official record of proceedings thursday,...

LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 12 February 2015

6421

OFFICIAL RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS

Thursday, 12 February 2015

The Council continued to meet at Nine o'clock

MEMBERS PRESENT: THE PRESIDENT THE HONOURABLE JASPER TSANG YOK-SING, G.B.S., J.P. THE HONOURABLE JAMES TO KUN-SUN THE HONOURABLE CHAN KAM-LAM, S.B.S., J.P. THE HONOURABLE LEUNG YIU-CHUNG DR THE HONOURABLE LAU WONG-FAT, G.B.M., G.B.S., J.P. THE HONOURABLE EMILY LAU WAI-HING, J.P. THE HONOURABLE TAM YIU-CHUNG, G.B.S., J.P. THE HONOURABLE ABRAHAM SHEK LAI-HIM, G.B.S., J.P. THE HONOURABLE TOMMY CHEUNG YU-YAN, S.B.S., J.P. THE HONOURABLE FREDERICK FUNG KIN-KEE, S.B.S., J.P. THE HONOURABLE VINCENT FANG KANG, S.B.S., J.P. THE HONOURABLE WONG KWOK-HING, B.B.S., M.H. PROF THE HONOURABLE JOSEPH LEE KOK-LONG, S.B.S., J.P., Ph.D., R.N.

LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 12 February 2015 6422

THE HONOURABLE JEFFREY LAM KIN-FUNG, G.B.S., J.P. THE HONOURABLE ANDREW LEUNG KWAN-YUEN, G.B.S., J.P. THE HONOURABLE WONG TING-KWONG, S.B.S., J.P. THE HONOURABLE RONNY TONG KA-WAH, S.C. THE HONOURABLE CYD HO SAU-LAN, J.P. THE HONOURABLE STARRY LEE WAI-KING, J.P. DR THE HONOURABLE LAM TAI-FAI, S.B.S., J.P. THE HONOURABLE CHAN HAK-KAN, J.P. THE HONOURABLE CHAN KIN-POR, B.B.S., J.P. DR THE HONOURABLE PRISCILLA LEUNG MEI-FUN, S.B.S., J.P. DR THE HONOURABLE LEUNG KA-LAU THE HONOURABLE CHEUNG KWOK-CHE THE HONOURABLE WONG KWOK-KIN, S.B.S. THE HONOURABLE IP KWOK-HIM, G.B.S., J.P. THE HONOURABLE MRS REGINA IP LAU SUK-YEE, G.B.S., J.P. THE HONOURABLE ALAN LEONG KAH-KIT, S.C. THE HONOURABLE LEUNG KWOK-HUNG THE HONOURABLE MICHAEL TIEN PUK-SUN, B.B.S., J.P. THE HONOURABLE JAMES TIEN PEI-CHUN, G.B.S., J.P. THE HONOURABLE NG LEUNG-SING, S.B.S., J.P.


6423

THE HONOURABLE STEVEN HO CHUN-YIN THE HONOURABLE FRANKIE YICK CHI-MING THE HONOURABLE WU CHI-WAI, M.H. THE HONOURABLE YIU SI-WING THE HONOURABLE MA FUNG-KWOK, S.B.S., J.P. THE HONOURABLE CHARLES PETER MOK, J.P. THE HONOURABLE CHAN CHI-CHUEN THE HONOURABLE CHAN HAN-PAN, J.P. DR THE HONOURABLE KENNETH CHAN KA-LOK THE HONOURABLE CHAN YUEN-HAN, S.B.S., J.P. THE HONOURABLE LEUNG CHE-CHEUNG, B.B.S., M.H., J.P. THE HONOURABLE KENNETH LEUNG THE HONOURABLE ALICE MAK MEI-KUEN, J.P. DR THE HONOURABLE KWOK KA-KI THE HONOURABLE KWOK WAI-KEUNG THE HONOURABLE DENNIS KWOK THE HONOURABLE CHRISTOPHER CHEUNG WAH-FUNG, S.B.S., J.P. DR THE HONOURABLE FERNANDO CHEUNG CHIU-HUNG THE HONOURABLE SIN CHUNG-KAI, S.B.S., J.P.


DR THE HONOURABLE HELENA WONG PIK-WAN THE HONOURABLE IP KIN-YUEN DR THE HONOURABLE ELIZABETH QUAT, J.P. THE HONOURABLE MARTIN LIAO CHEUNG-KONG, S.B.S., J.P. THE HONOURABLE POON SIU-PING, B.B.S., M.H. THE HONOURABLE TANG KA-PIU, J.P. DR THE HONOURABLE CHIANG LAI-WAN, J.P. IR DR THE HONOURABLE LO WAI-KWOK, B.B.S., M.H., J.P. THE HONOURABLE CHUNG KWOK-PAN THE HONOURABLE CHRISTOPHER CHUNG SHU-KUN, B.B.S., M.H., J.P. THE HONOURABLE TONY TSE WAI-CHUEN, B.B.S. MEMBERS ABSENT: THE HONOURABLE ALBERT HO CHUN-YAN THE HONOURABLE LEE CHEUK-YAN THE HONOURABLE PAUL TSE WAI-CHUN, J.P. THE HONOURABLE ALBERT CHAN WAI-YIP THE HONOURABLE WONG YUK-MAN THE HONOURABLE CLAUDIA MO THE HONOURABLE GARY FAN KWOK-WAI


6425

PUBLIC OFFICERS ATTENDING: THE HONOURABLE MRS CARRIE LAM CHENG YUET-NGOR, G.B.S., J.P. THE CHIEF SECRETARY FOR ADMINISTRATION PROF THE HONOURABLE ANTHONY CHEUNG BING-LEUNG, G.B.S., J.P. SECRETARY FOR TRANSPORT AND HOUSING THE HONOURABLE TSANG TAK-SING, G.B.S., J.P. SECRETARY FOR HOME AFFAIRS THE HONOURABLE MATTHEW CHEUNG KIN-CHUNG, G.B.S., J.P. SECRETARY FOR LABOUR AND WELFARE THE HONOURABLE LAI TUNG-KWOK, S.B.S., I.D.S.M., J.P. SECRETARY FOR SECURITY THE HONOURABLE EDDIE NG HAK-KIM, S.B.S., J.P. SECRETARY FOR EDUCATION THE HONOURABLE PAUL TANG KWOK-WAI, J.P. SECRETARY FOR THE CIVIL SERVICE DR THE HONOURABLE KO WING-MAN, B.B.S., J.P. SECRETARY FOR FOOD AND HEALTH THE HONOURABLE WONG KAM-SING, J.P. SECRETARY FOR THE ENVIRONMENT THE HONOURABLE PAUL CHAN MO-PO, M.H., J.P. SECRETARY FOR DEVELOPMENT MR YAU SHING-MU, J.P. UNDER SECRETARY FOR TRANSPORT AND HOUSING


CLERKS IN ATTENDANCE: MR KENNETH CHEN WEI-ON, S.B.S., SECRETARY GENERAL MRS JUSTINA LAM CHENG BO-LING, DEPUTY SECRETARY GENERAL MS ANITA SIT, ASSISTANT SECRETARY GENERAL MISS FLORA TAI YIN-PING, ASSISTANT SECRETARY GENERAL MISS ODELIA LEUNG HING-YEE, ASSISTANT SECRETARY GENERAL MR MATTHEW LOO, ASSISTANT SECRETARY GENERAL


6427

MEMBERS' MOTIONS PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Good morning, Members. The meeting now resumes. We will continue with the second debate session. The debate themes are "Land, Housing, Transportation, Environment and Conservation". MOTION OF THANKS Continuation of debate on motion which was moved on 11 February 2015 MR FREDERICK FUNG (in Cantonese): President, this Policy Address is the "reddest" Policy Address I have ever seen since I participated in politics. The Chief Executive has failed to respond to the aspiration for genuine universal suffrage strongly advocated in the Umbrella Movement. On the contrary, the Chief Executive uses "Hong Kong independence" as a pretext to spearhead in the Policy Address an attack on the activity. He accuses them of advocating "Hong Kong independence" and forcing members of the community to take side, creating an atmosphere of either friend or foe. This tactic of his must sound familiar to Members, for this is precisely the political struggle approach adopted in the Cultural Revolution. On the pretext of sounding a warning, he pinpoints the conspiracy behind the scene without producing any evidence. He adopts tactics like besmirching and labelling, and even claiming the existence of the so-called external forces, to overstate the severity of the struggle. He seeks to defeat his enemies or political rivals, so that he may reap the greatest political gains. LEUNG Chun-ying is now using these tactics to turn Hong Kong Communist. The Policy Address, which used to be a solemn means for the Chief Executive to explain the specific policies and measures to be implemented in the coming year, has now been reduced to a tool for suppressing a newspaper published by university students. The rational, orderly and evidence-based approach adopted in Hong Kong all along has now been turned into political manipulation and gimmicks. LEUNG Chun-ying does all this for his personal political interest, for confusion in politics will render the passage of the constitutional reform package impossible, and his position will then be reinforced. Certainly, another consequence is failure to keep a rein on the various political forces.


President, coming back to the topic of housing, since LEUNG Chun-ying took office, there has been widespread discontent in society. The housing problem is a case in point. Although LEUNG Chun-ying says that the Government accords top priority to the housing problem, the property prices keep rising, which is evident that the authorities have failed to prescribe the right remedy for the problem. Let us look at the reaction of the public after the announcement of the Policy Address. According to the survey of the Public Opinion Programme of the University of Hong Kong, on 14 January, the day the Policy Address was announced, the satisfaction rate was 30%, the dissatisfaction rate was 35%, and the net value was -5%, returning a score of 49.5 marks. Two days later, after the public had digested some of the content of the Policy Address, another public opinion poll was conducted. The results indicated a satisfaction rate of 30% and a dissatisfaction rate of 47%, which arrived at the net value of -27%, and the score was 43.4. President, if public opinion polls are important and if public opinions count, and if the "constitutional reform trio" uses opinion polls to pressurize the pan-democratic camp and urges the latter to vote in line with public opinions, should the constitutional reform and the Policy Address with no public opinion support not be negatived? Should the pro-establishment camp also pay heed to public opinions? The public opinion poll indicates that Hong Kong people are dissatisfied with this Policy Address and consider that the Policy Address has failed to address the problems faced by them now. The findings of the public opinion poll are rightly saying to the Chief Executive, "Sorry, no!". As for the housing problem, President, I think Members may know that before 1997, the peak of the property price index was 172.9%. I will read out the latest values of the index for Members' reference. In July 2012, the time LEUNG Chun-ying assumed office, the property price index was 206.1%, some 30% higher than that of 1997. In December 2014, when Hong Kong had been under the rule of LEUNG Chun-ying for more than two years, the latest index was 277.6%, which was 71% higher than the time LEUNG Chun-ying assumed office. During the two years since his assumption of office, the index had risen by 34% in comparison with the first year. As for the price index for small and medium-sized flats, it was 217.4% at the time LEUNG Chun-ying assumed office, yet in December 2014, it was 303.2%, an increase of 40%. As for rental index, it was 144.8% at the time LEUNG Chun-ying assumed office, and it was 165.7% in December 2014, an


6429

increase of 14.4%. Regarding the rental index for small and medium-sized flats, it was 152.3% at the time LEUNG Chun-ying assumed office and it had increased by 17.3% to 178.7% in December 2014. I have pointed out right at the beginning that LEUNG Chun-ying has indicated his desire to address the housing problem properly and to help Hong Kong people solve their housing problem. However, he has only made things worse, causing property prices to become increasingly expensive, and making home purchase and renting of flats more difficult. These are the achievements made by LEUNG Chun-ying during his two and a half year of office. Last year, The Chinese University of Hong Kong released the "Hong Kong Quality of Life Index". The findings indicate that Hong Kong people who have a job and income will have to refrain from eating for 14.19 years to save enough money for home purchase, which is six years longer than the time required in the past. President, the Policy Address states that the housing problem in Hong Kong will be handled properly. Yet the reality tells the opposite. The authorities are incapable and have failed to do so. LEUNG Chun-ying says in the Policy Address that sites for the construction of flats are available everywhere, including the 150 sites in green belts, and the artificial islands to be created in the middle of the sea by a mere snap of his fingers, for the construction of tens of thousands of flats. The total number of flats to be provided under the various proposals should meet the target in the Long-term Housing Strategy, a document formulated by the Housing Authority (HA), that is, to build 400 000 units in 10 years. All the relevant information is set out in the two reports I am now holding. Yet, there is one peculiar point. We notice that there are several obstacles preventing the full realization of these targets. The first obstacle is that many of the sites are not owned by the Government, many of the sites require change of land use and many of the sites can be used only after consulting the public and District Councils. Let me cite a simple example to illustrate my point. Last year, the Government proposed to change the only site within the green belt in Shum Shui Po to residential use. At that time, owners of the luxury flats in the vicinity were the first to voice objection. Members all know that owners of luxurious flats are usually better-off families. It was the first time I protested and submitted a petition with these wealthy families. Apart from the owners of residential flats,


some green groups also opposed the proposal, and the District Council eventually disapproved of it. It is evident that the uses of the 150 sites in green belts may not be changed readily as expected by the Government. The Government does not have a magic wand, so it must allow time for overcoming these hurdles. Certainly, the case of the artificial islands which I mentioned earlier is more serious. How long will it take for the making of the proposal now ― when he snaps his fingers at the sea ― to the completion of the 60 000-odd units in future? How long will it take for the fantasy to come true? I have sought the advice of some professionals and they said it may take 20 years. In other words, the LEUNG Chun-ying Administration has to be in power or LEUNG Chun-ying has to be the Chief Executive for 20 years, which will mean four consecutive terms. This is how the 480 000 flats was calculated. The characteristics of Chief Executive LEUNG Chun-ying have been clearly displayed in this Policy Address, that is: his words are final, his words have to be followed and his words are the truth. However, to what extent is this the truth? Will this dream come true in future, or will this just be some unrealistic talk of a fool? I think the latter one is likely the case. A brand new idea is put forth in this Policy Address suddenly, as if it has burst out from a rock, namely to sell public housing flats to be completed in future. The scheme titled Green Form Home Ownership Pilot Scheme (Green Form Pilot Scheme) is a budget home ownership scheme, under which public housing flats will be sold to eligible applicants on the Waiting List or sitting tenants of public housing. President, earlier on, I mentioned a consultation document titled Long Term Housing Strategy published by the Secretary for Transport and Housing in December 2014. Although the Long Term Housing Strategy consultation document was published in December 2014, its preparatory work and consultation was launched as early as a year and a half ago by the Long Term Housing Strategy Steering Committee chaired by the Secretary for Transport and Housing and lasted for nine months. After that, the Housing Authority (HA) had spent another two to three months to examine the consultation findings and draft the report. Various parties have spent around one and a half year in total on the subject.


6431

During the one and a half year of consultation, the authorities did not mention a word about the Green Form Pilot Scheme, but it is suddenly put forth in the Policy Address. In other words, the some 200 000 public rental housing (PRH) units to be built in next 10 years as mentioned in the Long Term Housing Strategy may be put on sale according to the proposal in the Policy Address. Which of the proposals is genuine, the proposal in the Policy Address or the proposal in the Long Term Housing Strategy? Will the 200 000 PRH flats proposed under the Long Term Housing Strategy still exit under the Policy Address? Who is lying? Who is responsible for making the decision? If it is the HA, why does the Chief Executive not follow the HA's decision? If it is the Chief Executive, why does the Chief Executive have to give the HA a slap on the face two months later, and why does he have to give the Housing Bureau a slap on the face? How can Hong Kong people be convinced by such a political system and operation? How can Hong Kong people believe that the LEUNG Chun-ying Administration can tackle the housing problem in Hong Kong? The consultation work conducted for a year or so turned out to be "rubbish". It is the remark of the Chief Executive that eventually counts. In that case, the Secretary for Transport and Housing, Prof Anthony CHEUNG, had better shut up in future. Later, I found out the true story. I learnt it from the first-person statement made by Dr Andy KWAN Cheuk-chiu in a radio programme. He said that at a dinner with the Chief Executive, members of the HA and members of the Long Term Housing Strategy Steering Committee, he put forth the proposal on the Green Form Pilot Scheme. The Chief Executive was quite interested in the proposal and later included it in the Policy Address. The dinner was held two months prior to the announcement of the Policy Address. President, can you believe that the comment of a single person is more important and powerful than the 18-month work of members of the Steering Committee, members of the HA and the Secretary for Transport and Housing, and that the Chief Executive considers such comment more acceptable? (Mr Frederick FUNG slapped the Policy Address on to the table hardly) MR FREDERICK FUNG (in Cantonese): What kind of consultation is it? What kind of conclusion is it? (Some Members spoke loudly in their seats)


PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Will Members please keep quiet. Will Members speaking note that staff are listening to the proceedings through the public address and recording system, and if Members make too much noise when they speak, it will cause considerable interference to staff. MR FREDERICK FUNG (in Cantonese): Sorry, President. Yet I have only made such noise once, and I think it is not too much. Certainly, some Members may not accept this kind of anger, for they will accept any change made by the Chief Executive arbitrarily … PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): It is not necessary for Members to express their emotions by "slapping the table and the chair". MR FREDERICK FUNG (in Cantonese): Yet, Members can also slap the table and the chair. President, what is the consequence of that proposal? Obviously, it will reduce the PRH resource, which means the number of units provided will be reduced from 200 000 units to less than 200 000 units. The PRH resource should be used on people with the greatest housing need, but the said proposal will reduce the number of PRH flats, allowing PRH flats to be taken up by tenants with a higher income. In the midst of the shortage of PRH, the long PRH Waiting List of 270 000 applicants, the large number of people living in sub-divided units, coffin-sized flats or coffin-sized rooms, it is unacceptable for the authorities to reallocate resource without consultation. Regarding the Green Form Pilot Scheme proposed in the Policy Address, I hope LEUNG Chun-ying will change his mind in the face of the prevailing and pressing need for rental housing. He should at least maintain the flat construction target set out in the Long Term Housing Strategy, not to mention that the flat construction target proposed in the Long Term Housing Strategy is considered inadequate by the public. The second concern is about Tai Hang Sai Estate. The Policy Address has prompted residents of Tai Hang Sai Estate to hold high expectations and hopes, for the Chief Executive has expressed the desire for the Hong Kong Housing Society, the Urban Renewal Authority (URA) and the Hong Kong Settlers


6433

Housing Corporation Limited (HKSHCL) ― Tai Hang Sai Estate is owned by the HKSHCL ― to collaborate in certain subsidized housing projects. The residents thus think that there is a chance for redevelopment of Tai Hang Sai Estate. Moreover, some time ago, one of the directors of the HKSHCL, Mr LEE Shau-kee, "Uncle Four", had indicated his wish to donate land to the Government. Residents thus thought that redevelopment would be carried out soon. However, in less than a week, the Secretary for Transport and Housing, Prof Anthony CHEUNG, showed his power. He said that the Tai Hang Sai Estate site did not belong to the Government, so the Government had nothing to do with the redevelopment, neither would the Government be involved in the rehousing of residents. Did the Secretary for Transport and Housing know about the decision of the Chief Executive? Should we believe in the remarks of the Chief Executive who has named three non-government organizations to handle the issue concerning the Tai Hang Sai Estate or that of the Secretary for Transport and Housing? The residents were so excited initially to give their support to the Policy Address, but now, they just want to toss the Policy Address into the sea. The Policy Address has failed to bring joy to the public. It has on the contrary pushed people towards the edge of the cliff. Now, the residents do not know whether the estate they are living will be redeveloped. Though I may want to give my views, I do not know whether I should express them to the Chief Executive or Secretary Prof Anthony CHEUNG. Since "Uncle Four" is willing to donate the land, and for the interest of the residents and the utilization of the Tai Hang Sai Estate site, the Government should gladly accept the site and carry out redevelopment and make rehousing arrangements for residents according to the approach adopted for public housing redevelopment. There are only 1 200 households in the estate now, but after redevelopment, over 3 500 residential flats can be provided. President, it is obvious to all that the housing problem is very difficult to handle, but it is not an impossible task. Suggestions have been proposed in the community, yet the Government and the Chief Executive refuse to listen to these suggestions. The only proposal heeded is the one made by Andy KWAN. President, we have also put forth a lot of proposals. I will point out one or two proposals we have made, for I do not want to make repetition. We have proposed some long-term and practical options. In gist, it is the redevelopment of some large and old housing estates. We have identified 30 housing estates of over 30 years of age for redevelopment. Even if the


redevelopment of any one of the estates is announced today, the redevelopment will at least take 10 to 15 years to be completed. By then, the housing estates will be 40 to 50 years of age. If these housing estates are demolished for redevelopment, the number of flats provided will double or triple, for housing estates constructed in the 1930s are of 24 floors or lower but it will be increased to 35 to 40 floors after redevelopment. The second proposal is about the three military sites I once mentioned. These so-called military sites are not used solely for military purposes or for use by military forces at present. For certain sites such as the Gun Club Hill, people who are not family members or relatives of the military forces are also allowed to use. Given such a case, why do the authorities not negotiate with the military forces on an exchange of sites? Another inadequacy of the Policy Address in handling the housing problem is the lack of short-term measures. President, we have mentioned earlier that 270 000 households are waiting for PRH flats, and some of them are still living in sub-divided units and coffin-sized flats; these are all pressing needs. Recently, the Government has cleared up certain illegal sub-divided units in industrial buildings. But where can the tenants live after removal? Why does not the Government identify ways to address the pressing housing needs of these people? In fact, we have proposed eight to 10 short-term measures to the authorities, but the authorities have not accepted. I do not mind whether or not the Government accepts our proposals. Yet the Government should propose some practical solutions, should it not? Now that the Government has rejected the proposals but does not offer other alternatives to solve the problem, that is a cause of concern. If the Government fails to address the pressing needs of the public, what is the point of discussing policies in the Policy Address? How can the Policy Address serve its purpose? I have proposed a number of solutions and I will give a brief account of them, which include the implementation of rent control, the provision of an allowance for cubicle tenants and the redevelopment of public housing estates. From the announcement of the redevelopment of a public housing estate to the actual date of demolition, there will be a lead time of three years or so. By the same token, the redevelopment of certain private buildings or redevelopments carried out by the URA will usually have a lead time of three years before demolition. Regarding the flats acquired, it is a desirable approach to allow applicants who have been waiting for PRH for three years or more to move into these flats, so that their housing need can be satisfied temporarily. The Government may as well acquire or rent a whole block of derelict or vacant


6435

industrial building and convert it into temporary residential flats. Some colleagues have proposed lifting the rental restriction on HOS flats and this is the only proposal the Secretary said he may consider. I hope the Government will seriously examine the feasibility of this proposal in both the legal and policy contexts. If it is confirmed that the proposal will swiftly provide additional rental space in the market to help those people in need, we will consider it worthwhile to implement. President, when it comes to housing, I cannot help citing the inadequacies of the Policy Address, for I really cannot find any long-term and short-term measures in it, short-term measures in particular. No measure will be introduced during the remaining two years of LEUNG Chun-ying's tenure to offer practical assistance to the residents to alleviate the plight they face in housing. I so submit. MR JAMES TO (in Cantonese): President, when the public look at livelihood issues, housing is given paramount importance. Although the present Long Term Housing Strategy of the Government is to increase land supply, I believe that … for example, recently, property prices have hit new highs repeatedly and the prices of small flats are even more stunning. Even the prices of public housing units that can be put on sale are so high as to be inconceivable, so how can we make members of the public, in particular, young people, feel that there is a future in continuing to live in Hong Kong and that there are opportunities of development? I believe this cannot be achieved by the sole reliance on private housing. Why? Because there is an issue very much related to the economic structure. Therefore, this time around, I wish to present once again the general direction of my idea for the record. On several public occasions, I have told the Government that, for example, if an applicant has applied for a Home Ownership Scheme (HOS) unit for seven years in a row and if on the seventh year, he has reached, say, 35 years of age, he could be allocated a HOS unit and start to pay off the mortgage. What is my idea exactly? This is very simple. Of course, there is quite a strong tone of social planning in this but under such an approach, each person can at least have the opportunity to be eligible to buy a property. For example, if an applicant is 35 years old, he will be 55 after servicing the mortgage for 20 years. Of course, the World Health Organization now says that


people between 18 and 65 years of age are also young people, so maybe we have to adjust the age somewhat. This notwithstanding, the basic concept is that if an applicant has reached 35 years of age and still meets the requirements in respect of assets and income … I believe that if the Government can plan housing supply according to this arrangement … although it cannot be materialized within a couple of years, if we can work in this direction, we can at least make society feel hopeful about the future. President, Mr Frederick FUNG was very agitated just now and I can also understand why he was so. Looking at the Policy Address in isolation, it is stated therein that the Government must actively explore ways to increase the supply of sale flats and provide more opportunities for property acquisition through a multipronged approach by engaging public or non-profit-making organizations, including the Housing Authority (HA), Hong Kong Housing Society, Urban Renewal Authority (URA) and the Hong Kong Settlers Housing Corporation Limited (HKSHCL). The reference to the HKSHCL is actually related to the redevelopment of Tai Hang Sai Estate. This being so, concerning the site at Tai Hang Sai, I do not understand why the Government does not provide any financial assistance in the rehousing of residents, yet the HKSHCL is expected to be able to carry out redevelopment on its own and assist the Government in increasing the supply of subsidized housing. It really beats me. It looked as though the Government, by making that remark, had already done the job, or after the Government had said that, the party concerned would automatically know how to get the job done. This is not so, is it? As the saying goes, even the Buddha would be infuriated by this, would he not? The Tai Hang Sai Estate surely represents a valuable site atop an MTR station in the urban area. In fact, it is desirable to redevelop it and we have actually been craning our necks in waiting for this to happen. However, just imagine: The Government tells the party concerned to do it on its own but how possibly can it? Had this been possible, it would have been completed years ago but so far, this matter has been dealt with for five decades. The plan was conceived more than a decade ago and the Government has been urged to lend a hand. The people concerned have also come to the Legislative Council to make representations countless times. However, the Chief Executive went so far as to think that once a remark is made the task will be completed as a matter of course. This is not so, is it?


