD waters, whether it knows how the existing regulatory controls over vessel fuels and their emission levels of Hong Kong, Macao and the Mainland compare with one another; whether liaison and meetings with the Mainland and Macao on the relevant subject matter have commenced; in addition, of the expected time when such proposal can be implemented;

    (c)given that in response to my question in 2007, the Government indicated that "there is yet to be an internationally-recognised standard for shore power supply and facilities on board for the shipping industry", thus the proposal of providing shore power supply in public cargo working area or other berthing facilities was considered not practicable for the time being, whereas as far as I understand, there are already more than 15 ports around the world which provide shore power, among which the Port of Shanghai has provided shore power service since last year, and relevant planning has been underway in a number of ports in Taiwan, whether the Government has, in the light of the latest development in various places, started afresh any study in this regard, or liaised with mainland, Taiwan or even international organizations of the trade to understand the relevant technological development as well as to discuss with them the formulation of trade standards; if it has, of the progress;

    (d)given that provisions have been made in the design of the Kai Tak Cruise Terminal for the use of shore power in future, whether the Government will consider making additional provisions of the same kind at the Kwai Chung Container Terminals, or initiating pilot schemes on the supply of shore power at various cargo working areas;

    (e)since the implementation of the Merchant Shipping (Prevention of Air Pollution) Regulation (Cap. 413M) ("the Regulation") in 2008, whether there has been an increasing trend of merchant ships violating the Regulation; and up till now, of the number of spot checks conducted by the Marine Department each month, and the number of cases in which the owners concerned were convicted for excessive smoke emissions by their vessels, as well as the fines imposed; and

    (f)apart from the measures in (a) to (e), whether the Government has other plans to regulate the emission of pollutants by vessels and container terminal facilities; whether the Government will make reference to the "Green Port" policy introduced by the Mainland and neighbouring regions one after the other to reduce emissions and pollution, and initiate related studies and plans?
Public Officer to reply : Secretary for the Environment

*8. Hon Mrs Regina IP to ask: (Translation)

In recent years, the Government has all along been encouraging and assisting owners in multi-storey buildings to form owners' corporations ("OCs") under the Building Management Ordinance (Cap. 344) ("the Ordinance") to represent all owners to deal with issues relating to the control, management or administration of the common parts of buildings under the corporate body status of OCs. The authorities have also indicated that they will soon conduct a review of the Ordinance. In this connection, will the Government inform this Council:
    (a)given that under section 40A of the Ordinance, the Authority or an authorized officer may, for the purpose of ascertaining the manner in which a building is being controlled, managed or administered, enter and inspect any common parts of a building, and attend meetings of an OC and inspect the records of account or other documents kept by an OC, of the number of times the authorities have invoked the powers under section 40A since 2005; and the factors that the authorities consider in deciding whether or not such powers should be invoked;

    (b)given that Schedule 3 to the Ordinance stipulates that the chairman of the management committee ("the committee") of an OC shall convene a general meeting of the owners at the request of not less than 5% of the owners for the purposes specified by such owners, yet some owners have indicated that such general meetings are only convened when there is a dispute between the committee and the owners and when the advice offered by the District Offices regarding the dispute is not accepted or the mediation undertaken is not successful, thus such general meetings of the owners presided over by the chairmen of the committees may inevitably invite suspicion that there may be favouritism towards one party to the dispute, whether the authorities will, when reviewing the Ordinance, consider introducing a statutory requirement that a general meeting of the owners shall be presided over by a third party, so as to increase fairness and transparency of the meetings and to address the owners' concerns; if they will not, of the reasons for that; and

    (c)given that section 20 of the Ordinance stipulates that an OC shall establish and maintain a general fund to defray the cost of the exercise of its powers and the performance of its duties, and to pay Government rent, premiums, taxes and other outgoings in relation to any maintenance or repair work, and that an OC may also establish and maintain a contingency fund to provide for any expenditure of an unexpected or urgent nature, yet some residential property owners have complained to me that some OCs seek to reduce the amounts of such funds by resolutions passed at general meetings of owners, and have the shortfall of the funds in meeting the relevant expenses shared among owners according to their ownership shares, whereas at present the Ordinance neither restricts nor regulates the apportionment of such a shortfall, whether the authorities will, when reviewing the Ordinance, consider introducing provisions to plug the existing loopholes or specify the relevant arrangements; if they will not, of the reasons for that?
Public Officer to reply : Secretary for Home Affairs

