A 13/14-26
1. | No. 100 | - | Research Endowment Fund Financial statements for the year ended 31 August 2013 |
(to be presented by Secretary for Education)
| |||
2. | No. 101 | - | The Government Minute in response to the Report of the Public Accounts Committee No. 61 of February 2014 |
(to be presented by the Chief Secretary for Administration, who will address the Council)
| |||
3. | Report No. 18/13-14 of the House Committee on Consideration of Subsidiary Legislation and Other Instruments | ||
(to be presented by Hon Andrew LEUNG, Chairman of the House Committee)
|
(1) | whether there is currently other legislation, apart from the Trade Descriptions Ordinance (Cap. 362), requiring manufacturers of pet feed and dry pet food (including "complementary and complete feed" and "feed materials") to label the following on the packaging of their products: (i) ingredient table, (ii) best-before date, (iii) place of origin, (iv) recommended daily quantity of feed and (v) age range of pets for which the product is suitable; if so, of the details, and the date on which the relevant legislation was last amended; if not, the reasons for that; whether it will consider amending the legislation to introduce such requirements;
|
(2) | whether there are currently relevant legislation or standards regulating the food safety of pet feed and dry pet food (including ceilings on the contents of harmful substances); if so, of the details, and the date on which such legislation or standards were last updated; if not, the reasons for that; whether it will consider amending the relevant legislation to impose such regulation;
|
(3) | given that some loose-pack pet food sold in the market do not have their composition and safety information marked on the packaging, whether the authorities have put in place any mechanism for regulating the package descriptions of loose-pack pet food; if so, of the details; if not, the reasons for that;
|
(4) | given that the Secretary for Food and Health, in reply to a written question from a Member of this Council on 28 March 2012, indicated that the Agriculture, Fisheries and Conservation Department would take the initiative to seek information on the quality of pet food products from the importers or distributors concerned where necessary, whether any government department was responsible in the past three years for (i) collecting overseas and local information regarding the safety of pet food, (ii) conducting sampling tests on the safety levels of pet food sold in the market, and (iii) verifying the accuracy of the package descriptions of such food as well as taking the necessary follow-up actions; if so, of the details; if not, the reasons for that;
|
(5) | whether the authorities or CC received any complaint about pet food in the past two years; if so, of the number of such complaints; and
|
(6) | whether it has considered setting up a channel for disseminating information (such as a reporting mechanism in respect of pet food incidents) so that members of the public can be expeditiously informed of the pet food which may have problems and they may stop feeding their pets with such food; if so, of the details; if not, the reasons for that? |
(1) | whether it has assessed if it is suitable for the linkage system to be constructed by MTRCL and if MTRCL has sufficient manpower and resources to ensure that the system can be commissioned in 2023 as scheduled; if the assessment outcome is that the system cannot be commissioned on schedule, of the expected duration of such delay;
|
(2) | given the surging prices of construction materials in recent years, coupled with the risk of project delay, whether it has assessed if the costs of the proposed elevated monorail will be substantially higher than the original estimates; if the assessment outcome is in the affirmative, of the anticipated increase in the costs; and
|
(3) | given that the Hong Kong Tramways Limited has proposed that modern tramways is the most suitable option for the linkage system (and it has been reported that according to the latest proposal put forward by the company, the option will include the construction of an additional transportation link between Kwun Tong and the Cruise Terminal), and indicated that the system can be commissioned as early as in 2018 while the fare for a single journey will need to be set at merely HK$3 for attaining a breakeven, whether the Government will consider and examine afresh the option put forward by the company, with a view to avoiding the dominance of MTRCL in rail transport and over-reliance upon MTRCL for the construction and operation of mass transit systems? |
(1) | whether it has requested TWGHs to conduct a review of the causes of the drastic decrease in the number of applicants for the stalls in Tin Sau Bazaar; if TWGHs has conducted such a review, of the outcome;
|