6437

When it comes to the Urban Renewal Authority (URA), I have served as its member for six years and have even gone to the farewell dinner arranged for me. The Government told the URA to increase the supply of subsidized housing but I find this most puzzling and do not know what it is talking about. The Government tells the URA to exercise fiscal prudence and this is even written into the relevant law. However, since there is now a strong demand in society and in a bottom-up process, the public are demanding that the URA assists them in redevelopment, the number of applications are overwhelming and the sizes of the sites are also getting ever bigger. But the URA is complaining as though it had a toothache, saying that whenever it carries out a project, it incurs losses. For this reason, it now makes its choices very carefully and does not dare implement projects on a large scale. Last year, the Government told it to review whether or not it is financially viable, yet this year, it has given the URA another onerous task. Normally, it would invite public tenders after taking over a site ― of course, at present, there is also the chance of hitting new highs ― but the Government told it that it could not do so and asked it to provide subsidized housing instead, and this means reducing its income. However, on the one hand, it is told to reduce its expenditure; but on the other, it is asked to reduce its revenue. If the measure to increase the supply of subsidized housing actually consists of only one site, that is, the site for resettlement at Kai Tak that cannot be used for the time being, we may as well tell it to take a one-off measure, that is, to do so only once. However, if the measure is only one-off in nature, my view remains the same: Do not write about this here in such a way as to make all parties wonder if this is a long-term policy. If this is a long-term policy, I have no idea what mechanism is needed to help the URA assume such a role. Moreover, in terms of division of labour, I think that if the Government really wants to increase the supply of subsidized housing, it should provide more land to the HA, so that it can undertake the work in this regard because in the first place, its principal task is to do such work. There is demand in the community, it is also used to carrying out such work and it also enjoys greater flexibility. The scale of the URA cannot compare with that of the HA. The Government has instructed one more organization to perform a new task for no apparent reason, yet it has not made clear if it wants the URA to do it long term. If the URA has to do it long term, policy support and such resources as land and even funds must be provided. Otherwise, the URA would only be trapped and can neither make any headway nor back out. In addition, what is the biggest problem? If the Government causes the accounts of the URA to get into a bind, what sort of situation would


arise? It would put the owners of old buildings awaiting redevelopment at loggerheads with people waiting for the URA to sell subsidized housing. Why? Because if the URA carries out fewer demand-led redevelopment projects, it can save some money and in this way, it can offer more subsidized housing. In fact, the Government is putting these two groups of people at loggerheads with each other covertly. President, I wish to talk about planning. I do not wish to talk about constitutional issues anymore, but if the Government lacks political energy and legitimacy but wants to deal with some rather controversial land development projects, I believe the Government will practically be incapable of doing so because there are a lot of controversies over many issues. As Mr Frederick FUNG said just now, there may be a green belt next to a luxury residential development on which the Government wants to build public housing, yet people there would voice fierce opposition. In fact, many issues are controversial in nature. Since the Chief Executive was elected with the support of only 689 votes, basically, society is full of suspicion and mistrust about him. Yet, he is tearing the entire society asunder, leaving a piece here and another there. In that case, how can he have the political legitimacy to truly overcome the challenges? All right, assuming that the Government can secure the land, I would then query why the Government does not use the land optimally after doing so. Take Liantang as an example, the Democratic Party has actually pointed out a number of times that it is necessary for the Government to consider if the retail space there should be expanded. Why? The Hong Kong section is 18.3 hectares in area but retail space will account for only some 10 000 sq ft. Just consider this: Recently, such issues as parallel goods and parallel traders have caused such a furore in the city and the Government already has such a control point in the pipeline ― we are now talking about border control points and Liantang is precisely a border control point ― if the Government can increase the usable retail area, it would dovetail with such a need and a control point will be available for visitors to do their shopping, then leave immediately, such that they do not have to go to Tuen Mun or other places for shopping, so at least, it can relieve the pressure. I do not mean that a single control point can save the world or Hong Kong, but the Government has not taken such a step. In addition, since the Public Works Subcommittee of the Legislative Council has recently approved the proposal to build the Quarters for Customs and Excise Department at Yau Yue Wan Village Road, my colleagues in the


6439

Democratic Party asked the Government if it could consider increasing the number of units because this kind of land is really hard to come by. However, the Government replied in the negative, saying that the number of units was already sufficient, that since the Government had already carried out the planning, it had to implement the plan and proceed according to the original plan. I really believe that since the Government has made such a lot of effort in finding the site, if the plot ratio can be increased by a reasonable rate, it should be done, should it not? However, the authorities did not do so and all departments only adopt linear thinking: Why is it necessary to do so? I am building the quarters for the Customs and Excise Department, so I will only think in this direction and all that matters is to complete the works project as soon as possible. However, can some facilities found in complexes, such as markets, cooked food stalls, libraries and sports facilities, be included, so that the facilities provided can be even more multi-dimensional or more 3D? Let me cite an example involving a smaller scale: For example, in the complexes of the HA, there are public badminton courts on the upper floors, so at least, they know how to make optimal use of a site. For this reason, I think that since it is very difficult to find land, should we not make optimal use of it and think harder? President, concerning my idea of enabling people aged about 35 years who have applied for HOS units for seven years in a row to be entitled to the allocation of HOS units, as raised by me at the beginning of my speech, I believe that in the long run, we must think in such a direction. No matter how the Government adopts curbs measures, suppresses property prices or points out such factors as potential interest rate increases in the future, in view of the overall supply of land to the Government, coupled with the purchasing power from outside Hong Kong, I believe that by relying on private land alone, the Government cannot resolve the difficulties faced by families the incomes of which meet the criteria for buying HOS units. President, as regards other more specific housing and land issues, my colleague, Mr WU Chi-wai, will elaborate them in greater detail. MR WU CHI-WAI (in Cantonese): President, after the presentation of the Policy Address, among the issues under the housing problem which LEUNG Chun-ying has described as the most important of all tasks, the proposal which I have raised in the Legislative Council a number of times, that is, allowing Home Ownership


Scheme (HOS) flats to be leased with premium not paid provided that the return will be apportioned between the owners and the Government according to their shares in the properties, has seen more discussion. In particular, I heard Secretary Prof Anthony CHEUNG say this proposal was worth further consideration. I consider that a positive response, since we are seriously handling a policy issue of reasonable utilization of public housing resources. I would like to take the opportunity of this policy debate to further talk about this part and respond to some misunderstandings in society about my proposal recently. I notice that the most common reason for objection, which was also the reason cited by the Secretary at the very beginning, is that this proposal will give rise to double benefits, benefiting HOS owners for a second time. Concerning this point, first of all, I would like to point out that if we look up the documents, we would find that the original intent of the HOS policy came from the Budget in 1976. It was put forward by Sir Charles Philip HADDON-CAVE, the then Financial Secretary, who stated that the objective of the HOS was to entice residents in public rental housing (PRH) to move out so that other families who were in greater need of low cost housing could move in. Hence, the earliest terms for the sale of HOS flats actually did not prescribe any restrictions on the owners of HOS flats with regard to the sale of their flats. Later, the sale terms only required the owners to pay the full premium based on the discounted price before they could sell their flats. Hence, in respect of HOS owners, especially those who bought the properties with the Green Form, the Government, through its policy, facilitates the capable PRH residents in vacating their flats so as to take care of those families on the Waiting List who are in greater need of public housing. Such an approach can provide an effective and natural ladder. Under this principle and against that background, Members will understand that the proposal to allow owners to lease their flats without paying the premium and then share the rental income with the Government according to proportions will simply enable the owners concerned to obtain the right to use their properties to which they are entitled in proportion to their shares in the flats and entice them to release the vacant units held by them to the private market, thereby increasing the supply of rental flats within a short period. Of course, some people may worry whether such a practice will lead to another round of property speculations. I would like to point out that many people have misunderstandings about this. The present emergence of HOS flats which are sold at sky-high prices is in fact what happens in the free market after premium payment has been made. Basically, the sky-high prices of HOS flats


6441

with the premium paid reflect the problem of insufficient supply of "first-time homes" in the whole private market. This is certainly a problem which the two Secretaries and LEUNG Chun-ying have to tackle all along. It is about how to increase the housing supply. And it is also the result of supply falling short of demand. If our proposition can indeed induce PRH residents to consider using the Green Form to buy HOS flats for which premium has not yet been paid, thus vacating the rental units occupied by them, it will help applicants waiting for PRH allocation to secure early accommodation and also achieve better utilization of the relevant housing resources. Of course, I have also considered the problem of speculations. So I have a suggestion as follows. If the Government concurs with the rationale of this policy, it may require a certain period of residence, say, 15 years, upon the purchase of the flat before the flat can be put on lease. The imposition of such restrictions will curb most of the speculative activities and uphold the Government's objective of producing subsidized housing mainly for the purpose of self-occupation. We understand that after a long period of residence, there may be changes in the families' conditions. Such an approach will give owners more choices in utilizing the housing resources they possess. It also provides the ground for effective use of subsidized housing resources. Some people ask if it is necessary to impose rent control in order to implement this special project. Yet in my view, the overall objective of the policy is to entice residents to vacate their PRH units for those in need. The imposition of such control will only undermine its attractiveness and make the reinstatement of this avenue for home ownership lose its effect. As such, I think if we are going to take forward this initiative, actually we are already fully equipped today. For example, if an owner wishes to lease his flat, first of all, he will have to apply to the Housing Authority for a certificate of availability for lease, just like the present requirement for HOS owners to apply for the Certificate of Availability for Sale when they wish to sell their flats. Then there will be some more specific procedures. For example, the tenancy must be handled by an estate agent and the stamp duty must be paid so as to ensure that the whole agreement has a sound basis. Certainly, we will have to address other management problems, but these problems will be exactly the same as those which we need to face in offering private properties for lease in the current market. What remains is simply the question of arrangements for the rental income. I believe there will not be any enormous difficulty in making such arrangements if the policy is endorsed.


Next, I would like to talk about the issue of rebuilding the home ownership ladder. After 2003, the Government broke the home ownership ladder and stopped the Sandwich Class Housing Scheme (SCHS), and the HOS was also terminated then. Now that we have resumed the construction of HOS flats, the next question to be asked is whether we need to formulate afresh certain measures to assist the sandwich class in home ownership. In the past, under the SCHS, families the monthly income of which was less than $60,000 would have the opportunity of access to subsidized housing. Hence, in my view, relaunch of the SCHS will allow Hong Kong families earning less than $60,000 a month to have different home ownership or accommodation arrangements, covering the poorest families which may rent public housing, the slightly capable families which may buy HOS flats, and the better-off families which may have one more option, which is to purchase flats under the SCHS. In fact, we may take a family earning less than $60,000 a month as an example. Allow me to cite the development of the Hong Kong Housing Society (HKHS) in Sham Shui Po for illustration purposes. The selling price of a flat with a usable area of 500 sq ft is $6 million. According to the present recommendation of the Hong Kong Monetary Authority, the owner may get a maximum mortgage loan of 70% of the property price. In other words, he has to make at least $1.8 million as the down payment. For a family monthly income of which is $60,000, even on my most positive assumption that the breadwinner earns $60,000 a month right after he has joined the labour market, if he saves $30,000 every month, it will take him five years to save enough money for the down payment, not to mention that the situation will definitely not be so ideal in real life. So, in this perspective, his need for home ownership can hardly be fulfilled under the current social situation. Even if it can be fulfilled, he will have to service the monthly instalment of $22,000 in the following 20 years. Looking at it from this angle, I consider that the SCHS can actually be relaunched to rationalize the present difficulty encountered by the whole society in home ownership. It will also enable the whole community, especially the middle class who have been the biggest supporters funding the Government's public policies, to be covered by the Government's policy. In my view, this is beneficial to society. On the other hand, the Policy Address proposes a "Green Form Home Ownership Pilot Scheme" which, I believe, is directed at the dropping popularity of the Green Form in the sale of HOS flats over the past decade. In my opinion, on the one hand, the problem certainly lies with the price. On the other hand, one will naturally ask, if I am already living in a PRH unit, having the right to


6443

reside in public housing, why would I want to dish out a large sum of money to merely replace it with the right to live somewhere else? As such, as I have said earlier, can the owner be allowed, after a certain period of residence, to lease his flat on the condition that he will share the return with the Government? This is another attraction which will give the better-off PRH residents a bigger incentive to vacate their flats so that families on the Waiting List who are in greater need can move into public housing more quickly. Of course, we understand that the Government has the responsibility to meet the overall housing need in society, meaning the responsibility of housing production. However, we also need to understand that if a resident is indeed capable, yet he continues to stay in public housing owing to various reasons, that is a waste of public resources to the Government as well as the whole society. We should know that at present, the average building cost of a PRH unit is $1 million. The amount of public resources used is by no means small. For this reason, should there be PRH residents who are better-off but still cannot fully afford buying properties in the private market, if there are different government policies in place to help them move from PRH units to the HOS market, it will be conducive to the utilization of public housing resources. Besides, I would like to talk about the situation of private properties. All along, we have pointed out that in respect of the housing policy, we agree that the Government should take the lead in the housing supply. Although the Government can control land supply, it cannot control the supply of private residential properties, as evidenced in the past few years when the Special Stamp Duty could only curb the demand but not improve the supply of private residential properties. In the present situation where property prices are beyond the purchasing power of most families, I think that the Government must dial up its efforts so as to strike a balance between the housing supply and demand. On this premise, I think the Government should seriously examine the housing need of the sandwich class and see if it can be addressed in a planned manner. Hence, concerning one point in this Policy Address, as mentioned by Mr James TO just now, the request for the HKHS or Urban Renewal Authority (URA) to assist in providing more subsidized sale flats basically reflects that in considering this matter, LEUNG Chun-ying did not have a full vision of the housing policy. He has not pondered thoroughly whether he actually wants them to deliver some units, or he really wants to reposition the SCHS afresh. We are aware that being public organizations, the HKHS and the URA have been under the criticism that they are merely private developers selling luxury flats. Why? Because after


all, they are respectively subject to restrictions under the law. In particular, restricted by the breakeven requirement, the URA is in fact a bit helpless. If the Government does not provide sufficient housing resources to support the URA's work, how can it meet the restriction and pressure from the breakeven requirement under the Urban Renewal Authority Ordinance? Hence, if the URA assists in developing subsidized housing, this will help it shake off the negative impression held by members of the public of it. Furthermore, it is the URA's principle to operate on a self-financing basis, and it has very high transparency in land acquisition and compensation. If it assists in developing subsidized housing, it can avoid criticisms of transfer of benefits. Of course, I have been rather worried, and on an occasion of the URA Board … President, I need to make an interest declaration because I am a non-executive director of the URA. We are rather worried that if the URA is merely requested to deliver some units in the absence of any relevant policy ― if the Government really wants to have some units delivered, actually a simpler approach is to buy a site for the URA. In fact, not many people will comment on what the Government intends to do after it has bought the site. However, if the URA is requested to conduct a scheme in its name to sell subsidized housing without support from any long-term policy, it will only make the URA wonder whether it is obliged to help the Government to make the books look good in its consideration of the matter. Actually, whether it be the HOS or sandwich class housing, the Democratic Party holds that a long-term policy should be put in place to promote such housing, and the policy should not be abandoned owing to market reversal. Telling from experience, that kind of mindset prevailing in the policy arrangements since 2003 has further made it impossible to remedy the current overheated housing market. With regard to land supply, I would like to point out that LEUNG Chun-ying has merely copied from the accounting journal prepared by Secretary Prof Anthony CHEUNG in the report on the Long Term Housing Strategy, showing no new ideas. Moreover, being former Convenor of the Executive Council, LEUNG Chun-ying shamelessly shirked all the responsibility for insufficient land supply to the previous-term Government in this Policy Address as though it has nothing to do with him. That said, the accusations concerning land supply made by LEUNG Chun-ying in this Policy Address reflect that LEUNG Chun-ying himself is a Chief Executive who is good at shirking responsibilities. He is unwilling to bear the responsibility which he should have


6445

shouldered as the Convenor of the Executive Council of the previous term. Moreover, he should be able to tell where the whole problem of land supply lies. With the professional knowledge which he always claims he has in the field of land and housing and in the deliberations of policies, it is impossible that he did not see such risks. LEUNG Chun-ying also indicates in the Policy Address that he is going to lay his hands on country parks. However, is it imperative not to develop country park land? We all understand that country parks are our backyard. It is not until all other room for land use has been exhausted, we have come to a dead end but still there is a shortage of land that we may consider the country parks. In reality, as we could see, 930 hectares of land are reserved for village-type development, while 1 000 hectares of agricultural land are held by major private developers, and there are brownfield sites in the New Territories. Regarding such land, I think Secretary Paul CHAN should consider whether it is necessary to make prudent use of the Lands Resumption Ordinance to resume idle agricultural land for the construction of public housing. Secretary Prof Anthony CHEUNG has repeated a number of times that even if he completes all the work on hand, there will still be a shortfall of some 30 000 flats. What should be done? Apart from seeking land from the Secretary and asking him to make up for the shortfall, what other options are there? When the Secretary needs to make up for the shortfall, how can he make use of the existing Lands Resumption Ordinance? These are worth consideration by the Secretary. Country parks are not like what some people say, that they are just pieces of grassland. Rather, they have undergone stringent planning procedures. Therefore, we should not alter them at will. Neither should we use development as the pretext and shield for demolishing Hong Kong's backyard. To search for land, the Government and various sectors of the community need to reach a consensus. However, given such low acceptance of the LEUNG Chun-ying Administration, he is actually unable to work in accord with others and resolve people's difficulties. What he has been doing all along is to act as the people's enemy. He has deliberately stirred up trouble even in this Policy Address. How will such a Chief Executive be able to forge a consensus in society on controversial issues and provide room for discussion?


Hence, I think the land supply mentioned by LEUNG Chun-ying will just turn out to be empty talk or a mere verbal statement in the end. Or, like what Mr James TO said, perhaps he treats words spoken as actions taken. On the transport policy, I would also like to say a couple of words. There are three small paragraphs which talk about the transport policy in the Policy Address. The first paragraph is about the Railway Development Strategy which has been announced earlier. The second one is about bus route rationalization, and the last one is the Universal Accessibility Programme. The residents in Kowloon East certainly do not wish to see the Government default on its promise again. So, as far as railway development is concerned, I hope that the East Kowloon Line project will be commenced as soon as possible and that it will not become another project of empty words. Anyway, back to the transport policy, I think there are a few questions to which the Government needs to answer. First, in view of the dominance of the railway service resulting in ambiguity of the roles played by other modes of public transport, is it the Government's duty to take the opportunity to re-examine the roles of various modes of public transport when the bus franchises are going to expire one after another? Moreover, in the Public Transport Strategy Study which is being conducted recently, should we add an important topic, that is, is there a policy objective which gives priority to public transport in road use? These two points will have direct impacts on the quality and performance of public transport service and even on whether it can effectively become the MTR's competitor, thereby improving the overall quality of transport service through competition. If the Government does not consider the whole matter from this angle, the ongoing public transport strategy review will merely repeat what is stated in this Policy Address, that more route rationalization will be conducted, that it will be positioned as feeder service, so and so forth. Actually we already know these things without conducting any study. Yet the most important question is, should public transport be accorded priority in road use? The franchise of the Eastern Harbour Crossing (EHC) will soon expire and the Government is going to recover it. Does the Government have any strategy to make use of the resumed EHC to adjust the traffic flow of cross-harbour tunnels?


6447

Last time, during the debate on a Fourth Comprehensive Transport Study, I mentioned that the growth in the number of private cars over the past decade is a problem which cannot be solved by road construction. In the Second Comprehensive Transport Study, the growth in the number of private cars was less than 2%, and it was also stated at that time that public transport should have priority in road use. Yet regrettably, this strategy disappeared unnoticeably when the third study on the same subject was conducted. Why? The Government owes us an explanation, but never mind, it is history. I hope the future studies on the public transport policy will chart afresh the position and direction in this regard. Otherwise, I cannot see how the Government can build our way out of the current problem of traffic congestion. Another transport policy which I am concerned about is the bike-friendly policy. Yet regrettably, with regard to the bike-friendly policy, the Government still sticks to the construction of more cycling tracks as the solution. It obviously neglects that bicycle itself is a mode of transport which should not be downgraded as a tool for recreational use. Since it is a mode of transport, naturally it travels on the road. If the Secretary has been to the cities in Taiwan, Japan or Europe, he will know that bicycle is regarded as a regular mode of transport in these places. If the Secretary thinks that primary roads cannot be made available for bicycle rides, can bicycles be allowed to travel on secondary roads in the urban area subject to safety specifications? That will make bicycle an effective means of transport in town planning. The roads in Hong Kong are relatively wide. We can really achieve such a result by designating a simple give way line or hard shoulder, thus giving bicycles an equal right to use the roads safely. It is only in this way that Hong Kong will become a truly bike-friendly city and attain the policy objective of incorporating bicycle as a mode of transport during the planning process. Otherwise, cycling will always be treated lightly as a kind of leisure and recreational activity. Lastly, I would like to talk about the environmental policy. I know that the Government will put forward the proposal of domestic waste charging later this year. In our view, the charge must achieve the purpose of waste reduction. For this reason, the charge must be levied on individuals direct. We support the option of charging according to the volume of waste generated by households. I hope the Government will make considerations from this perspective. Of course, I understand that the effect that can be achieved by this approach may not be big at the beginning, and many difficulties may arise in the course of implementation. However, to transform the established customs and habits, we


must start with individuals. If we adopt a charging mechanism based on the volume of waste disposed of by the whole building, it will lead to a lot of practices which we call "free ride". Such behaviour will only make it more difficult to transform the established customs and habits, and there will be no improvement though the policy is pushed forward. In closing, I would like to point out that the Government keeps saying it does not want to interfere with the market and subsidize waste recyclers. The Government, however, has not considered the fact that when waste is shipped to landfills, operating costs and externalities will be incurred all the same, so the community will still suffer from the relevant problems. As a matter of fact, the building cost of our "three landfills and one incinerator" is not small, involving project fees of over tens of billion dollars. The Government claims that it may have to subsidize recyclers' purchases of machines, and what they are facing right now is a logistics problem. That is true, but there is a greater need for the Government to take forward the policy so that they can save the related costs and expenses and really make better efforts in resource recovery. Of course, I think the most obvious tool which the Government has been unwilling to use is the cleaning contractors under the Food and Environmental Hygiene Department (FEHD) or the Housing Department (HD). Under the existing legislation, they commit an offence if they do anything at work to gain additional income. That is to say, even if the workers know very well that the materials have a value, they cannot recover such valuable materials efficiently on a large scale as they are restricted by the contract. Therefore, in my opinion, the Government may consider together with the FEHD and the HD amending these contract terms such that they can fulfil the requirements on cleaning work which they have to undertake, but at the same time they are given a new responsibility in resource recovery which will facilitate the expeditious establishment of network, thus improving the recycling effort in the whole society. President, I so submit. Thank you. MR TONY TSE (in Cantonese): President, in this year's Policy Address, the Chief Executive has talked at great lengths about housing problems and proposed some housing initiatives that will benefit the grassroots. I believe these initiatives will, to a certain extent, alleviate the housing pressure on them. However, I am disappointed with the failure of the Policy Address to propose any specific policy and measure to assist the sandwiched middle class.


6449

The middle class is a major component of Hong Kong. In recent years, the pressure of living on the middle class has continued to rise, with the soaring property prices and rents posing a heavy burden on their housing expenses. What is more, some middle-class people are facing a deteriorating standard of living which has affected not only their daily life but also their productivity. This has caused damage to Hong Kong's overall development. Hence, I hope the Financial Secretary can propose in this year's Budget concrete measures and tax concessions to assist the middle class, such as introducing a deduction for rentals, widening the tax band, increasing the amount of the Continuing Education Fund and expanding its scope, and so on, with a view to alleviating the pressure and burden on members of the public, especially the middle class. President, here is a question I often ask: Should housing be regarded as a necessity? If the answer is in the affirmative, the Government should formulate appropriate and relevant housing policies and measures to protect people of different strata and with different needs, including the grassroots and the middle class, to prevent them from encountering too great a difficulty in getting public rental housing (PRH) allocation or home ownership as well as providing them with assistance when necessary. According to the findings of the recently conducted "International Housing Affordability Survey", Hong Kong remains the most unaffordable place for five years in a row. Since the median property price is 17 times the median household income, I believe "affording a decent home" has become an extravagant hope for quite a number of people. Although I agree that the housing problem currently facing Hong Kong cannot be resolved overnight, the Government must set a clear target complemented by appropriate and relevant policies and measures for the problem to be resolved, or else the problem will cause irreparable damage to Hong Kong's overall development. President, the motion proposed by me in October 2013 on "Formulating a target ratio of housing expenses and a standard for the average living space per person" precisely pinpointed the relevant problem. Under my proposal, the Government should lower the ratio of housing expenses to total household expenditure of private residential housing households to 30% within five years, and further lower this ratio to 25% or below within 15 years, so as to alleviate the public's burden of housing expenses. Furthermore, the Government should formulate and implement a standard for the average living space per person, so


that the Government can have a clearer set of quantified data in exploring and developing land as well as calculating housing production. Unfortunately, the Government has all along refused to formulate a specific target. I am very disappointed with it. In the face of the persistently high property prices and rents, has the Government formulated a target to contain property prices or rents at certain acceptable levels? I have recently put some related questions to Secretary Prof Anthony CHEUNG at a meeting of the Panel on Housing, but he has so far failed to answer my questions direct. President, the provision of a home ownership ladder to enable more people to purchase a home is a consensus in society. Under a "Green Form Home Ownership Pilot Scheme" proposed in the Policy Address, some of the PRH units are to be sold to Green Form applicants, with prices set at a level lower than those of Home Ownership Scheme flats. This will not only help Green Form applicants purchase a home, but also release more PRH flats for allocation to families on the PRH Waiting List. Although I support this scheme, the Government must formulate a clear policy prior to the implementation of the Scheme to effectively monitor the resale of PRH flats in future to ensure that public housing resources will not be abused. Nevertheless, the Scheme merely targets the grassroots, which means that the sandwiched middle class can only say reluctantly that "it is none of their business". Hence, I hope the Government can make concrete efforts to care for those sandwiched middle-class people who are ineligible for subsidized housing but not sufficiently capable of purchasing private properties by providing them with a ladder to make it easier for middle-class households to purchase their homes and give them more opportunities of doing so. To the sandwiched middle class, private housing is currently their only option in home ownership. Therefore, a constant supply of adequate land for private housing development is most crucial. It is mentioned in paragraph 81 of the Policy Address that "the Government will relax outdated restrictions and streamline procedures to facilitate land development. For example, in last year's Policy Address, I announced lifting the development moratorium on the area close to Wah Fu Estate.". President, I support suitable relaxation of land control. However, the Government appears to have focused merely on the relaxation of restrictions on Government land. Why can the restrictions on private land not be relaxed as well? In my opinion, in reviewing and revising the Outline Zoning Plans to relax land control by the Government, consideration


6451

should also be given to whether or not the restrictions on adjacent private land should be relaxed in order to release more room and potential of development and boost the supply of land which can be used for development. I hope the Government can consider this proposal. As for long-term land planning and production, the North East New Territories and Lantau have greater development potential. Unfortunately, although discussions among members of the community have dragged on for more than a decade, the Concept Plan for Lantau proposed by the Government in 2004 is still not implemented. It is disappointing that it remains at the discussion stage. I hope the Government can advance at full speed and implement it expeditiously. Speaking of this Plan, there should still be quite a lot of agricultural land on Lantau. It is mentioned in paragraph 60 of the Policy Address that the Government has recently proposed a new agricultural policy and the establishment of an Agricultural Park with a view to encouraging the development of local farms and the adoption of modernized and diversified means of production. In a seminar organized by me the other day, quite a number of industry practitioners expressed the view that, when it came to promoting agricultural development, the Government should not only consider issues related to produce, it should also explore trades and industries related to or led by farms and produce, including the economic activities of different sectors such as retailing, catering, tourism, and so on, to enable the industry chain to develop in a more substantial manner, create job opportunities and enhance the economic benefits. We can see from the development of the agricultural industry that, owing to the Government's failure to formulate a comprehensive industrial policy, some trades and industries are dwindling or even moving towards extinction. The Government should indeed step up its effort in promoting industrial development and conducting a comprehensive review of land currently designated for agricultural purposes, including comprehensive planning of land suitable to be used for such purposes, to tie in with the Government's measures. For instance, the Government can stipulate that, unless public interest is involved, the use of the relevant land cannot be changed within 20 years or an even longer period, so as to encourage owners of agricultural land to actively use their land for agricultural purposes and boost returns.


It is mentioned in paragraph 64 of the Policy Address that the Government must actively explore ways to increase the supply of sale flats through a multi-pronged approach by engaging public or non-profit-making organizations including the Urban Renewal Authority (URA). And by so doing, more property choices and home ownership opportunities will be provided for low-and middle-income families. As such, the URA can hardly avoid facing more serious financial pressure in the future. Although it has completed quite a number of urban renewal projects, the URA has often given people the impression that the projects involved are single projects with the focus placed on renewal only while failing to highlight the results achieved by the URA in urban revitalization, environmental improvement and the upgrading of district economic vitality. In recent years, the URA has participated in quite a number of building rehabilitation projects by carrying out maintenance and repairs for buildings with no need for immediate renewal and improving the living environment of old buildings. Nevertheless, insofar as these renewal, development or building repairs projects are concerned, consideration has not been given to an entire district. For instance, although the URA has completed quite a number of renewal projects in Wan Chai, it has failed to carry out improvement and revitalization works to nearby roads and facilities, and even the whole of the Wan Chai district, such that the value of the entire district can be upgraded effectively. In this respect, there is a number of quite successful examples involving private developers. Not only have they successfully improved the environment of an entire district, but the value and economic efficiency of the properties concerned have also been boosted. The URA should draw on such experience and combine building revitalization with renewal projects for the purpose of carrying out revitalization works for an entire district to strive for greater efficiency. Furthermore, in order to alleviate its financial pressure, the URA should actively consider promoting and participating in the renewal and development of Civil Servants Co-operative Building Society Scheme buildings because quite a number of these buildings are dilapidated but have great development potential as they are situated in urban areas. Moreover, since these projects do not involve compensation for street-front shops, a high value-added effect can be achieved through renewal. I hope the Government can complement these projects policy-wise.


