A 16/17-29
Legislative Council
Agenda
Wednesday 21 June 2017 at 11:00 am
I. Tabling of Papers
| Subsidiary Legislation / Instruments | L.N. No. | |
|---|---|---|
| 1. | Pension Benefits Ordinance (Established Offices) (Amendment) Order 2017 | 121/2017 |
| 2. | Rules of the High Court (Amendment) Rules 2017 | 122/2017 |
| 3. | Declaration of Increase in Pensions Notice 2017 | 123/2017 |
| 4. | Widows and Orphans Pension (Increase) Notice 2017 | 124/2017 |
Other Papers
| 1. | No. 104 | - | The 28th Report on the Work of the Advisory Committee on Post-service Employment of Civil Servants (1 January - 31 December 2016) |
| (to be presented by Secretary for the Civil Service)
| |||
| 2. | No. 105 | - | The Sir Murray MacLehose Trust Fund Trustee's Report, Financial Statements and Report of the Director of Audit for the period of 1 April 2015 to 31 March 2016 |
| (to be presented by Secretary for Home Affairs)
| |||
| 3. | Report No. 21/16-17 of the House Committee on Consideration of Subsidiary Legislation and Other Instruments | ||
| (to be presented by Hon Starry LEE, Chairman of the House Committee)
| |||
| 4. | Report of the Bills Committee on Inland Revenue (Amendment) (No. 2) Bill 2017 | ||
| (to be presented by Hon Kenneth LEUNG, Chairman of the Bills Committee) | |||
II. Questions
1. Hon KWONG Chun-yu to ask: (Translation)
It has been reported that several government departments have recently set up interdepartmental teams and invoked land lease conditions, the Places of Public Entertainment Ordinance and fire safety legislation to take vigorous enforcement actions against the cultural, arts and sports activities (e.g. performances staged by foreign bands) conducted in industrial building units. Quite a number of cultural, arts and sports groups have pointed out that such enforcement actions run contrary to the policy direction put forward earlier by the authorities that restrictions be appropriately relaxed to allow non-industrial uses in industrial buildings for better utilization of the existing spaces in industrial buildings, and have thus made industrial building users feel confused. In this connection, will the Government inform this Council:
(1) of the respective numbers of enforcement actions targeting industrial building units which were taken individually and jointly by various government departments in the past three years, together with a breakdown of the cases of irregularities by the irregularity and District Council district involved; among such cases of irregularities, the percentage of those in which cultural, arts and sports groups were involved; (2) as the authorities have stressed that cultural, arts and sports activities involve the general public and a higher visitor flow, and therefore there is a need to prudently evaluate the safety hazard which may be brought about by such activities, whether the authorities will issue guidelines to define clearly the meaning of "higher visitor flow" and the fire safety standards that such activities are required to meet; as the authorities stated in April this year that they would examine the further optimization of the use of the existing industrial buildings for conducting various activities and providing more spaces for cultural, arts and sports activity purposes, of the progress, summary and timetable of such work; and (3) given that the authorities have, since 2015, amended more than 10 Outline Zoning Plans ("OZPs") to include "Art Studio" as an always permitted use in industrial-office buildings located in "Industrial", "Other Specified Uses" annotated "Business" and "Residential (Group E)" zones, of the authorities' timetable for amending other OZPs and whether they will expedite the amendment exercise; whether the authorities will grant temporary waivers to owners who have converted their industrial building units into art studios and exempt these owners from the payment of waiver fees; if not, of the reasons for that?
2. Hon LUK Chung-hung to ask: (Translation)
Some members of the sports community have relayed to me that all along, local free-to-air television channels seldom broadcast local sports tournaments, which is not conducive to the development and promotion of local sports. In this connection, will the Government inform this Council:
(1) whether it knows the number of local sports tournaments broadcast live or recorded, and the number of hours for which such tournaments were broadcast, by each local free-to-air television channel in each of the past three years; (2) whether the authorities have plans to take measures to encourage the various local free-to-air television stations to broadcast more local sports tournaments, and produce more programmes relating to local sports; if so, of the details; if not, the reasons for that; and (3) as Radio Television Hong Kong ("RTHK") is the only public service broadcaster in Hong Kong, whether RTHK has plans to broadcast more local sports tournaments (e.g. the Hong Kong Premier League, the Hong Kong Basketball League A1 Division matches and the Hong Kong Games) through its digital terrestrial television channels; if so, of the details and timetable; if not, the reasons for that and the difficulty involved?
3. Ir Dr Hon LO Wai-kwok to ask: (Translation)
The Recycling Fund, established by the Government with an allocation of $1 billion, has been open since October 2015 for application by recyclers for subsidies for enhancing their operational capabilities and efficiency. However, some recyclers have relayed to me that the application for subsidies involves rather high administration fees and complicated procedure. Although the authorities have streamlined the procedure for the application for subsidies by small and medium-sized recycling enterprises for the implementation of small-scale standard projects, the situation has not significantly improved. Besides, while the Government will implement the municipal solid waste ("MSW") charging scheme in the second half of 2019 at the earliest, there are not enough waste separation and recycling facilities in the community. In this connection, will the Government inform this Council:
(1) of the number of applications received by the authorities since the procedure for application for subsidies under the Recycling Fund was streamlined, as well as the percentage of applications approved and the total amount of subsidies involved; how such figures compare with those in the past; whether the authorities will formulate measures to further facilitate the submission of applications by recycling enterprises; if so, of the details; if not, the reasons for that; (2) whether the authorities will consider placing food waste processors and different types of recycling bins in various public housing estates, and subsidizing private housing estates to purchase waste recycling facilities, so as to complement the MSW charging scheme better; whether the authorities will implement public education to encourage members of the public to develop the habit of separating and recycling waste; if so, of the details; if not, the reasons for that; and (3) as some recyclers have relayed that at present there is not any credible and independent organization to provide the trade with technical support and services such as consultation and certification audits, whether the authorities will, in response to the trade's aspirations, consider setting up a centre for industrialization and development of environmental protection technologies; if so, of the details; if not, the reasons for that?