*9. Hon Jeffrey LAM to ask: (Translation)

In his 2010-2011 Policy Address, the Chief Executive proposed to retrofit the Euro II and Euro III buses of franchised bus companies with catalytic reduction devices to meet Euro IV nitrogen oxide emission standards, and recommended the Government to fund the full cost of procuring six hybrid buses for use by franchised bus companies along the busy corridors in Hong Kong to test their operational efficiency. In this connection, will the Government inform this Council:
    (a)whether it knows the respective numbers of Euro II and Euro III buses in the existing vehicle fleets of franchised bus companies in Hong Kong, and the number of buses already retrofitted with catalytic reduction devices;

    (b)whether it has assessed the costs of retrofitting all the Euro II and Euro III buses currently in use with catalytic reduction devices; if it has, of the details, and the time required to complete retrofitting all such buses; if not, the reasons for that; and

    (c)whether it knows the latest progress of the tests on hybrid buses; whether it has assessed when the tests will be completed; if it has, of the details; if not, the reasons for that?
Public Officer to reply : Secretary for the Environment

*10. Hon Audrey EU to ask: (Translation)

In the Report No. 47 of the Director of Audit ("the Report") published in October 2006, the Audit Commission recommended the Registration and Electoral Office ("REO") to explore the feasibility of requiring the applicants for voter registration or registered electors in doubtful cases to provide supporting evidence for verifying their residential addresses, and to consider verifying the residential addresses of registered electors recorded in the geographical constituencies final registers on a sampling basis. In response to the recommendations of the Report, the Chief Electoral Officer ("CEO") stated that as an established practice, REO will clarify with the applicants by phone or in writing if the addresses in their application forms for voter registration are incomplete or doubtful. Furthermore, regarding those cases of more than 10 electors registered under the same address which were passed to REO for further investigation as pointed out in the Report, CEO indicated that based on the information collected through checking the 2006 final register, making telephone enquiries, paying household visits and sending enquiry letters, REO did not detect any suspected illegal conduct, and the staff of REO had been vigilant in detecting any irregularities which appeared in voter registration forms. However, after the 2011 District Council Election, there have been extensive media reports on many suspected vote-rigging cases, including those cases involving several electors with different surnames registered under one particular address, incomplete or unspecific registered addresses, or electors who had used the addresses of residential buildings or floor levels in a building which do not exist, or of locations not for residential purposes (e.g. schools, warehouses and general post office boxes, etc.) to register as their principal residence. In this connection, will the Government inform this Council:
    (a)of the respective numbers of cases where the registered addresses of electors were found to be incomplete or doubtful by REO through checking the final register, making telephone enquiries, paying household visits and sending enquiry letters in each year since 2007 (with a breakdown set out in table form); whether the Government has conducted in-depth investigations into such cases; if it has, of the results (with a breakdown of the number of cases investigated in each year by investigation result and set out in table form); and

    (b)whether REO will undertake to review afresh the particulars of all registered electors before publishing the 2012 provisional register to identify doubtful cases including those cases involving incomplete or unspecific registered addresses, several electors with different surnames registered under one particular address, and electors who had used the addresses of residential buildings or floor levels in a building which do not exist, or of locations not for residential purposes (e.g. schools, warehouses and general post office boxes) to register as their principal residence, etc., and to proactively investigate and follow up such cases to verify the identities of suspicious electors and applicants?
Public Officer to reply : Secretary for Constitutional and Mainland Affairs

*11. Hon LAU Wong-fat to ask: (Translation)

    Will the Government inform this Council of the number of consultants hired by the offices of the Chief Secretary for Administration, the Financial Secretary and the Secretary for Justice ("offices of the Secretaries"), policy bureaux and government departments within their purview to assist their work and the expenditure incurred in each of the past 10 years, with a detailed breakdown by year and office of the Secretaries, policy bureau and government department?
Public Officer to reply : Secretary for Financial Services and the Treasury

*12. Dr Hon David LI to ask:

