A 13/14-2
Legislative Council
Agenda
Wednesday 16 October 2013 at 11:00 am
I. Tabling of Papers
| Subsidiary Legislation / Instruments | L.N. No. | |
|---|---|---|
| 1. | Road Traffic (Public Service Vehicles) (Amendment) Regulation 2013 | 151/2013 |
| 2. | Country Parks (Designation) (Consolidation) (Amendment) Order 2013 | 152/2013 |
| 3. | Arbitration (Amendment) Ordinance 2013 (Commencement) Notice | 153/2013 |
| Other Papers
| |||
| 1. | No. 7 | - | Competition Commission
Annual Report 2012/13 |
| (to be presented by Secretary for Commerce and Economic Development)
| |||
| 2. | No. 8 | - | Report of changes made to the approved Estimates of Expenditure during the first quarter of 2013-14
Public Finance Ordinance : Section 8 |
| (to be presented by Secretary for Financial Services and the Treasury)
| |||
| 3. | No. 9 | - | West Kowloon Cultural District Authority
Annual Report 2012/13 |
| (to be presented by the Financial Secretary)
| |||
| 4. | Report No. 1/13-14 of the House Committee on Consideration of Subsidiary Legislation and Other Instruments | ||
| (to be presented by Hon Andrew LEUNG, Chairman of the House Committee) | |||
II. Questions
1. Hon Jeffrey LAM to ask: (Translation)
It has been learnt that the Government is actively expanding land resources to meet the housing and social development needs of Hong Kong people. In this connection, will the Government inform this Council:
(a) of the area and percentage of developed land in the 1 100-odd square kilometres of land in Hong Kong at present; among the developed land, the respective numbers of sites used for public and private housing, commercial, industrial and agricultural purposes, as well as a breakdown of the respective areas and percentages of the sites by land use; (b) among the greenfield sites, of the respective areas of land designated as country parks and special areas under the Country Parks Ordinance, and the percentage of the area of such land in the total land area in Hong Kong; the area of the remaining greenfield sites and its percentage in the total land area of Hong Kong; as well as a breakdown of the respective areas and percentages of the above two types of land by District Council district; and (c) whether the authorities will explore ways to develop the existing greenfield sites (such as developing long-abandoned quarries and idle government, rural and industrial sites, as well as re-designating for housing purpose "Green Belt" areas in the fringe of the new development areas which are of low value) so as to increase the land supply; if they will, of the details; if not, the reasons for that?
2. Hon LEUNG Kwok-hung to ask: (Translation)
Quite a number of members of the public have relayed to me that they are dissatisfied with the Government’s performance in handling the aftermath of disasters. For instance, they are dissatisfied that the Government’s attitude towards the Philippine authorities has been weak and feeble in the Manila hostage-taking incident, and that in the maritime disaster off Lamma Island on 1 October last year causing 39 deaths, the Government merely expressed perfunctory condolences and adopted delaying tactics in dealing with the related issue of responsibility, with no intention to seek justice for the victims and their families. Moreover, in his speech during the National Day Reception this year, the Chief Executive made no mention of the maritime disaster, and the Government did not organize any memorial activity on the first anniversary of the maritime disaster. In this connection, will the Government inform this Council:
(a) given that the Taiwanese authorities promptly put forward sanctions after the incident of a Taiwanese fisherman being shot dead by the Philippine law enforcement officers, whether the Government will impose all possible sanctions against the Philippine Government, so as to press the Philippine Government to admit responsibility and offer apologies and compensations to the victims of the Manila hostage-taking incident and their families; if it will, what sanctions will be imposed in the coming six months; if not, the reasons for that; whether it has assessed if the taking of a dilatory approach in handling the incident will render the victims and their families unable to hold the persons involved responsible within the statutory period; (b) given that the Director of Marine has made an apology to the victims of the maritime disaster and their families, whether the authorities will demand the relevant heads of bureaux and departments to suspend duty immediately or even hold them accountable for the incident and require them to step down; if so, when this will be done; if not, the reasons for that; and (c) whether the Government will publish within three months the internal investigation report regarding the maritime disaster; if it will, of the publication date; if not, the reasons for that, and whether the Government intends to take a dilatory approach to handle the incident so that the victims and their families are unable to hold the persons concerned legally responsible for the incident?
| Public Officers to reply | : | Secretary for Transport and Housing
Secretary for Security |
3. Hon Emily LAU to ask: (Translation)
The United Nations Committee on the Rights of the Child ("the Committee") held a hearing on 26 and 27 September this year in Geneva to consider the report on the implementation of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child ("the Convention") by the Government of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region ("the SAR Government"). I have learnt that the Committee was concerned about the situation of underprivileged children in Hong Kong, in particular, their being deprived of the right to receive education on the basis of equal opportunity as stipulated in Article 28 of the Convention; the Committee was also concerned about the problems encountered by children with disabilities, children of ethnic minorities and children in poverty, and it did not understand why the SAR Government, which has hoarded enormous resources, failed to enable these underprivileged children to enjoy equal right of education, rendering them lagging behind at the starting line. According to the Hong Kong Poverty Situation Report 2012 released on 28 September this year, the number of poor children aged zero to 17 in 2012 was 253 600. However, owing to the limitations of the survey design, the Report was unable to provide the number of poor children and their poverty situation in individual underprivileged groups, e.g. ethnic minorities and persons with disabilities. In this connection, will the Executive Authorities inform this Council:
(a) when the authorities will conduct a detailed topical statistical survey, so as to grasp the number of different groups of underprivileged children (including children with disabilities, children of ethnic minorities and other groups of children) and their poverty situation; (b) of the authorities’ new plans, funding proposals and arrangements to ensure equal opportunities for these children to receive education, so that their chances of pursuing studies and securing employment will not be affected; and (c) whether they will take on board the Committee’s recommendation to set up an inter-departmental Commission on Children with concrete powers to monitor and promote the implementation of the Convention?
