Extract from Minutes of
House Committee
Meeting on 26.4.96

(1)Confirmation of the minutes of the last meeting held on 19.4.96

(LegCo Paper No. CB(2) 1073/95-96)

On item 9(b), Mr CHENG Yiu-tong proposed to amend the last line of page 10 of the Chinese version of the minutes to the effect that the word "release" (ÄÀ©ñ) be suitably replaced. Subject to this amendment, the minutes were confirmed.

(Post-meeting note : The last line on page 10 of the Chinese version should read ".... ´£¥X¥i§_°ò©ó¤H¹D²z¥Ñ­ã³u´­«O¥~´NÂå ....".

The corresponding amendment to lines 5 and 6 of paragraph 3 of page 12 of the English version should read "... the possibility for Mr XI to be allowed on bail for medical treatment ...")

(a)Report on the Chairman’s meeting with the Chief Secretary on 22.4.96

(i)Display of publicity materials in public places

The Chairman said that he had conveyed Members’ suggestion for a parallel pilot scheme to be conducted in a district with public housing to the Chief Secretary. The Chief Secretary suggested that Members might wish to follow up this point at the next meeting of the Panel on Information Policy on 3.5.96.

CAS(2)2

(ii) Legislative programme for the remainder of the current session

The Chairman said that he had requested the Chief Secretary to let Members know those bills which would be introduced into LegCo and those which must be passed before the summer recess. He would report to Members in due course.

Chairman

(iii)Briefing by the Chief Secretary

The Chairman said that the Chief Secretary (CS) had previously agreed to give briefings to Members at a quarterly interval. At his meeting with CS, she indicated that the appropriate timing for the next briefing would be after her meeting with Mr LU Ping in Beijing. He sought Members’ view on the following options :

(1) to request CS to give a briefing to Members on her visit at the earliest possible opportunity; or

(2) to request CS to make a statement on her visit at the LegCo sitting on 1.5.96.

Miss Emily LAU supported option (2) and suggested that LegCo should establish a convention for public officers to make statements on matters of importance at Council sittings. However, she considered SO 20(2), which only allowed short questions to be put to the public officer making the statement for the purpose of elucidation, very restrictive. While she agreed that no debate should arise on any such statement, she asked whether arrangements could be made for Members to put questions relevant to the statement, other than only for the purpose of elucidation, to the public officer. Her view was shared by Mr LEE Wing-tat and Mr SZETO Wah. Mr LEE also suggested that the duration for the question and answer session should be between 15 and 30 minutes.

In response to the Chairman on the point raised by Miss LAU, Secretary General advised that Members could consider moving a motion under SO 68 to suspend SO 20(2) for the purpose of allowing questions relevant to the statement to be raised. Members could also consider asking an urgent LegCo question under SO 17(4) on the subject.

Mrs Selina CHOW was concerned whether Miss LAU’s suggestion would create a precedent. She suggested that the Subcommittee on Procedural Matters be invited to examine the arrangements for public officers to make statements under SO 20. Meanwhile, it might be better to deal with the issue under the existing provisions of the Standing Orders.

The Chairman said that the proposal for CS to make a statement and to take relevant questions on her visit to Beijing at the LegCo sitting on 1.5.96 would be subject to : firstly, CS’ agreement to the proposal; secondly, the President’s consent to the moving of a motion to suspend SO 20(2) (since due notice could not be given in time); and thirdly, Members’ support of the motion. The Chairman said that he had checked with CS’ Office the possibility for CS to give a briefing on her visit to Beijing to Members on Tuesday, 30.4.96. The reply was that CS would be fully occupied on that day.

Mr Fred LI Wah-ming said that it was Members’ consensus that CS should brief Members on her visit to Beijing as soon as possible. In view of the complications involved in asking questions under SO 20(2), he supported option (1).

Mr CHEUNG Man-kwong had no strong view on either one of the options provided Members would be given the opportunity to ask questions on CS’ visit to Beijing.

After further discussion, the Chairman summarized the position as follows :

(i)he would request CS to brief Members on her visit to Beijing at the earliest possible opportunity, preferably before Wednesday 1.5.96, either by conducting a briefing for all Members, or by making a statement in Council under the conditions proposed by Members;

(Post-meeting note : The letter conveying the request was sent to CS on 27.4.96).

(ii)if CS agreed to make a statement at the sitting on 1.5.96, he would seek the President’s consent for him to move a motion without notice under SO 68 to suspend SO 20(2) at the LegCo sitting on 1.5.96. The purpose of the motion would be to allow questions, relating to the visit, although no debate would be permitted; and

(Post-meeting note : After discussing with the President, the Chairman agreed to seek the President’s permission to ask a question without notice under SO 17(4) on the subject at the sitting on 1.5.96.)

(iii) the Subcommittee on Procedural Matters be asked to examine the arrangements for public officers to make statements under SO 20.