4. Dr Hon YIU Chung-yim to ask: (Translation)
The Select Committee to Inquire into Matters about the Agreement between Mr LEUNG Chun-ying and the Australian firm UGL Limited ("the Select Committee") set up by this Council commenced operation in early February this year. In recent months, the Chief Executive Mr LEUNG Chun-ying ("Mr LEUNG") expressed his views on a number of occasions on the matters which the Select Committee is tasked to study ("the matters"), and sent his suggested amendments to the proposed major areas of study of the Committee to one Committee member. It has been reported that the Special Assistant in the Chief Executive's Office ("CEO") admitted that she had downloaded the aforesaid areas of study for Mr LEUNG. As such, some members of the public are concerned about whether the Government has deployed public resources (including government officers' time for handling official business and the facilities in CEO) to provide assistance to Mr LEUNG regarding the matters. In this connection, will the Government inform this Council:
(1) of the positions of the government officers who, under the existing arrangement, are responsible for assisting in handling the correspondence between the Chief Executive and Members of this Council, including delivery and filing of such correspondence; (2) whether, since the commencement of the operation of the Select Committee, the Government has deployed any public resources to assist Mr LEUNG in forwarding his oral or written views on the matters to any members of the Committee; if so, of the number of occasions of such deployment and the number of members involved; and (3) whether, since the commencement of the operation of the Select Committee, the Government has deployed any public resources to assist Mr LEUNG in preparing and publishing articles or speeches on the matters; if so, of the details, including the respective numbers of such articles and speeches, the government officers involved, and set out the time spent by such officers by their positions?
5. Hon LEUNG Che-cheung to ask: (Translation)
Since 19 April this year, an operator has progressively launched an automated bicycle rental service in some areas of the New Territories, under which members of the public who have downloaded the relevant smartphone application, opened an account and made payment through their credit card accounts may unlock the bicycles parked by the operator in public places and then use them for riding. The operator has named such service as the "bike-sharing service" and expects to have 300 000 shared bicycles coming on stream by the end of this year. Some members of the public have complained that such shared bicycles have occupied a large number of public bicycle parking spaces, exacerbating the exiting problem of shortage of bicycle parking spaces, and that many shared bicycles are indiscriminately parked in public places, causing obstruction to pedestrians. However, the operator told the media that before launching the service, it had communicated with the government departments concerned on bicycle parking issues and had received positive responses, and that the service was introduced into Hong Kong through the liaison of Invest Hong Kong which acted as a go-between. In this connection, will the Government inform this Council:
(1) of the Government's role in the introduction of the bike-sharing service into Hong Kong; whether it has regulated the use of public bicycle parking spaces for commercial purposes and conducted public consultation on the parking arrangement for the shared bicycles; if so, of the details; if not, the reasons for that; (2) of the number of complaints received so far by the authorities about the bike-sharing service, together with a breakdown by type, and whether they have taken corresponding law enforcement actions in respect of these complaints; if so, of the details; and (3) whether the authorities will provide additional public bicycle parking spaces, or follow the practice of London by providing designated parking spaces for shared bicycles in public places, in order to alleviate the shortage of bicycle parking spaces and dovetail with the development of the bike-sharing service; if not, of the authorities' solutions to the problems of illegal parking of bicycles and shortage of bicycle parking spaces, which have been aggravated by the emergence of the bike-sharing service?
6. Hon LEUNG Yiu-chung to ask: (Translation)
The Education Bureau ("EDB") released the updated Secondary Education Curriculum Guide on the 31st of last month. One of the updated emphases therein is to allocate a total of 51 lesson hours for teaching the Basic Law ("BL") at junior secondary level, among which 24 lesson hours will come from the curriculum of the Chinese History subject, with the latter accounting for about a quarter of a total of 100 lesson hours in the three-year duration of the curriculum. On the other hand, EDB is currently conducting the second stage of consultation on the revised curriculum of the Junior Secondary Chinese History subject, and it did not mention during the first stage of consultation that the arrangements for teaching BL would be included in the curriculum. On the contrary, the views received by EDB during that consultation were that the current curriculum was already over-packed with contents and hence the lesson time was insufficient. Besides, EDB has, in the module on "fundamental rights and duties of Hong Kong residents" in the latest learning package on "Constitution and the Basic Law" compiled by EDB, amended the parts about the rights of Hong Kong residents to enjoy the freedom of the person and not to be subjected to arbitrary arrest as prescribed in BL by relegating them to descriptions in a table, alongside with other personal rights. Some members of the education sector have pointed out that this approach may make the contents of the teaching materials biased. In this connection, will the Government inform this Council:
(1) of EDB's justifications and reasons for deciding to allocate 51 lesson hours for teaching BL at junior secondary level, and whether EDB has consulted the education sector in this regard beforehand; if so, of the organizations consulted and the views received; if not, the reasons for that; the dates of the meetings at which the Ad Hoc Committee under the Curriculum Development Council discussed the number of lesson hours for teaching of BL and the discussion outcome; (2) whether EDB has assessed if it has violated the established consultation procedure by making, prior to the completion of the consultation on the revised curriculum of the Junior Secondary Chinese History subject, the decision to allocate 24 lesson hours under the curriculum for teaching BL; and (3) of EDB's justifications for making the aforesaid amendment to the learning package on "Constitution and the Basic Law"; whether EDB has put in place measures to ensure that the teaching materials on BL will not be biased, so as to avoid running contrary to the professional principles of education; if so, of the details; if not, the reasons for that?