| Public Officer to reply | : | Secretary for Labour and Welfare
Secretary for Constitutional and Mainland Affairs |
4. Hon TANG Ka-piu to ask: (Translation)
The Panel on Public Service of this Council passed, at its meeting held on 15 July this year, the following motion moved by me: "this Panel urges the Government to take forward the full implementation of '44 hours of work gross per week (inclusive of meal breaks)’ as a condition of service for Government employees and give priority to the immediate implementation of '44 hours of work gross per week (inclusive of meal breaks)’ for civil servants under the Department of Health working in the Hospital Authority". The Civil Service Bureau indicated, in its written response made at the end of last month, that the authorities were studying proposals to reduce the conditioned hours of work of all employees belonging to Model Scale ("MOD") 1 grades, and were inviting various bureaux and departments to assess the viability of launching a related trial scheme to reduce the conditioned hours of the employees of such grades (including those civil servants of MOD 1 grades of the Department of Health working in the Hospital Authority ("HA")) from 45 hours net per week exclusive of meal breaks ("net hours") to 45 hours gross per week inclusive of meal breaks ("gross hours"). In this connection, will the Government inform this Council:
(a) as the authorities indicated in the aforesaid response that the returns from bureaux and departments on the assessment of the viability of the trial scheme would be received by the third quarter of this year, whether they have received those returns; if so, of the total number of employees involved in the trial scheme to be launched and the expected time for concluding and publishing the results of the relevant study; if such returns have not yet been received from all bureaux and departments concerned, the reasons for that; (b) upon the full implementation of the aforesaid trial scheme, whether the Department of Health will, in response to the demand of the staff union, work towards ultimately reducing the conditioned hours of work of the civil servants of MOD 1 grades working in HA to 44 gross hours per week, to align them with the gross hours of the staff of HA’s supporting grades; if it will, of the details; and (c) whether the authorities will further consider aligning the weekly gross hours of all civil servants and non-civil service contract staff to 44 hours, so as to take the lead in implementing a system of standard working hours?
5. Hon WONG Yuk-man to ask: (Translation)
Some government officials reportedly said at the meeting of the Sham Shui Po District Council held on 3 September this year that the rise in the number of street sleepers in the district in recent years was attributable to the distribution of materials and meal boxes to them by some enthusiastic organizations and members of the public, thereby thwarting street sleepers’ desire to quit street-sleeping and attracting street sleepers from other districts to move to Sham Shui Po. In addition, some voluntary organizations servicing street sleepers have relayed to me that the Home Affairs Department had arranged a discussion with them on the issue of street sleepers in a high-class club house at Yau Yat Chuen, and these organizations considered the venue incompatible with the content of the meeting. In this connection, will the Government inform this Council:
(a) whether the aforesaid remarks of the government officials were based on the findings of investigations or studies; if so, of the details; (b) why the Home Affairs Department had arranged for the discussion with the voluntary organizations on the issue of street sleepers in a high-class club house at Yau Yat Chuen; and (c) whether it has assessed if the Government’s current policy for supporting street sleepers can resolve the pressure and difficulties in living faced by street sleepers; if it has assessed, of the findings and details; if the findings of the assessment are in the negative, whether and when the Government will review the related policy?
| Public Officers to reply | : | Secretary for Labour and Welfare
Secretary for Home Affairs |
6. Hon KWOK Wai-keung to ask: (Translation)
Earlier on, I received requests for assistance from a group of private candidates who took the Hong Kong Advanced Level Examination held for the last time ("last HKALE"). They said that their HKALE results met the general entrance requirements for local first-degree programmes ("university entrance requirements") but, according to the authorities’ requirement, they could apply for university admission only through the non-Joint University Programmes Admissions System ("non-JUPAS") as they held results other than the Hong Kong Diploma of Secondary Education Examination. Moreover, the date for the release of HKALE results was so late that quite a number of universities did not have any places left, or the admission processes had already been closed, by the time they received the applications submitted by those private candidates with their HKALE results, leaving some of those candidates yet to be admitted to universities to date. In this connection, will the Government inform this Council:
(a) whether it knows, among the 72 candidates who met the university entrance requirements in the last HKALE, the number of those who have been admitted to universities at present, with a breakdown by institution; whether the authorities have provided those 72 candidates with special assistance (e.g. helping them strive for opportunities for interviews); if they have, of the details; if not, the reasons for that; (b) as it has been reported that certain universities had not considered the HKALE results of the HKALE repeaters in processing their non-JUPAS applications for admission because the HKALE results had not been released then, whether the authorities will request the various institutions to review the applications from those candidates; and (c) as some candidates have pointed out that although some candidates had attained outstanding results in the last HKALE, they were not admitted to universities probably because no places were left in universities, whether the authorities will liaise with the universities to look into the situation and ensure that the departments concerned are granted additional resources to provide places for the admission of those candidates?