CAS(HC)

(b)Non-Chinese ethnic minorities

The Chairman said that in response to Members’ request, he had written to the Indian Resources Group (IRG) to ascertain whether they were prepared to accept the alternative assistance pledged by the Prime Minister i.e. they would be guaranteed admission and settlement in the UK if they were to come under pressure to leave Hong Kong after 1997. The reply from IRG had been received and was tabled at the meeting (at Appendix). The main points of the reply were :

  1. Representatives of the Indian Chamber of Commerce earlier visited Mr LU Ping in Beijing. While Mr LU was sympathetic with their plight, he had advised that subsidiary legislation would be required in order for them to be granted Chinese nationality;

  2. IRG urged LegCo Members to continue to pursue with the UK Government the granting of full British citizenship to the ethnic minorities, which was their ultimate goal. They also considered useful if some sort of written assurance could be provided by the UK Government in the interim; and

  3. IRG enlisted Members’ assistance in obtaining from the Administration information regarding the number of affected minorities and their ethnic origin.

The Chairman said that he had already sent a letter requesting the Prime Minister to advise the kind of circumstances that would qualify the minorities for admission for settlement in UK after 1997. In view of IRG’s reply, he would further pursue point (ii) above with the Prime Minister. As regards point (iii), he suggested and Members agreed that this should be followed up by the Panel on Security. Chairman

CAS(2)1

(3) Legal Adviser’s report on the subsidiary legislation tabled in the Legislative Council on 24.4.96 (gazetted on 19.4.96)

(LegCo Paper No. LS 119/95-96)

Members agreed to support the subsidiary legislation.

(4)Position report on Bills Committees and Subcommittees

(LegCo Paper No. CB(2) 1091/95-96)

Members noted the report and that they had agreed the vacant slot would be allocated to the Immigration (Amendment) Bill 1996 as agreed at the last meeting.

(5)Further report by the Legal Adviser on outstanding bill

Biological Weapons Bill

(LegCo Paper No. LS 118/95-96)

Members noted that with the proposed Committee Stage amendment, both Mr James TO and the Legal Service Division were satisfied that the bill was in order. Members agreed to support the Bill.

(6)Legal Adviser’s report on bills referred to the House Committee under Standing Order No. 42(3A)

(a)Immigration (Amendment) Bill 1996

The Chairman said that Members agreed at the last meeting to form a Subcommittee to study the Bill, and to reserve a Bills Committee slot in anticipation of a Bills Committee being formed to take over the work of the Subcommittee, after the Bill was introduced into LegCo and referred to the House Committee.

Members agreed to set up a Bills Committee to take over the work of the subcommittee and that the chairmanship and membership of the Bills Committee be the same as those of the Subcommittee.

The Chairman advised Members that the Administration had on various occasions urged that the scrutiny of this Bill be completed as expeditiously as possible. Mr Ambrose LAU, chairman of the Bills Committee, said that the next meeting had already been scheduled for 29.4.96 to receive deputations.

(b)Plant Varieties Protection Bill

(LegCo Paper No. LS 124/95-96)

Members noted the Legal Adviser’s report and agreed to support the Bill.

(c)Merchant Shipping (Safety) (Amendment) Bill 1996

(LegCo paper No. LS 123/95-96)

Members noted the Legal Adviser’s report and agreed to support the Bill.

(d)Consumer Goods Safety (Amendment) (No 2) Bill 1996

Toys and Children’s Products Safety (Amendment) (No 2) Bill 1996

(LegCo paper No. LS 125/95-96)

The Legal Adviser drew Members’ attention to a representation received by the Secretariat which raised questions relating to the selection criteria of the safety standards for toys and children’s products. In view of the policy matters raised, he suggested that Members consider the need for a Bills Committee to study the Bill.

Mrs Selina CHOW suggested and Members agreed to form a Bills Committee. The following Members agreed to join the Bills Committee : Mrs Selina CHOW, Mr NGAI Shiu-kit, Dr LEONG Che-hung, Mr Fred LI Wah-ming, Mr James TIEN Pei-chun, Mr Paul CHENG Ming-fun and Dr Anthony CHEUNG Bing-leung.

(e)Stamp Duty (Amendment) (No 2) Bill 1996

(LegCo Paper No. LS 126/95-96)

The Legal Adviser said that the purpose of the Bill was to make permanent the provision for payment of stamp duty on agreements for sale of residential property which was conceived as an anti-speculation measure when first introduced. At present, the validity of this provision was subject to a time limitation which would expire on 31.12.97. In his view this proposal had policy implications and it was therefore a matter for Members to decide whether to examine the Bill in more detail.

Miss Margaret NG said that the legal professionals were concerned that the Bill sought to change the principle of the Ordinance i.e. for stamp duty to be charged on agreements for sale for property, instead of on the actual assignment of property. She suggested and Members agreed to set up a Bills Committee. The following Members agreed to join the Bills Committee : Mr Ronald ARCULLI, Mrs Miriam LAU Kin-yee, Mr LEE Wing-tat, Miss Margaret NG and Mr SIN Chung-kai.