*7. Hon YIU Si-wing to ask: (Translation)
In March this year, the Premier of the State Council put forward in the Report on the Work of the Government the formulation of a development plan for a city cluster in the Guangdong-Hong Kong-Macao Bay Area ("the Bay Area"). The governments of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region ("HKSAR"), the Macao Special Administrative Region ("MSAR") and the Guangdong Province are working on the planning of the Bay Area, which is expected to be finalized within this year and submitted to the State Council for approval. In reply to a question raised by a Member of this Council on the 17th of last month, the Secretary for Constitutional and Mainland Affairs pointed out that regarding tourism, the city cluster in the Bay Area had a strong potential to be developed into a world-class tourist destination cluster as it was located at the southern gateway of China and possessed abundant tourism resources. The HKSAR Government would continue to support the Hong Kong Tourism Board to establish cooperation platforms with Bay Area cities so as to jointly develop more "multi-destination" tourism products, as well as encourage the Hong Kong travel trade to seize the development opportunities in the Bay Area and develop more tourism products featuring the Bay Area for Hong Kong people and "multi-destination" visitors. In this connection, will the Government inform this Council:
(1) whether the authorities have conducted a study and collated relevant information on the key tourism resources in various Bay Area cities; if so, of the tourism resources in the area with potential to be developed into a world-class tourist destination cluster; if not, the reasons for that; (2) whether the authorities have, in the light of the characteristics of the tourism resources in various Bay Area cities, set the positioning and development targets of HKSAR in the context of the tourism industry in the area; if so, of the details; (3) given that the Government will submit its views on the planning of the Bay Area to the National Development and Reform Commission by the end of this month, whether the submission will include a separate chapter on the planning for the tourism industry; if so, of the details; if not, the reasons for that; (4) of the details of the tourism projects implemented in the past three years by the authorities in collaboration with other Bay Area cities; regarding the future development of the Bay Area, of the authorities' specific plans to promote the tourism industry in collaboration with the governments of the Guangdong Province and MSAR; and (5) whether it will allocate additional resources to support the local travel trade in tapping the Bay Area market; if so, of the details; if not, the reasons for that?
*8. Dr Hon LAU Siu-lai to ask: (Translation)
The Food and Environmental Hygiene Department ("FEHD") launched a six-month pilot scheme on installation of Internet Protocol cameras ("the Pilot Scheme") at the end of last year, under which Internet Protocol ("IP") cameras have been installed at a total of six illegal refuse dumping blackspots in Central and Western, Sham Shui Po and Yuen Long Districts to step up surveillance on illegal dumping of refuse and to assist in the planning of more effective law enforcement actions. FEHD has indicated that it will conduct a review on the scheme upon its completion to decide whether or not to extend the scheme to various districts across the territory in consultation with the District Councils concerned. However, some media organizations uncovered that the hygiene conditions at the relevant refuse blackspots did not improve during the implementation of the Pilot Scheme. In this connection, will the Government inform this Council:
(1) given that the Government once installed in 2003 closed-circuit televisions ("CCTVs") at various hygiene blackspots following the outbreak of the Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome for surveillance on the hygiene conditions of various districts but, upon a review conducted in 2008, it considered that the law enforcement departments had already grasped such information as the timing and pattern of environmental hygiene offences and subsequently removed such CCTVs one after another, whether the law enforcement departments have updated such information continually since 2008; if so, of the reasons why FEHD still needed to launch the Pilot Scheme; if not, the reasons for that; (2) of the details of the Pilot Scheme, including the respective numbers of IP cameras installed in the three aforesaid districts, the average number of inspections conducted daily by FEHD officers at the relevant refuse dumping blackspots and the manpower involved, as well as the respective amounts of the various expenses incurred so far; (3) whether FEHD encountered during the implementation of the Pilot Scheme a situation that illegal refuse dumping at locations near the refuse dumping blackspots concerned but not covered by the IP cameras had become worse than before; if so, of the measures that FEHD has put in place to tackle the situation; (4) whether the authorities received, during the implementation of the Pilot Scheme, complaints from members of the public about the violation of their privacy in respect of the IP cameras; if so, of the details; (5) as FEHD has advised that the footage on the relevant offences in respect of which no prosecution has been instituted within six months will be deleted, whether FEHD has, when deleting such footage, requested other government departments which have handled such footage to delete the same; if so, of the details; if not, the reasons for that; (6) whether FEHD has devised any performance indicators for the Pilot Scheme; if so, of the details; if not, how FEHD measures the effectiveness of the Scheme; and (7) of FEHD's considerations for reviewing the effectiveness of the Pilot Scheme and examining whether or not to extend the Pilot Scheme to other districts; whether FEHD will directly consult the residents of the districts concerned before making the relevant decisions; if not, of the reasons for that?