*7. Hon Paul TSE to ask: (Translation)
The Independent Commission Against Corruption ("ICAC") had reportedly indicated earlier that, due to insufficient evidence, it would not further pursue a corruption complaint against a former Executive Council Member who was suspected of having accepted a low-interest loan of $70 million from a developer. However, the former Director of Public Prosecutions ("the former Director") of the Department of Justice ("DoJ") had subsequently told the media prior to his retirement that he was examining the case. He also expressed the views that it was inappropriate for the Securities and Futures Commission ("SFC") to concurrently assume the roles of investigator, monitoring authority and prosecutor, and that its prosecution powers should be transferred to DoJ. In this connection, will the Government inform this Council:
(a) whether it has examined why the former Director expressed the aforesaid views on the operations of ICAC and SFC prior to his departure from office; if it has, of the outcome; if not, whether it will face up to the relevant views; (b) whether the incumbent Director of Public Prosecutions has followed up the aforesaid views of the former Director; if he has, of the progress; if not, the reasons for that; (c) whether it will, in the light of the former Director’s views, review the criteria adopted by ICAC for deciding whether investigation will be conducted into corruption complaints so as to enhance the transparency of the operation of ICAC; and (d) whether it will, with reference to the former Director’s views, study the transfer of SFC’s prosecution powers to DoJ so as to maintain proper checks and balances on the functions and powers of SFC?
*8. Hon WU Chi-wai to ask: (Translation)
The Long Term Housing Strategy Consultation Document published in September this year recommends that the total housing supply target for the next 10 years be set at 470 000 units, with 60% of them being public housing. Moreover, there are views in the community that some of the government sites or properties currently left idle should be re-designated for public housing use. In this connection, will the Government inform this Council of:
(a) the information concerning the idle government sites and properties fully owned by the Government and managed by the Government Property Agency ("GPA") at present (set out in the table below); Name
(if applicable)
and address of
site/propertyUse(s) of
site/property
specified in
outline zoning
plan ("OZP")
or rural OZPSite area/
land area and
gross floor area
("GFA") of propertyNumber of months
for which the
site/property
has been left idle, as
at the end of August
2013Whether
development
plan for the
site/property
has been made
and its details(b) the information concerning the idle government sites and properties (e.g. vacant school premises) fully owned by the Government and managed by government departments other than GPA (e.g. the Education Bureau, the Housing Department) at present (set out in the table below); Name
(if applicable)
and address of
site/property,
government department
in chargeUse(s) of
site/property
specified in OZP or
rural OZPSite area/
land area and
GFA of propertyNumber of months
for which the
site/property
has been left idle,
as at the end of August
2013Whether
development
plan has been
made for the
site/property
and its details(c) the information concerning the idle government properties partly owned by the Government at present (set out in the table below); Name and
address of
site/property, the
holding
departmentUse(s) of property
specified in OZP or
rural OZPGFA of property Number of months
for which the
property has been
left idle, as at the end
of August 2013Whether
development
plan has been
made for the
property and
its details(d) the situation of idle civil servants quarters managed by GPA or the Civil Service Bureau (set out in the table below); and Name of the
quartersAddress and
number of
vacant unitsGFA of quarters Number of months
for which its units
have been left vacantWhether
arrangements
have been made
for leasing or
conversion of
the units for
other uses and
their details(e) the number of properties managed by various policy bureaux/government departments which have been reviewed by GPA between 2000 and 2012 in respect of their utilization, and the time required for GPA to review such properties (set out in the table below)? Time taken for review Number of properties 0-6 months 7-12 months 13-24 months 25-36 months Above 36 months
*9. Hon Frederick FUNG to ask: (Translation)
It has been reported that, contrary to market expectations, the United States Federal Open Market Committee decided at its meeting held in September this year to maintain the current monthly scale of purchasing US$85 billion United States Treasury bonds, and did not announce any market exit plan. Most of the committee members considered that the federal funds target rate should not be raised until 2015, and the pace should not be too quick. It is therefore forecast that the interest rate will remain below 2% until the end of 2016. In this connection, will the Government inform this Council:
(a) whether it has assessed the latest impact of the decision made at the aforesaid meeting on Hong Kong’s economy, including the overall economic conditions, capital flows, asset prices and inflation, etc.; if it has, of the outcome; whether the authorities will consider raising this year’s forecast of the year-on-year rate of increase in the Composite Consumer Price Index (i.e. the underlying inflation rate) of Hong Kong; (b) whether it has assessed if abundant liquidity and the persistently low-interest-rate environment will bring about equity and property asset bubbles, which may lead to market fluctuations; whether the authorities have drawn up contingency plans and measures to curb the inflow of hot money, with a view to stabilizing asset prices and combating speculations; and (c) of the measures the authorities have put in place in response to the short to medium term low-interest-rate environment to reduce the risks faced by the banking sector?