(2) | of the process by which the Lands Department leased out the site of Tin Sau Bazaar to TWGHs under a five-year short-term tenancy, including whether it has conducted an open tender; if it has, of the details; if not, the policy basis for not conducting an open tender;
|
(3) | whether it has monitored the performance of TWGHs in managing Tin Sau Bazaar; if it has, of the details; if not, the reasons for that; whether it will, in view of the management performance of TWGHs, consider early resumption of the site of Tin Sau Bazaar and re-tendering the site for lease to other non-governmental organizations for operating a bazaar; if it will, of the details; if not, the reasons for that;
|
(4) | given that there are currently 30 stalls which are operated by organizations and four stalls by TWGHs on its own in Tin Sau Bazaar, whether it has assessed if such an arrangement is contrary to the original intention of setting up Tin Sau Bazaar;
|
(5) | whether it will discuss with TWGHs the comprehensive improvement to the facilities of Tin Sau Bazaar, including putting up more directional signs, further improving the power supply and surface drainage facilities, considering afresh the construction of a canopy and introducing a central air-conditioning system; if it will, of the details; if not, the reasons for that;
|
(6) | whether it will request TWGHs to revise the criteria for selecting the stall operators of Tin Sau Bazaar, such as adding the criteria of introducing a greater variety of merchandise, and giving priority to young applicants to provide them with an avenue to start their own business, etc.; if it will, of the details; if not, the reasons for that;
|
(7) | whether it will request TWGHs to extend the business hours of Tin Sau Bazaar or to operate it overnight as well as introduce cooked food stalls; if it will, of the details; if not, the reasons for that;
|
(8) | whether it has requested TWGHs to review the effectiveness of its publicity efforts on Tin Sau Bazaar; if TWGHs have conducted such a review, of the outcome; if the Government has not requested TWGHs to do so, the reasons for that; and whether it will request TWGHs to step up its efforts in this respect; if it will, of the details, if not, the reasons for that;
|
(9) | whether it has compiled statistics on the number of stall operators among the first batch of stall operators of Tin Sau Bazaar, who used to be hawkers carrying out hawking activities in the Morning Bazaar of Tin Shui Wai; whether such stall operators have renewed their tenancies upon the expiry of their one-year tenancy agreements; of the changes in the number of hawkers carrying out hawking activities in the Morning Bazaar since the operation of Tin Sau Bazaar;
|
(10) | whether it will consider setting up similar bazaars in other districts by drawing on the experience in the operation of Tin Sau Bazaar; and
|
(11) | whether it will, in the long run, consider setting up a public market in Tin Shui Wai so as to solve the existing problems of Tin Sau Bazaar in one go, including poor environment, insufficient patronage and merchandise failing to meet the needs of the residents in the district; if it will not, of the reasons for that? |
(1) | whether AFCD had fully consulted CMPB before making the decision of not incorporating the six aforesaid enclaves into country parks; if it had, of the consultation process; if not, the reasons for that;
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
(2) | whether it has all along been the practice of AFCD to consult CMPB only on the enclaves which it considers suitable for incorporation into country parks; whether AFCD has unilaterally revised the procedure for consulting CMPB; if it has, when and why the procedure was revised; if not, whether it will consider consulting CMPB on the incorporation into country parks or otherwise of all enclaves;
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
(3) | as CMPB endorsed a set of revised principles and criteria for designating country parks in May 2011, whether AFCD will draw up a timetable for expeditious assessments, based on such principles and criteria, of the suitability of all enclaves for incorporation into country parks; if it will, of the specific timetable; if not, the reasons for that;
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
(4) | of AFCD's assessment results of the six aforesaid enclaves in terms of their (i) conservation value, (ii) landscape and aesthetic value and (iii) recreational development potential, as well as (iv) the reasons for not incorporating such lands into country parks (set out in the table below); and
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
(5) | whether AFCD will make public all the discussion papers regarding enclaves submitted to CMPB in the past three years, so as to let the public and this Council understand the criteria adopted by AFCD for assessing whether the relevant enclaves should be incorporated into country parks; if it will not, of the reasons for that? |