6453

President, since land is the most precious resource in Hong Kong, the Government is duty-bound to perform its land management work properly. In this connection, I support the passage of the Land (Miscellaneous Provisions) (Amendment) Bill 2014 in end-January by the Legislative Council to combat unlawful occupation of Government land and increase the penalties for related offences, so that the relevant land can be better utilized. Furthermore, the problem of unclear land boundary records has been a great concern to the surveying sector for many years. When the surveying of land boundary and the recording of New Territories land were carried out in the early years, it was time-sensitive and the survey equipment and techniques were not as precise and advanced as they are now. As a result, the delineation of land boundaries was quite sloppy and the relevant plans were relatively simple, thereby easily resulting in inconsistencies between the data on the actual and recorded land boundaries. This has not only hindered land development, but also given rise to disputes over ownership and land boundaries. Such being the case, the surveying profession hopes that a statutory status can be accorded to the re-surveyed land boundaries on the site to replace the rough boundaries on old plans to enable land boundaries to be delineated in a clear and uniform manner. Since such an initiative can produce a positive effect on land development, I hope the Government can address it squarely. Following housing and land development, I will now speak on transport and environmental protection. President, transport is closely related to land planning, development, the economy and people's livelihood. This is why I am very disappointed that the Policy Address has devoted only three paragraphs to transport policy. It is evident in the Government's refusal in early January to take on board the motion proposed and passed by Members on expeditiously launching the Fourth Comprehensive Transport Study that transport is taken lightly by the Policy Address. I believe such a decision is entirely wrong. The Government has all along emphasized a transport policy of making railway the backbone with other modes of public transport playing a complementary role. However, it appears that the viability of these complementary modes of public transport, such as public light buses, taxis and ferries, has not been taken seriously by the Government. Over the years, the relevant trades and practitioners have been under tremendous pressure, as their livelihood has been affected by the dominance of railway. According to the data provided by the transport industry, the patronage of railway has seen substantial growth annually, but that of other modes of public transport, especially ferries


and trams, has been on the decline year after year. Although trams run on tracks and are also an important mode of transport on Hong Kong Island, the Government's policies towards the development of the MTR Corporation Limited and trams are obviously very different. This is most puzzling indeed. President, transport should not be confined only to the local territory. I propose that, insofar as the overall transport strategy study is concerned, the Government should complement the comprehensive transport planning of the Pearl River Delta (PRD) Region, actively interconnect transport networks with the PRD, and synergize the complementary advantages of the Region. I also hope that the Government and all sectors of the community can attach importance to the connectivity between Hong Kong and the PRD Region in terms of people and cargo, rather than staying aloof and refusing to forge ties with the Mainland, or else Hong Kong's overall interest will eventually be sacrificed. Hence, I hope Members can think twice about this. On environmental protection, I am a supporter of green buildings and energy conservation, and Secretary WONG Kam-sing is also a leading facilitator. Nevertheless, I wish to point that the green buildings stressed by the Government are merely confined to newly completed buildings. It has, however, failed to formulate corresponding policies and measures to help and promote existing buildings to embrace more environmental protection elements. Although it is announced in the Policy Address that a new target of achieving a 5% saving in electricity consumption for government buildings under comparable operating conditions in the coming five years has been set by the Government, why does the Government not consider setting a similar target for private buildings? I must emphasize that upgrading the energy efficiency of existing buildings in Hong Kong cannot rely merely on the Buildings Energy Efficiency Ordinance, under which a commercial building completed before September 2012 or the commercial portion of a composite building is required to carry out energy audit. More importantly, they should be encouraged to achieve energy saving and boost energy efficiency. Hence, the Government should step up public education, raise the public awareness of energy conservation, and adopt a two-pronged approach in both hardware and software to help promote environmental protection. President, some Members are now staging a non-cooperation movement and engaging in filibusters in this Council. As a result, the vetting and approval of funding for a large number of public works projects have been impeded, the construction output of the industry has experienced a significant change, and the livelihood of the practitioners have also been greatly affected. Should this


6455

situation continue, the relevant trades, especially small and medium enterprises, might have to close down. At the same time, the measures previously introduced by the Government to encourage young people to join the construction industry and the efficiency of the efforts to nurture them into technical staff will be seriously affected, too. This will in turn deter young people aspiring to joining the industry and result in a reversal of the growing trend of young employees joining the construction industry in greater numbers in recent years. Meanwhile, the young trainees might even find it impossible to use the skills they have mastered when they graduate because of the filibusters staged by Members. Hence, I strongly urge those Members who organize and participate in filibusters to stop doing so in the interest of the public and Hong Kong. Thank you, President. I will speak again on other policy areas later on. MR CHAN KAM-LAM (in Cantonese): President, nowadays, in neighbouring countries and regions like Singapore, Macao, Shenzhen, Shanghai, and so on, infrastructure projects develop at a fast pace, as evident to all. In comparison, there are very often instances of delay, cost overrun, manpower shortage, and so on, in Hong Kong's infrastructure development, and projects in the pipeline are mired in endless argument, hence they develop in a tortoise-like pace, which has made people sigh with mixed feelings. In our view, however, it only takes a return to the reasonable and the practical in order for the community to get out of the quagmire. As for the problems related to infrastructure, we think that the Government has to adopt the suggestions contained in the experts' report that looks into the Guangzhou-Shenzhen-Hong Kong Express Rail Link, and address the matter with the following three approaches: first, make up for the grave manpower shortfall in many of the current and future infrastructure projects expeditiously and introduce skilled labour on the premise that local workers are accorded priority, such that projects which have already commenced may complete as scheduled in order to restore public confidence, and there is a need to proactively train up more talents for the local construction sector and technicians in short to medium terms to alleviate the current and future manpower shortage; second, review and perfect the current systems and procedures on works supervision to minimize the recurrence of human errors that cause delays to projects; and third, look into ways to simplify existing administrative work related to planning and development as well as streamline the flow and the overlapping consultation procedures in order to avoid prolonged deliberations.


President, I wish to talk about the recent oil prices and transport fares. In the past, public transport operators raised fares year after year because of high oil prices or inflation. Members of the public once saw that international oil prices had surged from US$50 or US$60 a barrel to as high as US$150. However, we have also seen how they go down nearly 50% from the peak recently, so public transport operators should well feel some sense of relief. Given the reduced operating costs, they should fulfil their social responsibility and reduce their fares substantially in the next adjustment exercise. The Energizing Kowloon East initiative is something which people in Kwun Tong and Kowloon East have been looking forward to earnestly. In fact, the community is rather enthusiastic about this concept of the Government. Kowloon East has seen rapid development in recent years, but the development of its public transport facilities comes short of the demand, resulting in some serious traffic problems in the area. In 2013 alone, about 700 000 sq ft of office floor space were completed in Kwun Tong; figures from the Rating and Valuation Department show that in 2014 and 2015, the supply of office floor space in Kwun Tong is projected to reach 1.83 million sq ft, accounting for 40% of all such space in Hong Kong overall. Given the rapid growth of the employed population in Kwun Tong, and that the Kwun Tong Town Centre Redevelopment, the Development at Anderson Road and the development of the former Cha Kwo Ling Kaolin Mine site will begin one after another, there will be a huge growth in the number of people living in the district, so it is necessary to re-evaluate the precise traffic demand. The Development at Anderson Road will bring very huge pressure on traffic, but as we saw in the past, the consultancy report was far from reflecting the truth. Given the serious congestion at both Clear Water Bay Road and New Clear Water Bay Road during the rush hours nowadays, it is not difficult to imagine the challenge for the existing road network to cope with the additional traffic demand brought by a population of 40 000 or so. It is therefore no surprise that Laguna City residents voiced against the development of the former Cha Kwo Ling Kaolin Mine site recently. From the figures provided by the Development Bureau to my question on the traffic assessment surrounding Cha Kwo Ling, they hold that population growth will not bring too much pressure on the traffic in the future, and they will implement some improvement measures, yet we still consider this debatable. Because a number of large-scale private residential projects in Yau Tong will come on stream one after another in the coming


6457

decade, and they will likewise exert a lot of pressure on traffic in the neighbouring areas, but we have yet to see any plans from the authorities to increase the public transport facilities with a view to alleviating the residents' worries. As the traffic setup and road network within Kwun Tong have long since been fixed, and given the difficulty for them to keep pace with the community's development, various traffic problems have begun to emerge. Situations like traffic congestion, cars and people vying for space at crossroads, pedestrians being forced out of the pedestrian refuge, and so on, are not uncommon. Meanwhile, the absence of parking facilities in some buildings has resulted in the serious problem of illegal parking on roads, thus complicating and worsening the traffic scene. The vehicular flow in Kwun Tong is so large that it has exceeded the capacity, and some road sections remain congested throughout the day. Overloading is even observed in rail transport, as evidenced by passengers having to queue up to the flyover before entering the rail station during rush hours. Nowadays, the traffic systems and planning in Kwun Tong have become outdated in the sense that the community's needs are not met, the quality of life of residents there are badly affected, and the transformation of Kowloon East is restrained as well. Therefore, we have all along been stressing that apart from increasing housing supply, the Government also needs to do better overall planning at the same time, especially that for associated transport facilities. Given the present traffic situation, it will be difficult to energize Kowloon East without some all-round improvement. Of course, we are pleased that the Government has plans to develop a rail line for Kowloon East connecting the Diamond Hill Station on Kwun Tong Line and the Po Lam Station on Tseung Kwan O Line to serve such populous areas as Choi Wan, Shun Tin, Sau Mau Ping, Po Tat, with a view to diverting road traffic and enhancing the overall transport capacity of Kowloon East. Development should take an integrated form instead of being geared merely towards the completion of flats and commercial buildings. Community facilities have to catch up in order to cope with the long-term development of an area. Nowadays, the community facilities as well as the centres dedicated to healthcare, the elderly and the youth in Kowloon East are far short of meeting the demand. The Government needs to accelerate the pace of community facility development.


Furthermore, the monorail system, which is considered a key plank in the Energizing Kowloon East initiative, has been proposed for more than 10 years since the review of the Kai Tak Development in 2004. The system is originally scheduled for commissioning in 2023, which has already been considered remote by the public. We agree that the Government should fully consult the public and the community. However, there has to be an outcome following the consultation, and a rather long time has been spent on the two rounds of consultation. We hope the Government will expedite the progress for speedy commencement of the project. In the current Policy Address, the Government proposes using Kowloon East as a pilot area to explore the development of a Smart City. The community in general regards the concept as very good, wishing that the Government will soon introduce concrete measures and announce further details so as to realize the concept. (THE PRESIDENT'S DEPUTY, MR ANDREW LEUNG, took the Chair) Deputy President, when it comes to housing, I believe that many people may have grievances but we, unlike Mr Frederick FUNG, would not ascribe all the problems to Chief Executive LEUNG Chun-ying. In fact, since he took office, LEUNG Chun-ying has been working hard to seek land, plan for new town development, and even consider looking into reclamation as well as relaxing the plot ratio and building heights with a view to increasing housing supply. Mr FUNG is only good at criticizing how unaffordable property has become since the introduction of various measures. Let us imagine the level property prices may have soared to today without the various stringent demand management measures introduced over the past two years. Members are aware that property development on many of the land parcels do not come in any way the Government wishes, and Mr FUNG has also said that it takes time to clear the hurdle of consultation with the community; hence, is it possible to address the housing demand of the 200 000 or so applicants on the Waiting List in a short span of time? When the Government proposed developing North East New Territories, he opposed; when it proposed housing development in Kowloon West, he led residents in petitions; as regards the idea of facilitating home


6459

ownership for Green Form applicants, he reacted strongly. To solve the housing problems, it is necessary for Members to make concerted efforts, offer more valuable input and provide support in the form of concrete action. Deputy President, I so submit. MR YIU SI-WING (in Cantonese): Deputy President, one of the highlights of this year's Policy Address is housing. Given the current high property prices, the formulation of short-, medium- and long-term housing policies in order to provide Hong Kong people with homes will be welcome by members of the public. Since the Government has such determination, I hope Members of the opposition camp will not oppose for the sake of opposition and filibuster over the Government's resumption of land and housing issues, so as to expeditiously resolve the housing difficulties faced by Hong Kong people. I am disappointed at the absence of any future development plan for Hong Kong hotels in this Policy Address. According to the data provided by the Government, between 2014 and 2017, the annual growth of hotel rooms is 4% only, much lower than the growth of overnight visitors in recent years. The estimated supply of hotel rooms by 2017 is 82 000, but in respect of the situation after that year, the Government has not provided any specific data analysis of the new supply. Although the Government announced last year that the six sites within the "hotel belt" of Kai Tak would be released to the market soon, the completion date remains unknown. The shortage of hotels will result in seasonal prices and high room prices, thus dampening the desire of overseas visitors as well as MICE (meetings, incentives, conventions and exhibitions) and business travellers to visit Hong Kong and driving them to neighbouring countries and regions such as the Mainland, Macao, Singapore and Thailand. For this reason, I suggest that the Government should, from now on, draw up planning for hotel sites in various districts in Hong Kong and set a reasonable growth rate for the period after 2017. In case there is a shortage of hotel sites, the Government may also consider encouraging the industry to convert factory premises or commercial buildings into hotel or guesthouse use, so as to alleviate the shortage of hotels in future.


Deputy President, at present, apart from the shortage of commercial and hotel sites, the shortfall of parking spaces especially for coaches is even more serious. The Government has started to recover four temporary car parks for some 500 coaches at Kai Tak. But after the recovery, basically the Government has not assisted the industry in identifying other parking spaces as replacements, thus leading to widespread grievances among members of the industry. The shortage of coach parking spaces has started to affect various tourism districts and some residential areas, and illegal parking and traffic congestion have become increasingly serious. Two years ago, I had repeatedly asked the Transport and Housing Bureau how best the shortage of coach parking spaces could be addressed. Secretary Prof Anthony CHEUNG also admitted the existence of this shortfall. Let me quote the original wording of his reply at that time. He pointed out that with the continuous increase in the number of private cars and private light buses, and so on, the shortfall of parking spaces had presented a big challenge. A decade had passed since the last territory-wide Parking Demand Study, and it was time to conduct another review. Nevertheless, it has already been two years since he made those remarks, but the relevant study is not taken any way forward, nor is there any measure to improve the situation in districts with an enormous demand for coach parking spaces, especially Kowloon East. I hope the Administration will not attend to one thing but lose sight of another when resolving housing issues. Instead, it should draw up plans to increase commercial and hotel sites. Also, it should expeditiously and comprehensively review parking demand in order to increase the supply of various types of parking spaces especially for coaches. Deputy President, it was announced in the 2013 Policy Address that a recreational landmark "Kai Tak Fantasy" would be set up in the Kai Tak Development Area. Last November, the results for the relevant design ideas competition were ready, but we do not know how things are going on. This year's Policy Address proposed to continue to take forward the "Kai Tak Fantasy" project and commence studies on its planning, engineering and mode of implementation. I hope the authorities can expeditiously announce the specific details, investment scale and implementation timetable of the "Kai Tak Fantasy" project, and deliver this so-called world-class tourism, entertainment and leisure attraction as soon as possible, with a view to injecting new impetus into Hong Kong's tourism. Lastly, I am concerned about the pressure on some transport and facilities in the New Territories by the increasingly large number of Mainland and Hong Kong shoppers and parallel traders on day trips. I hope the Government will


6461

communicate with such public transport companies as the MTR Corporation Limited (MTRCL) and bus companies, asking them to maintain order through increased staff and strictly enforce the relevant requirements, so that passengers with no luggage will not be affected by those bringing along large amounts or pieces of luggage. Meanwhile, the relevant companies may also consider offering more concessions to residents in affected districts in order to alleviate public grievances. Recently, some radicals have launched a series of unlawful protest actions by making use of the discontent among residents of the districts, thus affecting tourists and shops. Their actions not only serve no good purposes, but also stir up conflicts, to which I am strongly opposed. I hope they will stop their actions and seek resolution of the prevailing problems with a rational and pragmatic attitude. Deputy President, I so submit. MR LEUNG CHE-CHEUNG (in Cantonese): Deputy President, since the inauguration of the current-term Government, the housing policy, no matter of long or short length, remains a top priority in policy addresses. As the policy spokesperson, and the Democratic Alliance for the Betterment and Progress of Hong Kong (DAB) have been giving our support to the Government's suggestions and measures to increase housing supply, including all kinds of suggestions to find land. However, a desirable home is not just about having a dwelling place but also means an appropriate living environment, for example, efficient transport links, integrated community facilities, sufficient employment opportunities and appropriate living space. The DAB welcomes the new housing target proposed in the Policy Address. Of course, taking into account the current levels of property prices, the number of people on the Waiting List and the over-subscription of Home Ownership Scheme (HOS) flats, the target of 480 000 flats is going to be barely enough judging on the amount of private properties, public rental housing (PRH) or HOS flats. But facing an insufficient supply of land, one can only try to make ends meet. I understand that the Secretary for Development and his colleagues are working hard to find land, but even in dire situations sometimes we need to be practical and consider in addition to securing land for housing whether traffic and community facilities can cope. Sometimes haste makes waste. As a District Council member, I have strong feelings about this subject and really hope the


authorities, while finding land for housing construction, can also take into account the capacity of the original communities. Otherwise even if houses are built, they would not serve as happy homes for the people, but may arouse popular discontent which would disturb social harmony. Yuen Long is a new town of character where additional population has concentrated at Tin Shui Wai. In daily life, residents from the countryside and Tin Shui Wai both like to or usually shop at Yuen Long town. However, since Yuen Long was upgraded to a new town, there is almost no more space in Yuen Long town centre for expansion and it also cannot accommodate a cluster of shopping malls like other new towns. Therefore, the movement of people in the entire area is still concentrated on the "Yuen Long Main Road". And now this town centre has to support the daily needs of over 500 000 people, sustaining the worst congestion among the 18 districts. The Long Term Housing Strategy proposes the target of building 480 000 flats in 10 years' time. Yuen Long is definitely going to be a "major contributor". I have also searched for the information on projects which will be completed in the next 10 years. Not counting development projects on private land, nearly 100 000 flats will be built in Yuen Long ― it is just a rough estimate but it should not deviate too much from the exact number. Secretary Prof Anthony CHEUNG may say that 10 years are a long time and there is still time to improve traffic and community facilities. But looking at the next two years alone, over 13 000 flats will be completed and ready for occupation in Yuen Long, meaning the population in the district will increase by 40 000 in the next two years. Have the authorities formulated traffic and community improvement plans in parallel? Based on past experience, the proportion between residential land and land for ancillary facilities is 1:1.3, that is, every one hectare of additional residential land should be matched with an additional 1.3 hectares of land for ancillary facilities. The authorities have significantly enlarged residential land in Yuen Long and New Territories West. But have they accordingly increased the land for ancillary facilities so as to provide community facilities, open space or roads? I cannot say they have not but it is definitely not proportional. If citizens cannot get on means of public transport during morning rush hours and the streets are so crowded that they cannot move, how can the authorities convince the District Councils to support the Government in finding land and increasing population?


6463

The Policy Address proposes rezoning 150 sites for residential development purposes and Yuen Long will again be a "major contributor" which will provide 42 000 flats. Like the Secretary, I also hope to increase housing supply but if community facilities cannot catch up with the pace of housing development and population growth, housing construction may not provide citizens with desirable homes but social problems and discontent will arise in tandem. I hope the authorities can think twice before acting. Deputy President, there are not many new suggestions about housing in the Policy Address and their focus is on the Green Form Home Ownership Pilot Scheme (the Scheme). Such a suggestion has aroused considerable controversy since its announcement. The DAB has been hoping the Government can, in addition to HOS flats, provide more options to assist home-buyers so that those in need and who can afford home purchases are given opportunities of home ownership. The Scheme allows citizens another option of a desirable home besides public rental housing (PRH) and HOS flats. The DAB is open to this suggestion as it is only a pilot scheme. There is this view which criticizes the designation of a certain number of newly-built PRH flats for sales as compromising the chance for applicants on the Waiting List to live in new flats. But looking at it from a different angle, recovered flats are generally located in more developed communities with better traffic and community facilities. From a broader perspective, they may not be less satisfactory than new flats. Taking Tin Shui Wai as an example, old flats in Tin Shui Wai South sometimes are more popular than new flats in Tin Shui Wai North, because of the latter's advantage of more convenient transport. Let me give one more example. No new PRH estate has been built in the Tai Po District since the beginning of the 1990s. Even if new flats will be completed next year, there are only 500 of them and no more new flats can be supplied afterwards. Therefore, to PRH applicants who want to live in the Tai Po District, recovered flats there may be more attractive than new flats in other districts. There is another view which considers that burgeoning property prices in recent years have created one "premium PRH flat" after another, the unit prices of which are almost as high as those of private properties. If the Government again offers PRH flats for sale and PRH owners resell the flats for profit, it is in essence providing capital out of the public coffers for profit-making and encouraging speculation. Nonetheless, based on past experience, the sale of PRH flats


usually carries certain resale restrictions that reduce the possibility of owners reselling the flats for profit within a period of certain years. Of course, to prevent the Scheme from deviating from the purpose of home ownership and to respond to public concern over PRH resources being used for speculation, the authorities should include an appropriate sale prohibition period and alienation restrictions. We understand that public housing is generally in short supply, with supplies of both flats for rent and for sale falling short of the demands. If the Scheme can respond to the Green Form applicants' need for home ownership without affecting the waiting time of families for allocation of PRH flats, we should adopt an open attitude and allow the Housing Authority to study the details and make a final determination after the details are announced and the public have expressed their opinions. Deputy President, apart from the Scheme, another focus concerning PRH is the rumour that the Financial Secretary does not intend to provide a one-month rent waiver to PRH tenants in the Budget to be published at the end of this month, although the public coffers are inundated with cash. Though according to the traditional division of work, the rent waiver proposal will usually be discussed in the Budget debate, I notice that one of the themes of this year's Policy Address is "improve people's livelihood" and the conclusion mentions the Government will "improve the livelihood of the general public, particularly the underprivileged" by "making effective use of financial resources". Such being the case, I also would like to make use of my speaking time today to state the DAB's position against the withdrawal of PRH rent waiver. Deputy President, last year the Financial Secretary forecast that the surplus for 2013-2014 would be $12 billion. To relieve people's hardship, he proposed relief measures worth $20 billion, including paying one month's rent for PRH tenants which involved $1 billion. Such an amount only accounted for 5% of the total relief measure expenses but benefited close to 770 000 PRH tenants, involving more than 2.1 million people. This year, according to the predictions by various sources, the fiscal surplus will be between $50 billion to $60 billion, four or five times that of last year just by conservative estimate. In relative terms, paying one month's rent for PRH tenants may only be some "odd cents" in the massive surplus. Looking ahead at the coming year, the people are going to face the same inflation pressure and the risk of an economic downturn, suffering from pretty the same conditions as last year. As the coffers have been


6465

persistently inundated with cash and citizens are facing a similar economic environment, we do not understand the rationale behind the Financial Secretary withdrawing relief measures, including a rent waiver. I have noticed the view that as PRH tenants are already enjoying low rents, an additional one-month rent waiver would mean double benefits. We can understand such kind of views but I hope everyone can consider two points. First, families eligible for PRH are the grassroots of society. Even if they have moved into PRH flats, it does not mean they can become rich suddenly. According to the Quarterly Report on General Household Survey from July to September 2014 released by the Census and Statistics Department, the median monthly household income in Hong Kong was $23,500, but the median income of public housing tenants was just $14,200, only about 60% of that of the overall Hong Kong figure. The numbers explain everything. Public housing tenants might now be living in an improved environment but in general they are still grassroots with limited incomes. We understand that some families, particularly those "N have-not families" need support from society more so than PRH tenants, but it does not mean the latter does not need help. Second, if resources in society are scarce and the Government can only make a difficult choice between PRH tenants and "N have-not families", it is another case. However, right now there is not only a fiscal surplus, but the coffers are inundated with cash. There is absolutely no need to "compete for the most miserable status" and set priorities. Therefore, we do not agree that the Government should give discriminatory treatment to PRH tenants who are also grass-root families and turn a blind eye to the financial hardship they are facing. Lastly, according to news leaked by the media, the authorities plan to keep tax rebates, rates waiver and an extra allowance in various welfare allowances while cancelling the PRH rent waiver. In other words, last year's relief measures are mostly maintained except the PRH rent waiver. As the saying goes "inequality, not scarcity, is the source of worry". As the Policy Address has made it a point to "improve the livelihood of the general public, particularly the underprivileged" by "making effective use of financial resources", we oppose withdrawing the PRH rent waiver in the coming budget. I so submit.


MR POON SIU-PING (in Cantonese): Deputy President, the labour sector is disappointed at the 2015 Policy Address as the part related to labour in the Policy Address is even a far cry from being "better than nothing". Yet, there is a lengthy and verbose part covering the policies which directly impinge on labour rights. I will comment on the relevant labour issues in the subsequent session. In this session, I will share my views on the relationship between development and labour. When it comes to development, it cannot take place without the construction industry, especially construction workers. In the Policy Address, the contents related to construction workers are mainly found in paragraphs 103, 104 and 105. However, the relationship between the construction industry and labour is described in a fragmented manner in these paragraphs for an ulterior purpose. Paragraph 103 stated that the stipulation of "designated workers for designated trades" under the Construction Workers Registration Ordinance has raised the quality of construction works and level of skills. Yet, the Policy Address did not mention a single word about the surge in the number of industrial casualties in the construction industry. As for how to improve the industrial safety of the construction industry, the Government only made brief mention of such issue under the subject of "Employee's Welfare" in the Policy Agenda. After joining the Legislative Council, industrial safety, especially that of the construction industry, has always been my concern. I have asked three questions and moved two motions altogether. In the Policy Address consultation this year, I asked the Government to review the progress of public works and comprehensively enhance occupational safety. These suggestions, however, were not adopted in the Policy Address. At the briefing on the Policy Address, the Secretary said, in reply to the question on industrial casualties of the construction industry, that there had been a drop in the overall industrial accident rates. However, statistics may not reflect the reality. Last month, Mr CHAN Kin-por of this Council moved a motion on "Combating insurance frauds" for debate. In my speech, I cited the statistics of the Labour Department (LD) and pointed out that in 2012, there was over 900 convicted cases in which employers were charged with not taking out labour insurance policies, an increase of more than 30% as compared with 2011. The main reason for the surge in the number of cases in which employers did not take


6467

out labour insurance policies was the drastic increase in the premium of labour insurance policies. According to the annual reports of the Office of the Commissioner of Insurance, the premium of Employees' Compensation business had increased 8% in 2011 and there was an even larger increase of 36.4% in 2012. Market prices cannot be deceptive and, sometimes, they can even reflect the reality more accurately than statistics. Pricing of the insurance sector is based on risks. The reason for the sharp spiral of increase in premium of labour insurance policies was the surge in the number of industrial accidents, especially fatal industrial accidents. High premiums of labour insurance policies not only resulted in employers not taking out labour insurance policies, it also led to a more serious problem, that is, concealment of occupational injuries. In order to reduce the cost of labour insurance policies, employers coerced or offered incentives to employees so that the latter would not report the occupational injuries to the LD. Every year, my office and the labour union to which I belong will receive many requests for assistance from this kind of injured workers. According to the LD's statistical analysis on occupational injury, there is a downward trend in the number of industrial injury cases and the accident rate per 1 000 workers. However, this downward trend is contradictory to the several-fold increase in labour insurance premiums in recent years. The Secretary said that there has been a drop in the overall industrial accident rates, but I doubt such figure. It is because the LD's statistics on occupational injuries do not include unreported cases. There is a type of industrial accident which cannot be concealed, that is, fatal industrial accidents. In recent years, there has been an increasing number of fatal industrial accidents. Basically, at least one employee died in an industrial accident every two weeks on average. The "outstanding records" of Hong Kong are listed in the Hong Kong Yearbook every year. For example, according to the Hong Kong Yearbook 2013, Hong Kong was ranked the world's third most competitive economy; its economic growth was consistently faster than most high-income economies; and its per capita Gross Domestic Product is one of the highest in Asia. Despite having an economy with such a remarkable achievement, at least one employee died in an industrial accident every two weeks on average. Can the Government remain indifferent to that? In the first half of last year, there were 15 fatal industrial accidents, a dramatic increase of


200% as compared to the corresponding period in 2013 while the number of industrial accidents in the construction industry had even increased by 300%. Secretary, when we talk a lot about development and importation of labour, how should we face the fact that at least one worker died in an industrial accident every two weeks? The Policy Address did not address these problems. The contents in the Policy Address which were related to the construction industry were simply saying there is a manpower shortage and therefore we have to import labour. It even misled the public that if anyone opposes importation of labour, then he has to be held accountable for the delay of projects, such as public rental housing (PRH), hospitals, schools and public transport, as well as the increase in project costs, attempting to provoke division among the grassroots with an extremely vicious motive. Will any parents ever agree to letting their children enter an industry with one employee dying every two weeks? Paragraphs 103 and 104 of the Policy Address stated that we should raise the professional image of the construction industry and attract more people to join the industry. My advice to the Secretary is that if we do not improve the problem of industrial casualties in the construction industry, we cannot attract more young people to join the industry. The Bureau did not review the various outdated rules and malpractices of the construction industry and refused to face the main reason why young people do not join the industry. Instead, it simply emphasizes that there is a manpower shortage and therefore we have to import labour. Such an approach disregards the root of the problem. When I conveyed my views on the Policy Address to the Chief Executive, I mentioned that, "The Government plans to implement construction projects extensively and invest over $70 billion in public works every year. According to the estimation of the Construction Industry Council, the overall construction expenditure will remain at the level of $200 billion in the next few years. However, if we implement too many construction projects at the same time, it will do no good to the construction of infrastructure and development of the industry. We believe that apart from enhancing the overall competitiveness of Hong Kong, the Government's investment in public works should, more importantly, regulate the market of the construction industry. We hope the Government will review the construction progress of the public works".