*10. Hon Charles Peter MOK to ask: (Translation)
When the Government conducted a consultation in 2009 in respect of the review of the Personal Data (Privacy) Ordinance (Cap. 486) ("the Ordinance"), the Office of the Privacy Commissioner for Personal Data ("PCPD") proposed that personal data available in the public domain should be exempted from Data Protection Principle 3 (i.e. personal data should only be used for the purposes for which it was collected or for a directly related purpose), but the Government considered the proposal not well justified and did not pursue the matter. In the investigation report released by PCPD in mid-August this year, PCPD alleged that a mobile phone application, which enabled users to search litigation and bankruptcy data in a database formed by consolidating data available in the public domain, had seriously invaded the privacy of the data subjects. Some members of the information technology ("IT") industry have relayed to me that it is necessary to review the legislation on the use of data available in the public domain, as it has failed to keep up with technological developments. Meanwhile, the Government has developed 62 mobile applications to provide services to the public, and those applications also involve access to users’ data. In this connection, will the Government inform this Council:
(a) whether it knows if PCPD has consulted the personnel and bodies of the IT industry in formulating "the Guidance on the Use of Personal Data Obtained from the Public Domain" to ensure that the Guidance is practicable; if PCPD has, of the details; if not, the reasons for that; (b) given that making public sector information ("PSI") widely available and providing PSI for free re-use to facilitate the development of online services and mobile applications have been proposed in the public consultation document on 2014 Digital 21 Strategy, whether the authorities have discussed with PCPD about the formulation of guidelines to help the IT industry to avoid invading personal privacy when using PSI; if they have, of the details; if not, the reasons for that; (c) given the privacy legislation in some countries (such as Singapore and New Zealand) has made certain exemptions for the use of data available in the public domain, whether the authorities will review (i) the definition of "data available in the public domain", (ii) the scope of exemptions from the data protection principles, and (iii) the (explicit or implicit) purposes of making data publicly available when the Ordinance came into effect in 1996; if they will, of the details; if not, the reasons for that; (d) whether it knows if PCPD has conducted sample checks on the ways that personal data are used by the mobile applications developed by government departments; and if PCPD has requested various government departments (and their agents) to develop the applications concerned in accordance with "Personal data privacy protection: what mobile apps developers and their clients should know"; if PCPD has, of the details; if not, the reasons for that; and whether the Government has assessed the potential risks posed by its mobile applications to the privacy of users and implemented corresponding measures; if it has, of the details; if not, the reasons for that; and (e) whether mobile applications developed by various government departments (and their agents) have accessed users’ data (including unique phone identifier, location data, account information for accessing the applications, the applications running on the mobile phone, camera/microphone function of mobile phones, SMS/MMS messages, call logs, address book, calendar details, etc.), with a breakdown of the types of personal data accessed by the name of the mobile application; whether various government departments (and their agents) have prepared privacy policy statements that are easy to find and understand, so that when users download the applications, clear explanations are given as to whether the data on the users’ phones will be accessed by the applications and the purposes thereof, the types of data to be accessed and the ways that such data will be accessed; how the departments concerned (and their agents) handle the data which are personally identifiable and those which are not?
*11. Hon Christopher CHUNG to ask: (Translation)
Regarding the demolition of structures containing asbestos materials, will the Government inform this Council:
(a) whether it knows the number of buildings with structures containing asbestos materials throughout the territory at present, with a breakdown by the 18 District Council districts; (b) whether it has set a timetable for demolishing structures containing asbestos materials, and when all such structures are expected to be demolished; (c) of the number of owners who have applied for subsidies under assistance schemes such as the Integrated Building Maintenance Assistance Scheme, the Building Maintenance Grant Scheme for Elderly Owners or the Comprehensive Building Safety Improvement Loan Scheme since 2011 for carrying out works which involved demolishing structures containing asbestos materials; (d) given the legal requirement that a registered asbestos consultant or a registered asbestos contractor must be engaged to carry out works involving asbestos-containing materials, of the respective numbers of such consultants and contractors in Hong Kong at present; whether it has assessed if the numbers are sufficient; (e) of the number of persons prosecuted for breaching the legal requirement stated in (d) in the past five years, as well as the penalties imposed in general on persons convicted by the courts; (f) of the number of cases in which prosecution was instituted against illegal disposal of asbestos waste in the past five years, as well as the penalties imposed in general on persons convicted by the courts; the number of asbestos contractors who were prosecuted in such cases; and (g) as some members of the construction industry have pointed out that all works involving asbestos-containing materials are presently regulated by the Air Pollution Control Ordinance (Cap. 311), which is enforced by the Environmental Protection Department, but these works also involve issues such as labour safety and works supervision, whether the authorities have assessed if the regulation of such works is comprehensive at present in the absence of co-ordination and supervision by the Labour Department and the Buildings Department; whether the Government has any plan to review and improve the aforesaid ordinance in the light of the issues in question, so as to enhance the safety of such works?
*12. Hon WONG Yuk-man to ask: (Translation)
Quite a number of elderly persons have complained to me that the waiting time for cataract surgeries in public hospitals is exceedingly long, and that some patients who were registered in 2008 are still waiting for the surgeries. In this connection, will the Government inform this Council:
(a) whether it will ask the Hospital Authority ("HA") to allocate additional resources for the Cataract Surgeries Programme to increase the number of subvented places each year, with a view to shortening the waiting time for cataract surgeries in public hospitals; if it will, of the details; if not, the reasons for that; and (b) given that HA has set up cataract centres in Hong Kong West Cluster and Kowloon East Cluster respectively, resulting in a drastic reduction of the waiting time for cataract surgeries in those two clusters, whether it knows if HA will implement similar initiatives in Kowloon West Cluster?