According to the findings announced in June this year of a survey conducted by a trade union organization which compared the prices of selected commodities at wet markets in various districts, the food prices in the wet markets in Tung Chung are the highest in Hong Kong, even though it is one of the poorest districts in the territory. In this connection, will the Government inform this Council:
    (a)whether it had conducted any comparative survey of the prices of basic food items in the Consumer Price Index by District Council district in the past three years; if it had, how the outcome compares with the aforesaid survey findings;

    (b)whether it had studied in the past three years the reasons why food prices were higher in certain districts with high concentrations of low-income families; if it had, of the findings; and

    (c)whether it has assessed if the issue in (b) should be addressed through greater government intervention, or through greater transparency and better operation of the free market through measures including the introduction of legislation?
Public Officer to reply : Secretary for Commerce and Economic Development

*13. Hon James TO to ask: (Translation)

In March this year, the Government informed this Council of its study on regulating external lighting installations for resolving the issues of energy wastage and light nuisance. It also proposed to set up the Task Force on External Lighting ("Task Force") and formulate the Guidelines on Industry Best Practices for External Lighting Installations ("Guidelines"). The Government stated in its paper that it "plan[s] to set up the Task Force in the second quarter of 2011" and "would write to all stakeholders and invite their comments in the next three months before the draft guidelines are finalized for promulgation". However, when I met the representative of the Environmental Protection Department in September this year, the representative said that the consultation on the Guidelines was still in progress. It was until October that the Secretary for the Environment indicated the Guidelines would be promulgated at the end of this year. In this connection, will the Government inform this Council:
    (a)of the stakeholders being invited by the authorities to give their comments on the Guidelines; the comments collected and whether the authorities will report such comments to the public and this Council;

    (b)given that the Task Force could not be set up in the second quarter of this year as scheduled, why the authorities could only complete the procedure for appointing Task Force members in August this year; of the work progress of the Task Force so far, and whether it has started the work on collecting public views as well as publicity and education, etc.; if it has, set out in chronological order all the work done and dates of meetings held; and

    (c)given that the authorities have not yet promulgated the Guidelines, and the establishment of the Task Force has been delayed, whether, according to the estimation of the authorities, the Task Force can complete its work in early 2012 as scheduled; if not, of the measures in place to expedite the work progress which is behind schedule at present; and when the authorities expect to promulgate the Guidelines?
Public Officer to reply : Secretary for the Environment

*14. Hon Emily LAU to ask: (Translation)

Woman health service is currently provided in three Woman Health Centres ("WHCs") and 10 Maternal and Child Health Centres ("MCHCs") under the Department of Health. In this connection, will the Executive Authorities inform this Council:
    (a)of the respective monthly statistics on the cases on the waiting list for woman health service in each WHC and MCHC last year;

    (b)whether they will set up additional WHCs; if they will, of the details; if not, the reasons for that; and the costs required for setting up an additional WHC; and

    (c)whether they will consider splitting the units in MCHCs which provide woman health service at present and upgrading them to formal WHCs; if they will, of the details; if not, the reasons for that; and the costs involved?
Public Officer to reply : Secretary for Food and Health

*15. Hon Paul TSE to ask: (Translation)

It has been reported that a large number of unscrupulous pharmacies have emerged at tourist spots in Hong Kong in recent years, and they are suspected of covering the brand names on the package of fake proprietary Chinese medicines with price labels and selling these spurious medicines specifically to mainland tourists. It has also been reported that even though the police officers, after receiving the complaints, have come to the pharmacies involved, they only settle the cases by mediation. The defrauded tourists vent their grievances at various forums on the Mainland, and some of them even indicate that they have lost their confidence in shopping in Hong Kong. In this connection, will the Government inform this Council:
    (a)whether it knows the respective numbers of complaints received by the Police, Hong Kong Customs and Excise Department, Hong Kong Tourism Board and Consumer Council in the past three years involving any shop alleged to be selling fake proprietary medicines; how such government departments and organizations handled the relevant cases after receiving the complaints; among the complaints, of the number of those in which the persons-in-charge of the shops involved were prosecuted due to such selling activities;

    (b)in the past three years, of the number of the aforesaid complaint cases which the Police dealt with by mediation only, and the respective reasons why after receiving the relevant complaints, the Police did not lay any charge or initiate any investigation;