*9. Hon CHEUNG Kwok-kwan to ask: (Translation)
It has been reported that some lawbreakers abetted and lured cross-boundary students (especially primary students) into smuggling. Besides, the Shenzhen exit/entry border inspection authorities recently smashed, within one day, 10 cases in which cross-boundary students smuggled smartphones and expensive food ingredients into the Mainland via the Huanggang Port. In this connection, will the Government inform this Council:
(1) of the respective numbers of cases in the past five years in which (i) the Customs and Excise Department intercepted primary students or students under the age of 12 smuggling items out of Hong Kong at various land boundary control points ("BCPs"), and (ii) exit/entry border inspection authorities of the Mainland intercepted such students smuggling items into the Mainland at the relevant land ports; (2) of a breakdown of the number of cases in (1) by (i) BCP/port, (ii) age of the students, and (iii) category of the smuggled items (set out in a table); (3) whether the authorities have grasped the intelligence on lawbreakers using cross-boundary students for smuggling; (4) whether the authorities took, in the past five years, initiatives such as conducting decoy operations, to investigate and combat the crimes of using cross-boundary students for smuggling; if so, of the relevant details, including (i) the type and (ii) number of operations, as well as (iii) the number of persons arrested; and (5) of the measures in place to prevent and curb lawbreakers' using cross-boundary students for smuggling; whether publicity targeting schools admitting cross-boundary students and the parents of such students will be launched to remind them that they should teach students not to smuggle items for others; whether it has held regular discussions with the exit/entry border inspection authorities of the Mainland the making of concerted efforts to combat such kind of activities?
*10. Hon Dennis KWOK to ask: (Translation)
Section 2(1) of the Rehabilitation of Offenders Ordinance (Cap. 297) provides that where an individual has been convicted for the first time of an offence in respect of which he has not been sentenced to imprisonment exceeding three months or to a fine exceeding $10,000, and has not been convicted of an offence again within three years, such a conviction may be considered spent. In addition, the withholding of the record of his spent conviction by the individual concerned shall not be a lawful or proper ground for dismissing or excluding him from any office, profession, occupation or employment, and for prejudicing him in any way in that office, profession, occupation or employment. On the other hand, some members of the public have relayed to me that when they, on request of their prospective employers, applied to the Police for access to their criminal conviction data, the data they obtained included their criminal conviction records which might be withheld under Cap. 297, and that the prospective employers refused to employ them upon learning of such conviction records. Such members of the public consider that this situation is not in line with the spirit of Cap. 297. In this connection, will the Government inform this Council:
(1) of the number of complaints received by the authorities in the past three years concerning members of the public being refused employment by prospective employers upon learning of their conviction records which might be withheld; (2) of the measures currently in place to prevent inappropriate disclosure of the conviction records of members of the public which may be withheld; and (3) whether the Police will review the scope of the criminal conviction data to be released under the existing mechanism for access to criminal conviction data, so as to ensure that it is fully in line with the relevant requirements and the spirit of Cap. 297?
*11. Dr Hon CHIANG Lai-wan to ask: (Translation)
It has been reported that in February this year, a consumer purchased from an airline's website a return air ticket and completed the payment procedure after seat reservation had been confirmed, but not until the check-in process did the consumer realize that the airline did not have her purchase and payment records, and she was denied boarding eventually. The Customs and Excise Department conducted an investigation upon receipt of a report from that person, and arrested on 26 May a general manager of the airline for the alleged offence of contravening the Trade Descriptions Ordinance (Cap. 362). On the other hand, airlines usually estimate the "no-show rate" of passengers and exercise discretion to oversell air tickets. In this connection, will the Government inform this Council:
(1) whether it knows, in each of the past three years, (i) the number of cases in which airlines failed, for various reasons, to provide seats for ticket-holding passengers to board flights (set out the relevant information by name of airline), (ii) the respective numbers of relevant complaints received by the government departments concerned and the Consumer Council and how they followed up such cases, and (iii) the number of cases in which airlines were prosecuted for contravening Cap. 362 as a result, and the penalties imposed on convicted airlines; (2) whether it knows how airlines dealt in the past three years with incidents in which they had failed, for various reasons, to provide seats for ticket-holding passengers to board flights; if so, of the details of the relevant arrangements (including the arrangements for making compensation or refund to consumers); if not, the reasons for that; and (3) given that section 13I (wrongly accepting payment) of Cap. 362 provides that a trader wrongly accepts payment for a product if the trader accepts payment or other consideration for the product and at the time of that acceptance there are no reasonable grounds for believing that the trader will be able to supply the product within the period specified by the trader at or before the time at which the payment or other consideration is accepted, whether the Government has studied if an airline contravenes the said provision when the airline oversells air tickets and the number of passengers who subsequently check in as scheduled exceeds that expected by the airline, resulting in some passengers being denied boarding; if it has studied and the outcome is in the affirmative, of the details; if the outcome of the study is in the negative, the reasons for that?
*12. Prof Hon Joseph LEE to ask: (Translation)
Some speech therapists have relayed to me that with an ageing population, the demand for speech therapy service has increased continuously in recent years, but there is an acute manpower shortage of speech therapists in public hospitals. They have pointed out that the Hospital Authority ("HA") has not worked out a reasonable manpower establishment in the light of the service demand, thereby affecting the rehabilitation progress of patients. In this connection, will the Government inform this Council whether it knows:
(1) the following information regarding speech therapists in public hospitals in each of the past five years: (i) a breakdown of their number by rank, (ii) the contents of their service, (iii) the average service attendance per therapist, (iv) the average number of cases handled by each therapist, and (v) the average number of hours spent on each case; (2) the manpower requirement of HA for speech therapists in the coming five years, and HA's plan to recruit additional speech therapists to meet the requirement; and (3) the criteria based on which HA determines the manpower requirement for speech therapists, and whether HA will make reference to the practice of developed countries (e.g. Australia) and set a reasonable manpower target on the basis of service attendance and the type of diseases, with a view to providing quality service to patients; if HA will, of the details; if not, the reasons for that?