*13. Hon Alan LEONG to ask: (Translation)
In his reply to a question from a Member of this Council on 3 July this year, the Secretary for Labour and Welfare ("the Secretary") said that the Immigration Department ("ImmD") had all along been assessing employment visa applications from foreign domestic helpers ("FDHs") in a serious manner. He also said that if the applicant was suspected to have any adverse records or breaches, including abuse of the employment arrangement for FDHs, ImmD would consider refusing the application based on individual circumstances. ImmD had already strengthened the assessment of suspected abuse of contract termination arrangement by FDHs, such as examining the frequency and reasons of contract termination. Future applications for employment visa would be refused if the abuse was substantiated. Also, in his reply to a question on intermediaries for FDHs ("intermediaries") on 4 July last year, the Secretary reassured Members that the Labour Department would step up surprise inspections to the intermediaries concerned and investigate if they had breached the Employment Ordinance (Cap. 57) and Employment Agency Regulations (Cap. 57 sub. leg. A). In connection with ImmD’s assessment of FDHs’ employment visa applications and regulation of intermediaries, will the Government inform this Council:
(a) of the number of FDHs’ employment visa applications rejected by ImmD in each of the past five years, together with a breakdown by reason (e.g. involving "adverse records", "breaches" or "abuse of the employment arrangement for FDHs"); (b) of the respective numbers of FDHs’ employment visa applications received by ImmD in each of the past five years; and among such applications, of the number of applications involving FDHs who had prematurely terminated their employment contracts with their former employers for (a) one to three times and (b) four times or more, and the numbers of applications rejected (as set out in the table below); 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013
(up to 30 September)Number of employment visa applications from FDHs (a) those involving FDHs who had prematurely terminated their employment contracts with their former employers for one to three times: (i) number of applications made (ii) number of applications rejected (b) those involving FDHs who had prematurely terminated their employment contracts with their former employers for four times or more: (i) number of applications made (ii) number of applications rejected (c) of the number of FDHs currently working in Hong Kong who had prematurely terminated their employment contracts with their former employers, together with a breakdown by the frequency of premature contract termination (as set out in the table below); Number of FDHs Currently working in Hong Kong and had prematurely terminated contracts with their previous employers Frequency of premature contract termination within 12 months (i) once (ii) twice (iii) thrice (iv) four times (v) five times or more (d) as it has been reported that at present, quite a number of FDHs do not return to their places of domicile after premature termination of employment contracts with their employers, but instead they go to the neighbouring regions (e.g. Macao) for a brief stay and then re-enter Hong Kong, whether the Government has explored requiring FDHs previously worked in Hong Kong who have now applied for employment visas again to provide proof of entry to their places of domicile when processing their applications; if it has, of the details; if not, the reasons for that; (e) of the respective numbers of cases in which the authorities refused to issue a licence to, or renew the licence of, as well as revoked the licence of, an intermediary pursuant to section 53 of the Employment Ordinance, in each of the past five years, together with a breakdown by the reason for the decision; and (f) of the number of complaints received by the authorities in each of the past five years which involved intermediaries seeking from FDHs rewards other than the prescribed commission, thus constituting an alleged breach of section 57 of the Employment Ordinance, and the number of convictions among the relevant cases?
*14. Hon CHAN Hak-kan to ask: (Translation)
Some local organizations providing services of guide dogs have conveyed to me that while the use of guide dogs by the visually impaired is very common in foreign countries, only a handful of trained guide dogs are in service in Hong Kong at present even though it is estimated that as many as 400 visually impaired persons are fit to use guide dogs. Moreover, there is a lack of qualified professional guide dog trainers in Hong Kong. In addition, under the existing legislation, guide dogs under training ("guide dog puppies") are not allowed to enter indoor public venues or take any means of public transport, and therefore they are unable to receive comprehensive localized training. In this connection, will the Government inform this Council:
(a) whether the authorities will consider establishing a registration system for guide dogs (for example, by adding fields containing data on guide dogs/guide dog puppies to the chips implanted in dogs), compiling a central register of qualified guide dogs/guide dog puppies, and setting up a licensing and assessment system for guide dog trainers and users; if they will, of the implementation schedule; if not, the reasons for that; (b) given the comment that as the households of public rental housing ("PRH") estates, Home Ownership Scheme ("HOS") courts and some private housing estates are not allowed to keep dogs, guide dog puppies may not be kept in the flats of such estates/courts, thus making them difficult to fully adapt to the living environment of Hong Kong in future, whether the authorities will consider relaxing the relevant stipulations to allow households of PRH estates and HOS courts to keep guide dog puppies; whether the authorities will promote the inclusion of a clause allowing households to keep guide dog puppies in the deeds of mutual covenant of private buildings; (c) given the stipulation in the Disability Discrimination Ordinance (Cap. 487) that it is unlawful for a person to discriminate against another person with a disability by refusing to allow that other person access to, or the use of, any premises that the public may enter or use, or by refusing to allow that other person the use of any facilities in such premises, whether the authorities will consider extending the relevant provisions to cover people with guide dog puppies in company, in order to facilitate the provision of localized training to guide dog puppies; whether the authorities will step up publicity and public education on the relevant provisions; (d) given that some guide dog service providers plan to introduce more guide dogs into service but currently there is no specialized dog training centre in Hong Kong, whether the authorities will consider allocating land free of charge to subsidize such service providers for the construction of a dog training centre; if so, of the details; if not, the reasons for that; and (e) whether it has looked into the concrete results of the "pilot training scheme for guide dog users"; whether it has drawn experience from the scheme; whether the Government will provide more support to those organizations implementing the scheme, and support the continuous and full-fledged implementation of the scheme, with a view to enabling more visually impaired persons in need to benefit from the scheme?