    (c)given that tourists stay in Hong Kong for a brief period, of the existing policies and measures to provide timely assistance to tourists suspected to be defrauded during their stay in Hong Kong; and

    (d)of the existing policies and measures to deal with the aforesaid shops which sell fake proprietary medicines by means of fraud; in addition, how it will clearly inform the mainland tourists visiting Hong Kong of such policies and measures, so that they know the channels through which they can lodge complaints and make reports, and the measures for protecting consumers and their rights in Hong Kong?
Public Officer to reply : Secretary for Commerce and Economic Development

*16. Hon Abraham SHEK to ask:

It has been reported that an ethnic Indian boy with an intelligence quotient of 120 to 129, which is close to the benchmark of 130 for prodigies, in accordance with a cognitive test he took using the "Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children", has been schooled at home for two years. His parents pointed out that they could not find a suitable school to satisfy his special learning needs, as several schools had refused their demand to admit the boy into a more advanced class. Moreover, the Education Bureau ("EDB") has failed to find a proper school for the boy in two years. In this connection, will the Government inform this Council:
    (a)whether it knows the number of gifted ethnic minority ("EM") children who had been schooled at home in the past three years; and of the details and the reasons why they did not attend school;

    (b)whether it knows which schools currently offer Chinese-language education to EM students, the number of EM students admitted to each of such schools in the past three years and the districts where the schools are located;

    (c)given that several schools, as reported, have refused some parents' requests for admitting EM students, according to the authorities' assessment, whether this constituted indirect discrimination against EM students; if yes, of the details; if not, the reasons for that; and

    (d)of the reasons why EDB has failed for two years to arrange a school which suits the special learning needs of the aforesaid ethnic Indian boy, and whether any relevant party involved has to bear legal liability for the reported incident; if yes, of the details with any follow-up measure taken?
Public Officer to reply : Secretary for Education

*17. Hon Frederick FUNG to ask: (Translation)

An earlier study conducted by the Harvard University in the United States found that the urinary Bisphenol A ("BPA") level in people who consumed canned soup was 20-fold higher than that in people who consumed fresh soup. The academic leading the study pointed out that in order to prevent metallic substances (e.g. stannum) in food cans from leaching into the food inside the cans, manufacturers add BPA in the interior coating of cans, resulting in indirect human intake of BPA. Although the aforesaid study has not assessed the potential health risks of BPA intake, past studies have found that BPA may suppress male sex hormones, resulting in indistinct sexual characteristics. In addition, other studies have found that BPA may cause cardiovascular diseases, diabetes, obesity and cancer. At present, the United Kingdom ("UK") has enacted legislation to stipulate that stannum and BPA in canned food containers cannot affect the quality of food. Canada, Australia and the European Union have also banned the use of BPA or encouraged the industry to stop using BPA to produce baby bottles. In this connection, will the Government inform this Council:
    (a)what safety regulations the authorities have imposed on food cans or other food containers (particularly to avoid the materials used for making food containers and the chemicals therein from polluting the food inside the cans or containers and affecting the health of consumers) at present; how the relevant ordinances and regulations in Hong Kong compare with those in other advanced countries; and

    (b)whether the authorities will draw reference from the practices adopted in the aforesaid countries and take preventive measures to ban the sale of any baby bottle made from BPA in the market, and whether they will draw reference from the aforesaid study and the practices in countries such as UK, etc. to formulate safety standard for the materials used for canned food containers, so as to stipulate that substances such as stannum and BPA, etc. contained in food cans cannot pollute the food inside the cans; if not, of the reasons for that?
Public Officer to reply : Secretary for Food and Health

*18. Hon Tanya CHAN to ask: (Translation)

Recently, some parents of the primary school section of the Lingnan Primary School and Kindergarten ("LPSK") have relayed to me that the primary school section of LPSK will be relocated in January 2012, yet the parents of the students of LPSK have not been informed of any detail so far. In this connection, will the Government inform this Council:
    (a)given that LPSK has indicated that it will officially close down the school campus situated at Stubbs Road in January 2012, whether the Lingnan Education Organization ("the school sponsoring body") has informed the authorities of the relevant relocation arrangements; if it has, of the details;

    (b)as I have learnt that the school sponsoring body has rented a campus at Cheerful Garden in Siu Sai Wan, whether the authorities know the permitted accommodation of that campus;