*13. Hon Andrew WAN to ask: (Translation)
Regarding the regulation of the installation of radio base stations ("RBSs") for mobile communications in private buildings by mobile network operators ("MNOs"), will the Government inform this Council:
(1) given that works on installation of RBSs on rooftops of buildings may be carried out under the Minor Works Control System without obtaining the prior approval and consent from the Buildings Department as long as the RBSs have not exceeded the relevant restrictions on the size, whether the Government will consider imposing restrictions under the System on the maximum permissible (i) number of RBSs installed on a rooftop and (ii) weight of a RBS; if so, of the details; if not, how the authorities ensure that, in the event that several RBSs have been installed on the same rooftop, (a) the total weight of such RBSs will not exceed the loading capacity of the rooftop, (b) the total electricity consumption of such RBSs will not affect the electrical safety of the building, and (c) the total heat dissipation of such RBSs will not affect the fire safety of the building; (2) in respect of those RBSs currently installed on the external walls of the rooftops of buildings, whether it has assessed if such RBSs (i) are unauthorized structures, and (ii) have affected the structural safety of the buildings; if it has assessed, of the outcome; if not, the reasons for that; (3) given that MNOs are required to obtain prior approval from the Communications Authority ("CA") before installing RBSs, whether CA conducted in the past three years any surprise inspections on RBS installation works and on those RBSs installed; if so, of the number of cases involving unauthorized installation of RBSs that CA uncovered and its related follow-up actions; and (4) given that it was reported that some MNOs installed, without the authorities' approval, RBSs in rented top floor units of commercial or residential buildings and on their rooftops, and even cut through the rooftops to connect such units with the rooftops, of (i) the number of complaints received by the authorities about such RBSs, (ii) the number of removal orders issued by the Buildings Department in respect of such RBSs, (iii) the number of cases in which the Lands Department ("LandsD") issued warning letters in respect of such units and registered the letters at the Land Registry (commonly known as "imposing an encumbrance"), and (iv) the number of prosecutions instituted by the authorities against those parties who had not complied with the removal orders, in the past three years, and the average time taken from the issuance of a removal order to the institution of a prosecution; whether it knows the number of cases in the past three years in which the owners' corporations of the buildings instituted legal proceedings against the owners of such units for contravening the deeds of mutual covenant of the buildings; whether LandsD will consider invoking the Government Rights (Re-entry and Vesting Remedies) Ordinance (Cap. 126) to re-possess the units concerned?
*14. Hon Tanya CHAN to ask: (Translation)
It has been reported that on the 6th of this month, the Leisure and Cultural Services Department ("LCSD") sent staff members from its tree team to carry out tree pruning work at a woodland located at the junction of Kwong Fuk Road and Wan Tau Kok Lane in Tai Po. Such work destroyed a number of nests on the trees concerned and the eggs therein, and also caused the injury or death of a number of chicks. On the following day, LCSD indicated that it would investigate and follow up on the incident. On the other hand, section 5 of the Wild Animals Protection Ordinance (Cap. 170) provides that: "[n]o person shall, except in accordance with a special permit, take, remove, injure, destroy or wilfully disturb a nest or egg of any protected wild animal". According to Schedule 2 to Cap. 170, protected wild animals include all wild birds. In this connection, will the Government inform this Council:
(1) of the respective numbers of eggs and chicks affected by the aforesaid tree pruning work, with a breakdown by species; whether it knows the current conditions of those chicks; (2) of the number of LCSD staff members who carried out the aforesaid tree pruning work and their ranks; (3) of the progress of the investigation conducted by LCSD into the aforesaid incident, and whether LCSD will make public the investigation outcome; (4) of the time when and the channel through which the Agriculture, Fisheries and Conservation Department ("AFCD") learned about the aforesaid incident, the details of the follow-up actions taken by AFCD (including the time and the government departments involved), and the actions that AFCD will take; (5) whether LCSD has issued guidelines to its staff members on how to handle the situation where nests are found on the trees to be pruned; if so, of the contents of such guidelines, and whether the staff members who carried out the aforesaid tree pruning work had acted in accordance with the guidelines; if it has not issued such guidelines, the reasons for that; (6) whether LCSD applied, in the past five years pursuant to Cap. 170, to AFCD for the permits required for handling the nests and eggs of wild birds on the trees to be pruned; if so, of the dates on which such permits were issued and the details of such permits; and (7) whether AFCD has launched a criminal investigation under Cap. 170 into the aforesaid incident; if so, of the details; if not, the reasons for that?