*15. Dr Hon KWOK Ka-ki to ask: (Translation)
The Chief Executive indicated in his Policy Address this year that the Housing Department ("HD") would step up its efforts to combat the abuse of public rental housing ("PRH") resources. Together with the PRH units surrendered voluntarily by tenants, on average a net number of about 7 000 units would be recovered every year. With another 15 000 or so new units completed, there would be more than 22 000 PRH units available for allocation a year. However, it was reported by the media in December last year that only 300-odd units of Lung Tin Estate, which had a total of 552 units, had been allocated since the first occupation 30 years ago, representing a vacancy rate as high as 40%. In view of this, the Government announced in February this year that the units in Tin Lee House of Lung Tin Estate would be converted into Home Ownership Scheme ("HOS") flats to be put up for sale. It has also been reported that quite a number of the single-person units in Tin Yan Estate, Tin Shui Wai have been left vacant for a long time due to poor response because of their cramped toilets, and that there are PRH applicants who have been offered PRH units thrice in a row but have yet to find units in the districts of their preference. In this connection, will the Government inform this Council:
(a) in respect of the units in each of the PRH districts (i.e. urban areas, extended urban areas, the New Territories and Islands) in each of the past five years, of (i) the number of PRH applicants who had opted for allocation of them, (ii) their average vacancy rate and (iii) the number of vacant one-person units among them (set out in the table below); Year Urban areas Extended urban areas New Territories Islands 2008 Number of applications Average vacancy rate Number of vacant one-person units 2009 Number of applications Average vacancy rate Number of vacant one-person units 2010 Number of applications Average vacancy rate Number of vacant one-person units 2011 Number of applications Average vacancy rate Number of vacant one-person units 2012 Number of applications Average vacancy rate Number of vacant one-person units (b) of the number of PRH applicants in the past five years who had been offered PRH units for the first time within three years after submission of applications; among them, the number of applicants who had refused the first offer of PRH units, and their main reasons for refusal; the number of applicants who had moved into PRH units within three years after submission of applications (set out in the table below); Year Number of PRH applicants offered PRH units for the first time refusing the first offer moving into PRH units 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 (c) of the number of PRH applicants who had accepted the allocation of one-person PRH units in the past five years, broken down by the age group to which the applicants belonged (set out in the table below); Year Number of PRH applicants aged 18 to 39 aged 40 to 64 aged 65 or above 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 (d) of the current number of applicants on the PRH Waiting List; among them, the number of applicants for one-person units; (e) of the number of cases of voluntary surrender of units by PRH tenants in each of the past five years; (f) of the projected number of new PRH units in each of the years from 2013 to 2017 and, among them, the number of one-person units, broken down by the four PRH districts (set out in the table below); and Year Number of new PRH units Urban areas Extended urban areas New Territories Islands One-person units Other units One-person units Other units One-person units Other units One-person units Other units 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 (g) of the details of HD’s plan in the coming five years to convert PRH units, apart from those in Tin Lee House of Lung Tin Estate, into HOS flats to be put up for sale and the number of units involved; the removal arrangements for the tenants of the housing estate concerned (including whether HD will arrange for in-situ rehousing and offer rent concessions)?
*16. Dr Hon Kenneth CHAN to ask: (Translation)
It has been reported in the media that developers have planned large-scale residential developments in the "enclaves" (i.e. lands adjacent to but not included in the country park) in Hoi Ha, Sai Kung. Some members of the public have relayed to me that should there be no proper planning by the Government regarding the land use of enclaves and major development projects be allowed on such land, the environment of country parks would be adversely affected. In this connection, will the Government inform this Council:
(a) of the current uses and statutory land uses of various enclaves, and whether they are privately owned and are involved in development projects; (b) of the latest planning for various enclaves (including whether they are covered by any statutory plan and the types of such plans); (c) whether it will draw up a schedule to expeditiously include enclaves in statutory plans and conduct public consultation on the use of such enclaves; if it will, of the details; if not, the reasons for that; (d) whether it will step up inspection of enclaves to ensure their actual uses in compliance with the stipulations in land leases and to eradicate acts of "destroy first and build later"; if it will, of the details; if not, the reasons for that; and (e) as some members of the public have pointed out that residential developments in enclaves will affect the environment of the adjacent country parks, whether the Government will conduct environment impact assessments and traffic impact assessments in respect of such development proposals; if it will, of the details; if not, the reasons for that?