    (c)as it has been reported that a developer has applied to the Town Planning Board for developing residential properties on the site of the former Lingnan College, and quite a number of parents are concerned whether the school sponsoring body have planned to sell the land of LPSK to tie in with the development of the aforesaid property project, whether the authorities have received any application from the school sponsoring body at present to revise the land use or land lease conditions of the site of LPSK; if they have, of the details;

    (d)apart from instructing the school sponsoring body to continue to operate LPSK, whether the authorities have taken any specific measure to assist LPSK's students in continuing to attend school when LPSK insists on closing down its campus at Stubbs Road in January 2012; if they have, of the details of such measures; if not, the reasons for that; and

    (e)given that the school sponsoring body is a licensed educational institution, whether the authorities will follow up the case in accordance with the existing regulatory ordinances when the school sponsoring body closes down the campus in January 2012; if they will, of the details; if not, the reasons for that?
Public Officer to reply : Secretary for Education

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

The Chief Executive has proposed in the 2011-2012 Policy Address to provide elderly people aged 65 or above and recipients of Comprehensive Social Security Assistance ("CSSA") who are aged between 12 and 64 with 100% disability as well as recipients of Disability Allowance ("DA") in the same group with a public transport fare concession ("the concession scheme"), enabling them to travel on the general MTR lines, franchised buses and ferries anytime at a concessionary fare of $2 a trip. It is expected that about 1.1 million people, including 130 000 persons with disabilities ("PWDs"), will benefit. In this connection, will the Government inform this Council:
    (a)of the estimated total expenditure required for implementing the concession scheme, with a table listing the respective estimated amounts of subsidies to be received by various public transport operators ("the operators");

    (b)given that the authorities have indicated that the concession scheme will only be launched in the latter half of next year, whether the scheme can be launched earlier in the first half of next year; if so, of the specific time and details; if not, the reasons for that;

    (c)why the authorities restrict that for people aged between 12 and 64, only CSSA recipients with 100% disability and DA recipients can benefit;

    (d)whether it has assessed the increase in the number of beneficiaries and government expenditure in expanding the concession scheme to cover all PWDs, CSSA recipients and other disadvantaged groups;

    (e)of the criteria based on which the fare level at $2 a trip was set;

    (f)why public light bus is not included in the concession scheme, and whether it will reconsider including public light bus in the scheme;

    (g)given that the Government has indicated that it will negotiate with the operators and urge them to continue to provide existing fare concessions to the elderly and PWDs, and not to withdraw the present concessionary measures for passengers because the Government has made additional commitment, how the authorities ensure that the operators will continue to offer the existing fare concessions; what corresponding measures the Government has put in place against non-compliant operators;

    (h)apart from introducing the concession scheme, whether the authorities have requested the operators to offer more fare concessions to members of the public so as to pass on the benefits to society; if they have, of the details; if not, the reasons for that;

    (i)whether it has considered including the operators' offer of fare concessions to members of the public as a condition when it negotiates with the operators on public transport franchise; if it has, of the details; if not, the reasons for that;

    (j)whether the concession scheme has any limit on the implementation period, and when a review will be conducted; and

    (k)whether it has assessed the increase in government expenditure on the reduction of the fare of $2 a trip in the concession scheme to $0?
Public Officer to reply : Secretary for Labour and Welfare

*20. Hon Frederick FUNG to ask: (Translation)

It has been reported that the health authorities in the United States earlier expressed concern about a new H3N2 influenza ("flu") virus mutated from H1N1 human swine flu virus, pointing that this flu variant, which combines the genes from the viruses of ordinary human flu, H5N1 avian flu and H1N1 human swine flu, can be transmitted among humans, and there is a possibility of a major outbreak. In this connection, will the Government inform this Council:
    (a)whether the authorities have approached the overseas health authorities concerned and the World Health Organization to seek the latest information about the aforesaid new flu virus; if they have, of the details (including the characteristics of the aforesaid new flu virus, mode of transmission and spreading rate, symptoms as compared with those of ordinary flu, possible complications, methods of treatment, as well as comparison with the human swine flu epidemic which broke out and spread in Mexico in 2009, etc.); and