*15. Hon WU Chi-wai to ask: (Translation)
Units put up for sale in recent years under the Home Ownership Scheme ("HOS") and the Green Form Home Ownership Pilot Scheme ("GFHOPS") have both recorded over-subscription, and De Novo, a subsidized housing project implemented by the Urban Renewal Authority ("URA"), has also been very well-received. On the other hand, the Government promulgated the Long Term Housing Strategy ("LTHS") on 16 December 2014, setting a supply target for public and private housing in the coming decade at 480 000 units, with a public-private housing split of 60:40. Regarding the supply of public housing, will the Government inform this Council:
(1) in each of the two periods from the promulgation of LTHS to now and from now to 2024, (i) of the respective numbers of public and private housing units completed/expected to be completed and their relative ratios (set out in a table such information by year and District Council ("DC") district); (ii) among the public housing units completed/expected to be completed, of the respective numbers and percentages of those which are (a) public rental housing units, (b) HOS units, (c) GFHOPS units, (d) subsidized housing units built by the Hong Kong Housing Society, and (e) subsidized housing units built by URA (set out in a table such information by DC district); and (iii) of the respective areas and relative ratios of lands that were used/expected to be used for building public and private housing (set out in a table such information by year and DC district); (2) whether it has assessed if there is any imbalance between the supply of and demand for various types of subsidized housing; if it has assessed and the outcome is in the affirmative, of the corresponding measures, including whether the Government will (i) set a target on the number of subsidized housing units to be built, (ii) formulate a concrete proposal to increase the supply of subsidized housing, (iii) revise the current public-private housing split, and (iv) revise the current ratio of areas of the lands used for building public and private housing each year, so as to increase the public housing production; (3) given that quite a number of people in the sandwich class who aspire to acquire home ownership can neither afford the down payments for private housing nor be eligible for applying for HOS, whether the authorities will invite URA or other relevant organizations to offer subsidized housing similar to that under the Sandwich Class Housing Scheme; if not, of the measures the Government has in place to assist such people in acquiring home ownership; (4) of the total number of sites which have been rezoned from private housing use to public housing use since 2014; the following information regarding each site: (i) the location, (ii) the date of rezoning, (iii) the type of public housing built/expected to be built on the site, (iv) the number of units to be provided by the public housing project concerned and (v) the date of completion of such units; and (5) whether it has assessed, among the sites in the Land Sale Programme for this year, the number of private housing sites (in particular those which have not been sold over the years) that are suitable for rezoning to public housing use; whether the Government will formulate objective criteria for rezoning; if so, of the details; if not, the reasons for that?
*16. Hon Charles Peter MOK to ask: (Translation)
A study has pointed out that governments of over 60% of regions across the world will increase investments on and application of blockchain technology in the coming three years. Blockchain technology is a type of distributed ledger technologies ("DLT"), which works on the principle of breaking up a database into blocks and connecting the blocks with immutable links that are built with a hash function, so as to enable participants to create, store and disseminate information in a highly efficient and reliable manner. Another study has pointed out that by breaking through the existing technology boundaries, blockchain technology can significantly enhance the efficiency of public services, thereby saving public expenditure, and will change the paper-based mode of operation currently adopted by governments. Many regions in the world have started exploring the application of blockchain technology in various industries (the financial services industry in particular), such as fund transfer, payment service, exchange and clearing, and information authentication system. On the other hand, the application of blockchain technology is not yet subject to regulation under the existing legislation. In this connection, will the Government inform this Council:
(1) whether it has assessed the potential of blockchain technology in enhancing the efficiency of public services, such as handling tax returns, land registration, voting and issuance of various types of identification documents; if it has assessed and the outcome is in the affirmative, whether it will formulate strategies for extensive application of such technology; (2) whether it has studied the inclusion of a function of identity verification using blockchain technology in the next generation smart identity card; if so, of the details; if not, the reasons for that; (3) whether it has studied the regulation of the payment and currency exchange activities of digital currencies using blockchain technology; if so, of the details; if not, whether it will conduct the relevant study; (4) whether the Hong Kong Smart City Blueprint Consultancy Study commissioned by the Government currently underway will cover the exploration of (i) matters regarding the application and regulation of blockchain technology, and (ii) measures to promote the application of such technology in the Government and commercial organizations; and (5) whether it will allocate more scientific research funding for blockchain and DLT technologies and strengthen the training of information technology talents with the relevant knowledge; if so, of the details; if not, the reasons for that?
*17. Hon HUI Chi-fung to ask: (Translation)
At present, in the event that the Urban Renewal Authority ("URA") cannot reach agreements on acquisition of property titles with the owners of properties in a redevelopment project area due to issues such as acquisition prices and vesting of titles, it may, under the Urban Renewal Authority Ordinance (Cap. 563), apply to the Government for resumption by the Government, under the Lands Resumption Ordinance (Cap. 124), of those property titles which have not been acquired so that those titles would revert to the Government. In this connection, will the Government inform this Council:
(1) whether it knows URA's criteria for deciding whether or not to make an application to the Government for compulsory resumption of property titles; whether such criteria include the successful acquisition of no less than a certain percentage of the property titles within the redevelopment project area; and (2) of the following details of the redevelopment projects in respect of which URA's applications for compulsory resumption of property titles were approved in the past five years: (i) the project name, (ii) site area, (iii) the number of property titles compulsorily resumed, and (iv) the amount of public expenditure incurred for making compensation or ex-gratia payments to the property owners whose property titles were compulsorily resumed?