*17. Dr Hon LAM Tai-fai to ask: (Translation)
While the Chief Executive ("CE") has indicated that tackling the housing problem is a top priority of the current-term Government, quite a number of the members of the public have relayed to me that the community has diverse views on whether the sites where country parks, golf courses and industrial buildings are situated as well as the former site of the Hong Kong Institute of Vocational Education (Lee Wai Lee) in Kowloon Tong can be used for housing development, and has queried the sources of land. In this connection, will the Government inform this Council:
(a) whether it has examined the latest situation of sites in Hong Kong available for development, and the floor areas of different types of residential units that can be built on the relevant sites; if it has, of the details, together with a breakdown set out in the table below; if not, the reasons for that; Sites Area
(hectares)Location Available for public rental housing development and floor area to be provided
(square feet)Available for Home Ownership Scheme development and floor area to be provided
(square feet)Available for private housing development and floor area to be provided
(square feet)Country parks Brownfield sites (i) Barren land (ii) Abandoned recovery parks (iii) Abandoned container yards Agricultural land Small House sites Golf courses CE's Fanling Lodge Quarry sites (b) of the number of sites of government industrial buildings in Hong Kong that can be converted for residential housing development, together with details on their locations and areas; (c) as it is learnt that a total of about 25 000 submissions were received by the Town Planning Board during the consultation for the rezoning of the former campus of the Hong Kong Institute of Vocational Education (Lee Wai Lee) in Kowloon Tong, with over 99% of the submissions against the rezoning of the site to residential use, whether the authorities will stick to the proposed planned use of the site; if so, of the details; if not, the reasons for that; (d) given that CE stated in the 2013 Policy Address that the Government has secured land for the development of about 75 000 new public rental housing ("PRH") flats within the five years starting from 2012-2013 and about 17 000 new Home Ownership Scheme ("HOS") flats within the four years starting from 2016-2017, whether the authorities have set out respectively the annual supply of PRH and HOS flats, distribution of the flats in various districts as well as the respective numbers of persons to be benefited during the two aforesaid periods; if so, of the details set out in a table; if not, the reasons for that; (e) whether it will consider relaxing the number of storeys and the area of each floor of New Territories Small Houses for better utilization of land resources; if it will, of the details; if not, the reasons for that; (f) as the results of a survey commissioned by the Long Term Housing Strategy Steering Committee have estimated that there are at present 66 900 sub-divided units ("SDUs") in the territory, but SDUs in industrial buildings have been excluded, whether the authorities have compiled statistics on the number of SDUs in industrial buildings to assess the demand on land for housing; if so, of the details; if not, the reasons for that; and (g) given that quite a number of members of the public have proposed to re-designate parts of country parks and the Hong Kong Golf Club in Fanling for housing development purpose, whether the authorities have embarked on any relevant assessment; if they have, of the time when they embarked on the assessment, as well as the estimated date of completion and the details of the assessment; if they have not, the reasons for that?
*18. Dr Hon Helena WONG to ask: (Translation)
As cases of animals being cruelly treated have occurred time and again in recent years, various animal welfare concern groups are urging the Police to step up actions to combat such crimes. In this connection, will the Government inform this Council:
(a) whether the Hong Kong Police College will provide any training course to teach police officers the skills of investigating cases of cruel treatment of animals; if so, of the details; if not, the reasons for that; and (b) whether it will make reference to the composition of the existing part-time special teams (such as the Police Negotiation Cadre, the Force Search Unit, the Explosive Ordnance Disposal Team, etc.) within the Police and set up an Animal Police Team comprising interested voluntary police officers; if so; of the details; if not, the reasons for that?
*19. Dr Hon LAU Wong-fat to ask: (Translation)
It has been learnt that when contractors of the Government carry out extension or maintenance works of expressways, plastic water barriers are often used to divide the lanes, and a large quantity of water has to be consumed to fill up those water barriers. In this connection, will the Government inform this Council whether it has required such works contractors to:
(a) handle the water barriers properly upon completion of the works, and not to dispose of them casually or send them to landfills for disposal; (b) hand over damaged water barriers to recyclers for recovery and recycling; and (c) use only water sources other than potable water (such as river water) to fill the water barriers?
*20. Hon TAM Yiu-chung to ask: (Translation)
According to the prevailing policy, the remains of civil servants who have died on duty may be buried in the earth burial spaces in Gallant Garden ("the Garden"). If they have been posthumously awarded a bravery medal by the Chief Executive, they are considered as meeting the requirement of having died on duty due to an "exceptional act of bravery" and thus eligible for permanent earth burial there; otherwise, their remains have to be exhumed six years after burial and be re-interred in the Garden’s permanent urn spaces or in columbarium niches after cremation. Recently, representatives from the staff of a number of disciplined forces have relayed to me that the aforesaid six-year exhumation policy not only shows disrespect for the deceased but also revives the painful memories of the family members of the deceased, thereby inflicting on them for the second time the traumatic experience. While these representatives have repeatedly requested the Civil Service Bureau to change the relevant policy to allow all civil servants who died on duty to be buried permanently in the earth burial spaces in the Garden, the Bureau has all along refused to do so on grounds of limited earth burial spaces available in the Garden and the need to adhere to the principle of fairness. In this connection, will the Government inform this Council:
(a) of the existing numbers of (i) earth burial spaces, (ii) permanent urn spaces and (iii) columbarium niches provided in the Garden and the respective utilization rates of such spaces; (b) whether the authorities have earmarked any land adjacent to the Garden for its future extension; if so, of the site area of the land earmarked, and the respective numbers of the three types of burial spaces mentioned in (a) to be provided there, and the number of earth burial spaces that can be provided if the said piece of land is exclusively used for earth burial; if no land has been earmarked, of the reasons for that; (c) whether the authorities have assessed, if all civil servants who died on duty are allowed to be buried permanently in the earth burial spaces in the Garden, the estimated (i) number of years within which the existing earth burial spaces in the Garden will be fully occupied, and (ii) size of the additional land to be provided in the coming three decades; and (d) whether the authorities will reconsider changing the existing policy to allow all civil servants who died on duty to be permanently buried in the earth burial spaces in the Garden; if so, of the details; if not, the reasons for that?