6469

Housing is an extremely sensitive issue in Hong Kong and delays in PRH construction projects will provoke a huge social outcry. Yet, the delays in PRH construction projects definitely have nothing to do with labour shortage. From 2000 to 2001, the former Chief Executive, TUNG Chee-hwa, actually constructed 55 492 PRH units, which outnumbered the number of units constructed last year (14 057 units) and even exceeded the total number of PRH units to be built in the next two years (33 200 units) as forecast in the Policy Address. During that period, there was no shortage of labour. The Government is now saying that there is a labour shortage in the construction industry. However, the fundamental reason lies in the fact that the Government has implemented too many projects, such as PRH, hospitals, schools and public transport, at the same time. As a result, it is inevitable that there will be a labour shortage and an increase in project costs. Yet, the Government is the only party to blame for such a consequence. Deputy President, the labour sector supports development. The peak and non-peak seasons of the construction industry are very obvious. Seasonal fluctuations of the construction industry could have been regulated by the public works of the Government. When there is an increase in private construction output, the Government can regulate the construction of public works accordingly so as to avoid a surge in construction output and the resulting additional social cost. Similarly, when there is shrinkage of private construction output, the Government can launch more public works to meet the shortfall in private construction projects. A continuous and stable implementation of public works in the construction industry will only bring benefits instead of harms to the healthy development and recruitment of the construction industry as well as the livelihood protection and health of workers. The Chief Executive, LEUNG Chun-ying, visited Shenzhen at the end of last month. He said he was really envious of the development pace of Shenzhen. In response to this remark, Mr WANG Rong, Party Secretary of Shenzhen, said that, "While Shenzhen is learning from the quality and quantity of Hong Kong, Hong Kong is still looking back at the pace of Shenzhen." Mr WANG Rong may not be aware that the quality and quantity of development in Hong Kong were achieved at the expense of one worker killed every two weeks. Yet, he implicitly criticized that LEUNG Chun-ying still remained in a state of solely focusing on the pace of development and it was even worse than Shenzhen. This criticism addressed the crux of the problem and pointed out the blind spot of development in Hong Kong. I urge the Development Bureau to review afresh


the progress of public works and, in collaboration with the Labour and Welfare Bureau, comprehensively enhance industrial safety and terminate any proposal of expanding labour importation. Deputy President, I so submit. MR JEFFREY LAM (in Cantonese): Deputy President, the Business and Professionals Alliance for Hong Kong (BPA) believes that the direction of the Policy Address is correct but concerning many of the details, we also hope that the Financial Secretary can give an account of the detailed fiscal arrangements in the Budget to be released on 25th of this month. We hope that the development of Hong Kong society as a whole can be balanced and forward-looking, while economic development is also an important aspect. We hope all the more that the Financial Secretary can adopt more measures to assist the middle class, small and medium enterprises (SMEs), and so on, because even though they are affected, they do not speak up very often. Recently, due to inflation and the impact of some movements on their businesses, they have suffered major blows. For this reason, if there is close to $60 billion of surplus, I believe more tax deductions should be offered to the middle class because ultimately, the money would be channelled back to society and the middle class can also have some spare money to buy a cup of coffee or watch a movie. I believe that it is by no means excessive if the amount of tax rebate is increased to $15,000. If measures can be taken to ease the difficulties faced by SMEs, this would enable them to continue to survive the uncertainties of this year. I believe the Financial Secretary will also show compassion for members of the grassroots confronted by problems and I also hope that he can take more measures to help the grassroots. Deputy President, living in peace and working with contentment is the common hope of all Hong Kong people. After the release of the Policy Address, the attention of society is invariably focused on such issues as housing and land supply. One of the issues arousing greater concern is the Government's proposal on reviewing the land use of green belts. Some people in society even described the Government in such a light that it looks as though the Government had committed an unpardonable sin. In fact, the Government proposed the construction of buildings in green belts with low conservation value near the urban area, so as to ease the problem of a tight supply of land for housing in Hong Kong, so is this really such a heinous crime? In the past year, we could see property prices hitting new highs repeatedly and now, properties valued at


6471

$4 million for first-time home buyers are very hard to come by. Deputy President, if you can find any, you really have to publish a notice in the newspapers to provide the information to young people who aspire to buying their first home. In fact, units valued at $4 million have all but disappeared from the urban area, so voices of discontent from many members of the middle class and small families can be heard and the waiting time for public housing is also very long. When new Home Ownership Scheme (HOS) flats were put up for sale, 130 000 applications were received. Rents have been hitting new highs all the time and millions of Hong Kong people are troubled by the housing problem. In the past few years, housing supply in Hong Kong has been very tight and in the next five to 10 years, land and housing supply will also face tall challenges. If the Government cannot increase land and housing supply in the short and medium terms, public discontent may get out of hand. In view of this, in order to do a good job in this regard, I believe the Government must speed up and boost the intensity of its efforts. For this reason, I support the Government in actively studying the development of green belts, so as to develop land resources. Certainly, I am not talking about sites with high conservation value, for example, country parks, but low-value green belts in a state of disuse located near urban areas, for example, in such places as Tung Chung on Lantau and Hung Shui Kiu in Yuen Long. Since the sites in these places are close to fairly well-developed new towns with sound community facilities, such as transport, roads, sewage discharge facilities, and so on, if they can be developed, they can be turned from potential sites into disposed sites in a relatively short time, so that the problem of housing supply in the short and medium terms can be solved. Of course, the development of green belts is a very sensitive topic, particularly in the present political environment. If the Government wants to conduct a review, the going will be very rough. I hope some political parties and groupings will seriously consider the wish of the public to live in peace and work with contentment, rather than one-sidedly object to the development of land by the Government. At times, I think that some people really oppose for the sake of opposition. When the Government is considering all possible ways to find land, they are hindering the Government. However, when housing supply experiences an acute shortage, they criticize the Government for doing nothing. In doing so, do they have their own political interests or the welfare of the public in mind?


Deputy President, another more inflammable subject related to housing in the Policy Address is the proposal to enhance the Supplementary Labour Scheme. It is indisputable that there is a shortage of labour in the construction industry in Hong Kong. Be it the Government or members of the industry, they all admit that at present, manpower in such work processes as bar benders, plank fixing workers, and so on, is experiencing an acute shortage. Coupled with the launch of a number of large-scale infrastructure projects in the coming years, the shortfall in workers for projects in the public and private sectors will reach a total of over 10 000. Of course, the high property prices in Hong Kong are directly related to the manpower shortage and high labour costs in the construction industry. I believe that the proposal to enhance the Supplementary Labour Scheme in the Policy Address will be conducive to solving the problem of manpower shortage in the construction industry. I also believe that it is only when manpower in the construction industry is increased that housing construction in Hong Kong will be speeded up and there will be hope of construction costs seeing a drop. However, the prerequisite for the importation of workers by the Government is that employment opportunities for local workers will not be affected. For this reason, I support giving priority to relaxing the importation of workers for government projects and large infrastructure projects. Deputy President, in fact, many places near Hong Kong, for example, Macao and Singapore, began to import workers to enhance their competitiveness and speed up their economic development years ago. I believe Hong Kong can make reference to such experience. Both employers and employees can also have in-depth and rational discussions and there is no need to regard the issue or measure of importing workers as anathema. Our actions should be founded on the development of the Hong Kong economy and the welfare of the public. Deputy President, I so submit. DR KENNETH CHAN (in Cantonese): Deputy President, in this session, I will first discuss environmental issues, and then talk about the situation of transport and development. After that, I will proceed to an overall observation and analysis about this Policy Address. Deputy President, during the Chief Executive election LEUNG Chun-ying made a boast on the topics of environmental protection and nature conservation, claiming that waste reduction at source will be the dominant policy, and that


6473

municipal solid waste will be disposed of by incineration only when necessary. He also indicated that he would implement the waste producer responsibility schemes and perfect the conservation and development of country parks. But in the past year, what was most evident to us seemed to be the Government sparing no effort to bulldoze through the extension of the three landfills and its plan to construct incineration facilities in Shek Ku Chau. Meanwhile, from recent news reports, we have come to know that according to the Government's statistics, Hong Kong people's per capita disposal rate has hit a record high, but the waste recovery rate continues to drop. The Government originally indicated that by 2015, the recovery rate should reach 55%, or 50% by 2014. However, according to the final results of 2013 released recently, our recovery rate only amounted to 37%. So, how can we live up to the pledge in the Hong Kong Blueprint for Sustainable Use of Resources, namely a recovery rate of 55% by 2022? I must hereby make myself clear in the first place. I have long been worried that the Government will default on honouring its promise, meaning that after we have approved the proposal to extend the three landfills and construct an incinerator facility this time around, the Government will soon ask us again to approve the funding for the extension of the landfill in Tuen Mun, New Territories West, and may propose an additional incinerator facility. Is such a Government one that values integrity and adheres to credibility? There is yet another point showing that this Policy Address has gone too far. The incumbent Government has long been indicating that a balance should be struck between environmental protection and development. But in an abrupt manner, it has corrected itself by saying that environmental protection will impede development, leaving both in a conflicting state. Does this mean that the tone employed in an election is "disposable" after the election? The green groups have also given their responses, but I will not repeat them here. Nevertheless, the Government has made a striking remark that goes like this, "A substantial amount of land was zoned for non-development uses such as country parks to improve the environment … These are causes of the serious shortage of housing supply that we have been facing in recent years". Such words from LEUNG Chun-ying have infuriated the green groups and me as Deputy Chairman of the Panel on Environmental Affairs. As to other green measures, the Policy Address mentioned low emission zones, a marine park and energy conservation targets. But in my opinion, most of them are "hollow tactics". The New World First Bus Services Limited and Citybus Limited anticipated long ago that by the end of this year, only 87% of the


low-emission buses deployed in low emission zones would fall into the low emission category, and full implementation of the scheme would at least be delayed to the third quarter of 2016. Regarding the statement on designating or zoning the waters around the Brothers Islands as a marine park, it cannot clear itself of the suspicion that it is an offer in return for proceeding with the third runway project, which is detrimental to the habitat of Chinese White Dolphins and finless porpoises and marine ecology. We have also come to learn from recent news reports that in less than two months into this year, two Chinese White Dolphins have been found injured and dead. Apparently, the Government's inertia has in fact made itself an accomplice. Moreover, I have enquired with the Environment Bureau about the data of energy use of government buildings. According to the Bureau, secondary schools, indoor sports centres and public markets have room to save 13.2%, 9.6% and 5.5% of the energy used respectively. However, in this Policy Address, the Government told the public about its target of achieving a 5% saving in electricity consumption for government buildings in the coming five years. In other words, with sufficient energy saving capacity, the Government has nonetheless set a target of 5% only. I think this is nonsense and totally irresponsible. Concerning the third runway, when Secretary Prof Anthony CHEUNG was present, I already expressed my views clearly. In fact, at the last meeting of the Legislative Council, we had exchanges with him about the airspace and air traffic control in relation to the third runway. I am much worried that Members are full of ambitions and determined to turn the third runway proposal into reality. The project must be taken forward as it relates to one of the leading economic pillars. However, have they considered the damage to the environment when the project is underway, and whether there is adequate transparency in the whole financing process? Do the authorities intend to avoid monitoring by the public and the Legislative Council, thinking that they can get it done by submitting a financing option to the Chief Executive in Council by virtue of the Airport Authority Ordinance (AAO) for affixing stamps and granting approval? It involves an important issue of public interest. I believe the Secretary also understands that according to the relevant provisions of the AAO, especially sections 14 and 20, as one of the members of the Airport Authority (AA) and a government official, he is actually obliged to serve as the gatekeeper for the whole works project in the context of public interest. I hope that the Member with dual membership, namely Member of the Legislative Council and the Executive Council, Mr Jeffrey


6475

LAM, who has just spoken, or our colleagues Mr CHAN Kam-lam, Mr Albert HO and Mr Frankie YICK, who are also members of the AA, can enlighten us. Given their role as public officers and capacity as representatives of the people, after joining the AA, can they really turn a deaf ear to external criticisms and care nothing about public calls for transparency and accountability in respect of the whole financing option, while only stating that they think as a member of the AA with no consideration given to other issues? In that case, big trouble will ensue. It will not only result in a loss of balance, but also breaches the requirements under the relevant provisions of the AAO. Therefore, I hereby tender a piece of advice to Secretary Prof Anthony CHEUNG. When facing such a controversial issue as the construction of the third runway, as it not only involves marine ecology and environmental protection, but also concerns such issues as airspace, air traffic control and financing option the deliberation of which has not been fully completed, he should not consciously or unconsciously attempt to avoid monitoring by the public or even the legislature. Instead, he should allow public participation in a frank and sincere way, so that Members can serve properly as the gatekeeper for members of the public. Deputy President, next I will talk about development. The Government's latest claim about the identification of sites for housing development is a lack of land available for development instead of a lack of land. Hence, we should be active in our search. However, Secretary Paul CHAN present here must remember that a year ago, we had a discussion or even a debate over the construction of "squeeze-in buildings" on a "diminutive" site off Tung Tao Court. The area of that site is even smaller than the Chamber of the Legislative Council. After this Council has resumed this year, apart from the Tung Tao Court issue, we also have to handle issues relating to Braemar Hill, North Point. Recently, we have met with a group of residents from Braemar Hill, North Point. Mr Jeffrey LAM indicated earlier that we have to cater and care for the middle class. He made a very good point there. But at the same time, he pointed out that those who oppose the Government's identification of land supply for housing development are certainly aggressive with political calculations. It is fine for him to smear me. But as he claims that we should cater for the middle-class people in Hong Kong, he should not smear those middle-class residents who actually live on Braemar Hill, North Point. What did they wish to express to me at that meeting? I think Members also know that place as it is where the Chinese International School is situated. Members should know how serious the traffic congestion is, how narrow the


roads are and how difficult it is to wait for transport to go uphill and downhill in that place. On the Government's existing list of 151 sites, three are community sites and the Government is now thinking about rezoning them for housing construction. In respect of these community resources and sites, I also hope very much to do my part. I do not intend to join hands with them to raise opposition, but rather, I hope to bring about a meeting so that the Secretary or your representative will have the opportunity to have exchanges with the middle-class residents from Braemar Hill in order to gauge their thoughts and aspirations. If the GIC sites are rezoned for housing construction, it must involve the town planning process. And I can tell you that when the relevant process is underway, strong opposition and resistance will certainly arise. Let me make myself clear in the first place. I hope to bring about a meeting. The Secretary may examine these 151 sites, and negotiate with the affected locals over these valuable community resources and facilities. If the eventual decision is to proceed with school development in that place, there will be two schools altogether. The relevant site will basically be no longer suitable for housing development, for fear of further increasing the traffic load of the area. Secretary Prof Anthony CHEUNG will talk about transport issues in a while. I hope he can be equally concerned about the various challenges and difficulties that may be faced by the Government in using the three GIC sites at Braemar Hill, North Point for housing development this time around. Deputy President, speaking of the town planning process, I have repeatedly pursued the matter with the Secretary. Amendments were made to the Town Planning Ordinance (TPO) in 2004, but now, the Government indicates that it has no intention to introduce any amendment, nor to make any consideration or take any action. It really puzzles me greatly. Recently, judicial review cases which have successfully challenged the Town Planning Board's decisions have sprung up in court one after another. Some of them concern height restriction, while others concern other land use issues. Hence, as such aspects in relation to representativeness, accountability and proceedings of the TPO are laden with criticisms, suspicions and condemnations, coupled with the recent occurrence of confrontations, is it time to stop trimming the toes to fit the shoes? Just do not make it sound like you are doing me a favour by reviewing the TPO afresh in response to my repeated enquiries. In fact, it has got nothing to do with me at all. We hope to see the Government honour what it has promised to do step by step. Given that one of the phases of reform of the TPO was completed in 2004, why is it barred from further development without leaving even a single trace?


6477

The issue is complicated, but no matter how complicated it is, the Government should not evade it. For this reason, I do not mind taking all the trouble to urge Secretary Paul CHAN again to proceed with a discussion on the reform of the TPO instead of evading it. In addition, I also wish to point out that every time we discuss two particular issues, Secretary Paul CHAN will say "There is a written reply for record purposes. I thank Dr Kenneth CHAN for his question.". But no matter how many times we ask the question, the reply will be the same. These two issues are tree management and a tree law. Last year, a pregnant woman was killed in a tree collapse accident in the Central and Western District. I just do not hope that Secretary Paul CHAN and the Government will look hard-hearted in people's eyes, being indifferent to various aspirations relating to enacting a tree law and perfecting tree management measures. The Government often mentions staff shortage, and that such issues involving qualifications and regulation are very complicated. Therefore, the time is not ripe yet. However, it is only a chicken and egg question. I believe if the Government is determined and clear about its direction, it can definitely catch up in terms of training and nurturing of talents. The question actually boils down to whether the Government is truly determined to prove to its people the validity of its claim that "nothing about people's livelihood is trivial". Will the tasks relating to a tree law and tree management still be making little progress as they are more trivial than trivialities in its eyes? Deputy President, following the Umbrella Movement, LEUNG Chun-ying's Policy Address should have proposed ways to alleviate social conflicts. It should be an important step to solving problems. However, this Policy Address has clearly shown LEUNG Chun-ying's narrow-mindedness and his attitude that favours struggles. Our society is loaded with a number of critical policy issues. The Policy Address and Members are supposed to put forward different views on policy issues in the form of criticisms, commendations, questions and expectations. But regrettably, this Policy Address delivered by him has failed to give people hope and a direction to solve problems. Instead, the Chief Executive openly lambasted a university student magazine Undergrad in the Council in an attempt to divert attention and conceal his own inability. We honestly do not need a Chief Executive who is an extreme leftist, filled with thoughts about how to wage power struggles and political fights, and quick to suppress the freedom of speech and academic freedom and


create enemies, delighting himself in such acts to the extent that he is unable to extricate himself from them. Hong Kong does not need such a Chief Executive in LEUNG Chun-ying. I so submit. DR KWOK KA-KI (in Cantonese): Deputy President, the scandal or incident concerning bitcoins is definitely the hottest, biggest issue of late. It is heard that 3 000 people are affected, involving $3 billion. However, we in Hong Kong also have a "father of bitcoins", and that surely is LEUNG Chun-ying. What did he tell us before he took office in 2012? He said that Hong Kong's housing policy, housing shortage or housing issue was amongst the top priorities to him. Two years or so have passed, let us look at what he has done. The number of applications on the Waiting List for public housing, not counting singleton applicants, amounts to 133 000 at present, or 270 000 if the singletons are included; property prices are 40% higher than the time before he took office, whereas rentals are 14% up and 17% for small and medium property units; and people need to work for 14 years without spending a penny before becoming a flat owner. These are what LEUNG Chun-ying, the "father of bitcoins" in Hong Kong, has done. The most embarrassing part is that the Secretaries of Departments and Directors of Bureaux who dance with him have joined him in telling lies. This year's Policy Address has demonstrated how shameless he is. He said that a historic high had been hit with regard to the housing units produced. Figures are what I only care, so let me review what happened in the past with him! What historic high is it? Prior to the reunification in 1997, Hong Kong's population was a million or so less than now, and there was a supply of 31 000 Home Ownership Scheme units and 18 000 private housing units in the year, totalling 49 000; it was 37 000 in 1996; 35 000 in 1995; 47 000 in 1994; 42 000 in 1993; 48 000 in 1992; 52 000 in 1991; and 53 900 in 1989. The population then was a million or so less than now, but 40 000 to 50 000 units were built each of the years. The awfulness of the incumbent Government is second to none. This year, the Housing Authority misses the target again, offering 9 900 units instead of the targeted 12 700, and this Government is so shameless as to tell a lie that a record on housing has been shattered. I consider this a new liar's record instead.


6479

Recently, the Long Term Housing Steering Committee put on a big show to increase 10 000 units; and the Chief Executive introduced the initiative to facilitate home ownership for Green Form applicants after some casual talk with an agreeable academic in an evening. What Government is it, Deputy President? Comparing the Steering Committee's figure on sub-divided units last year, this year's figure is 30% or 17 000 up. The former Secretary for Development once said that Hong Kong had 2 000 hectares of idle land. When the new Secretary took office ― apart from lying, the current Government is also very good at working embarrassing magic to make everything disappear ― it was found that all of these idle land lots were not real, but they were minuscule ones only. However, when I requested a list from the Secretary, he just asked me to access it online. What Government is it? It shirks all responsibilities and does not shoulder anything, and yet it is incapable by itself, a fact that is rather embarrassing. This Government can be very outrageous, as illustrated in the example I am going to cite. The airport's third runway, which may incur more than $200 billion to build, will circumvent this Council in the future, and the project will force its way into implementation through the "good buddy" Airport Authority and with the blessing of the Government. In the Government's estimate, the seven major infrastructure projects involve a total investment of $320 billion, and additional projects worth about $500 billion have been put on the agenda after LEUNG Chun-ying took office. As of now, the projects involve cost overruns of about $64 billion. Among them are the so-called "white elephant" projects, including the Guangzhou-Shenzhen-Hong Kong Express Rail Link, the Hong Kong-Zhuhai-Macao Bridge, the Liantang boundary control point and artificial islands, costing $160 billion in total. These "white elephant" projects also involve cost overruns of $30 billion. May those who blindly support LEUNG Chun-ying please look clearly. I used the term "double blindness" yesterday, and today I would like to talk about those suffering from "LEUNG blindness", who regard every proposal made by LEUNG Chun-ying as fine, as if they were blind to the reality. Nevertheless, the most comforting point to me is that while many pro-establishment Members criticize that many people are pulling his legs, his "buddy", namely Mr CHAN Kam-lam from the Democratic Alliance for the Betterment and Progress of Hong Kong, is also pulling his legs in urging him not to do this or that in his constituency, like property development, because of the concern over traffic. Hence, as some people put it, among the so-called friends who support LEUNG


Chun-ying's governing team, not many are confidants, because they may say what they have to, but then they will stab him in the back. This is the way it has to go, given the character of the Chief Executive who shows no mercy even to universities. Today, there are news reports about him even intervening in the selection of the University of Hong Kong's Vice President. Who will truly support him anyway? Therefore, I doubt the sincerity of those with "LEUNG blindness". They may just finish what they have to say, and then they will stab him in the back. Before I stop, I would like to present a gift to the two Secretaries here. Look this way, this is a signage the Buildings Department posts on the street, and it carries a slogan that reads, "Safety first when choosing subdivided flats". A gift to the "Secretary of subdivided flats", as well as the Secretary for Transport and Housing, who has made our buildings or housing issue worse, becomes more adept in defaulting on delivery, and bears a remarkable resemblance to LEUNG Chun-ying. I so submit. Thank you, Deputy President. DR PRISCILLA LEUNG (in Cantonese): Deputy President, after experiencing Occupy Central which caused social division last year, the people of Hong Kong really need happiness. Just an inflated big yellow duck could bring happiness to many people a few years ago. A free wine and dine event also made many people happy for a few days amidst such a depressive atmosphere during Occupy Central. It is evident that the people of Hong Kong have really very simple demands. We desperately need some activities that can let people share happiness and make people of all ages happy. An example is the Green Harbour Actions group formed by Prof HO Kin-chung and me in 2010, which has been proposing to the Chief Executive a water-friendly culture. Before the Chief Executive took office, we had invited him to inspect Tai Kok Tsui and Hung Hom and suggested that if we were to develop a water-friendly culture, we needed to first improve the water quality. Using a metaphor, water quality is like a girl who looks pretty but stinks when you get close to her. Such a scene occurred in Hung Hom or old districts in the past. We always hope the West Kowloon Cultural District (WKCD) can become a place where people can share joy and happiness ― rich or poor people of high or low origins, even if they cannot afford the tickets to enjoy the programmes the WKCD provides, can still go there to immerse in the cultural aura and feel their attachment to the District's


6481

improvements. Therefore, it would be a remarkable achievement in a political career to improve the water quality, develop a green waterfront and create a water-friendly culture. Back then, Governor Murray MACLEHOSE left the people of Hong Kong with an enduring memory, that is, the MacLehose Trail. I really hope the incumbent Chief Executive, while facing so many demands and such acute popular discontent, can at least leave behind this achievement to win people's approval. However, to successfully establish a water-friendly culture, apart from a continuous waterfront with plants of different colours such that when we look down at it from a height we can enjoy a very colourful and beautiful view of it, we really need to invest resources to improve the water quality. We have done a lot over the years. I think the Environmental Protection Department (EPD) is one of the very proactive departments, but there are other departments the jobs of which are related, such as the Marine Department, Home Affairs Department (HAD), Drainage Services Department and the Transport Department (TD) ― Secretary Prof Anthony CHEUNG is present today. To foster a water-friendly culture, the TD and the HAD are very important. Recently there has been news that the Chief Executive Officer (CEO) of the West Kowloon Cultural District Authority has resigned. We always think that it is like a "WKCD Bermuda" there. I hope the next CEO will not only complete the physical structure of hardware, but also bring a genuinely international culture imbued with local attributes. It is just like the case of a person who, having a good build, also needs vitality in his body. Regarding vitality, I have been to a Chinese city that I believe to be a third-tier city, which is Nanchang. At 8 pm every day, the Nanchang Government hosts activities at the waterfront, including colourful fountain shows and wonderful musical events, to allow residents who usually do not have much entertainment to gather happily at the waterfront. Many of them bring along the elderly and the youth. Some performers would give performances too. The Victoria Harbour in Hong Kong is an important asset of the city. If we can create the same effect then Hong Kong will become a first-class city instead of a third-tier one. However, in this regard we will need the help of the HAD in addition to the EPD. Besides fixing the wrongly-connected pipes so that sewage will not flow into the sea, the HAD has to take up the job of developing culture and hosting these kinds of events at the waterfront. I have spoken to many young people and they said if such facilities could be provided they would be happy for being able to find personal creativity and life there without the hassle of


cramming into pedestrian precincts. It would spare them of complaints and water bombs thrown by residents living in nearby buildings because of nuisance complaints. If we can develop the waterfront there may be another outlet for young people to vent their spleen. And the elderly can thus improve their health and stop feeling they are too old. (THE PRESIDENT resumed the Chair) Moreover, why is the TD important? I hope Secretary Prof Anthony CHEUNG can hear this. As a matter of fact, a few years ago when the ferry service between Hung Hom and Central was cancelled, local residents felt very offended. It was because at the time the MTR was being built, causing extremely congested road traffic while the sea transport was stopped. After some research we discovered that the ferry service had only recorded a loss of $2 million a year. Therefore I brought this issue to the attention of the then Secretary for Development, Ms Carrie LAM. From her term in the Development Bureau until the change of the term, she had been liaising with the Transport and Housing Bureau to explore ways to make use of and revitalize the Hung Hom ferry pier, for example, allowing advertisements to be placed which could possibly attract some private cruise companies or ferry companies to turn loss into gain. In addition, I believe the Tourism Commission is important, too, because if we can develop a continuous waterfront, I hope co-ordination can be made with the WKCD Authority. In 2008 we proposed to the Government the introduction of water taxis. What routes do the water taxis run? From Tai Kok Tsui to Tsim Sha Tsui, the WKCD, Hung Hom, as well as the Kai Tak Cruise Terminal. If tourists do not want to take buses as they are wary of the crowdedness ― especially coaches in To Kwa Wan; residents in To Kwa Wan welcome tourists on the one hand but feel disgusted by the traffic congestion thus produced ― the Government can make use of water transport and formulate more policies to facilitate it, while working with the Tourism Commission to consider how best to facilitate business operation. It can have the best of both worlds: on the one hand it reduces road traffic congestion, and on the other, it makes it easier for tourists to enjoy the view of the Victoria Harbour. I think it is most appealing to both local residents and international tourists.


6483

Furthermore, Mr Frederick FUNG has mentioned the redevelopment of Tai Hang Sai Estate. The Policy Address this year talks about increasing land supply to cater for people's housing need. One of the measures is the redevelopment of Tai Hang Sai Estate under the Hong Kong Settlers Housing Corporation Limited (HKSHCL). I believe Secretary Prof Anthony CHEUNG is concerned about this project as well. The Kowloon West New Dynamics has conducted a large-scale survey with District Council (DC) member WAI Hoi-ying and chairmen of the Mutual Aid Committees (MACs) of eight blocks in the estate. Indeed it is not like what some rumours or pamphlets distributed by people who hold different views suggested. The local residents actually do not oppose building flats for the youth and even welcome assisting them in acquiring their first homes. Their most important demand is not that the site be handed over to the Government but in the target of supplying 5 000 flats, 1 300 should be reserved for rehousing the local residents. There are 75% of the local residents who said that they are willing to purchase the redeveloped flats without going through an asset test. The remaining can only afford to rent the flats, such as some Comprehensive Social Security Allowance recipients and poor households, who cannot afford to move away or purchase the redeveloped flats and hope the HKSHCL can help them. Everyone wants to be rehoused in the same district and does not oppose this project of helping more people to achieve home ownership. But it is hoped that the scheme can include a removal allowance. I think the redevelopment project contains a lot of details. This Monday I met with the representative of the HKSHCL, Mr SUEN, with the chairmen of the MACs of seven blocks in Tai Hang Sai Estate, DC members and some dozens of local residents. The meeting was broadcast live and open to media coverage. Mr SUEN said they are willing to consider residents views. In particular, they do not want some poor households to feel being neglected in this project. Therefore, we had clearly expressed the views and messages, that is, local residents want in situ rehousing and these 1 300 households being given priority in purchase and rehousing. We hope this can serve as a direction. I personally tend not to criticize this matter. Instead I think it merits commendation. It would be even better if it can encourage more developers to donate land. For too much criticism will give other developers the excuse that good deeds are doomed to be criticized so they will just not do any good deed. I hope people from different political parties and groupings will try their best to make this project a success.