*18. Hon Paul TSE to ask: (Translation)
Cases of Hong Kong people being arrested in overseas places for alleged drug trafficking have been heard of from time to time. Examples include the cases of Mr Paul AU Wing-cheung, Mr CHEUNG Tai-on who died in a foreign country, and Mr TANG Lung-wai, who was sentenced to imprisonment of 40 years by the Philippine authorities allegedly due to unjust imprisonment and whose appeal is still pending. In recent days, three youths aged 19 to 24 were arrested upon arrival at an airport in Bangkok, Thailand, by flight from Brazil because local anti-narcotics officers had found 12.3 kilograms of cocaine with a market price of some HK$10 million in the secret compartments of their luggage. The maximum penalty for them upon conviction is life imprisonment. Regarding the provision of assistance by the Government for Hong Kong people who have been imposed criminal compulsory measures in overseas places for alleged drug trafficking, will the Government inform this Council:
(1) as it has been reported that the aforesaid three youths were recruited by a parallel trader for a reward of $8,000 per person for drug trafficking, and the three youths communicated with the parallel trader via a group in the instant messaging software application WhatsApp, whether the authorities have assessed the number of Hong Kong people who joined similar groups in the past five years and, among them, the number of those who might have engaged in drug trafficking; (2) whether it has examined the current number of organizations that recruit Hong Kong people via social networking websites to engage in parallel trading activities or even drug trafficking and, among them, the number of those organizations that are suspected to be under the control of triad gangs or drug syndicates; (3) of the dedicated policies in place to combat the recruitment of youths via channels such as social networking websites and smartphone applications to engage in parallel trading activities, drug trafficking or other unlawful acts; whether the authorities have, in their investigation, conducted in-depth gathering of evidence by carrying out decoy operations; (4) of the assistance provided by the Government to the aforesaid three arrested youths, including assistance which ensures that they will have fair and open trials in Thailand; (5) whether it has rendered assistance to Mr TANG Lung-wai, whose appeal is still pending in the Philippines, and his family in recent months; as it is learnt that the British Embassy in the Philippines is more proactive than the Government and the State Ministry of Foreign Affairs in rendering assistance to Mr TANG (including lodging an appeal for legal assistance, regular visits in the prison as well as financial support), whether the Government will render assistance to Mr TANG more proactively and urge the State Ministry of Foreign Affairs to render more assistance to Mr TANG; and (6) as I have learnt that for years some members of the public have been satirizing the Government for "watching with folded arms" and taking a passive manner towards the well-being of Hong Kong people serving sentences in overseas places, as well as rendering ineffective assistance, whether the Government will conduct a review in this regard; whether it will cooperate with the British Embassy in the Philippines to proactively provide assistance for Mr TANG who is allegedly having been tried unfairly, so as to ensure that he will have open, fair and reasonable trials in relation to his appeal?
*19. Hon CHAN Hak-kan to ask: (Translation)
It has been reported that the Centre for Health Protection of the Department of Health received a total of 202 new cases of Human Immunodeficiency Virus ("HIV") infection in the first quarter of this year, hitting a record high for a single quarter since records were first kept in 1984. Some doctors have pointed out that the increase in the number of infections is related to public ignorance of the risks of unsafe sex. Moreover, there is a downward trend in the age of people who have been infected with HIV, with those of them who are younger being less inclined to receive treatment than those who are older, which is a worrying situation. In this connection, will the Government inform this Council:
(1) of the details of the publicity work undertaken by the authorities and relevant organizations on prevention of Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome ("AIDS") in each of the past three years; (2) whether it has studied the reasons why those people infected with HIV who are younger are less inclined to receive treatment than those who are older, and of the plans it has to encourage the former to receive treatment; (3) given the downward trend in the age of people who have been infected with HIV, whether the authorities have reviewed the effectiveness of the publicity and education work currently conducted in schools; if so, of the details; and (4) whether it has plans to allocate additional resources and adopt new approaches to promote the prevention of AIDS; if so, of the details; if not, whether it will formulate such plans?
*20. Dr Hon Elizabeth QUAT to ask: (Translation)
Some members of the construction industry have pointed out the slow pace of the Finance Committee ("FC") of this Council and its Public Works Subcommittee ("PWSC") in scrutinizing funding proposals for works projects in this legislative session. In this connection, will the Government inform this Council:
(1) of the respective total amounts of allocations involved in the funding proposals for the works projects the scrutiny of which by (i) FC and (ii) PWSC has yet to complete; the respective projects among them which have been placed on the agendas for the relevant meetings the earliest, and how much time has elapsed since the dates of such meetings; (2) of the current number of works projects to which the following applies: (i) FC has yet to complete the scrutiny of the funding proposals for them and (ii) their tender validity periods will expire at the end of July this year; the additional costs, as estimated by the authorities, to be incurred for those projects due to (a) extension of the tender validity period, (b) re-tendering or (c) the requirement to update the consultancy reports before inviting tenders; (3) of the number of works projects the costs of which increased in the past three years due to the following reason: the time required for FC to approve the funding proposals for the works projects was longer than the authorities' expectation, and set out in a table the relevant details by works project; (4) of the current number of works projects to which the following applies: (i) the authorities have consulted the relevant District Councils (if necessary) and panels of this Council on such projects and (ii) FC has yet to complete the scrutiny of the funding proposals for them; among them, of the project with the earliest date on which the relevant panel(s) of this Council was consulted, and how much time has elapsed since that date; and (5) whether it has assessed if the slower-than-expected pace of scrutiny of funding proposals for works projects by FC in this legislative session has resulted in unemployment or underemployment of practitioners of the construction and engineering sectors; if it has assessed and the outcome is in the affirmative, of the details?