    (b)of the mechanism currently in place for comprehensively monitoring the possible appearance of any new flu variant; whether the authorities have any measure (e.g. any plan to specify the aforesaid new flu as a statutory notifiable disease, etc.) in place at present to cope with the possible major outbreak of the aforesaid new flu; and whether they have formulated any contingency plan for the purposes of perfecting the mechanism for the prevention and control of flu, disseminating information, flexibly deploying and purchasing medical resources, organizing and coordinating the work of various government departments in combating epidemics, strengthening public health education and immunization, etc.; if they have, of the details?
Public Officer to reply : Secretary for Food and Health

* For written reply

III. Bills

First Reading

Mandatory Provident Fund Schemes (Amendment) (No. 2) Bill 2011

Second Reading (Debate to be adjourned)

Mandatory Provident Fund Schemes (Amendment) (No. 2) Bill 2011:Secretary for Financial Services and the Treasury

Second Reading (Debates to resume), Committee Stage and Third Reading

1.General Holidays and Employment Legislation (Substitution of Holidays) (Amendment) Bill 2011

:Secretary for Labour and Welfare

2.Road Traffic (Amendment) Bill 2011:Secretary for Transport and Housing

(i)Secretary for Transport and Housing to move Committee stage amendments

(The amendments were issued on 8 December 2011
under LC Paper No. CB(3)227/11-12)

(ii)Hon KAM Nai-wai and Hon Andrew CHENG to move Committee stage amendments respectively

(The amendments were issued on 12 December 2011
under LC Paper No. CB(3)249/11-12)

IV. Members' Motions

  1. Proposed resolution under section 34(4) of the Interpretation and General Clauses Ordinance Hon James TO to move the following motion:

    Resolved that in relation to the -

    (a)Inland Revenue (Double Taxation Relief and Prevention of Fiscal Evasion with respect to Taxes on Income) (Portuguese Republic) Order, published in the Gazette as Legal Notice No. 155 of 2011;

    (b)Inland Revenue (Double Taxation Relief and Prevention of Fiscal Evasion with respect to Taxes on Income) (Kingdom of Spain) Order, published in the Gazette as Legal Notice No. 156 of 2011; and

    (c)Inland Revenue (Double Taxation Relief and Prevention of Fiscal Evasion with respect to Taxes on Income) (Czech Republic) Order, published in the Gazette as Legal Notice No. 157 of 2011,

    and laid on the table of the Legislative Council on 23 November 2011, the period for amending sbsidiary 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 11 January 2012.

  2. Proposed resolution under section 34(4) of the Interpretation and General Clauses Ordinance Hon LEE Cheuk-yan to move the following motion:

    Resolved that in relation to the -

    (a)Hong Kong Air Navigation (Fees) (Amendment) Regulation 2011, published in the Gazette as Legal Notice No. 159 of 2011; and

    (b)Civil Aviation (Aircraft Noise) (Certification) (Amendment) Regulation 2011, published in the Gazette as Legal Notice No. 160 of 2011,

    and laid on the table of the Legislative Council on 23 November 2011, 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 11 January 2012.

  3. Proposed resolution under section 34(4) of the Interpretation and General Clauses Ordinance

    Hon Miriam LAU to move the following motion:

    Resolved that in relation to the Frontier Closed Area (Amendment) Order 2011, published in the Gazette as Legal Notice No. 170 of 2011, and laid on the table of the Legislative Council on 7 December 2011, 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 1 February 2012.

  4. Proposed resolution under section 34(4) of the Interpretation and General Clauses Ordinance

    Hon Miriam LAU to move the following motion:

    Resolved that in relation to the Mandatory Provident Fund Schemes (Contributions for Casual Employees) (Amendment) (No. 2) Order 2011, published in the Gazette as Legal Notice No. 171 of 2011, and laid on the table of the Legislative Council on 7 December 2011, 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 1 February 2012.

  5. Proposed resolution under section 34(2) of the Interpretation and General Clauses Ordinance

    Hon James TO to move the following motion:

    Resolved that the Companies Ordinance (Exemption of Companies and Prospectuses from Compliance with Provisions) (Amendment) Notice 2011, published in the Gazette as Legal Notice No. 143 of 2011 and laid on the table of the Legislative Council on 26 October 2011, be repealed.