(1) | whether it has assessed if the substantial increase in the number of STRs received last year as compared with that of the preceding year was a result of more rampant money laundering activities or that of increased public awareness of the relevant legislation; if the assessment outcome is the former, of the specific measures put in place by the authorities to step up law enforcement;
|
(2) | given that the Shanghai-Hong Kong Stock Connect, which allows the mainland and Hong Kong investors to trade through local securities companies eligible stocks listed on the stock exchange of the other side, will be implemented in six months, whether the authorities have assessed if the settlement method of such transactions will encourage cross-boundary money laundering activities; if the assessment outcome is in the affirmative, of the measures put in place by the authorities to plug any loophole and reduce the risks involved; if the assessment outcome is in the negative, the justifications for that;
|
(3) | as I have learnt that quite a number of law enforcement officers previously responsible for combating money laundering activities have changed jobs to work in private financial institutions, whether the authorities have any plan to step up training and recruitment of such talents, so as to ensure effective combat of the ever-changing and increasingly rampant money laundering activities; if they have, of the details; if not, the reasons for that; and
|
(4) | given that the Joint Financial Intelligence Unit ("JFIU"), formed by officers from the Hong Kong Police Force and the Customs and Excise Department, is currently responsible for managing STR in relation to money laundering and terrorists' financing activities, whether the authorities have any plan to re-organize JFIU into an independent regulatory body, so as to enhance its functions and independence, thereby stepping up the efforts in combating the related illegal activities? |
(1) | whether the authorities have conducted any comprehensive and in-depth assessment on the Shanghai-Hong Kong Stock Connect to be launched six months later, including the possible positive and adverse impacts that may arise from the relevant co-operation model; if so, of the assessment outcome; and
|
(2) | how the authorities will ensure that no adverse impact will be brought about by the Shanghai-Hong Kong Stock Connect to the existing regulatory system and investor protection measures in Hong Kong, including how the authorities will tackle problems of cross-boundary regulation so arise; in discussing with the stock exchanges of Shanghai and Hong Kong on matters relating to the "connectivity mechanism", how the authorities will ensure that the Shanghai-Hong Kong Stock Connect can achieve the greatest effect in promoting the financial and economic development of both places, rather than merely benefitting the development of the relevant stock exchanges themselves; whether the authorities or the Hong Kong Exchanges and Clearing Limited have currently formulated any plan or timetable for further extension of the relevant programme, such as co-operation with the Shenzhen Stock Exchange under a model similar to the "connectivity mechanism"? |
(1) | whether it has assessed the numbers, and their rates of increase, of passenger arrivals and departures through the Terminal upon the commissioning of the second berth of the Terminal this year; if it has, of the assessment results;
|
(2) | whether the authorities will organize mega events targeting mainly at Hong Kong people at the Cruise Terminal Building or its rooftop garden so as to increase the visitor flow of the Terminal; if they will, of the details of such events;
|
(3) | of the respective numbers of hotels in Wong Tai Sin ("WTS") and Kwun Tong ("KT") which are currently (i) in operation, (ii) under construction and (iii) at the planning stage with planning applications submitted to the Town Planning Board, as well as the respective total numbers of hotel rooms being provided/to be provided in these hotels;
|
(4) | whether it has assessed the impacts of the tourists brought about by the Terminal on the traffic-bearing capacity, coach parking spaces, shop rentals and livelihood-related consumption activities, etc. in WTS and KT; if it has, of the assessment results; if not, the reasons for that; and
|
(5) | as it has been reported that WTS and KT are districts with relatively high concentration of the poor and the elderly, of the measures put in place by the authorities to ensure that the development of KE into a tourism and core commercial district will not affect the consumption activities and daily lives of local residents as well as the community services rendered to them? |
(1) | whether the operating licences granted by the authorities to public transport operators (including franchised bus companies) require the operators to provide certain channels for members of the public to contact them; if so, of the details;