Moreover, President, I think this year's Policy Address has made efforts in tackling people's livelihood issues. As regards medical services, the Policy Address states that the Government will set aside $50 billion for retirement protection. Yet it still overlooks the welfare of people aged 60 to 64. I hope the Government can do more in this aspect. Thank you, President. I so submit. MR SIN CHUNG-KAI (in Cantonese): President, Dr Priscilla LEUNG expressed her hope that LEUNG Chun-ying can promote a water-friendly culture. I have no idea if he could achieve it, but when it comes to a communism-friendly culture, I think he can certainly make the grade because he already visited the Liaison Office of the Central People's Government in the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region the next day after he was elected. TUNG Chee-hwa successfully promoted the 1 July rally, whereas "689" successfully promoted the Umbrella Movement. Let me come back to the topic. This session of the debate is about development and air. Mr Frederick FUNG seemed to have a lot of complaints against the Green Form Home Ownership Pilot Scheme but this may probably boil down to a problem of procedure as the Long Term Housing Strategy seems to make no mention of this Scheme and it was put forward all of a sudden. Having said that, this policy is actually worth discussion. The Government will put up whole blocks of new public rental housing (PRH) for sale and these units can be taken as new Home Ownership Scheme units and as some colleagues said earlier, when PRH units are sold to Green Form applicants, their PRH units would then be vacated for allocation to applicants on the Waiting List without affecting the queues on the Waiting List and so, this should be worth exploring. However, the Secretary should consider the policymaking procedure. I am glad to see that Secretary Paul CHAN is in the Chamber now as I had been beaten by him before, not that I had beaten him. I was once beaten by him in the case concerning the site opposite Tung Tao Court mentioned by Dr Kenneth CHAN earlier on. We tried to request the Government to change its plan of squeezing in buildings on the site but I lost this battle.


6485

Besides, Dr Kenneth CHAN also mentioned residents of Braemar Hill. I wonder if Paul CHAN would consider them difficult citizens. They had approached me and told me about those three sites. I told them that I had been beaten by Paul CHAN before and that the Government would not heed public opinions and would only be hell-bent on its own way. With regard to those three sites of their concern, I said that they should be prepared to lose as Paul CHAN will definitely be insistent. That said, I think the Secretary should, granting the opportunity, stop travelling in his vehicle with a licence plate starting with "AM" for a while and try taking a minibus on Braemar Hill when students commute to and from school in order to understand the public sentiments there. Residents of Braemar Hill said that they have to wait for six to nine minibuses to go home during the rush hours, which often takes them more than an hour. They said that while the elderly cannot walk home, the young people will go downhill on foot from the mid-level to take the MTR to work. I hope that the Secretary will listen to public opinions. However, I told residents of Braemar Hill that the Secretary would still need to make an application to the Town Planning Board (TPB) and seek the approval of the TPB for changing the land use. Then they asked who the Chairman of the TPB is. I told them it is the Permanent Secretary for Development, a subordinate of Paul CHAN. They all felt depressed on hearing that. President, let me also talk about property prices. LEUNG Chun-ying had criticized Henry TANG during the election. As Henry TANG was responsible for the work of poverty alleviation then, he criticized that the more Henry TANG had done to help the poor, the poorer the people had become. Let me say this to the Secretary: The more property prices are controlled, the higher they have become. Tell me, what are you going to do about it? Since the Secretary for the Environment is in the Chamber now, let me also say a few words to him. He particularly said in the Panel on Environmental Affairs in respect of the Policy Address that restrictions would be imposed on access to a number of districts by buses at the end of this year and in other words, the so-called low emission zones will be set up. But it will take four years to


thoroughly implement this measure, meaning that pre-Euro IV diesel vehicles will be completely phased out only in 2019 the earliest, if my memory has not failed me. President, can the Secretary advance the implementation of this plan? I understand that the complete phasing out of these vehicles is due in 2019, but is it possible to ban the access of these vehicles to these three districts two years earlier, say, in 2017 or 2016, or in 2018, before their complete phasing out? Or at least their access should be banned during the rush hours from 7 am to 7 pm, and this can improve the air quality in these several zones. When these vehicles have switched to other districts to provide services, the effect of the low emission zones can be achieved earlier. Certainly, legislation is required for implementing this measure but as the Government said that legislation should be avoided, the public will have to put up with the appalling air quality. The Finance Committee has already made a provision of more than $10 billion to facilitate the replacement of pre-Euro IV diesel goods vehicles but the public still have to put up with the vehicular emission for a few more years. Is there room for advancing the implementation of this scheme? I hope the Secretary will give a response. Lastly, I would like to talk about the power grid. In the report of the strategic study published recently, the Secretary mentioned the future development of the power grid in Hong Kong or ways to open up grid access. He said that one of the options to be considered is to purchase electricity from the Mainland. Secretary, I wish to emphasize that it is not cost-effective to purchase electricity from the Mainland and the oil prices are volatile. When he published the report of the study last year, the oil prices were close to US$80 or US$90 to US$100, compared to less than US$50 per barrel now. Of course, when oil prices drop, the prices of natural gas will drop too, though there may be a time gap, and this will cause the oil prices or energy prices to remain at low levels. Some people forecast that oil prices may slightly go up this year or next year but I have seen that particularly with regard to the production of shale gas in the United States, although quite a number of the so-called rigs have closed down in recent months, they will be reopened when oil prices go up. Simply put, it will be difficult for oil prices to return to the level of US$100 as I have just mentioned in the next few years, or three or five years, or even eight or 10 years down the line.


6487

On this premise, is it actually necessary to force a grid interconnection between Hong Kong and the Mainland? I hope the Secretary will think twice. It is because if the power companies in Hong Kong are allowed to purchase fuel oil in the international market, there will actually be a lot of choices. A few years ago the Government forced the local power companies to accept the transmission of gas from west to east and the power companies are thus forced to purchase gas at high prices. Is the Government going to force a power interconnection between the local power companies and the Mainland through purchasing electricity from the Mainland? With regard to this measure, I think the Secretary must think twice, for this will involve huge capital investment. Will it involve less capital investment in purchasing electricity from the Mainland? I have great misgivings about this. Compared with the purchase of energy in the international market, I do not see much advantage in purchasing electricity from the Mainland. Of course, if the purpose of this measure is to pressurize the two power companies and make them reduce the rate of return, I would very much support the Secretary in exerting himself to beat them in this arm wrestling match, thereby forcing them to stop pitching the rate of return at 9.9%. Places all around the world are now taking the so-called "QE" measure which involves very low capital cost. Is it possible to make them reduce the rate of return from 9.9% to 6% to 7%? This is also what the Secretary should do. I will throw great weight behind the Secretary if he is going to do it. But if the Secretary forces the power companies to purchase electricity from the Mainland, I will have reservations about it. MR CHAN HAK-KAN (in Cantonese): President, I wish to talk about environmental protection and conservation as well as housing development in this session. I noted Honourable colleagues' remarks on housing development this morning, yet the Secretary for the Environment, Mr WONG Kam-sing, seemed to have been given a cold shoulder, so I would like to talk about my views on the environment. A lot of measures on improving Hong Kong's air quality are actually included in this year's Policy Address and Policy Agenda of the Government. I wish the Secretary would help Hong Kong reach the goal of restoring the blue sky and clean air within his tenure. The Chief Executive's relevant policies, ranging from those concerning the sky and the sea as well as those for promoting green buildings and energy conservation, are all related to air quality improvement. However, I wish to tell


the Secretary that these are merely initiatives on paper. If he has to really achieve all this, I believe a lot of efforts will have to be taken. At that time, many people and green groups as well as Members from both the pro-establishment and opposition camps in the Council will give him a big hand. I actually do not see many environmental initiatives in this year's Policy Address, but there is a bright spot, namely the designation of low emission zones in Causeway Bay, Central and Mongkok. Many of the environmentalists have given the Secretary a big hand upon learning of the policy in appreciation of his determination; nevertheless, Members familiar with green policies should know that this is by no means a new initiative, because it was proposed in the 2010-2011 Policy Address. From the information I have looked up, this policy was proposed as early as 2010-2011 and a trial scheme has since been launched, so what is the outcome then? As a matter of fact, no remarkable improvement has been seen in the roadside Air Pollution Index readings of these three districts. President, it shows that imposing the low-emission vehicle restriction on buses alone but not also on diesel vehicles as well as light and heavy goods vehicles, which are still allowed access to these districts, will render the initiative ineffective. Therefore, as regards the Government's current proposal of designating low emission zones in Causeway Bay, Central and Mongkok to restrict franchised bus companies from sending buses other than low-emission ones to the districts, to what extent will the air quality be improved? I do not have much expectation, but taking a step forward is still better than staying put, as in the case of our constitutional reform. Therefore, given the Secretary's determination, I wish him to walk an extra mile by encouraging the wider use of electric taxis, buses and minibuses in the districts. Will the Secretary consider extending the low emission zones to all the 18 districts instead of just three so as to allow all Hong Kong people to enjoy good roadside air quality? President, in our discussion on air quality improvement, apart from controlling power plant emissions as a source of pollutants, as the Secretary always mentions, Members may not have noticed one point, namely the very serious problem of emissions from vessels. If Members have paid attention to the Public Accounts Committee Report No. 59, they may be aware of the remark that the substantial increase of emissions from local vessels has constituted a main source of air pollution in Hong Kong, as well as the criticism on how slow


6489

the Government has been in controlling the use of ultra-low sulphur diesel by both local and river trade vessels, an aspect where further government action is warranted. I note that the Government has actually put in place a $300 million Pilot Green Transport Fund, through which 88 applications have been granted approval. Secretary, only one of them goes to subsidizing a shipping company's trial run of a diesel-electric powered system. Given the serious problem of vessel emissions and the Government's $300 million Pilot Green Transport Fund, why is there only one application related to vessel emissions out of the approved 88? Can more efforts be made in this regard? Of course, the Secretary may tell us that he will impose restrictions on the switch to cleaner fuels by vessels while at berth in Hong Kong waters, but the amount involved is minimal, because such vessels may have to do the switch while not in Hong Kong waters after all. However, if the authorities do not control local vessels as well as river trade vessels plying between Hong Kong and the Mainland, such source of emissions will keep polluting the Victoria Harbour. Even though we do not inhale such emissions immediately, the pollutants above the Victoria Harbour may still spread to the urban areas. Another environmental initiative mentioned in the Policy Address is about green buildings, an area in which the Secretary is very must well-versed. The target proposed is nothing but precise, namely "achieving a 5% saving in electricity consumption for government buildings under comparable operating conditions in the coming five years", which is a new target. However, promotion of energy efficiency and conservation has been carried out in Hong Kong for more than two decades, and the Energy Efficiency Office under the Electrical and Mechanical Services Department was established in 1994 to promote energy conservation and emission reduction; the voluntary Hong Kong Energy Efficiency Registration Scheme for Buildings was introduced in 1998; and the Buildings Energy Efficiency Ordinance came into full operation in 2012 as well. In this year's Policy Address, we simply propose the target of saving electricity consumption by 5%. Secretary, does it not appear to be a bit slow? Is it not too mild in terms of vigour? In neighbouring regions, such as Singapore, a very aggressive blueprint on green buildings has been proposed, aiming to have 80% of all the country's buildings going green, and private-sector operators are offered various incentives on green building, such as tax reduction and floor area concessions.


Of course, we also note the Government's efforts in energy conservation and emission reduction, such as the water conservation scheme of the Water Supplies Department (WSD) which is well received throughout Hong Kong. Will the Secretary consider taking a leaf out of the WSD's book by introducing a electricity conservation initiative for all Hong Kong people? I know that improving air quality and tackling climate change cannot be achieved overnight, and it requires the concerted effort of all Hong Kong people as well as the Government. I very much hope that the Secretary may keep up the effort with us in this regard. In addition, for all the arguments we can see in this Council, yet environmental protection is among the very few issues over which consensus has been reached across political parties and groupings. Hence, under this favourable condition, the Secretary should take a few steps forward on environmental issues, such that we, the green groups, Members from other political parties and groupings as well as the authorities may work together for a better environment in Hong Kong. President, I now turn to the development of housing and land in the following part of my speech. The Chief Executive always says that the housing policy is amongst the top priorities, and Members are also aware that to achieve the goal of everyone having a roof over him, the key lies in the supply of land, and the onus is on the shoulders of Secretary Paul CHAN. Certainly, no flat can be built without land, so the Government has become more proactive in making land available since 2010, set out the land supply target of producing 20 000 units a year, and started announcing the annual Land Sale Programme as well as the forecast of private housing land supply since 2011, which is good in the sense that it increases the transparency of land supply and declares the Government's determination to take the initiative to make land available. However, I have to do some sums with Secretary Paul CHAN. The target was not met at all in each of the past three years. The gaps between actual housing supply and the authorities' projection ranged from 7 000 to 14 000, and there was surely a trend of narrowing down. Secretary Paul CHAN, sorry, despite the approach of the Chinese New Year, I still need to "collect the debt" from him. But figures reveal a lot, so I would take this opportunity to tell the Secretary how the figure on private flat supply is derived. As I said just now, the Government has become more proactive in increasing land supply since 2010, and the Policy Address of that year projected that a total of 61 000 primary residential units would come on


6491

stream in the three to four years after 2010. That three to four years have passed in a blink. According to the quarterly statistics on private housing supply in the primary market released by the Government at the end of last month, 15 700 primary residential units came on stream in 2014, and this made some positive newspaper headlines at the time, like "completed new flats make an eight-year high", so the situation seemed not bad. However, when we settle the score with Secretary Paul CHAN by comparing the target of 61 000 flats proposed four years ago with the aggregate supply of new flats over these four years (43 500 flats), we note a shortfall of 20 000 flats or so, Secretary. In fact, it is not my real intention to "collect debt" from Secretary Paul CHAN by quoting these figures, because the time lost cannot be recovered. I only wish the Secretary could have a grasp of the supply of flats and the pace of construction while working proactively to make land available at the same time. Otherwise, the targets will never be achieved, a situation which will not only disappoint this Council, but also shatter the aspiration of many an aspiring home owner. We have seen how popular the recent application exercise for Home Ownership Scheme units is, and a proposal to facilitate home ownership for Green Form applicants is floated in the Policy Address, so Members may focus on the 290 000 public rental housing (PRH) units. However, it is also mentioned in the report of the Long Term Housing Steering Committee as to how and when the 200 000 private housing units will be built, and this has implications on the effectiveness of the Long Term Housing Strategy. In particular, the Secretary also needs to pay attention to the way prices of low-price units are soaring to a point where entry-level small and medium-sized residential units have become simply unaffordable to those from the grassroot or even the middle class. Therefore, I pretty much wish that apart from PRH supply, will the Secretary also please pay attention to small and medium-sized private residential units so as to make our housing ladder complete. President, we do not see any other large-scale land planning or development plans for land in the current Policy Address, but projects like Hung Shui Kiu New Development Area, Tung Chung New Town, planning for Yuen Long South and rezoning of Green Belt sites will be carried out in the next two to three years. When the Government rezoned and acquired a site in the past, it would meet different forms of opinion or even resistance in the community. As we have seen in recent years, disputes on land are very often played up by those


with ulterior motives to exaggerate the conflicts and politicalize the matter. Let me cite an example. The North East New Territories (NENT) development project, which is obviously aimed at solving Hong Kong people's housing problems, can be portrayed as a "city for doubly non-permanent resident billionaires", a "back-garden of Shenzhen" and an "SAR within an SAR" with visa-free access. These specious propositions always go viral on the Internet. As a result, most of those who come out to oppose the NENT development project are not residents there. The Secretary should draw on the lesson learnt from the consultation process for NENT development. I am not saying the Secretary has not consulted people at all, what I mean is that improvement has to be made to the consultation process. In fact, Members are aware of the changes in time. If we carry out the existing consultation procedures as they are to address queries in a passive manner and adopt conventional means of publicity, new development initiatives will turn out to be thankless tasks in terms of both action and word. Given the many large-scale development projects ahead, the authorities really need to draw on the lesson learnt from NENT development to deepen the consultation effort and take the initiative to clarify and refute some fallacies. From my observation of the Government's past consultation exercises, I note that comprehensive development blueprints and planning were very often ready in the first place, and concrete proposals might even have been drawn up in some cases, but Members would consider such consultation model outdated. I hope the Secretary will do it the other way round in other consultation exercises, namely a bottom-up approach, so as to allow greater room for public participation. As we always mention, LEE Myung-bak visited the community some 3 000 to 4 000 times throughout the consultation and rezoning exercises for the Cheonggye Stream; and in Japan, it very often takes around three years or more to rezone many of the old districts. Of course, the time we have is tight, but this kind of bottom-up approach, which welcomes participation by members of the public and the community, should by no means be neglected. Lastly, President, I would like to mention a recent innovative initiative by the Urban Renewal Authority (URA), namely their decision to turn Wing Lee Street, where the film Echoes of the Rainbow was shot, into a preservation zone, and to rent 10 of the tenement units at Nos 3 to 12 Wing Lee Street out to a social enterprise, which in turn sub-lets six of the units to grass-roots families. The point I note from this is that, can the URA turn some projects into youth hostels


6493

nowadays? Because we always say that URA projects are very often not large in terms of floor area, and some of them may be just single-tenement buildings, and it is also our hope to help young people own a place of theirs. Of course, the Government has earlier proposed the concept of youth hostels, but only 1 000 units are included so far. Moreover, apart from the 1 000 units as promised by the Government earlier, there should be two or three more sites, but the relevant funding application has yet to be submitted to the Finance Committee of this Council, an indication that the concept of youth hostels seems to have been stuck at this point, possibly because of the failure to identify suitable sites. As I said earlier, if the URA takes up a role and we join forces together to enable young people to have a decent home of their own in the urban areas, this will also be a proposal that is worth consideration in my view. Instead of looking for a place in remote areas, young people may live in the urban areas as well. In fact, Members can see that most of the young urban dwellers nowadays are residents of "sub-divided units" because they wish to save dozens of dollars from their travel expense and use less time to travel to work. Given the URA's concept for Wing Lee Street to sub-let residential units to grass-roots families through a social enterprise, should they not lend young people a helping hand in housing or youth hostels? I hope the Secretary will consider this after the meeting. President, I should stop here in this session. MR LEUNG YIU-CHUNG (in Cantonese): President, the Chief Executive, LEUNG Chun-ying, delivered the Policy Address 2015 in the Legislative Council on 14 January this year. That was the third policy address delivered by him since he took office. It can be said that the emphasis of the first policy address was placed in the housing problem and the second one, in poverty alleviation. On these emphases, it can be said that the first two policy addresses accorded top priority to issues of livelihood. However, the Policy Address this year represents a departure from the norm and it is highly political in nature, thus further dividing and tearing society apart, so this is indeed a major departure from the past. President, having regard to this difference, the Hong Kong Institute of Asia-Pacific Studies of The Chinese University of Hong Kong conducted a public opinion survey a week after the release of the Policy Address. The survey


showed that nearly 40% of the members of the public interviewed were dissatisfied with the proposals in the Policy Address, an increase of 5% compared to last year. Can the Policy Address help the SAR Government enhance its popularity? This year, 48% of the respondents said it could not, an increase of 15% from 32.8% last year. Public opinion reflects the fact that the Policy Address this year is not in line with public sentiments and cannot respond to public opinion, rather, it again intensifies the conflicts in society. President, the title of the Policy Address this time around is "Uphold the Rule of Law/Seize the Opportunities/Make the Right Choices/Pursue Democracy/Boost the Economy/Improve People's Livelihood". Of the six parts in this long title, the first four are related to politics. "Uphold the Rule of Law" clearly targets the Occupy movement that erupted earlier on, whereas "Pursue Democracy" refers to the decision of the Standing Committee of the National People's Congress (NPCSC), that is, the framework for electing the Chief Executive in 2017 and only the last two parts are oriented towards the economy and livelihood. President, the introduction in chapter I already touches on politics. First, the Chief Executive calls on Hong Kong people to gain an understanding of the constitutional status of "one country" in "one country, two systems" and dwells at length on the need for Hong Kong people to abide by the law. In addition, in about 1 600 words in the 12 paragraphs of the introduction, the term "Basic Law" can be found eight times, the expression "one country, two systems" can be found four times and the term "NPCSC" can be found three times. President, I have cited these figures mainly to illustrate how much importance this Policy Address attaches to the 31 August Decision of the NPCSC. President, it is blameless for the Policy Address to attach importance to the 31 August Decision of the NPCSC because it is understandable for the SAR Government to act according to the instructions of the Central Authorities. However, the problem is: The Government is following them blindly and speaking in a one-sided manner, making an analysis that lacks objectivity, fair-mindedness, seriousness and impartiality and such an approach has disappointed the Hong Kong public and aroused resentment among them. President, I remember that on the last occasion, when the motion moved by Ms Cyd HO in relation to the 31 August Decision of the NPCSC was debated in the Legislative Council, a number of Members pointed out that the 31 August


6495

Decision of the NPCSC had violated the Basic Law and also trampled on a "high degree of autonomy", to which we all attach great importance, because Annex I and Annex II of the Basic Law both spell out the relevant stipulations very clearly, that is, on the method of selecting the Chief Executive and forming the Legislative Council, the process should be bottom-up and the duty of the NPCSC is to play the role of an eventual gate-keeper by confirming whether or not amendments should be made, rather than making the decisions. However, as we all know, the 31 August Decision of the NPCSC has shut the door on the election of the Chief Executive in 2017 and made all the decisions, so does it think that the Basic Law actually exists? Has it shown any respect for the wishes of the Hong Kong public? Has it shown any respect for the spirit of "a high degree of autonomy"? President, even as a governing regime, it has not acted according to the stipulations of the Basic Law, yet it stresses that it is practising governance according to the law and also asks the public to respect the rule of law, so is this not tantamount to thief crying thief? On the face of it, the Central Authorities and the SAR Government say that they want to give Hong Kong democracy; in reality, they are stymying the development of democracy in Hong Kong and preventing the Hong Kong public from practising "a high degree of autonomy". In these circumstances, how can a Government that does not show respect for the public win them over? How can its administration win hearts? President, the discussion in this session is related to housing and transport issues and they are important issues that the public have to face on a daily basis. In fact, these are the issues with which the public harbour the greatest discontent ever since the new Government assumed office. This precisely reflects the fact that under the leadership of a Chief Executive lacking popular support, not only have difficulties in administration arisen, even chaos has arisen and it is difficult to see any major change in solutions to problems. In fact, in order to solve these problems, it is necessary to have a Government that adopts a "people-oriented approach" as its policy direction. Only in this way can there be any chance and hope of solving problems. However, if we want a Government that adopts a "people-oriented approach" as its policy direction, there must be a Government that is returned by democratic elections. However, the existing SAR Government is still returned by a small circle and lacks recognition, so there is little hope that problems can be solved effectively.


In fact, although more than half of the tenure of the new Government has passed since it took over, property prices remain high. Not only has the price per square foot of low-density properties hit new highs time and again, even that of public housing has also broken the record. The number of people waitlisted for public housing is also increasing continually and the promise of flat allocation in three years has also been broken. It can be said that not only is there no relief to the overall housing problem, on the contrary, the problem has become increasingly critical. On transport, traffic congestion occurs in many places frequently. Many members of the public have complained continually that during the rush hours, they have to wait for a number of trains before boarding one. Of course, we understand that these problems cannot be solved overnight. However, so far, the public are still waiting to no avail for a timetable and roadmap for solving these problems, so this is really disappointing. President, when we talk about the housing problem, we often put the blame on the last-term Government. Undoubtedly, the track record of the previous Chief Executive, Donald TSANG, on housing policy during his term was indeed deplorable. Not only did he announce a moratorium on land sales, he also announced a moratorium on the construction and sale of Home Ownership Scheme (HOS) units, thus causing a sharp drop in the supply of residential units and making it impossible for grass-roots families to realize their dream of home ownership. Property prices, in particular, that of low-value flats, spiked. At the same time, on the construction of public housing, the Government also did not take the need of the public seriously and maintained a low flat production volume, thus causing a drastic increase in the number of people waiting for public housing. The above facts are the distant causes leading to the emergence of the prevailing housing problem. However, President, we must not forget that the incumbent Chief Executive was a Member and Convenor of the Executive Council since the reunification. As we all know, the SAR Government is executive-led. In other words, the Chief Executive and the Executive Council make decisions together and this applies to all policies. For this reason, although we say that to date the problem remains not solved and more than half of the term of this Government has passed without the problem being solved, we cannot just blame the several previous Governments. In fact, the Chief Executive and the present Government should also assume responsibility.


6497

President, of course, the flat production volume is closely related to land supply. Although there is no doubt that this Government has been trying very hard to find land everywhere for the provision of housing ever since it assumed office, the Government, in its quest for land, has adopted the attitude of achieving its ends without any regard for the means and as a result, when the Government identified land suitable for the provision of housing, it would even disregard the strong opposition of local communities and ride roughshod over them in making decisions, so the phenomenon of squeezing in buildings anywhere possible has arisen. President, what has such a situation led to? It will disrupt the well-planned development of local communities. We feel gravely concerned that in the future, numerous problems in local communities are bound to arise, including insufficient community facilities or mismatches in facilities. Although the Government is searching for land everywhere, it still succumbs to the rich and powerful in society as did past Governments. As a result, it is unwilling to use land suitable for the provision of housing despite its availability and prefers to adopt the attitude of accommodation. The golf course in North East New Territories is a prime example. Given such an attitude and policy, may I ask how the Government can convince the public? President, since the release of the Policy Address this year, most public opinions level the criticism that although the Policy Address has dwelled at length on the housing problem, there is nothing new in the specific measures on housing supply. On this point, I do not quite agree because there is one novelty in the Policy Address, as mentioned by many Honourable colleagues just now, that is, the Government proposes that the Housing Authority identify suitable flats among its public rental housing (PRH) developments under construction for sale to Green Form applicants in the form of a pilot scheme, with prices set at a level lower than those of HOS flats. Target buyers are mainly sitting PRH tenants and PRH applicants who have passed the detailed vetting and are due for flat allocation. President, on the face of it, as the Government puts it, this scheme involves exchanging a unit for a unit and would not reduce the number of units available to people on the PRH Waiting List. However, some problems related to this scheme have arisen. One of the problems has been mentioned by a Member but I do not agree with him. In fact, this problems really exists, that is, the opportunities of people on the PRH Waiting List being allocated new units will be reduced. This is absolutely true and undeniable because originally, when units in new buildings come on stream, people on the PRH Waiting List have the opportunities to choose them but now, the units will be sold. What happens


after they are sold? They are sold to Green Form applicants, including those living in public housing. If public housing residents are eligible to move into the new units, they have to return their old units. In that event, people on the Waiting List will have no alternative but to move into these old units. President, not only that, there is also another problem, that is, the old units have to be renovated and renovation takes time. It can take three months at the fastest, as claimed by the Government, to more than a year at the slowest, as is the case for many units, and remains uncompleted for that matter. In that case, what are the consequences? Not only is the time of moving in delayed ― this is for sure ― a lot of construction materials will also be wasted and this is yet another problem. Moreover, objectively speaking, the indirect consequence is that the number of public housing units available will decrease because the waiting time is lengthened and the number of public housing units available will be reduced as a result. Therefore, the claim of exchanging a flat for a flat is incorrect and deceptive. For this reason, since the Government says that it wants to deal with this long queue of people waiting for public housing, why does it not allocate those public housing units directly to the people who are waiting? If we really want public housing tenants to have the chance to buy their own properties, just build HOS units. In fact, all along, HOS units have been a ladder of home ownership for the public, only that many Green Form applicants do not want to buy HOS units now. President, do you know why? This is very simple and there is only one reason, that is, the prices of HOS units are also very high, fetching as much as over $3 million, so may I ask how they can afford them? It is only because they just cannot afford them. Therefore, if we want to conceive a new plan under which low prices are offered, it would do simply to lower the prices of HOS units. I remember that Secretary Prof Anthony CHEUNG once said that the sale prices of HOS units did not necessarily have to be linked to the market. This being so, it would do simply to lower the prices of HOS units. There is practically no need to think too much. What need is there of depriving people on the Waiting List of their right to move into new units? Why does the Government not do so? Meanwhile, another phenomenon that we find nowadays is that the prices of public housing units have spiked so much that they have reached a level on a par or almost on a par with, or have even exceeded, those in the private market. This is a very strange phenomenon, that is, we provide the land resources, then build some units for some people to live in and even as they are doing so, they


6499

can make money by speculating on them, yet the Government does not mind the least bit. Do Members not find this strange? I think that if public housing units really have to be sold, there can only be one client, that is, the Government and they cannot be sold again in the private market. If they are sold in the private market, property prices will only soar continually and there will be continual speculation. The units will be used for speculation all the time and this is totally inconsistent with our original goal and principle in providing public housing. Therefore, I call on the Government to review the development in this regard. President, there is no doubt that buying a property is the dream of many people but the urgency of this dream is not as great as the need of residents living in cubicles and "sub-divided units" with poor sanitation being charged high rents to move into public housing. In the past, we have all along requested the Government to step up its efforts in solving the problem of "sub-divided units", for example, we hope that the Government can provide temporary housing, so that people living in illegal "sub-divided units" can live in transitional homes as a transitional arrangement. Unfortunately, although the Government heeded our advice by clamping down on unlawful "sub-divided units", even as it does so, it turns out it does not provide the residents concerned with proper residential units, thus making them move from one unlawful, unsatisfactory and improper "sub-divided unit" to another unlawful, unsatisfactory and improper "sub-divided unit". Not only that, since they are forced to move out, they have to pay even higher rents. To these residents, this kind of so-called actions to combat "sub-divided units" have made them fare even worse, so their plight is so miserable that no words can describe. However, so far, the Government has still adopted the attitude of turning a blind eye and a deaf ear and being indifferent to them, just leaving these residents in deep water without paying any heed to them, so is this Government really solving the housing problems of these people or not? President, on the housing problem, I still have a lot to say, including the issues related to the acquisition of properties by the Urban Renewal Authority at present. However, since this session also covers transport, I also wish to spend a little time on talking about transport problems. At present, the transport problem is indeed very serious. As I said just now, even now, many residents are still facing the situation of traffic congestion or having to wait a long time before getting on board a mode of public transport, but what is our Government's solution to these problems? So far, it only amounts to waiting for the completion of new developments and new railway networks. However, has it ever considered another problem, that is, after the completion of these new


facilities, can the problems be really solved? The truth is that they cannot be solved because the most important issues are our present town planning, population distribution, and so on, which are also closely related. We can see that originally, no transport problems could be found in many districts but recently, serious transport problems have emerged and the reason lies in the fact that the populations have increased continually but the ancillary facilities cannot keep up, nor can the environment of the community tie in. For example, this kind of situation can be found in New Territories West, in particular, in places like Yuen Long, Tin Shui Wai and Tuen Mun. Among them, the situation of Yuen Long is the most serious. For example, Members may have visited the Yuen Long Section of Castle Peak Road before. They may find that not only do people and vehicles compete for road space, even people are competing for space among themselves because no improvements have been made to the environment, yet the Government is paying no heed to this and only keeps erecting new buildings and increasing the population there. How can these problems be solved? They are impossible to solve. The Light Rail blocked the use of roads, so we requested the Government to make the Light Rail run on viaducts or underground instead, but the Government refused to consider this and just left it alone. Not only does the Light Rail cause congestion on the roads, if Members have the opportunity to take a look at the Light Rail platforms in Yuen Long, they will find that there are indeed many dangerous scenes. Passenger queues are so long that they reach the vicinity of traffic lights and the extent of crowdedness is very serious. This has been the case for many years but no improvements can be seen. I can only say that the Government is indifferent and just lets the public sort it out by themselves and find ways on their own. We have discussed this problem with the Government a number of times and last year, we also made site visits together with the Under Secretary but so far, almost one year has passed, the situation remains the same. Therefore, on the transport problem, I really think that there are many problems. Apart from the problems with various modes of transport, there are also problems related to fares. This is also a serious problem and many Honourable colleagues have also talked about it, so I do not wish to repeat it again. I only wish to say that be it housing or transport, they are major issues facing the public in their daily lives but now, people everywhere are discontented. I hope the Government will cease to drag its feet on these problems but summon its resolve to tackle these problems in earnest, so that the public can lead happy lives. President, I so submit.