*21. Hon Kenneth LEUNG to ask: (Translation)
The High Court pointed out in a judgment on a judicial review case (ZN v. Secretary for Justice and others, HCAL 15/2015) handed down last year that the Government had failed to fulfil its obligation to protect the right, under Article 4 in Part II (Hong Kong Bill of Rights) of the Hong Kong Bill of Rights Ordinance (Cap. 383), of the applicant in that case of not being subjected to forced labour or human trafficking. The judgment also pointed out that there was currently no specific criminal legislation against forced labour and human trafficking for forced labour in Hong Kong; the applicant's suffering was due to his cultural and ethnic differences, his difficulty in communicating with law enforcement officers, and the lack of an effective framework and measures in Hong Kong to address the problem of forced labour or human trafficking. In this connection, will the Government inform this Council:
(1) whether it has collated, from the Hong Kong Police Force, the Immigration Department, the Customs and Excise Department, the Labour Department or other relevant government departments, statistics on persons claiming to be victims of forced labour or human trafficking; if so, of the number of such persons in each of the past five years, together with a breakdown by their age, gender, nationality and nature of the abuse they suffered; if not, whether it will collate and make public such statistics; (2) whether the authorities have taken follow up actions in relation to the aforesaid judgment; if so, of the details; if not, the reasons for that; (3) whether the meaning of "forced labour" and "human trafficking" are defined under the existing legislation; if so, of the details; if not, the reasons for that; (4) how the authorities prohibit acts of forced labour or human trafficking through the existing legislation; whether the authorities will examine the introduction of dedicated criminal legislation and penalties to prohibit such acts; and (5) whether the authorities provide legal protection and relief for victims of forced labour or human trafficking at present; if so, of the details; if not, whether the authorities will consider granting legal protection, relief and the right to exemption from criminal liability (subject to examination) to such victims; if so, of the details; if not, the reasons for that?
*22. Hon Holden CHOW to ask: (Translation)
The Guangdong-Hong Kong-Macao Bay Area ("Bay Area") encompasses 11 cities with a total population of over 66 million. It has been reported that the gross domestic product ("GDP") of the Bay Area in 2015 was HK$11,200 billion, which exceeded the GDP of San Francisco Bay Area in the United States by more than two times. In the Report on the Work of the Government released in March this year, the Premier of the State Council stated that "[w]e will promote closer cooperation between the Mainland and Hong Kong and Macao. We will draw up a plan for the development of a city cluster in the Guangdong-Hong Kong-Macao Bay Area, give full play to the distinctive strengths of Hong Kong and Macao, and elevate their positions and roles in China's economic development and opening up". There have been comments that the Bay Area development plan is one of the important regional development plans advocated under the nation's Belt and Road Initiative, and offers a once-in-a-thousand-year opportunity for the long-term economic development of Hong Kong. As such, the Hong Kong Government should seize the opportunity and properly carry out planning work on various aspects so as to tie in with the development of the Bay Area in future, and conduct a forward-looking study on the impacts of the Bay Area plan on the economic development of Hong Kong. In this connection, will the Government inform this Council:
(1) as the authorities have indicated that they will conduct a study on Hong Kong's role in the Bay Area, whether they will, in the light of the study findings, expeditiously formulate specific policies and measures (e.g. those relating to infrastructure and post-secondary education programmes) to complement Hong Kong's giving full play to such role; if so, of the details and the timetable; (2) given that the cities in the Bay Area are currently under three different judicial systems and three separate customs territories, and the Guangdong Province and Hong Kong are competing with each other in terms of aviation networks, container terminals, airport facilities, etc., whether the Government has plans to propose to the Central People's Government, the Guangdong Provincial Government and the Macao Special Administrative Region Government that a permanent communication mechanism be set up to solve problems arising from such situation; whether the Government has plans to propose to the Central People's Government that tax exemptions or concessions be granted to Hong Kong people who work across the boundary in other cities in the Bay Area in respect of the individual income tax payable by them in those cities; and (3) as there are comments that the existing immigration and customs clearance arrangements between Guangdong and Hong Kong are not smooth enough, e.g. travellers need to wait for a long time (often more than an hour) at the land boundary control points ("BCPs") in Hong Kong and at Mainland ports for clearance during festive holidays, and among the various existing BCPs, only the one at Lok Ma Chau operates round the clock, which causes inconvenience to people travelling frequently between Guangdong and Hong Kong, whether the Government will study ways to improve the immigration and customs clearance arrangements (e.g. providing more BCPs which operate round the clock)?
* For written reply
III. Government Bills
| First Reading
| |||
| 1. | Dutiable Commodities (Amendment) Bill 2017
| ||
| 2. | Private Healthcare Facilities Bill
| ||
| Second Reading (Debate to be adjourned)
| |||
| 1. | Dutiable Commodities (Amendment) Bill 2017 | : | Secretary for Food and Health
|
| 2. | Private Healthcare Facilities Bill | : | Secretary for Food and Health
|
| Second Reading (Debate to resume), Committee Stage and Third Reading
| |||
| Inland Revenue (Amendment) (No. 2) Bill 2017 | : | Secretary for Transport and Housing
| |
|
Secretary for Transport and Housing to move Committee stage amendments (The amendments were issued on 16 June 2017 under LC Paper No. CB(3) 690/16-17) | |||
| (Debate and voting arrangements for Committee stage of the Inland Revenue (Amendment) (No. 2) Bill 2017 (issued on 20 June 2017 under LC Paper No. CB(3) 712/16-17(01)) (same as the Appendix to the Script of Council meeting of 21 June 2017)) | |||