|
(2) | whether TD will urge various franchised bus companies to improve their channels for members of the public to contact them, including making public their email addresses on their web sites; and
|
(3) | of the government department(s) with which members of the public may lodge complaints when they are dissatisfied with the replies from public transport operators to the complaints about the operators' services (e.g. lost trips of vehicles or ferries); and the follow-up procedures of such department(s)? |
(1) | whether it knows the respective numbers, with a breakdown by the District Council ("DC") district in which the site concerned is located, of the Demand-led Scheme applications rejected by URA in respect of which:
| |
(i) | the sites concerned are smaller than 400 square metres;
| |
(ii) | the sites concerned are smaller than 300 square metres; and
| |
(iii) | the buildings concerned have been assessed as "not dilapidated, not varied or not poor" in the building condition surveys conducted by URA;
| |
(2) | whether it knows the justifications, apart from planning considerations, of URA for making "the site under application not being smaller than 400 square metres" a principle for consideration and an application requirement for the Demand-led Scheme;
| |
(3) | whether it has assessed the current number and distribution of the old buildings in Hong Kong that broadly meet the other application requirements for the Demand-led Scheme but the sites concerned are smaller than 400 square metres; if it has, of the findings, with a breakdown of the number by DC district and age of the buildings; if it has not, the reasons for that, and whether it will conduct such an assessment; regarding the buildings the sites of which are smaller than 400 square metres, of the other specific measures and arrangements to assist the relevant property owners in the redevelopment or maintenance of their buildings;
| |
(4) | whether it knows the mechanism of URA for conducting building condition surveys for the Demand-led Scheme applications; of the criteria and indicators adopted by URA for carrying out such surveys; of the specific and objective standards for grading the conditions of a building as (i) not dilapidated, (ii) varied, and (iii) poor; whether, prior to conducting assessments in each round of applications, URA adjusted the mechanism and criteria; if so, of the details; if not, the reasons for that;
| |
(5) | whether it knows if URA has assessed whether URA has adequate manpower and financial resources to handle Demand-led Scheme applications on an ongoing basis; if URA has, of the findings, and the corresponding measures and arrangements; if URA has not, the reasons for that, and whether URA will conduct such an assessment;
| |
(6) | whether it knows when a comprehensive review of the Demand-led Scheme will commence at the earliest, as well as the direction, scope, content and timeframe of the review; and
| |
(7) | whether it knows if URA will make appropriate adjustments to the basic framework for implementing the Demand-led Scheme; if URA will not, of the reasons for that, and how URA will address the rising aspirations among members of the public for redeveloping old buildings? |
(1) | whether the authorities have set any standard or target on the number of EPs that mainstream schools providing integrated education should have; if they have, of such a standard or target; if not, the reasons for that;
|
(2) | of the respective numbers of primary and secondary schools currently provided with the School-based Educational Psychology Service ("SBEPS") Grant by the Education Bureau;
|
(3) | of the respective total numbers of EPs currently employed by the Education Bureau and school sponsoring bodies to provide SBEPS to primary and secondary schools, as well as their ratios to schools and to students; of the average annual number of days of visits to schools by such EPs;
|
(4) | of the average time taken by school-based EPs and the Educational Psychology Service Section of the Education Bureau to conduct an assessment for SEN students (from receipt of a referral to completion of the assessment report);
|
(5) | of the numbers of places and graduates of educational psychology programmes in Hong Kong in each of the past five years;
|
(6) | of the current number of EP supervisors ("supervisors") and the average number of EPs supervised by each supervisor; of the specific duties and qualification requirements for supervisors, and the measures put in place by the authorities to monitor their work;
|
(7) | of the average annual expenditure per school on the services of supervisors and the percentage of such expenditure in the SBEPS Grant received per school; and
|