(7)Further Business for the LegCo sitting on 1.5.96

(a)Question

(LegCo Paper No. CB(3) 707/95-96)

The Chairman said that Members had considered the wording of the 20 questions at the last meeting. As Mr David CHU Yu-lin had withdrawn his oral question, the vacant slot was allocated to Mr James TIEN.

(b)Bill - resumption of debate on 2nd Reading, Committee Stage and 3rd Reading

Inland Revenue (Amendment) (No 3) Bill 1995

Members noted that they had agreed to support the Bill at the last meeting.

(8)Business for the LegCo sitting on 8.5.96

(a)Questions

(LegCo Paper No. CB(3) 706/95-96)

20 questions (six oral and 14 written) had been tentatively scheduled.

(c)Government Motion

Resolution under section 100A of the Interpretation and General Clauses Ordinance (Cap 1) - to be moved by the Secretary for Recreation and Culture

(LegCo paper No. LS 127/95-96)

Referring Members to the paper, the Legal Adviser said that supplementary information could be found in LegCo Paper No. CB(3) 670/95-96 which enclosed a speech by the Secretary for Recreation and Culture explaining the background to the Minicipal Council’s proposals. He added that the drafting aspect of the resolution was in order. Members agreed to support the resolution.

The Chairman advised Members that the deadline for giving notice of amendments to the motion, if any, was 1.5.96.

(d)Bills - 1st and 2nd Readings

(i)Companies (Amendment) Bill 1996

(ii)Employee’s Compensation (Amendment) Bill 1996

(iii)Noise Control (Amendment) Bill 1996

The Chairman advised Members that the above Bills would be introduced into LegCo on 8.5.96 and considered by the House Committee on 10.5.96.

(e)Motion debate on "Broadcasting policy" - to be moved by Mr Albert CHAN Wai-yip

(f) Motion debate on "Review of major advisory and statutory bodies" - to be moved by Mr Bruce LIU Sing-lee

The Chairman advised Members that the deadline for giving notice of amendments to the above motions, if any, was 1.5.96 and that the usual speaking time and arrangement should apply.

(9)Any Other Business

(a) The mixed use of English and Cantonese in speeches at meetings of LegCo committees

(Miss Emily LAU’s note dated 23.4.96 refers)

The Chairman informed Members that in response to the Commissioner for Official Languages (COL), the Secretariat issued a note on 29.9.95 requesting Members to, inter alia, refrain from using "cocktail" language, i.e. Cantonese mingled with English words and terms, as it would be impossible for simultaneous interpreters to switch to another language just for those words and terms.

Miss Emily LAU briefly highlighted the main points in her note which was prompted by an increasing use of "cocktail" language by Members, Government officials and deputations at committee meetings.

Mr LEE Wing-tat pointed out that Government officials, who were trained to communicate in English, would on occasions have difficulty in using Cantonese in formal meetings, especially when special and technical terms were involved. He suggested that the Administration should consider providing appropriate training courses to staff to address the situation.

In response to the Chairman, Secretary General said that under
SO 2(1), Members might address the Council in either the English or the Cantonese language. In response to the Chairman, the Legal Adviser advised that on the wording of SO 2(1), the two languages were not mutually exclusive; Members could use both languages if they so wished. The Chairman said that notwithstanding the Standing Order, "cocktail" language should not be used at committee meetings as far as possible so as to facilitate the work of the interpreters.

Members had reservations about Mr Albert CHAN Wai-yip’s suggestion to penalize Members who used "cocktail" language. They agreed that, in exceptional circumstances, the use of English technical terms in a speech delivered in Cantonese was acceptable.

Mr Henry TANG Ying-yen and Miss Margaret NG were concerned about the implications of the proposal on deputations. Members agreed that although the chairman of a committee should advise a deputation not to use "cocktail" language, the deputation should be allowed flexibility if it had difficulty expressing its views in one language consistently.

To facilitate implementation of the proposal, the Chairman suggested and Members agreed to the following arrangements : PASA

  1. chairmen of committees, whenever necessary, should remind Members and Government officials to refrain from using "cocktail" language at committee meetings;

  2. simultaneous interpreters could activate the "bleep" tone to alert Members whenever they used "cocktail" language;

  3. the note on "Simultaneous Interpretation Service" dated 29.9.95 should be re-circulated to all Members; and

  4. Director of Administration’s assistance be enlisted in reminding Government officials to speak in one language as far as possible at meetings of LegCo committees.

(b)Meeting with the Rt Hon Robin Cook, Shadow Secretary of State for Commonwealth and Foreign Affairs

The Chairman reminded Members of the above meeting which would be held on 1.5.96 at 11:30 a.m.

Last Updated on {{PUBLISH AUTO[[DATE("d mmm, yyyy")]]}}