6501

MR CHRISTOPHER CHUNG (in Cantonese): President, I will express my views on transport and housing policies in this session. In respect of mass transit service, the proposal on the construction of the Siu Sai Wan Line was rejected in the result of the Railway Development Strategy consultation announced some time ago. I am terribly discontented and disappointed about this. The reasons put forth by the Government are less than convincing. The authorities explain that it is because no site has been earmarked for the construction of railway, the number of passengers is inadequate to support the operation of a railway and the existing transport support services in the district are adequate. All of these claims are incorrect, and they are put forth merely to reject the Siu Sai Wan Line proposal. It is undesirable that the authorities have made such excuses and shirked the responsibility. At present, there is a population of around 50 000 to 60 000 and a few primary and secondary schools in Siu Sai Wan, and the transport demand from students is great. Therefore, it is a planning mistake that mass transit service support like the railway is not provided in the district. The Government should be open-minded and make proactive efforts to identify alternative solutions. For instance, it may consider constructing a light rail system to provide feeder service, or consider using an overhead bridge or a cross-harbour tunnel in railway construction, to solve the problems. The authorities should not kill the Siu Sai Wan Line in one strike. (THE PRESIDENT'S DEPUTY, MR RONNY TONG, took the Chair) The West Island Line is now open, yet the business of public light buses and taxis in the district has been greatly affected. As such, we think the Government should conduct a comprehensive transport study as soon as possible. Although railway is the backbone of transportation in Hong Kong, consideration should be given to supporting transport services, so that places inaccessible by MTR or railway will be connected by feeder services provided by other means of transport. Such an arrangement will enable other means of transport to play a supporting role and maintain room of survival for the public light buses and taxis trades.


Second, I would like to talk about housing. Deputy President, the housing problem is always the key concern of the incumbent Chief Executive, and he started addressing the housing problem in his first Policy Address. Yet concerning the housing aspect in the Policy Address this year, the authorities have basically set out the number of flats to be completed in the next few years. I think this approach can be likened to quenching thirst with imagined satisfaction. It will not help much in meeting the short-term housing demand. Although the current-term Government has raked its brain in identifying ways to increase housing supply, it is hindered by the opposition camp and a small number of bogus conservationists, so progress can hardly be made. In my view, the fundamental solution to the housing problem is to develop new and large-scale residential areas or new towns. At present, the authorities rely on the approach of grabbing "toothpick-tower sites" and "mini sites" blindly for the construction of single buildings providing a limited number of flats. However, such attempts will be futile, for the number of flats provided is too small to satisfy the great demand. Worse still, it will make the already crowded urban environment even more unpleasant and arouse opposition from the public. Yet, it is true that the authorities have met much resistance in developing new sites. Whenever the Government puts forth new proposals on development, such as the North East New Territories New Development Areas, the artificial islands in central Hong Kong waters and the periphery of country parks, some bogus conservationists will leap forward with requests for the conservation of certain rare species, or initiate judicial reviews, and so on, to delay the development initiatives of the Government by all means. Their efforts are matched by filibusters launched by politicos of the opposition in the legislature at the Public Works Subcommittee and the Finance Committee. They do all these to wreck the proposal. Who are actually blocking attempts of increasing housing and land supply? I think the public know that well at heart. In paragraph 67 of the Policy Address this year, the Chief Executive proposes the Pilot Scheme on home ownership for Green Form applicants, which is called the Green Form Home Ownership Pilot Scheme in brief. However, the proposal may give rise to some other problems. For instance, will sitting public housing tenants enjoy double benefits; will this reduce the supply of public housing; what is the rate of discount on Home Ownership Scheme (HOS) flats to be offered to match the affordability of public housing tenants; if target purchasers are well-off tenants in public housing, will it beg suspicions of giving preferential treatment to well-off tenants; and whether it is a reasonable target in


6503

housing construction for the Government to provide assistance in home ownership. The Government should be extremely cautious in considering these factors, lest it causes unfair treatment policy-wise in the haste of solving the housing problem, which may backfire in provoking greater discontents among the public. Moreover, there is this proposal in the community which suggests allowing owners of HOS flats to rent their flats with premium not paid out to applicants on the Waiting List of public housing or people eligible for applying for public housing with Green Forms. I have reservations about this proposal. Since owners of HOS flats have already enjoyed the home purchase subsidies provided by the Government, it may constitute the concern about double benefit if they are allowed to sublet their flats to make a profit without paying land premium. Worse still, if HOS flats are allowed to be rented out, it may create more problems of "sub-divided units". Besides, this arrangement may not necessarily be a solution to the excessively long waiting time for public housing. Therefore, I hope the Government can think twice before it acts, so that it will not lose sight of other concerns due to over-concentration on solving the problem. The list of applicants on the Waiting List is very long now. Yet sometimes, the offers of public housing flats in remote areas of the New Territories are not accepted. To deal with the situation, will the Government implement some policies to attract applicants to move into public housing units in remote areas? For instance, the Government may consider concessionary policies like offering rental discount and relocation subsidies, and relaxing the space allocation limit, to attract the public to move into remote areas. As for under-occupation of public housing flats, policies have already been put in place to protect the elderly and persons with disabilities, ensuring that they can continue to live in their original flats. As for other under-occupation cases, will the authorities consider introducing concessionary policies, such as rental remission, relocation or renovation allowances, and so on, to encourage the tenants in question to move into smaller flats, thereby ensuring that public housing resources are used reasonably? Deputy President, in my view, the current housing problem should not be attributed to the Government solely, for the opposition camp has a major role to play. Since the opposition camp has ruined Hong Kong people's livelihood and


jeopardized the interests of Hong Kong, the housing problem in Hong Kong has been dragged on for a long time without seeing any imminent solution. Thank you, Deputy President. MISS CHAN YUEN-HAN (in Cantonese): Deputy President, we are extremely disappointed with the labour measures in the Policy Address, and I will explain the reasons in another session later on. In this session I will focus on the land issue because land resources are an important aspect to society as a whole. I will not talk on this at length as I will focus only on two areas in my discussion. Before I go on further with my speech, I wish to point out that two very important Directors of Bureaux are in the Chamber now. One is the Secretary for the Environment, and the other is the Secretary for Transport and Housing. Why? Because I have recently requested a special meeting with Secretary WONG Kam-sing, during which I said that in the course of development, he would develop roads for places intended for development but he entirely had no regard to the fact that while roads can meet our needs, they can at the same time bring about environmental pollution, including noise problems. The Legislative Council has recently received complaints from different people about serious noise problems at Fanling Highway. The Government has undertaken to come up with solutions to the problem but no action has been taken so far. In view of this, I wish to point out that in the course of development, these two Directors of Bureaux must think about ways to resolve problems brought about by development in modern cities and whether roads should be developed in such a way, so as to avoid causing great impacts on the residents. However, I do not plan to discuss this part today. I wish to focus on land in my discussion. I am very glad to see that Secretary Paul CHAN is in the Chamber. He was not in the Chamber just now and I was worried that he would not come back, because I have expended a great deal of effort in writing this part of my speech on land. In respect of land, I have always heard a view in various districts of the territory and that is, everyone is sick of planning. Whenever people hear of planning, they find it abhorrent, all the more so among young people working in factory buildings in Kwun Tong. They think that planning is tantamount to transferring benefits to real estate developers and that it is all about collusion between the Government and developers. Their views have gone to the extreme. This is the second time that I talked about this issue in this Council. In view of this situation, I think we should consider how we can clearly explain the reasons,


6505

so that these people can change their views gradually and get the real picture. I understand that there is a need for the Government to implement construction projects extensively but the problem lies in planning. This is originally a good thing, but why is it that apart from people in the rural areas who welcome development and planning ― some of them may not like it either ― other people find it quite worrying? What exactly is the problem? In the past, whenever fresh planning was proposed for an old district, everyone would be happy about it for this could improve the living conditions, and the original demands of the residents could also be met in the process. But why is there this situation now? After the large-scale social movement last year, the relevant situations have shown that these voices are actually a continuation of the discontent with planning. Therefore, I very much hope that the Government can clearly listen to various views. I fully appreciate that the failure of the last-term Government to address this problem has brought difficulties for the current-term Government. Housing is very important, and I also agree that housing development is very important. But why can we not adopt better methods while listening more to the voices in the districts to forge closer communication? I will further elaborate this point later. For example, if communication is lacking and a bulldozing approach of planning is adopted to pull down everything and then use all the land hence acquired for developing housing units, there would be many voices of opposition. Why should everything be demolished? Why do people have strong views after housing units are developed? Therefore, under such circumstances, I think the Government must conduct an analysis carefully. However, in the Policy Address there is a paragraph ― I wonder who wrote it for the Chief Executive ― and it reads (I quote), "The development of the former Diamond Hill Squatter Areas (Tai Hom Village), the former Cha Kwo Ling Kaolin Mine and former Lamma Quarry are making good progress. These three development projects are expected to provide over 8 000 public and private residential units.". I do not need to explain it in detail because Mr CHAN Kam-lam has just mentioned the case concerning Cha Kwo Ling received by the Legislative Council recently, and Mr CHAN Kam-lam and I happen to be handling the case together, and he also mentioned the views of the people in the surrounding area. Is it that the several examples cited in the Policy Address are all wrong? The example concerning the Diamond Hill Squatter Areas (Tai Hom Village) is correct. Recently, or more precisely, last week, the Government visited the community to listen to views. I have asked the Chairman of the District Council about the visit and they said that the feedback was good as everyone generally agreed to the


proposal. At first, we were worried that some residents might raise objection. Why? Because the Government will carry out construction works in front of Galaxia, that is, Plaza Hollywood. There were originally 1 600 residents and now, some 4 000 people are living there. Why is it so? During the specific consultation conducted in the district a fortnight ago, there was generally no problem. I have followed up the Tai Hom Village project for many years and dozens of meetings have been held. In the most recent meeting, nine government departments met with us representatives from the community. Let me spell out these nine departments: The Planning Department, which is responsible for the overall planning of Tai Hom Village; the Transport Department, which is responsible for reviewing the impact of the roads on traffic; the Highways Department, which is responsible for analysing whether the newly planned road connections can facilitate residents' access to Tai Hom Village; the Housing Department, which is responsible for handling the ratio between public rental housing units to Home Ownership Scheme units and ascertaining whether the building height has any impact on the environment; the Leisure and Cultural Services Department, which is responsible for the design of cultural and recreational facilities in the new development area; in respect of creativity, the feasibility of allocating part of this place formerly known as the "Hong Kong Hollywood" to the promotion of culture and creativity will be explored; the MTR Corporation Limited, which handles issues relating to the exits; the Architectural Services Department, which is responsible for studying ways to utilize the remaining space in the design; and the Environmental Protection Department, which is responsible for handling the environmental impact and noise problems caused by the new planning. Deputy President, nine departments are involved, and I very much appreciate the two Deputy Directors for holding meetings with us and the concerted efforts made by various departments to resolve the problems. The number of flats affected has increased from 1 600 to some 4 000 now. Why do I sing praises of the two Deputy Directors? The reason is that communication had to be forged for countless times and dozens of exchanges and meetings were held in the process and ultimately, the problem was resolved by the concerted efforts of nine departments. One of these two Deputy Directors is the Deputy Director of Housing, who is very competent, and the other is Ophelia WONG, Deputy Director of Planning, who has left the Government. Concerted efforts should be made to hold discussions in order to understand why it works in this district but not in New Territories North and even not in the Northwest New


6507

Territories soon. Why is it so? I very much hope that the Secretary can look into the situation and gain some comprehensive understanding. In fact, under the Secretary there are some capable officials who are good at communication. So, I really have no idea what has gone wrong. I have time and again presented views to the Government. I remember that when I returned to the Legislative Council, the first official with whom I had to meet was Secretary Paul CHAN. At that time, a colleague proposed a motion against the North New Territories development project but I did not agree to it as I considered that development should be proceeded with. Therefore, I, jointly with some green groups and architects from universities, met with the Secretary. We mentioned organic development at the time and urged the Government to forge communication properly before commencing the development project, while stressing the need to preserve in the process the culture and characteristics of the district and respect the views of the indigenous villagers. Regrettably, we saw that the residents who are most affected by the entire planning were nevertheless the last group of people who learnt of the situation, and it was too late when they found out about it, and this, I think, is most heart-rending. I also wish to talk about Shek Tsai Leng in New Territories North. Many people are aware of this incident. This place is home to more than 1 000 elderly. Matthew CHEUNG is having a headache now, not knowing where these elderly can be provided with elderly care service as the Government is still looking for suitable care homes for these elderly. He is going to pull down the elderly care home there and then turn his back on them. How can he do this? The Secretary has not ignored these elderly though, for he has listened to their views, just that he failed to get the message. So, in view of the situation, I then came to realize that the Secretary is only responsible for planning while matters relating to welfare are within the purview of Matthew CHEUNG. Since the welfare issue is involved, we immediately asked Matthew CHEUNG to pay a visit there with us, but Matthew CHEUNG was clever as he went there with the Assistant Director of Planning. In the process, I felt at ease, and we eventually managed to resolve the problem of these 1 000-odd elderly in Shek Tsai Leng gradually. Another example is Yuet Wo Sauce and Preserved Fruits Limited, a winery with characteristics which is now rarely found in Hong Kong. Without it, there will be problems with the production of sweet vinegar in Hong Kong, for people rely on it to cook "ginger vinegar", and we are also confident in "Made in Hong Kong" products. When we visited its boss, he nevertheless said to us, "Miss


CHAN, had it not been the reporters telling me that development would be carried out here, I would never have learnt of it.". I, therefore, went to see Gregory SO but he said that this is a traditional industry and so, he had nothing to do with it. Deputy President, how laughable this is. This sauce making industry has supported the living of many people. Dr LAM Tai-fai, I understand that you are very concerned about industries, so please show some concern about their situation. I very much hope that friends in New Territories East will also care about their situation. Another example is Kwu Tung North where there are many farmers. During my first meeting with the Secretary I told him that many people wanted to resume farming. I would like to point out that a good decision was made on the future development of Long Valley in the relevant consultation, and he had indeed made an improvement. But the problem is that the Secretary did not deal with the aspirations of people who wish to resume farming. The Secretary has proposed to develop Kwu Tung South. It seems to be a matter of course to shift from Kwu Tung North to Kwu Tung South and so, following the instruction of the Secretary ― I am just joking ― I went to Kwu Tung South for a site visit. Deputy President, all the places there were fenced up with wire mesh, which I found really incomprehensible. A resident saw me and came up to me. He said, "Miss CHAN, are you here to visit us?" I asked him, "Why is this place all fenced up by wire mesh?" He told me that some villagers had put up these mesh fences everywhere. I then told the Secretary that it was impossible for this place to be used as farmland. The villagers had long got wind of the news that the Government had plans to carry out development there and so, they put up one mesh fence after another all over the place. What can the authorities do? After hearing what I said, the Secretary remarked that these matters were within the ambit of KO Wing-man and so, I went to see KO Wing-man. Deputy President, in any case, as KO Wing-man has now put forward an agricultural policy and while I do not know the details of it, I hope that he can address this issue seriously. In citing all of these examples, I hope to remind all government officials that they must understand that planning without thorough consideration and communication will ultimately make the successful implementation of their plans impossible. On the contrary, there will be even greater social discontent and


6509

criticisms about collusion between the Government and real estate developers, inviting even more voices of opposition. This is the first point. I need to speak more quickly. Secondly, I wish to point out that development is not only about housing development as it is also necessary to make consideration in various aspects. In reply to me the Secretary said, "Miss CHAN, I will set up a logistics zone in the Northwest New Territories." I do not oppose this. But I must say that you have, in more cases, destroyed their original economies. Therefore, I think we should not be made to lose a lot of other things only for the purpose of housing development. Just now I stressed the importance of housing development but while housing units are being developed, does it mean that our original economic activities can be neglected completely? Officials responsible for land development should give this some thoughts. In every place, development does not only concern housing, and many different cultural and economic aspects or projects in society will also require room for development. In this connection, the Chief Executive said during the election that alternative projects would be launched to facilitate the development of people who do not belong to the mainstream economy, but what has he done? Tell me what he has done. The answer is nothing. Therefore, I think this is not only about housing development. I will not go into the details because time is running out. I would like to talk about green belts. Concerning green belts, I wish to stress one point. Why are there green belts in Hong Kong? The reason is to provide a green belt between the urban areas and the countryside, and this green belt is meant to caution the Government that it has to leave some space for the people in the course of development. Apart from building housing units and providing facilities, it is also necessary to provide some refreshing places for the people to unwind. However, it seems that these places are nowhere to be found now while the Government presses ahead with housing development on strong grounds. I have debated this with my colleagues, and I hold that the Government must not rashly carry out development in green belts. I do not oppose the acquisition of land but land should not be used in such a way. Let us look at some successful examples. In Taiwan, for instance, development is carried out to a mild degree and the places are known as local economic activities zones. This is a very good measure. I will not explain it in detail as time does not allow me to. While we can see development in Taiwan, a


lot of homestay lodges and local community economy elements are preserved at the same time, and many natural things native to the place can also be found. This is also the case in Japan where the economy is so advanced, but I will not go into the details as time is running out. In their overall development, they do not only think about housing development and real estate projects; nor do they emphasize only modernization, but they will preserve many different types of economy and culture that can be originally found in the country. Therefore, we should not pull down everything with the bulldozer, just as what we are doing now. Our professors have put questions to officials of the Planning Department, asking them whether they have taken into consideration the residents living in the surrounding areas when they decisively draw a line in the course of planning. The answer is "No". But I do not blame these officials because they work according to the Government's policies. In developing housing flats, it is also necessary to provide living space to the people and preserve the characteristics of the community. There is another point which is also very important and that is, the gap between the rich and the poor. Many people are not provided with employment and development opportunities, and this is precisely the reason why many young people feel frustrated. In tandem with the development of land, it is necessary to identify solutions to these problems, rather than giving consideration to housing development only. The mild development approach adopted in Taiwan is worthy reference for us but due to the time constraint, I cannot explain it in detail here. Lastly, summing up my speech, I wish to make one point and that is, I support the Government in carrying out development and I support the development of housing units but the Government absolutely must not take the current approach because all Hong Kong people find the current approach detestable. In the course of housing development by the Government, there is always a point of contention as people query whether the Government is serving real estate developers. I hope that the Government can change its planning concepts overall and stop putting across negative messages. I do not wish to see so many quarrels in society. But the first and foremost task of the Government is to make changes in its policies in order not to give people the impression that all the developments are meant to serve real estate developers. Deputy President, I so submit.


6511

MR VINCENT FANG (in Cantonese): Deputy President, I mentioned in my speech made in the first session that the Government had cited a lot of figures in relation to the housing problem, the greatest concern to the public, to let them know how much it was concerned about the problem. However, the Government cannot rely solely on these figures to resolve the problem. In fact, the latest figures and indicators show that the problem has come to a point which brooks no delay. Over the past several years, quite a number of "curb" measures were introduced by the Government in a bid to curb property prices. However, the latest information has revealed a rise in residential property prices in Hong Kong for six years in a row, with the prices of flats under 430 sq ft for first-time home buyers having risen most frantically by nearly two folds. Like the frantic surge in property prices, the applications for public rental housing (PRH) and Home Ownership Scheme (HOS) flats are equally frenetic. The number of applicants on the Waiting List for PRH has exceeded 270 000. The figures of HOS applicants are even more dramatic: Although only 2 000-odd flats were put on sale for the recent phase, a record 130 000 applications were subsequently received, of which 117 000 applications were submitted by White Form applicants. This situation reflects that the public's demand for home ownership has come to a point where they will flock to submit applications for a "shelter", regardless of whether it is a PRH or HOS flat and the chances of success. Should the Government fail to expeditiously alleviate the strong demand for home ownership, greater dissatisfaction with the Government will most probably erupt again in society. Let us come back to this Policy Address. The only substantive project on the housing front is the sale of flats to Green Form applicants in the form of a pilot scheme, so I fully support this Green Form Home Ownership Pilot Scheme. Contrary to the comments made by Mr LEUNG Yiu-chung just now, I think this proposal can serve multiple purposes. It can not only increase the quantity of subsidized sale flats expeditiously to satisfy the home ownership demand of Green Form applicants but also, without prolonging the waiting time for PRH allocation, separate the channels of home purchase for Green Form and White Form applicants, so that Green Form applicants and White Form applicants can purchase mainly flats sold under the pilot scheme and HOS flats respectively. As a result, the chances of applicants purchasing HOS flats will increase, too.


The sale of an entire block under the Pilot Scheme can avoid the problems of fragmented ownership and management difficulties encountered under the previous Tenants Purchase Scheme. What is more, the Housing Authority can reduce expenditure on repairs and maintenance in the long term, thereby reducing its financial pressure. Hence, I think that the Government should not only launch the Pilot Scheme expeditiously, but also consider providing more PRH units. However, I have to remind the Government that, during the sale of flats under the Pilot Scheme, the flats must not be sold at a low price. A stringent approach must be adopted because the Government should not provide double subsidy to the buyers. Actually, an adequate supply of land is most crucial to resolving the problem of housing shortage once and for all. However, the current-term Government has already served nearly two and a half years. How much progress has it made in the provision of land? In last year's policy address, the Government indicated in a high profile that 150 plots of land had been identified, which sounded quite satisfactory. Nevertheless, as I mentioned a long time ago during the debate on the policy address last year, these plots of land had to overcome hurdles after hurdles before they could be used for housing construction. After one year, only 45 plots of land have their statutory plans revised, but it would take a long time before housing construction could commence, not to mention the other 105 plots of land. I hope the Chief Executive can secure these 150 plots of land expeditiously during his term of office for housing construction. Besides the land problem, the problem of labour shortage in the construction industry is most worrying, too. In particular, not only will flat production in both the public and private sectors increase in the next few years, but quite a number of major infrastructure projects will also be launched one after another. As a result, everyone will be making frantic attempts to meet very tight schedules and scramble to hire construction workers. But the question is: How many construction workers are there in Hong Kong? The number is indeed calculable. According to the Government's projection, there will be a shortfall of 15 000 construction workers within a short time. Given such a huge shortfall, it is simply impossible for so many local workers to be trained in the near future. Furthermore, how many of the recently trained local workers will stay in the construction industry? I believe the Government has a pretty good idea of the number.


6513

Should the construction industry in Hong Kong remain in the situation of "having 10 pots but only seven lids" for a long period of time, the commissioning of railways and the completion of public housing will be delayed. Moreover, all projects will be delayed and Hong Kong people will be affected in the end. To tackle this problem, the Government must be committed to importing an adequate number of foreign construction workers to meet the urgent needs in Hong Kong. However, no solution has been proposed despite a long delay. Fortunately, years after this proposition was made by us, the Policy Address this year has finally given us some response by announcing a further relaxation of the labour importation mechanism and permission for imported skilled workers to work across various public-sector works projects for the same contractor. As I consider this proposal better than none, we support it. However, we hope that the Government can put it into implementation expeditiously, for doing so can benefit Hong Kong even more. Nevertheless, given the current huge shortfall of construction workers in Hong Kong, the new plan, even if introduced, might not be enough. In my opinion, the Government must evaluate the success or failure of this plan expeditiously and, if necessary, take "additional" actions promptly at any time as contingency measures instead of waiting for the next policy address to make a response. Deputy President, I so submit. MR NG LEUNG-SING (in Cantonese): Deputy President, in the 2015 Policy Address, the discussion on housing and land issues takes up quite a number of paragraphs. Right from the start, the first sentence makes it clear: "Housing is the most critical of all livelihood issues in Hong Kong." As a matter of fact, among clothing, food, housing and transport in people's livelihood, the demand for housing is especially pressing in Hong Kong, and so far the relevant policy is still accorded the top priority in the administration of the current-term Government. To those with discerning eyes, and as mentioned by a Member earlier, the problem of housing supply of the previous-term Government has become the major cause of problems which the current-term Government must tackle. I also anticipate that the problems of housing supply and fluctuations of property prices will become entwined, looming over the Government's future administration and people's livelihood in Hong Kong.


The Policy Address stresses that vigorous efforts will be made to speed up the development of public housing and Home Ownership Scheme (HOS) flats. It also puts forward various new measures under the land and housing policies, which include increasing the supply of subsidized sale flats by engaging the Hong Kong Housing Society (HKHS), the Urban Renewal Authority and the Hong Kong Settlers Housing Corporation Limited which has been mentioned lately. I note that just now a Member asked why these organizations were mentioned. It is because these organizations have their respective statutory powers and the Government will not take their place. Hence, it is necessary to prompt these organizations to provide assistance. Besides, recently, there is also a proposal on selling whole blocks of public housing units to Green Form applicants so that people with different affordability will have more options and opportunities of home ownership. All these seek to address social needs on various fronts by giving people more hopes. As we could see, regarding the supply of 2 160 new HOS flats recently, the Government received some 110 000 applications in total, representing an over-subscription rate of 54 times. Among them, 100 000-odd applications were made with the White Form and 10 900, the Green Form, resulting in the respective situations' of 124 applicants competing for one unit and eight applicants competing for one unit, thus showing the strong demand of the middle class and the grassroots for home ownership. Deputy President, the present housing situation in Hong Kong is worrisome. Firstly, the number of applicants waiting for public rental housing (PRH) allocation has hit record highs time and again. In June, September and December last year, the number of applicants on the PRH Waiting List increased from 250 000 to 260 000 and then rose to 270 000. Given such a growth rate, the Government could not but break its pledge of allocating an applicant a public housing flat within three years on average. Besides, as the growth in the estimated PRH production has failed to catch up with the number of applicants on the Waiting List in recent years, the situation is, again, worrying. Regarding the number of PRH flats to be produced and the production timetable, I suggest that the Government should make quarterly announcements to enhance transparency and seek to address public concern. In view of the strong housing demand, it is only natural that supply of land for housing production is urgently needed. The Policy Address points out: "What Hong Kong lacks is not land, but land that is developable." In this regard, I expect the Government to make full-scale efforts to press ahead as a team and strive to garner support from various sectors in society in planning and exploring land that can be used for housing construction. To improve people's livelihood, it must really rouse everyone to action.