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

  6. Capitalizing on the opportunity presented by the building of a cruise terminal to develop Kowloon East into a business and tourism district

    Hon Paul TSE to move the following motion: (Translation)

    That this Council urges the Government to capitalize on the opportunity presented by the building of a cruise terminal by consolidating the existing tourism infrastructure and facilities and building new ones, while implementing the plan of Energizing Kowloon East, with a view to developing Kowloon East into an important business and tourism district.

    Amendments to the motion
    (i)Hon CHAN Kam-lam to move the following amendment: (Translation)

    To add "the plan of Energizing Kowloon East announced by the Chief Executive in the Policy Address this year will inject fresh economic impetus and create employment opportunities for the entire Kowloon; in this connection," after "That"; to delete "by consolidating" after "a cruise terminal" and substitute with "and the development of Kai Tak new area, expeditiously finalize an environmentally friendly linkage system and its extension to To Kwa Wan, enhance the designs of the Metro Park and the Longjin Bridge conservation zone, construct a new Kowloon harbourfront promenade stretching from Lei Yue Mun to Sham Shui Po, enhance the uses of typhoon shelters, introduce leisure water sports facilities, and improve the transport network of Kowloon; and, to consolidate"; to delete "building" after "and facilities and" and substitute with "build"; and to add "core" after "an important".

    (ii)Hon Alan LEONG to move the following amendment: (Translation)

    To delete "this Council urges the Government to" after "That" and substitute with ", as the Government intends to develop another core business district in the Kai Tak Development Area, Kwun Tong and Kowloon Bay, and this will involve huge investment of public money in land use review and large-scale infrastructure projects, this Council urges the Government to: (a) when establishing a Kowloon East Development Office responsible for steering and monitoring this strategic development project, follow the same approach of holding discussions with the public adopted in the planning for the Kai Tak Development Area, so as to enable people, especially those from Kowloon East, to fully participate in the discussions and put forward views on the alignment, station locations and fares of an environmentally friendly elevated monorail system, as well as the layout of public open spaces, the construction of footbridges, and the designs of waterfront promenades, etc.; (b) expeditiously complete and announce the financial report and feasibility study on the monorail system, and study the sustainable development of monorail operation; (c) complete the construction of the Metro Park on a priority basis, so as to facilitate people's enjoyment of adequate open space; (d) improve the linkage of the existing transport network of Kowloon East with those of the various districts in Hong Kong, and ensure that the new developments will not cause any traffic congestion and obstruct local district residents commuting to and from work and travelling to and from the district; (e) expedite the relocation of government office buildings in Wan Chai to the district, so as to stimulate economic activities in the district and create employment opportunities; and (f)".

    (iii)Hon WONG Kwok-kin to move the following amendment: (Translation)

    To add "the first berth of the Kai Tak cruise terminal will be commissioned in 2013, and the Kai Tak New Development Area will also become the largest urban development area in Hong Kong in the future; in this connection," after "That"; to delete "by consolidating the existing" after "a cruise terminal" and substitute with ", consolidate the regional links, transport connection, infrastructural facilities, cultural monuments and community services in Kai Tak and other areas of Kowloon East, and build new"; to delete "and building new ones" after "infrastructure and facilities"; to add "integrating and harmonizing the development of new and old areas, residents' living conditions, community facilities and even cultural characteristics in Kowloon East, and, in addition to" after "a view to"; and to add ", preserving its original humanistic features to create a quality living environment for residents in the district; the specific proposed measures should include: (a) to review the road transport network of the various areas of Kowloon East, project whether the traffic loads of the existing road networks in the various communities are adequate for dovetailing with the future development of the district, and expeditiously implement improvement works in accordance with the review outcomes and development needs; (b) to study the linkage of the new and old areas in Kowloon East by an environmentally friendly mass transit system, and improve the public transport supporting facilities connecting Kowloon East to other districts, so as to cope with the needs of tourists and businesses in the future; (c) to perfect the pedestrian linking systems and barrier-free facilities in the new and old areas of Kowloon East, so that tourists and residents can travel between new and old development areas smoothly and without obstruction; (d) to expeditiously finalize the construction of a general hospital in Kai Tak and expedite the expansion of the United Christian Hospital, so as to meet the medical needs arising from the population growth and development of Kowloon East in the future; (e) to study the construction of cycle tracks along the harbourfront of Kowloon East and various other districts for linkage with the cycle track to be constructed in the Kai Tak New Development Area, so as to develop a network of urban cycle tracks; (f) to make use of the advantages of Kowloon East, such as cultural monuments and existing waterways, etc., for developing a special heritage trail blending environmentalism, historical monuments, local culture and tourism, so as to add special features to the district; (g) to increase the space for greening and public art in Kowloon East, and introduce bazaars with local characteristics, such as temple fairs, so as to attract tourists and create employment opportunities; and (h) to use the site of the former Tai Hom Village and San Po Kong Industrial Area, etc., for developing cultural and creative industries, so as to build the district into a tourism spot related to the Hong Kong film industry" immediately before the full stop.