(8) | of the improvement measures put in place by the authorities to address the problems of (i) insufficient number of EPs, (ii) excessively short stationing time of EPs in schools and (iii) unduly long waiting time for EPs' services and time taken by them for the relevant assessments? |
2012 | 2013 | 2014
(projection) | 2017
(projection) | ||
(a) Inbound tourism | |||||
Retail trade | |||||
Accommodation services | |||||
Food and beverage services | |||||
Cross-boundary passenger transport services | |||||
Others | |||||
(b) Outbound tourism | |||||
Travel agency, reservation service and related activities | |||||
Cross-boundary passenger transport services |
(1) | whether staff members of HAD are required, after paying each visit to a local organization for implementing the District Administration Scheme, to record and report to their superiors on the content, effectiveness or any follow-up action of the visit; if they are not required to do so, how HAD monitors its staff in performing such duties, and how it gets to know the problems faced by local organizations (such as building management problems) and assists them in solving such problems;
|
(2) | given that the representatives of some OCs have relayed to me that most staff members of HAD lack expertise in building management and often fail to effectively assist OCs in dealing with building management matters, how HAD assesses the effectiveness of the support services provided by its officers to OCs; and
|
(3) | of the average number of staff members of HAD designated to handle requests for assistance concerning building management in each of the past five years; whether it has assessed the adequacy of resources allocated in this regard? |
(1) | the respective annual numbers of (i) applicants for, and (ii) those of them admitted to, subsidized Master of Philosophy and Doctor of Philosophy programmes run by each funded institution, with a breakdown by the places of domicile (i.e. Hong Kong, Mainland China and overseas countries) of the applicants; and
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
(2) | the respective numbers of local students graduated with first-class honours, second-class (upper division) honours or second-class (lower division) honours or holding other academic qualifications who (i) applied for, (ii) were admitted to, and (iii) were rejected by, the programmes mentioned in (1) each year, and set out a breakdown, by institution and academic discipline, in tables of the same format as the table below?
|
(1) | whether it has looked into the specific causes of the aforesaid incidents; whether it knows if MTRCL has conducted a review on how to prevent the recurrence of similar incidents; if such a review has been conducted, of the details; if not, the reasons for that;
|
(2) | as it has been reported that the computer systems of OCC, which is responsible for monitoring and controlling the operation of 10 MTR lines, are outdated, whether it knows if MTRCL has assessed whether there will be more failures of the computer systems as a result and the consequences thereof; if such an assessment has been made, of the outcome, when MTRCL will replace the whole system, and the relevant details; if such an assessment has not been made, the reasons for that;
|
(3) | of the cumulative total amount of fines paid by MTRCL since the implementation of the Service Performance Arrangement; the details of the mechanism under which the authorities monitor the return of the full amount of fines by MTRCL to passengers;
|
(4) | whether it knows the measures MTRCL should take, according to the procedures it formulated, in the event of a malfunction of the backup signalling system; of the number of malfunctions of the backup signalling system in the past five years;
|
(5) | whether it has assessed if MTRCL's recent increase in train frequency has accelerated the ageing of the data transmission components in the signalling system, and therefore caused the aforesaid malfunction of the signalling system; if such an assessment has been made, of the outcome; if not, the reasons for that;
|
(6) | whether it knows if MTRCL will review the existing procedures for procuring new models of trains and parts, maintenance and quality control; if MTRCL will do so, when such a review will be conducted, and of the details; if not, the reasons for that;
|
(7) | whether it knows the expenditure on maintaining various railway lines in each of the past five years; whether MTRCL will recruit more maintenance staff; if MTRCL will do so, of the details; if not, the reasons for that;
|
(8) | whether it will review the existing Fare Adjustment Mechanism to peg the fare adjustment rate with the level of railway services, so as to press MTRCL to endeavour to improve its services; if it will, when it will do so, and of the details; if not, the reasons for that;
|
(9) | whether it will urge MTRCL to expeditiously implement a system of deducting the remunerations of senior management personnel according to the frequency of railway incidents, with a view to pressing its management personnel to endeavour to improve management and service quality; if it will, when MTRCL will implement the system, and of the details; if not, the reasons for that;