6515

Secondly, the surging demand for public housing accentuates the severity of high property prices and exorbitant rents. The International Monetary Fund (IMF) made a comparison of 52 countries or places in terms of their Home Price Index, and Hong Kong ranked second in the world for its increase rate of home prices last year. According to the latest Hong Kong Property Review of the Rating and Valuation Department, since April last year, property prices have soared every month. The overall price level of domestic properties has risen 13%, and the per-square-foot price has also hit a record high. It is also pointed out in a survey that for a couple who have worked in Hong Kong for a decade, even if they do not make any expenses and save up all of their income, it will take them 14.4 years to save enough money to make the down payment for a flat of 40 sq m. On the matter of rent, the annual rental increase in Hong Kong was 6%, and the rental value also hit a record high. We did not see any effective curbs on the rise in property prices and rents in the short run, while the rents and selling prices of shop premises and offices are also on the rise, causing a serious impact on small and medium enterprises. It will also indirectly undermine employment in society and weaken the spending power of the public. Again, the future situation does not bode well. Deputy President, there are certain unique phenomena in the housing scene in Hong Kong which many members of the public find exasperating. First of all, recently, the selling prices of public housing and HOS flats are getting close to those of private domestic properties. According to media reports, now the prices of small units are spiralling, while "crazy prices" have emerged in the HOS market. Previously, in the middle of last month, Hoi Fu Court in Tai Kok Tsui hit an all-time record high in terms of the per-square-foot price among HOS flats in the territory. The per-square-foot price in the transaction of a studio flat with an area of only 213 sq ft was unbelievably close to $15,000. The resale price of public housing units also repeatedly broke the record high in the same month. In late January, a tiny unit with an area of 147 sq ft in Wah Ming Estate in Fanling was, to our surprise, sold at $1.7 million. With its per-square-foot price reaching $11,000-odd, it can be described as a public housing unit with the most impressive selling price, being far more expensive than the private housing units in the same district. Nevertheless, within 10 days, the per-square-foot price of a "shoebox" unit in Fung Tak Estate in Wong Tai Sin even reached $12,000, which was another record breaking price. Public housing funded with public coffers is


supposed to cater for those residents who have housing needs and whose financial conditions do not allow them to live in private housing, but now public housing has stepped into the private domestic property market, giving rise to a "home speculation scheme" which obviously distorts and contradicts the original intention of the provision of public housing. As I said just now, many people find such a situation exasperating. Moreover, in late January, the Office of The Ombudsman found out from its direct investigation that both the Housing Department (HD) and the HKHS seemed to have connived at tenants' abuse of public housing. In one case, a single tenant occupied three flats. In another case, the father passed the flat on to his son, making public housing hereditary. There were also public housing tenants who had leased their jointly owned private property valued at some $3 million in the market. There was even a tenant who had simultaneously held public housing units of the HD and HKHS for more than eight years. I believe these cases investigated are just the tip of the iceberg. In the view of many members of the public, this shows that hidden cases or cases where people exploit loopholes in the regulations to abuse public housing are numerous. Given the more than 270 000 applicants waiting for PRH allocation, and given the tens of thousands of low-income households in "sub-divided units" who are in desperate need of support, such cases of abuse of public housing funded with public coffers are indeed infuriating. Deputy President, enjoying an annual income of a million dollars, someone in the Chamber who claims to be the "people's representative" serving the people permanently occupies a PRH unit, saying that his assets have been left with his friendly society. With such evasion or direct conflict of interests involved, such blatant occupation of public housing brings disgrace to this Council. Such selfish occupation of housing is also disgraceful to Che GUEVARA, the Cuban whom he claims to respect. Hence, on the Government's administration relating to housing and land in Hong Kong, I have the following few concerns: Firstly, the Government should produce public housing in a reasonable and planned manner and also redevelop old public housing to raise its use value. At the same time, it must formulate measures to rigorously combat abuse of public housing, adopting practical measures to reduce the number of public housing units left vacant and facilitate their timely availability for use. Regarding the "Well-off Tenants Policies" which have been adopted for years, since the tenants


6517

are well-off, why do they still use public subsidy? For this reason, the "Well-off Tenants Policies" should keep abreast of the times so as to vacate more public housing units for use by people in need. Secondly, the HOS is supposed to be an effective ladder which facilitates the residents' upward mobility. It should uphold the idea of "home ownership" rather than "home speculation". The resale of HOS flats should be confined to people who meet the HOS requirements. As the HOS is the starting point for home owners, it should focus on practical rather than extravagant design or installations and avoid repeated conversions which will lead to the utilization of large amounts of construction materials, generation of waste, and pollution problems such as noise and dust. These are green building concepts which must be noted. As regards the demand for housing and land in the medium and long terms, the Government should conduct planning in step with demographic development, make reasonable distribution of land and develop as appropriate the land in the New Territories and on Lantau Island. Of course, consideration should be given to the relationship between balanced development and environmental protection in planning. Deputy President, to live in peace and work with contentment, we should not rely solely on the Government or benefit at the expense of taxpayers. The Government should only set out a position and plan in the general direction and examine how best to create favourable conditions for development, serving members of the public to the greatest extent. To really live in peace and work with contentment, members of the public need to make industrious efforts, look for opportunities, take their destiny into their own hands and fight for the right choice they made. Deputy President, I so submit.

DR LAM TAI-FAI (in Cantonese): Deputy President, good afternoon. Deputy President, during the first day of the policy debate yesterday, I heard our Honourable colleague, Mr Christopher CHEUNG, describe this year's Policy Address as the best of all policy addresses since LEUNG Chun-ying took office. I think he is really kind to people. I also heard another Honourable colleague,


Mr Vincent FANG, say that insofar as this Policy Address is concerned, he could not see what path LEUNG Chun-ying is taking Hong Kong people to tread. He criticized LEUNG Chun-ying for only producing a heap of figures but his policies are just scratching the surface. In this respect, I think Mr Vincent FANG's remarks are practical and forthright. Miss Alice MAK of the Hong Kong Federation of Trade Unions said that the Policy Address had only repackaged some of the reforms to make people think that the Government has done its job and completed all of its tasks. She criticized the Government for adopting stalling tactics again and again over the development of brownfield sites. Mr Charles Peter MOK of the information technology sector described this Policy Address as "old wine in an old bottle". All in all, quite a number of Members are dissatisfied with this Policy Address, be they pro-establishment Members or pan-democratic Members. Deputy President, today, I have no intention to make any criticism of this Policy Address which has been worsening year after year and which is indifferent to the middle class, to the small and medium enterprises and to the development of industries. Deputy President, as you must also know, many people in society hold that should the pro-establishment Members hurl scathing criticisms at the Chief Executive, it would mean that they do not stand united and are not patriotic and would even render governance affected. I really feel helpless about it. Deputy President, this year's Policy Address is not at all a disappointment to me because never have I had any expectation for it. Time will tell, and I treat this Policy Address with equanimity. This new Government has administered Hong Kong for two and a half years. Its performance in administration, ability of administration and mentality of administration are there for all to see. So what expectations can we hold for it? Deputy President, with regard to the first Policy Address of the current-term Government, I had read it repeatedly for five times; for the second Policy Address, I read it at least thrice; and for this year's Policy Address, I did not wish to go on reading it when I started reading it the second time. Frankly speaking, if I wish to find out about the figures set out by the Chief Executive, I can check them out by browsing the websites or reading newspapers. If I wish to find out about the vision or goals of the Chief Executive, I think I may probably fare better in buying a book of predictions for the Year of the Goat at the newsstand.


6519

Deputy President, the current-term Government always says that the housing issue is most important of all but since the Government took office, obviously they have been clueless as to what they should do. The housing and land problems remain not resolved effectively and worse still, they have been deteriorating. Many people are living in dire straits. In paragraph 61 of the Policy Address, the Chief Executive said, "The current-term Government is not only determined to avert the supply-demand imbalance progressively, but is also confident and capable of achieving this.". The Chief Executive has also said recently that the long-standing situation of the supply of housing falling short of demand in Hong Kong should be coming to a close. Deputy President, with regard to these two lies told with his eyes wide open, not even the Secretary for Development, Paul CHAN, has the guts to give a response to the media direct, though Paul has admitted that the current level of property prices is indeed beyond the affordability of the general public. He went further to say that for the land secured by the Government, every inch of it was secured with painstaking efforts. From this we can see that Paul CHAN is an honest man who is still willing to face the reality. However, the Secretary for Transport and Housing, Prof Anthony CHEUNG, said that they already have 150 sites and so, the Government has identified most of the sites and reaching the target should not be as difficult as it appeared to be. But when being repeatedly questioned by the reporters how many of these sites can be immediately made available for constructing housing units, he could not give a reply. Deputy President, the Chief Executive and these two officials have told three different stories about the same issue. I would like to ask: Who should the public trust? Deputy President, let me tell you this: None of them is trustworthy. We had better believe in God, believe in Buddha or believe in ourselves. Deputy President, in paragraph 69 of the first Policy Address, the Government said, "We have adequate funding, sophisticated technology and feasible plans for increasing land supply. The only question is whether we can stand united with one vision." The second Policy Address also stated that with the community's full support, we will be able to provide sufficient land to achieve the housing target. In this year's Policy Address, it is stated that to achieve the target of public housing development, the support of local communities and other people is of crucial importance. Deputy President, since the Chief Executive understands that unity and the full support of the community is required to


resolve the housing and land problems, he should carry out work in the directions of fostering unity in society, enhancing the sense of belonging and the sense of mission among members of the community, and strengthening collaboration between the Government and society, so that all sides can be of one mind in carrying out work effectively while showing goodwill to each other to forge consensus and formulate practicable proposals, including proposals on compensation or land exchange. But I have not seen the Chief Executive doing this. He preaches one thing but does quite another. He has, intentionally or unintentionally, kept on creating divisions, confrontations and conflicts in society. In fact, not only is unity lacking in society, there is even a sense of alienation, and many people are feeling disheartened and sad for the Government. In this connection, I very much hope that the Chief Executive will make effective improvements to his deeds and thoughts. Otherwise, I am afraid the unity stressed by him may not be achieved even when his term expired and in other words, the housing problem would not be resolved. Deputy President, in the first Policy Address the Chief Executive said, "Roughly, more than half of the private dwellings have a saleable area smaller than 50 sq m. Do we have the courage to make it our vision to improve the living space for the future generation?" This is a very good vision. In the second Policy Address he said, "Our target is to ensure that Hong Kong people are adequately housed and will have better accommodation." In this year's Policy Address he further reiterated, "The current-term Government is not only determined to avert the supply-demand imbalance progressively, but is also confident and capable of achieving this", adding that "apart from making the right choices of land use, we must also undertake long-term land planning and development". Deputy President, it is more than enough to tell a beautiful lie just once, and it is disgusting. But the Chief Secretary can go so far as to treat all Hong Kong people as ignorant people (愚民) ― not "漁民" (meaning fishermen) in the agriculture and fisheries industry, and I mean the word "愚" as in "愚蠢" (meaning foolish). These lies have been outrageously told for three years in a row and his visions and undertakings are obviously no more than empty talk. As we can see, the living space of Hong Kong people is getting smaller and smaller, and their living conditions are becoming more and more deplorable. Has their living area ever been increased? Property prices have kept soaring.


6521

Even the property developers can see the need to build low-priced flats and small-sized flats, in order for the flats to be affordable to the public and marketable. The problem of "sub-divided units" has worsened continuously, with more and more people operating and living in "sub-divided units" and the conditions of "sub-divided units" worsening while the rent has become more and more expensive. So, has there ever been better accommodation for the public? Deputy President, the housing problem that we face today has precisely reflected incompetence on the part of the Government in tackling the housing and land problems. Who will benefit most from the "curb" measures introduced by the Government in respect of housing? The Treasury. Hong Kong people are actually not the beneficiary, for they are still not allocated with housing units and they still have to pay exorbitant rents. Many young couples even have to live away from each other after getting married, so is this any different from a separation? Deputy President, the number of applicants on the Waiting List for public rental housing (PRH) already exceeded 270 000 in 2013 to 2014, with an average waiting time of 3.2 years. The Waiting List has grown longer and longer, and many people are forced to live in small, crowded "sub-divided units" or cubicles. Some time ago the Government estimated that in 2013, there were over 66 000 "sub-divided units" with 171 300 people living in them in Hong Kong but in 2014, the number of these units drastically rose to 86 000, showing an increase of 30% in a short span of one year, which is astonishing indeed. But I believe these figures are only superficial and many hidden "sub-divided units" have not been counted. However, the Government has said categorically that it would ban "sub-divided units" and improve the conditions of "sub-divided units", but "sub-divided units" abound all over the territory, and the problem of "sub-divided units" has never been solved since this Government took office. Hong Kong is a civilized cosmopolis, and when there are so many people living in places with such appalling conditions, I would say that this is absolutely tragic to our society and this is the fault of the Government. Deputy President, as many Honourable colleagues said earlier, the prices of PRH units per square foot have become even higher than those of private residential units recently. A mini-sized unit with a saleable area of 149 sq ft in Fung Tak Estate, Wong Tai Sin, was sold at $1.79 million or over $12,000 per square foot based on the saleable area, which is an all time high. A unit with a saleable area of 147 sq ft in Wah Ming Estate, Fanling, was sold at $1.7 million


or $11,565 per square foot. In respect of Home Ownership Scheme units, a studio flat (which means having no partitioned rooms) with a saleable area of 213 sq ft in Hoi Fu Court, Mong Kok, was sold at $3,095,000, and together with the handling fees and legal fees, the cost totalled over $4 million or over $14,500 per square foot based on the saleable area. Is this not outrageous? These flats measuring some 100 sq ft have even become luxurious residential flats now. In the private sector, property prices were up by over 10% last year, showing an increase of 56% over 1997. The mortgage payment to household income ratio was 57% in the third quarter. Deputy President, I really do not wish to talk about this any further. There are too many figures and they are too horrible, whereas the Government is clueless as to how the housing supply problem can be resolved. As property prices keep spiralling upward, the Government has again sought to scare the people by saying that the duty rates would be adjusted upward, causing the supply in the market to become even tighter. How possibly will members of the public, especially the young people, believe the housing policies proposed in the Policy Address? How possibly will they believe the vision and goals depicted by the Government for them? So, if LEUNG Chun-ying really thinks that unity in society is essential to resolving the housing problem in Hong Kong, I urge LEUNG Chun-ying to drum up the resolve to address the problem of unity as the first step starting from tomorrow. After resolving the problem of unity, I believe he will stand a chance of resolving the housing problem. Deputy President, I so submit.

MR FRANKIE YICK (in Cantonese): Deputy President, at the meeting of the Legislative Council on 7 January, I moved a motion urging the Government to expeditiously launch the fourth Comprehensive Transport Study. While the motion was passed with the support of a majority of Members, unfortunately the Government has no intention to carry out a new round of Comprehensive Transport Study and has only undertaken to conduct a study on public transport. In fact, it has been 16 years since the Third Comprehensive Transport Study was conducted, and there have been changes in population, economic development and the transport layout. With the completion of the Hong Kong-Zhuhai-Macao Bridge and the Express Rail Link in the future, there will be increasingly frequent passenger flow or cargo flow and the demand for transport services will be ever


6523

increasing. Therefore, it is indeed imperative for the Government to start planning early and draw up plans from a macroscopic perspective to cope with the rapid growth in transport demand in the future. Hong Kong is a small place with a large population, and it gives no cause for criticism for the Government to use railway service as the backbone of the transport system in order to meet the public demand for transport services. In the next six years, five new railways will be completed one after another, and with the completion of seven new railway projects in the Railway Development Strategy 2014, the railway network will serve about 75% of the population in Hong Kong, and this will indeed affect the operation of other modes of public transport. In this connection, we do not oppose the Government's plan to conduct studies on public transport in an effort to determine more clearly the roles of various modes of public transport. But if a review is conducted merely on the roles of public transport and even though a number of focus studies will be incorporated, we consider that these would only be some fragmented studies that can neither mitigate the operational difficulties of public transport services nor facilitate the formulation of long-term plans for transport in Hong Kong. Therefore, I maintain that the Government should carry out a comprehensive study on the overall transport situation. The industry represented by me and I support the continuous efforts made by the Government to actively promote the franchised bus routes rationalization programme. To reduce opposition from the districts, I hope that the Government can facilitate co-ordination among other modes of public transport in order to provide support for the routes affected by such rationalization. For instance, bus routes with less patronage can be taken up by green minibuses in order not to cause inconvenience to the public after rationalization. If the bus operators can successfully implement the rationalization of bus routes, it can reduce their operational costs and help ease the pressure for fare adjustment. In the meantime, the rationalization of bus routes is helpful to improving roadside air quality and alleviating the pressure on road traffic. In the Report on Study of Road Traffic Congestion in Hong Kong published recently, it is pointed out that the average car journey speed in urban areas has dropped by about 11% from 25.6 km per hour in 2003 to 22.7 km per hour at present. It is learnt that the Transport and Housing Bureau is currently studying the suggestions made by the Transport Advisory Committee for mitigating traffic congestion on roads. I hope that the measures to be implemented ultimately will not seek to address the problem only by levying fees


and charges. There is the view that the "chief culprit" of road congestion is the surge in the number of private cars, but this problem is also attributed to the failure of matching public transport facilities to support the development of new towns. As a result, private cars have become a necessity to some people for commuting. If the Government follows the suggestion made in the Report of substantially increasing the First Registration Tax for private cars as a means to reduce the number of private cars, I think this is not fair to people who has a need for car purchase. Moreover, I have reservations about suppressing the desire for car purchase through the imposition of heavy taxes. Take Singapore as an example. Although a high threshold is set for vehicle buyers in Singapore as it is stipulated that a certificate of entitlement must be obtained beforehand, which has resulted in the prices of vehicles in Singapore outgrowing those of Hong Kong by nearly 100%, they still failed to reduce the growth in the number of cars. Therefore, I do not support the increase of the First Registration Tax for private cars as a means to suppress the number of cars. However, the Government can consider increasing the cost of drivers in driving during the peak hours and offering incentives for travelling by public transport as solutions to traffic congestion on roads. Regarding the situation of lost trips by franchised buses and green minibuses, although the bus operators must be held responsible for this, the problem can be ascribed to the shortage of drivers. Drivers in bus companies are currently of 55 years of age on average, and the situation of green minibus drivers is even worse as three green minibus drivers currently add up to over 200 years of age. The shortage of drivers has led to longer working hours of drivers and also the idling of some buses. Last year, the Government introduced a measure to be implemented on 1 June this year to require mandatory attendance at a pre-service course by applicants of public light bus driving licence. The industry considers that this would only amount to deterrence to people interested in joining the industry. Yet, the problem of shortage of drivers is not limited to franchised buses and green minibuses, for this is also the case for taxis, non-franchised buses, heavy goods vehicles and articulated vehicles. If the authorities cannot help the industry address the problem of inadequate manpower resources, this would create certain impacts on the public transport services and economic development. Apart from stepping up training and importing foreign workers, I suggest that the authorities can address the problem of inadequate drivers by relaxing the relevant policy. Under the existing regulation, an applicant for a


6525

professional driver's licence shall be a holder of a valid full private car or light goods vehicle driving licence for at least three years and this does not mean having driving experience for three years. I would like to ask this: What difference is there between holding a driving licence for three years and holding it for one year when the holder never drives? Since there is not a link between holding a valid private car driving licence for three years and the driving experience of the licence holder, can the authorities consider relaxing the requirement by reducing the years of holding a private car driving licence from three years to one year? The Government should issue a driving licence to an applicant as long as he meets a certain driving standard and passes the test. I hope that through relaxing the unreasonable requirement for application for a professional driver's licence, there can be more new drivers joining the trades. Drivers aside, there is also a succession gap in the vehicle repairs industry, and this is also a problem faced by the transport industry. Given that vehicle repairs involves road safety and air quality, the Government should, apart from providing more resources for training to recruit talents, also allocate land for development of the vehicle repairs industry, with a view to centralizing the development of the vehicle repairs industry. On the one hand, this can help centralize the disposal of sewage, waste oil and emission to reduce environmental pollution; and on the other hand, through effective planning, the working environment will be improved and the professional image of the practitioners can be upgraded, thereby attracting young people to join the industry. Furthermore, with regard to the shortage of parking spaces for heavy commercial goods vehicles (including vehicles of a larger size, such as coaches, container trucks and articulated vehicles), I have noted that the Government is conducting a study on the development of multi-storey public car parks for heavy vehicles. However, I hope that if the Government should decide to develop these multi-storey public car parks, it should not make assessments based on the financial viability of one single project only. The Government should consider the overall social benefits that can be brought about by the land released by the development of multi-storey public car parks. Otherwise, if the fees charged by these multi-storey public car parks are not affordable to the industries, nobody would be interested in using these parking facilities at the end of the day. In order to make planning for the provision of sufficient parking facilities for commercial vehicles in line with the development of society, the Government should expeditiously launch a new round of Parking Demand Study as it has been 15 years after the last study was conducted.


In respect of improvement of air quality, the Liberal Party supports the Government enacting legislation to require ocean-going vessels to switch to the use of low sulphur fuel while at berth in Hong Kong. However, we also hope that this measure can be implemented by ports in the Pearl River Delta (PRD) in the Mainland in parallel, with a view to achieving greater environmental benefits and maintaining a level playing field for various ports in the PRD. As regards roadside air quality, the Government is not proactive enough in promoting the use of zero-emission electric vehicles. In last year's Policy Address, it was announced that electric taxi suppliers can set up quick chargers in car parks administered by the Transport Department but only six car parks have been involved. In fact, given inadequate government support, the taxi trade feels somewhat frustrated in promoting the use of electric taxis. I hope that the Government will continue to actively expand the charging network. It is only with comprehensive charging facilities that the Government can encourage more members of the public and enterprises to switch to electric vehicles. Lastly, I wish to point out that the Government has provided First Registration Tax concession for vehicle owners purchasing environmentally-friendly commercial vehicles which meet the specified standard, in order to reduce vehicular emission and encourage vehicle owners to purchase environmentally-friendly vehicles. This measure is worthy of support. However, the standard is often too far ahead of the times as only the newest models of vehicles can enjoy the tax concession without giving consideration to the financial viability of the prices to the enterprises. As we have learnt from the sources ― actually the Government already announced it yesterday ― starting from 1 April this year, the tax concession for heavy goods vehicles will be applicable only to pre-Euro VI vehicles. However, there are only limited choices in the market, and the heavy vehicles made in Europe are generally 25% more expensive than vehicles of the same class manufactured in Japan, which means that the subsidies provided by the Government will all go into the pockets of the automobile manufacturers, thus defeating the original intention of the entire subsidy scheme. I, therefore, hope that the Secretary, in upgrading the standard under this measure, should at the same time take into account the actual situation the market. Deputy President, I so submit.


6527

MR STEVEN HO (in Cantonese): Deputy President, I originally planned to speak on the agriculture and fisheries industry in greater detail in the fourth session but today, I have heard many Members express great interests in agricultural land and some have even said that the unused agricultural land should be made available for housing development direct. I am worried that as Members have said so much about it, it would kindle a desire in the Government or, put in a colloquial way, make the Government "develop sputum" (起痰)1 for agricultural land and so, I must say something to "dissolve sputum". Members of the agriculture and fisheries industry have actually conducted discussions on this. We consider that social development, environmental protection and the development of the industry have a relation of an iron triangle. Why is agricultural land or the agriculture and fisheries industry in a such a miserable situation nowadays? Why is it so difficult for the Government to develop land and identify land for housing development? In fact, the Government itself has an unshirkable responsibility. Over the past few decades, it is true that the Government has not done much for the industry, allowing the industry to stew in its own juice and taking a positive non-intervention attitude in dealing with problems. Therefore, the current situation is, to a certain extent, attributed to the crimes committed by the Government in the past. Of course, some people have said today that the crime of the filibustering Members is even more serious and unpardonable. I think the Government may not deserve a death sentence for what it did because the Government has introduced a new agricultural policy this year and this may be taken as the Government's sincerity for atonement for its past crimes. So, here, I have to commend the Government for this. Let me turn back to how we should deal with the problem of land in relation to the new agricultural policy. I have discussed this issue with some Members of the Legislative Council versed in planning. In fact, it is not the case that no concession can be made insofar as agricultural land is concerned, but the problem is that the Government has put excessive emphasis on achieving quick success and instant benefits. This is like a person fallen sick ― I talked about "dissolving sputum" just now ― A person who is seriously ill should be given a balanced mix of medicine and fed with congee; when his conditions have improved, he should be prescribed with a dosage of strong medicine and fed with

1 "起痰" is a colloquial expression in Cantonese that means the development of a fondness for girls in

particular, or for valuable articles in general.


meat to revitalize his bodily functions, so that his overall health and spirit can be restored. The situation in Hong Kong is that over the last several decades, the past housing policy has eaten into the health of the territory. On the one hand, there is the squeezing in of buildings on land and on the other hand, the transport problem ― Under Secretary YAU can perhaps give a response later ― the transport problem, which has remained unresolved, is tackled with the approach of "treating the head when there is a headache and treating the leg when there is an aching leg", thus giving rise to many different problems. This runs counter to the pharmacology of Chinese medicine, and this is why we often urge the Government to take a more "Chinese" approach rather than being too "westernized" in its work as Western medicine may sometimes cause some chaos in society. Just now we mentioned whether no concession can be made in respect of agricultural land. The first problem that needs to be addressed is the restructuring of the industry and the planning of agricultural land, with a view to providing incentives for many more people to move to a certain district or region where they can find room for sustainable development. Then, planning can be made for those sites to be used for building housing units or other purposes. This is negotiable to us, but it seems that steps have been taken too rashly now. Therefore, I hope that the Government can pay attention to this and conduct studies on how this should be done. The new agricultural policy mentioned the development of an Agricultural Park ― the Secretary for Development is in the Chamber today ― Let us take a look at the situation in Singapore. In such a small country there are six agrotechnology parks. In this connection, I wish to particularly point out today that even if the Government really takes forward the new agricultural policy and formally establishes an Agricultural Park of 70 hectares to 80 hectares, the Government must be psychologically prepared that this is not the only Agricultural Park and that there may be more of it in the future. This may require the concerted efforts of Secretary WONG, Secretary Dr KO, and the Secretary for Development then. The issue of environmental protection was raised earlier on, and I certainly have to say a few words for the fisheries industry. I think social development is irresistible. Society must move ahead for development and the quality of the people's living must be upgraded. However, the people have a new demand in their living now while our industry needs sustainable development and reclamation works at sea and other maritime works projects have indeed affected the marine ecology.


6529

In 2012, the Government managed to get a bill passed, which provided for the implementation of a trawl ban in Hong Kong waters with effect from 31 December. The relevant paper mentioned why the marine resources in Hong Kong had developed to such a state. The reasons were firstly, water pollution in the Pearl River Basin; secondly, overfishing in the fisheries industry; and thirdly, the effects of maritime works projects of the Government. For these reasons, the Government proposed a trawl ban and the provision of compensation while explaining how the fishermen should switch to other modes of operation. The Government also undertook to introduce the loan fund which has just been strangled and withdrawn by the Government due to filibustering. It was said that funds would be injected but $810 million was out of the question and it was made clear that they did not have sufficient funds. So, there are views in the industry that the fishermen had done something for the conservation of the marine ecology. Why has the Government continued to implement maritime works projects so ferociously? I certainly do not oppose all the projects but the Government must explain to us what it is going to do when the agriculture and fisheries industry has made sacrifices. It is unreasonable for the quota sacrificed by us to be given to the Government for it to carry out maritime works. This is indeed far from convincing to the industry. Besides, a very bad precedent was set a long time ago and that is, the Government stuffed a marine park into the environmental assessment report on the Hong Kong-Zhuhai-Macao Bridge. From then onwards, marine parks were stuffed into most of the marine works projects. So, it is not for the purpose of conservation that the Government has developed marine parks. Moreover, with regard to the possible development of the third runway by the Government ― the Policy Address mentioned that works are in progress ― the Government will come to the Legislative Council to discuss it with Members in future, and the Government will be saying that a marine park will be developed. Why? The reason is to protect the white dolphins. Such being the case, we must find out the cause of the problem. Why are the white dolphins forced to move out or why has their number decreased gradually? I have read some reports which pointed out that it is not because the dolphins do not have sufficient food, but it is mainly due to busy traffic at sea. For example, the white dolphin which died recently was injured by the propeller of the vessel motor. This is the problem of high-speed vessels. As such, can the establishment of marine parks serve the purpose?