    (iv)Hon Fred LI to move the following amendment: (Translation)

    To add ", in order to enhance Hong Kong's development opportunities," after "That"; to add "including the construction of an elevated transport network and a network of designated cycle tracks in Kowloon East for internal and external connection, strengthening green transport as a feature of the district, building a continuous harbourfront promenade and upgrading bay water quality standards for enjoyment by the public and tourists, as well as promoting diversified local development by linking up local historical and cultural attractions and sports facilities," after "building new ones,"; and to add ", and providing Hong Kong people with an appropriate urban residential area" immediately before the full stop.

    Public Officer to attend : Secretary for Development

  7. Alleviating the difficulties of small and medium enterprises in taking out insurance

    Hon Tommy CHEUNG to move the following motion: (Translation)

    That, given that in recent years, many retail consumption and business services industries in Hong Kong, when taking out employees' compensation insurance and motor vehicle third party risk insurance as required by the law, often encountered significant premium increases or even refusal of underwriting insurance policy by insurance companies on various pretexts, causing the employers of many small and medium enterprises great anxiety and significant increases in costs, this Council urges the Government to proactively discuss with the insurance sector to make efforts to reduce the costs and difficulties of various industries in taking out the relevant insurance, so as to avoid affecting their business operation and effective protection for employees; the relevant measures should include:

    (a)to enhance the Employees' Compensation Insurance Residual Scheme by, in addition to the existing list of 19 high-risk occupations, including those occupations such as retail consumption and business services, which are of lower-risk but have practical difficulties in taking out employees' compensation insurance, and to set relevant premium benchmark rates to serve as market reference indicators, so as to provide support as the last resort to enterprises in need of insurance coverage;

    (b)to require the police to rigorously combat illegal acts such as champerty and conspiracy to make fraudulent insurance claims, etc.; and

    (c)to increase the transparency of matters such as pricing, operation, risk assessment and complaint handling, etc. of the insurer sector, and strengthen the efforts of the Government, various industries, the media and the public in monitoring insurance companies, so as to prevent law-abiding employers from bearing unnecessary burden.

    Amendments to the motion
    (i)Hon CHAN Kin-por to move the following amendment: (Translation)

    To delete "given that in recent years" after "That," and substitute with "as recently"; to delete "on various pretexts" after "by insurance companies" and substitute with "for various reasons"; to delete "; and" after "insurance claims, etc." and substitute with ", and to establish a reporting channel for the public and insurance companies to report cases of suspected fraudulent insurance claims; (c) to request the Hospital Authority to combat attempts to make fraudulent insurance claims through obtaining prolonged sick leave certificates by exaggerating clinical conditions and degrees of injuries; (d) to request the Department of Justice to initiate prosecution against civil contempt of court, so as to deter misstatement with the intent of making fraudulent insurance claims; and"; and to delete the original "(c)" and substitute with "(e)".

    (ii)Hon WONG Kwok-hing to move the following amendment: (Translation)

    To add "the recycling industry as well as" after "in recent years,"; and to add "recycling," after "occupations such as".

    (iii)Hon LEE Cheuk-yan to move the following amendment: (Translation)

    To delete "and" after "etc.;"; and to add "; and (d) to set up a publicly-operated 'central employees' compensation fund' for lowering administration fees under the privately-operated employees' compensation insurance system, which not only can reduce employers' expenses on taking out insurance, but also provide better protection for employees" immediately before the full stop.

    Public Officer to attend : Secretary for Financial Services and the Treasury
Clerk to the Legislative Council