|
(10) | whether it knows the existing division of responsibilities among the members of the Board of MTRCL;
|
(11) | whether it will require MTRCL to set up an independent committee to investigate the causes of the series of incidents which occurred recently, and make public the findings of the investigation; and
|
(12) | whether it has assessed the losses caused by frequent occurrence of railway service incidents to the community and economy of Hong Kong, and whether members of the public will have doubts about the safety, reliability and quality of railway services; if such an assessment has been made, of the outcome; if not, the reasons for that? |
(1) | of the following information concerning each of the existing derelict mines/mine caves in Hong Kong: the name and location, site area, type(s) of minerals extracted, organization(s) previously engaged in the mining operations, as well as when the operations started and ended; if such information is not available, of the reasons for that;
|
(2) | whether it knows which organizations/persons in Hong Kong have conducted feasibility studies on the revitalization of derelict mines/mine caves, and in respect of each of the mines/mine caves concerned, set out its name and location, the year in which the relevant study commenced and the completion date of the study, the organization/person that conducted the study, and whether the authorities took any follow-up action on the outcome of the study and the details;
|
(3) | whether the Antiquities Advisory Board has conducted any historic building assessment on the derelict mines/mine caves on its own initiative or upon request; if so, of the names of the mines/mine caves concerned, the years in which the relevant assessments were conducted and the outcome; if the Board has not conducted any assessment on derelict mines/mine caves on its own initiative, the reasons for that; whether the Board has plans to conduct historic building assessments on all derelict mines/mine caves; if so, of its work schedule; if not, the reasons for that;
|
(4) | whether the authorities have received any proposal on revitalization of derelict mines/mine caves to become tourist attractions; if so, of the organizations/persons putting forward such proposals, the years in which the proposals were made, and the reasons for the authorities' acceptance/rejection of the relevant proposals; and
|
(5) | whether the authorities will conduct a feasibility study on the revitalization of derelict mines/mine caves to become tourist attractions so as to make Hong Kong's tourist attractions more diversified, thereby attracting different types of tourists to visit Hong Kong; if so, of the government departments and relevant organizations responsible for the task; if not, the reasons for that? |
First Reading
Competition (Amendment) Bill 2014 | ||
Second Reading (Debate to be adjourned)
| ||
Competition (Amendment) Bill 2014 | : | Secretary for Commerce and Economic Development
|
Committee Stage and Third Reading
| ||
Appropriation Bill 2014 | : | The Financial Secretary
|
Amendments to heads of estimates in
Committee of the whole Council on the Appropriation Bill 2014 | ||
Hon Albert CHAN, Hon LEUNG Kwok-hung, Hon CHAN Chi-chuen, Hon Claudia MO, Hon WONG Yuk-man, Hon SIN Chung-kai, Hon James TO, Dr Hon Helena WONG, Hon Gary FAN, Hon WU Chi-wai, Hon LEE Cheuk-yan, Dr Hon Fernando CHEUNG, Hon CHEUNG Kwok-che and Hon Cyd HO to move the Committee stage amendments in the Appendix.
| ||
(These amendments were also issued on 17, 24 and 30 April 2014 under LC Paper Nos. CB(3)566/13-14, CB(3)573/13-14 and CB(3)602/13-14 respectively) | ||
(Debate and voting arrangements for Committee stage amendments to the Appropriation Bill 2014 (updated version issued on 5 May 2014 under LC Paper No. CB(3) 615/13-14(01))
| ||
Other Public Officers to attend the Committee stage | : | The Chief Secretary for Administration
The Secretary for Justice Secretary for Transport and Housing Secretary for Home Affairs Secretary for Labour and Welfare Secretary for Financial Services and the Treasury Secretary for Commerce and Economic Development Secretary for Constitutional and Mainland Affairs Secretary for Security Secretary for Education Secretary for the Civil Service Secretary for Food and Health Secretary for the Environment Secretary for Development Under Secretary for Home Affairs Under Secretary for the Environment Under Secretary for Transport and Housing Under Secretary for Security Under Secretary for Food and Health Under Secretary for Education Under Secretary for Constitutional and Mainland Affairs Under Secretary for Commerce and Economic Development Under Secretary for Financial Services and the Treasury Under Secretary for Development |