*21. Hon Gary FAN to ask: (Translation)
In the light of the latest requirements in the Protocol adopted by the International Maritime Organization in 1996 ("the Protocol"), the Government submitted to this Council a bill in 2005 which proposed certain amendments to the relevant ordinance in Hong Kong, including raising the limits of liability in respect of loss of life. The Merchant Shipping (Limitation of Shipowners Liability) (Amendment) Ordinance 2005 ("the Ordinance") was enacted by this Council in March 2005, but the Ordinance has yet to come into operation. It is learnt that the SAR Government must complete the procedures for formal notification of Hong Kong’s joining the Protocol through the Central People’s Government ("CPG") for implementation of the Ordinance. It has been reported that as the Ordinance has yet to come into operation, the amounts of compensation receivable by the families of the victims of the vessel collision accident in the water near Lamma Island happened on 1 October last year ("maritime disaster off Lamma Island") may be affected. In this connection, will the Government inform this Council:
(a) why the Government has not yet completed the legal procedures concerned after the Ordinance has been enacted for eight years, and of the government department(s) responsible; the detailed timetable the Government currently has for implementing the Ordinance; whether the Government has requested CPG to provide assistance in completing the procedures for formal notification of joining the Protocol; if so, when it made the request, and set out in detail the chronology of the various tasks involved, as well as the respective departments and ranks of officers in Hong Kong and the Mainland that are responsible for the tasks (set out in the table below); Date Task involved Department and rank of officer in Hong Kong Department and rank of officer on the Mainland (b) as the amounts of claims made against the owners of the vessels involved and the amounts of compensation receivable by the families of the victims of the maritime disaster off Lamma Island may be affected by the fact that the Ordinance has yet to come into operation, whether the Government will consider making compensations to the families of the victims in this respect; if not, of the reasons for that; (c) whether the Government and CPG have put in place a mechanism for dealing with Hong Kong’s legal matters involving foreign affairs; if so, of the details; and (d) apart from the aforesaid Ordinance, of the number of the existing ordinances which have been enacted by the Legislative Council but have yet to take effect, and set out respectively the titles of such ordinances, the reasons for their not having come into operation, the expected commencement dates as well as the government departments responsible?
*22. Hon Claudia MO to ask: (Translation)
Earlier on, the Government sought funding approval from this Council to inject $100 million into the Disaster Relief Fund ("the Fund") for providing emergency relief to earthquake victims in Sichuan Province on the Mainland. However, some members of the public have queried the allocation of funds to the mainland authorities and they worry that the funds will ultimately be misappropriated for improper uses, or will even go into the pockets of corrupt officials. In this connection, will the Government inform this Council:
(a) of the latest situation regarding the usage of the aforesaid funds of $100 million; among such funds, the amounts allocated to non-governmental organizations ("NGOs") and government authorities outside Hong Kong as well as their uses respectively; whether the authorities have any concrete plan to regularly monitor the actual uses of the funds and their effectiveness; (b) given that NGOs allocated with funds are required to submit evaluation reports and audited accounts within six months after completion of the disaster relief programmes, but government authorities outside Hong Kong allocated with funds are not required to submit evaluation reports within a specific period of time, of the measures put in place by the authorities to ensure that the funds allocated to government authorities outside Hong Kong are properly spent; (c) of the details of the allocations made by the Government through the Fund to places outside Hong Kong in each of the past five years (set out in the table below); and Year Country or region receiving funds Name of government authorities or NGOs receiving funds Amount of funds allocated Designated uses of funds Outcome of evaluation on effectiveness 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 (d) with respect to NGOs or government authorities outside Hong Kong found to have used the funds improperly, whether the authorities have put in place mechanisms to immediately terminate the allocation of funds to them and recover the allocated funds; if so, of the details; if not, the reasons for that; whether the authorities will blacklist such government authorities and NGOs and reject their future applications for funds?
* For written reply
III. Motion
Proposed resolution under the Pharmacy and Poisons Ordinance
Secretary for Food and Health to move the following motion:
Resolved that the following Regulations, made by the Pharmacy and Poisons Board on 23 September 2013, be approved -
| (a) | the Pharmacy and Poisons (Amendment) (No. 5) Regulation 2013; and
|
| (b) | the Poisons List (Amendment) (No. 5) Regulation 2013.
|
|
(The two Regulations are in Appendices I and II and were also issued
on 27 September 2013 under LC Paper No. CB(3) 14/13-14) | |