This can be likened to my having caught the flu, so I certainly should take the right kind of medicine to treat my flu but if I am prescribed with medicine that does not only treat flu, but also headache, menstrual pain, and even a knee pain, should I still take the medicine? Will there be side-effects? It may really cause side-effects. Therefore, the Government's policy on environmental protection must be target-specific. Can the Government protect the white dolphins in other ways rather than developing marine parks? Furthermore, white dolphins are not unique to Hong Kong. The Government should work in concert with the entire Pearl River Delta Region to formulate policies for the protection of white dolphins. This is important. I often talk with Secretary WONG Kam-sing and I find that he is very intelligent. But sometimes when we talked about the interests of the industry, or when I considered that some environmental measures may not necessarily be implemented in the way as planned, I actually very much wish to make friends with him, and between us there is the feeling that while we could not become good friends, we could not become enemies either, and I very much respect him. Therefore, I hope that in the future, on issues relating to the agriculture and fisheries industry, apart from holding discussions and identifying solutions to problems with Secretary Dr KO, I also wish to have more co-operation with Secretary WONG and other government departments, thereby making improved and the best policies for the society of Hong Kong as a whole. Deputy President, I so submit. MR WONG KWOK-KIN (in Cantonese): Deputy President, I will now speak on the themes on "Land, Housing, Transportation, Environment and Conservation" in this session. The latest Policy Address has proactively addressed the public's concern about housing and put forth proposals on building the housing ladder to provide opportunities of upward mobility for the public. The Hong Kong Federation of Trade Unions (FTU) welcomes this. It is proposed in the Policy Address that the Government will actively explore ways to increase the supply of subsidized sale flats through a multi-pronged approach by engaging public or non-profit-making organizations


6531

including the Housing Authority (HA), the Hong Kong Housing Society and the Urban Renewal Authority (URA), and so on. I believe the redevelopment of old buildings is one of the major approaches to increase the supply of subsidized sale flats. I would like to take this opportunity to point out that it is now the suitable time to review the work of the URA in this respect and the role of the URA in housing supply in future. Deputy President, we all know that redevelopment projects of single buildings are not cost-effective, and one of the problems faced by the URA in its redevelopment projects is the failure to maintain cost-effectiveness. Apart from the redevelopment project at the town centre of Kwun Tong, which is of a relatively large scale, the projects initiated by the URA in the past or demand-led projects initiated at the request of owners mostly involve small sites, where the cost of redevelopment is high but the cost-effectiveness relatively low. Take my constituency Kowloon East as an example. The latest demand-led redevelopment project is the Hang On Street project. The URA has spent about $1.2 billion to acquire the ownership of 90 flats. There were 160 units in the original building but only 115 units will be provided after redevelopment, which means the supply has decreased by 45 units. Worse still, in the face of the high construction cost and the reluctance of developers to submit tenders, the URA is in fiscal deficit. Under the tremendous fiscal pressure, redevelopment projects of this kind are adding to the burden on the URA and yet not helping much in increasing flat supply in the market. Another issue is the provision of luxurious flats in redevelopment. The present approach adopted in redevelopment has led to another question: Whether or not the flats built after redevelopment can cater for the housing needs of the public in general? I believe Members have the answer in their minds. We all know that the URA runs on a self-financing basis and it has to maintain a healthy financial status long term. Hence, it has to co-operate with developers in present development projects, and the flats completed subsequently will have to be priced at market rate. In the midst of high property prices, some luxurious flats like the Park Metropolitan in Kwun Tong are built, and these flats are dubbed astronomical-price flats. In other words, residents affected by redevelopment will have no hope of purchasing flats in the local district, and not many members of the public can afford buying this kind of luxurious flats.


Therefore, regarding the role of the URA in future, including the ways to increase the supply of subsidized sale flats by utilizing redevelopment of old buildings, as well as the possibility of co-operating with the HA to provide suitable opportunities for more people to buy their first homes, we consider it worthy of examination. Next, I will talk about increasing the supply of subsidized housing through redevelopment. In fact, some time ago, the community had started discussing whether or not the Government should increase the capital injection for the URA, so that the URA will have a healthy financial status to carry out acquisition and redevelopment projects of a larger scale in old districts and formulate district-wide planning. Regarding the current approach adopted in redevelopment, many views have been expressed in society. Some consider that the URA is indeed doing old building redevelopment but not old district redevelopment, which does not tally with its name, that is, Urban Renewal Authority. Hence, we think the Government should conduct a review in this aspect with a view to improving the fiscal strength of the URA, so that it can carry out large-scale acquisition and fully realize the objective of old district renewal. As for housing provided after redevelopment, in fact, the authorities may convert a whole building into subsidized housing for sale. It can adopt the approach implemented under the Sandwich Class Housing Scheme in the past and target at households which can afford housing priced lower than private flats but higher than Home Ownership Scheme flats. It may also consider the FTU's proposal on home ownership for the sandwich class, the "Home Purchase Ease Scheme" (安居易), where flats will be sold to families with a household income ranging from $16,000 to $30,000, thus helping them to realize their home ownership dream. I think this is worthy of deep thoughts and consideration by the Government. Deputy President, I will then talk about "Smart City". As a Member from the Kowloon East Constituency, there is another item in the Policy Address which has drawn my attention, that is, the proposal on exploring the feasibility of developing a Smart City in Kowloon East. I did not quite understand what it meant when I first heard of the proposal, for I have only heard of the term "intelligent cities" which is more common. What is the specific definition of the so-called "Smart City"? Will the authorities be referring to something else?


6533

The Smart City proposed by the Government mainly involves measures on enhancing pedestrian and vehicular accessibility and improving walkability for pedestrians, and various measures derived from that concept. In fact, many of those measures were proposed at the launch of "Energizing Kowloon East", such as the construction of additional flyovers, the installation of additional signs and the construction of additional footbridges, and so on, yet these measures do not seem to be related to the Smart City. Among the various measures, the following proposals are relatively novel: intelligent traffic lights, accessible shortcuts, information dissemination and face-lifting of back alleys, and so on. Yet what is the purpose of developing a Smart City after all? Will a place become a Smart City simply because technology, digital devices and Wi-Fi are applied to everything? Deputy President, we always consider that the application of technology should be people-based. We do not oppose application of technology in a city, yet we must beware of putting the cart before the horse. After all, the key to urban development is the people living in the district. It is good that the new development can benefit the local residents, but if the authorities only look for superficial achievements like technology and digital development but spurn the originality of and the interpersonal relations in the community, it will on the contrary cause inconvenience to people living in the community. If the development is of this nature, it should be discouraged. In certain new towns, pedestrians enjoy great convenience in walking around the network of footbridges, but no one is willing to move around on the streets and the community as a whole looks lifeless. Take the new interim hawker bazaar in Kwun Tong as an example. Although the exterior of the bazaar is beautiful, stall tenants often complain about the poor business turnover, which is far worse than the days when they were operating in tin-plate kiosks. Technological advancement seems to be natural, yet not everyone can benefit from it. The Department of Health's switch to the telephone booking system for out-patient appointment booking some years ago is a case in point. On the surface, patients are spared from waiting in long queues for consultation, yet we have received many complaints from the public, the elderly in particular, that they cannot get through to the line and cannot make consultation appointments, so they have to go queuing in the middle of the night all the same. The authorities should realize that the primary objective of developing a Smart City is for the convenience of local residents and improvement in life, so that residents will find it easier and more convenient in using community services


and enjoying leisure time and entertainment. It should beware of introducing technology development blindly. The installation of intelligent meters for water, electricity and gas supply and intelligent traffic lights is naturally desirable. Yet, the Government may put itself in the shoes of the residents, thinking from the angle of residents every detail of their daily life, so as to know whether the measures implemented can truly benefit the residents. Moreover, the authorities should fully utilize technology concepts. For instance, Kwun Tong is the traffic hub of Kowloon East and a lot of bus routes run through the district. However, the waiting time for buses is unpredictable most of the time. In this connection, the authorities may consider installing electronic display panels at bus stops to provide real-time arrival information for coming buses, enabling the public to know the actual waiting time required. Deputy President, the authorities have to pay attention to local concerns in development. Although we welcome the launch of the Energizing Kowloon East programme, it has been mere empty talk for many years, and a new atmosphere has yet to be seen in Kowloon East. The release of the Kowloon Bay Action Area for development has been mentioned in the Policy Addresses for two consecutive years, yet there has been no specific progress. We only see the increase in the number of offices and worsened traffic congestion. During peak hours, the vehicle queue in Kwun Tong Road extends from Kwun Tong to Kowloon Bay. Therefore, be it in the project on Energizing Kowloon East or Smart City, I urge the authorities to conduct detailed studies before carrying out any development. It should consider the impact of the proposed development on local residents, connect the new concepts with the features of the district and give regard to the existing problems faced by the district, so that the problems will not be aggravated even if they cannot be solved. Otherwise, the disadvantages of development will outweigh its advantages. Deputy President, I so submit. MR TAM YIU-CHUNG (in Cantonese): Deputy President, many colleagues from the Democratic Alliance for the Betterment and Progress of Hong Kong (DAB) have already expressed our views on issues of discussion in this session. I also wish to make two points to the Under Secretary for Transport and Housing while he is here in the hope that he can address the relevant problems squarely.


6535

I believe he is aware of the recent increase in the number of Mainland visitors shopping in Tuen Mun. In particular, there has been a heavier flow of people with the approach of the Chinese New Year. As such, more attention should be paid to the relevant transport arrangements. I hope the Government can conduct a site inspection and hold discussions with District Council members and the relevant departments. Quite a number of Mainland visitors will take cross-boundary bus route number B3X plying between Shenzhen Bay Port and Tuen Mun to visit Hong Kong because it is quite convenient and the fare is inexpensive. In particular, with the approach of the Chinese New Year, the number of visitors has become greater than before. Certainly, I noted that these visitors would observe the rules and queue up to board the buses, but the number of people waiting is simply too large. Although there were no problems with the bus frequency, for three buses could sometimes be seen queued up to pick up the passengers, traffic congestion often occurs in places near the bus stop probably because it takes time for the passengers to board the buses. Coupled with the fact that it is adjacent to a local bus stop, the cross-boundary bus stop has, to a certain extent, affected the traffic there. Some New Territories taxis would even opt for "taxi pooling" when there were no policemen around to direct traffic by carrying at the same time a number of passengers who did not know each other and charging them a fare of $100. As the journey is not long, the profits made by these taxi drivers can be described as very lucrative. Such a situation can actually be tackled through management. Despite the views expressed on this issue by some Tuen Mun District Council members from the DAB, no action has been taken by the Government so far. For instance, there is a large roundabout at the ground floor of a mall known as V city, which is situated beside bus stop number B3X. However, except for a small number of designated cross-boundary buses and some taxis whose drivers might have gone somewhere else to take a break, not too many vehicles are found parked there. Since such a large roundabout is already provided there, and the ground floor was specially set aside for this purpose when the mall was built years ago, the Government might as well identify a suitable location here to enable cross-boundary passengers to wait for, board or alight from the buses there. This can segregate the cross-boundary bus stop from other local bus stops, thereby avoiding unnecessary disputes, and what is more, prevent taxi drivers engaging in "taxi pooling" from entering the area. In my opinion, the occurrence of conflicts between cross-boundary visitors and local residents can be


reduced through management and appropriate arrangements. I hope colleagues from the relevant departments can carefully study the matter and examine ways to make proper arrangements and ease traffic in order to avoid unnecessary conflicts. Secondly, I have recently discussed the problem of the Light Rail Transit (LRT) with Secretary Prof Anthony CHEUNG. Although the LRT is a major and convenient mode of transport for Tuen Mun residents, they are often unable to board the trains during peak hours in the morning. Hence, I would like to appeal to Secretary Prof Anthony CHEUNG again to exert pressure in the Board of the MTR Corporation Limited (MTRCL) and request the MTRCL to provide more train cars. One of the easier solutions is to make use of trailer cars to double the carrying capacity. To the MTRCL, the LRT might be a burden because, if only income and expenditure are taken into account, it is a losing business. However, I do not think that we should calculate in this manner because the LRT serves connection purposes. Moreover, we cannot only allocate resources to profiting businesses but attach no importance to loss-making ones. In view of this, should the Government step up its efforts in exerting pressure on the MTRCL for the procurement of new train cars as the order of train cars takes time? Otherwise, not only will traffic congestion not be eased, but public grievances will also be triggered. I only wish to express my additional views on these two points since I have already conveyed my other views to Secretary Prof Anthony CHEUNG earlier on issues related to the Tuen Mun Western Bypass and the South Extension. Furthermore, as I have already conveyed the views of the DAB on these issues to the Secretary, I will not repeat them here again. Thank you, Deputy President. MR CHAN HAN-PAN (in Cantonese): I cannot agree more with a remark made by the Chief Executive in the Policy Address. He said we have got to make a choice: "we have to choose … on people's livelihood, between reforms and clinging to the status quo". I very much agree with this point because we cannot cling to the status quo anymore, especially with regard to the housing problem. The Chief Executive has devoted a considerable length in the Policy Address to talking about housing and land supply. Paying close attention to the supply of public housing, Home Ownership Scheme flats and private properties and mapping out a ladder for home ownership by members of the public, it looks


6537

pretty good. However, the whole housing policy has actually neglected one thing. That is, it has neglected a helpless group who are in great need of assistance. This group of people are those living in "sub-divided units". Unable to move to public housing, they can only stay in "sub-divided units" which are vulnerable to fire hazards, or in squatter huts, pigsties or chicken sheds which may be cleared at any time. While public housing production is slow, the Government needs to consider where this group of people should reside. In my view, the Government should introduce a policy on transitional housing. We cannot dither over "sub-divided units" any longer. As a matter of fact, since the Government withdrew its policy on temporary housing areas years ago, the supply of public housing has been tense for long. The grassroots' dwelling in "sub-divided units" has thus become a norm which looks like reasonable. Some applicants for public housing have to live in "sub-divided units" for four years, whereas new immigrants living in "sub-divided units" may have to wait for as long as seven years because they have to meet the residence requirement for public housing allocation. Given the scarce supply of public housing in recent years, the demand for "sub-divided units" has surged and the rents have soared drastically. In the past, a flat was sub-divided into two units, then two units were further sub-divided into four, and such sub-division went further and further out of line. Now a single flat can be sub-divided into 12 units, and there are "sub-divided units" even in industrial buildings and remote areas in the New Territories. Sure, some "sub-divided units" take a higher class approach which may offer fire safety facilities or Wi-Fi. The facilities are slightly better, but the rents will certainly be exorbitant. People who cannot afford to rent these places will rent the cheaper "sub-divided units". When considering the lack of shelter, vulnerability to fire hazards or fire safety problems and financial difficulties, very often they will accord safety a lower priority as long as they can get a shelter. Members probably still remember that a fire broke out at Yi Pei Square in Tsuen Wan last week, resulting in one death and one person injured. At present, the safety factory of some "sub-divided units" is indeed very low. The corridors can barely allow one person to pass through. Besides, the whole flat is converted in such a way that the passageway is narrow and winding. Moreover, many "sub-divided units" are located in single-staircase buildings. When a fire breaks out, the consequences will be disastrous. For instance, in the case of Yi Pei Square, why was only one person killed in the fire? It might have caused more deaths, but fortunately, the fire broke out in the cockloft, so the residents needed


not take the stairs. They could climb out from the window to get to the ground, so they survived in the fire. Had it happened on a higher floor, they might have died from falling to the ground instead of being burnt to death. Furthermore, "sub-divided units" have now given rise to many hygiene problems. In the past, it might be necessary to handle the sewage from only some 10 households on each floor. Now suddenly it is necessary to handle the sewage from 50 households. In the event of an epidemic, they may become the breeding ground for viruses. After moving in, residents in "sub-divided units" have no idea who their neighbours are. There are people with all kinds of backgrounds, and law and order problems will arise in the community. In fact, a number of law and order problems have emerged in "sub-divided units" before. Besides, regarding the materials used in the conversion of "sub-divided units", those who are more conscientious will use lightweight materials or concrete, whereas those who have no conscience or covet petty gains will use heavyweight concrete which may exert unnecessary stress on the building, posing the danger of collapse. All these undermine the quality of the living environment in the whole community and run counter to social development. According to press reports, the Long Term Housing Strategy (LTHS) Steering Committee has conducted a general survey to find out how many "sub-divided units" there are in Hong Kong, and the result is that there are about 80 000. However, according to my observations, the true figure should far exceed the Government's estimate. Take Tsuen Wan as an example. In Tsuen Wan there are about 400 old buildings. My conservative estimate is that there are two flats on each floor, only half of the flats are sub-divided, each building is only six-storey high, and on each floor there are about eight "sub-divided units" ― in reality, there are more ― so the total number of "sub-divided units" reaches 20 000. In just one district there are already 20 000, not to mention that "sub-divided units" may be present in many districts. Hence, I think the figures of the LTHS Steering Committee may be a bit conservative. According to the reports, the LTHS does not recommend regulating "sub-divided units". It may be owing to factors such as the need for rehousing or concern over the impact on rents. Nevertheless, we cannot but admit that it is indeed an intractable and complex problem in which there is a complicated triangular relationship. For example, as the rents keep rising, people who have housing needs can only afford to rent "sub-divided units", so the number of "sub-divided units" will keep increasing. As the number of "sub-divided units" keeps increasing, there will be safety issues. If regulation is introduced in view


6539

of the safety issues, the supply of "sub-divided units" may decrease. If supply decreases, the rents will go up again. Then the situation will repeat, forming a vicious cycle. The other day, someone commented on the radio that since there are so many problems with "sub-divided units", it would be better banning such units. Yet the crux of the problem is, after "sub-divided units" are banned, where can the people live? As it is such a difficult problem, no wonder the LTHS Steering Committee was not too willing to touch this issue, but then it would look awkward if it ignored it. So it put forward the measure to ban "sub-divided units" in industrial buildings, getting past the matter briefly. However, this leads to the same question: After the "sub-divided units" in industrial buildings are banned, where can the people live? I believe the LTHS Steering Committee and the Government have considered this question and grasped a number of actual circumstances. And there is only one last task ― to make a choice. As mentioned by the Chief Executive in the Policy Address, we have got to make a choice. The choice I am talking about is not banning all the "sub-divided units" territory-wide. On the contrary, both the Government and the community have to admit one fact. The fact is, it is necessary for "sub-divided units" to exist for a period of time, and during this period, actually there is something which the Government can do. I suggest that it can do the following few things. First, the Government should introduce a temporary registration system for "sub-divided units". The purpose of this system is not law enforcement. Rather, it aims to get hold of the overall situation of the existing "sub-divided units", collect information on the contact persons of the "sub-divided units", find out how many units each flat is sub-divided into and obtain simple layout plans. What is the use of collecting such information? The information can be used for grading and categorization to see which units are the most dangerous and which ones are less dangerous. We may then follow them up by categories. Take the fire at Yi Pei Square as an example. It has been almost a week, but the owner of the unit never showed up, and we are unable to find him. The principal tenant has not shown up either. Who converted the unit like this? Who sealed off the doorway to the main staircase? Who sealed off the doorway to the staircase leading to the lower floor? Who moved the entrance of the unit to the back alley? No one knows, and no one assumes the responsibility. After all, who turned the unit into such a state? Is it safe? Perhaps even the


Government does not know whether the existing "sub-divided units" are safe. With the introduction of a registration system, at least the Government will have a certain grasp of the present problems. After the establishment of a registration system, the next step is to draw up some basic safety standards for "sub-divided units". I am talking about the basic ones. Under the present Fire Services Ordinance there may be many different types of standards, and I believe there will be considerable difficulty in complying with all these standards. Say, with regard to corridors, our requirement may not be as high as the Government's standard. The Government requires the width to be 1.05 m, but we just need it to be 1 m. Will it do? We even do not request the installation of sprinklers or hose reels in "sub-divided units", but can a few fire extinguishers be put in place? One day I organized a fire prevention activity in the district and invited some firemen to demonstrate how to use fire extinguishers. Some residents told me that they did not have any fire extinguisher at home, and they did not realize there could be such things. That means they had never seen it before. If a registration system is established together with these standards, and if we are able to find the landlord or property owner, actually we could invite him to come for a meeting and request him to make improvements, and buy him a coffee when he is free. If he is willing to improve the environment, that will be great. However, if he is unwilling to make any improvement, we would have to think up a solution. Then this takes us to the third step. In the third step, it is necessary for the Government to introduce a policy on regional transitional housing. For example, the Government may take action itself or provide financial assistance to some official bodies and even non-government organizations to, say, buy an industrial building and convert the whole building into transitional housing so as to facilitate the Government's enforcement of the fire safety legislation. For example, if the landlord of a certain unit refuses to make any improvement despite repeated advices, we will close down the unit, but then the tenants will still have a place to live. Since a place is available as dwelling to them, there is a buffer which enables the Government to start off, and the Government will venture to tackle this issue. The present problem is that once "sub-divided units" are banned, the residents will have nowhere to live. This problem must be tackled. Of course, the Government could say, there is no such need. We have interim housing. They can move to the interim housing. I consider it OK if the Government is willing to include interim housing in this scheme. In my opinion, now the Government,


6541

being too tolerant of the issue of "sub-divided units", is at a loss as to how to deal with it. If there is a place where tenants of "sub-divided units" can temporarily stay, basically it can solve many problems. Actually, which is the most difficult part in the building safety programmes implemented by the Government over the years? I think the biggest problem is the failure to locate the owner. It is because after buying a unit, most people will write the address of that unit as their contact address. After they moved out and leased the unit, they may not update their contact address. After a while, it may become impossible to locate the owner. Such a situation often occurs in the existing old buildings, as in the case of the unit on fire mentioned just now. Currently, the Government has issued many different orders for old buildings which require discussion among the owners. If there is no communication among the owners, such orders will not achieve any effect. If they cannot achieve any effect, how can the buildings be safe? Sometimes the owners will claim that they did not receive any notice, thus shirking all their responsibilities. For this reason, I think that the Government should amend the legislation such that owners have the duty to take the initiative to update their correspondence address. It is similar to the past situation in which the Government mailed penalty tickets for traffic offences to vehicle owners. Very often, the vehicle owners would claim that they did not receive the tickets or they had already moved out. Then they would keep delaying payment. According to some reports in the past, some vehicle owners could delay for a whole year before paying the fines. Later, the Government amended the legislation such that all licence holders who have moved home shall go to the Transport Department to change their address within three months, and those who do not update their address commit an offence. Since then, now most of the penalty tickets can be delivered to the hands of the vehicle owners. Even if the penalty tickets cannot be delivered, the vehicle owners cannot use failure to receive the tickets as their defence. If the registration of vehicle licences can work this way, why can property units not work in the same way? Similarly, on the matter of privacy, now if we pay a few dozen dollars, we will be able to find out a vehicle owner's address from the Transport Department. As such, how come the contact addresses in the Land Registry for property units might be the addresses reported 10 or 50 years ago? In my view, it is not that the Government cannot do anything; it just lacks the will to do so.


It has been many days since the fire broke out at Yi Pei Square, but still the owner cannot be located. Who is to blame? I find it unreasonable if we do not deal with this problem and do not make any change, or think in the rut that members of the public will gradually forget about it after the event. In short, as the Chief Executive says we have got to make a choice, I appeal to the community that we need to make a choice, too. In the face of the problem of "sub-divided units", we need to make a choice. The safety of life must override our practice of clinging to the status quo. Hence, I hope that the Government will not give up pursuing the problem of "sub-divided units", and it will be determined to remove this time bomb of 80 000 "sub-divided units". This can brook no delay. Next, I would like to talk about other issues relating to building safety. In recent years, the Government has introduced various pieces of legislation concerning building safety, such as the Fire Safety (Buildings) Ordinance (Cap. 572), and measures such as mandatory building and window inspections. Nevertheless, there is a question which I have asked from time to time. Is it really safer after such work is done? The Government says that it will be handled by Authorized Persons on site in the buildings and by "Authorized Persons", it means they have been authorized by the Government. However, what is the biggest objection in society in recent years? It is bid-rigging. Bid-rigging may not be carried out solely by maintenance contractors. It is possible that some Authorized Persons have also participated in such a shady practice. Besides, the Government's continuous issue of orders has completely distorted the maintenance market, causing project prices to increase incessantly. Is it safe after maintenance work is done? This remains a question. I remember that a decade ago, after a building had finished maintenance work or the workers had chiselled off all the concrete, the Buildings Department (BD) would send its staff to the building to check if the concrete had been chiselled off thoroughly. After the workers had applied three coats of paint, the BD would inspect whether the building had really been painted with three coats. Only then could it be regarded as safe, but now it will do as long as it is handled by Authorized Persons. Hence, I hope the BD will expeditiously increase its manpower. At present, in each district there is only one or two officers responsible for both clerical and inspection work. Even in the case of the recent fire, only one person was responsible for going to the unit on fire to check if the unit was safe. How can that be the case? The BD is so short of manpower that


6543

it entirely relies on the Authorized Persons to deal with all the work. If the Government is committed to building safety, it can work in a very simple way. Every time maintenance work is completed, the Government can simply tell the maintenance contractor that the BD will conduct random inspection, and when it will be chosen for inspection is yet to be known, but if the maintenance contractor is lax in checking or supervising its work, the Government will revoke its licence. In this way, I believe no one will ever dare to be sloppy and use inferior materials in their work. Now the owners' biggest dissatisfaction is that they have spent money on the maintenance of their building, but a couple of years later, something falls off. It turns out that the building was not cleaned up properly back then, and parts which should be coated with five layers of paint were coated with only one layer. Given such project prices, where did the money go? It has surely been pocketed by someone. Hence, I hope the BD will be committed in this regard. My second point is about something which is implemented in many countries but not in Hong Kong. At present, there are many pre-war buildings in Hong Kong which are almost 40 to 50 years old. When will be the suitable time for their demolition? None of us dare give an answer, and we can look only at the surface. Many such places will set up a database on concrete tensile strength. If the Government introduces such a database, it may take samples of concrete from these old buildings to conduct a tensile test every few years so as to check if the concrete has enough tensile strength to support the buildings. If such a database is established, the Government will easily find out the concrete in which district has got a problem that may require redevelopment. Only then can it set the priorities. For this reason, I hope the Government will consider introducing a database on concrete tensile strength. Lastly, as I can see the Secretary for the Environment here today, there is something I would like to say. Last year we legislated for the introduction of the Ringelmann Chart in the hope that vessels would use low-emission fuels or fuels which would not release dark smoke. I welcomed it and was very happy. It is because we have suffered enough, especially in Kwai Chung and Tsing Yi where there are container terminals. A lot of vessels will anchor there and turn on their engines while waiting for the loading of containers. According to the information of the Environmental Protection Department, the major source of air pollution in Kwai Chung, Tsing Yi and Tsuen Wan is the container terminals. During the construction of the cruise terminal, we were very concerned about the use of on-shore power there, but have we offered to show our concern about


whether on-shore power can be used at the Kwai Chung Container Terminals which have been operating in Hong Kong for years? Nowadays, many ports around the world, including the Kaohsiung Port, have introduced on-shore power. Almost more than half of the vessels there must use on-shore power. The installation of on-shore power supply will bring at least 50% improvement. Can the Hong Kong Government really expedite the installation of on-shore power supply at the Kwai Chung Container Terminals so that the residents in Kwai Chung, Tsing Yi and Tsuen Wan will not have to breathe such polluted air? Besides, I would like to talk about the transport problem. In our earlier meeting with the Secretary for Transport and Housing, I relayed certain views on cars to the Secretary. At present, the population in many districts, particularly in the New Territories, has increased sharply. The number of residents has increased a lot. Yet very often, people move to the New Territories with one condition, or they will discuss it with their families. That is, since they live so far away from the urban area, they might as well buy a car. Consequently, there is a serious shortage of parking spaces in such areas as Yuen Long and Tsuen Wan in recent years. Unable to find a parking space, many people will just park their cars curbside. According to the figures which I have recently obtained from the Government, the number of prosecutions against illegal parking in 2014 has doubled over the previous year. It is not because the Police have worked harder. Rather, it is because illegal parking has become more serious than before. The main reason is that given the growth in population, the number of parking spaces is not sufficient, but the developers of the newly built properties are unwilling to provide additional parking spaces. We have protested for additional parking spaces, but the developers said that they had worked according to the planning guide and they would not provide any more parking spaces. We have come to learn that the number of residents in the whole New Territories West, such as Yuen Long and Tuen Mun, will substantially increase, and these residents may purchase cars. In that case, our whole community will be jammed with cars. Such congestion is not related to visitors. Rather, it is because our own population is expanding. Therefore, I hope that in formulating the future development plans, particularly on housing production, the Government will give due consideration to ancillary facilities in the community. In fact, sometimes we really have to make a choice, cherishing the hope that we can live in greater comfort and wider space with the provision of more ancillary facilities in the community, including parking spaces. Deputy President, I so submit.


6545

MR TANG KA-PIU (in Cantonese): Deputy President, several aspects of this topic are a concern to me. Just now Mr CHAN Han-pan said air pollution in Kwai Chung is related to the container terminals. I am very familiar with Tung Chung. In the last couple of years, Tung Chung has always been among the districts where higher air pollution indexes are recorded. The population of Tung Chung is just 100 000 and it is located on Lantau Island. Why is it so? The Government has repeatedly explained that the reason is connected to ozone, which is a regional factor. As there are so many development projects on North Lantau Island and in the airport, if the Government is to promote the sustainable development of the entire North Lantau Island and respond to residents' concern over air pollution, I hope North Lantau Island can be included in the low emission zones when they are put into practice. Otherwise, when the Hong Kong-Zhuhai-Macao Bridge is open to traffic in the future ― though it is still unknown whether it can be open to traffic in 2017 ― residents will be worried about which types of vehicles are going to use the Bridge. Can something be done first? It is because projects at Sunny Bay and Siu Ho Wan, reclamation in Tung Chung and the third runway plan will commence one after another. Residents' worries are indeed not unfounded. They are worried about the so-called accumulative air pollution, and hence I hope the low emission zones can include North Lantau Island. The second concern that I have is about energy. In response to the Consumer Council's research results that criticized the fuel price adjustments for quick rises but slow drops and more increases but less decreases, Secretary Prof Anthony CHEUNG or other related public officers said they have not noticed such problems and not seen anti-competitive conduct. I believe the general public, the many car owners and professional drivers were very disappointed with such an answer. Competition falls under the charge of Secretary Gregory SO but energy issues are the responsibility of Secretary Prof CHEUNG. But I would like to point out that one of the industries which are commonly regarded to be lacking in competition and suspected of collusive pricing is oil companies. For this reason, is it possible for the Transport and Housing Bureau and the Commerce and Economic Development Bureau to allocate some resources to set up some task forces, or provide resources to the Competition Commission to carry out investigations? If these problems do not exist, it will clear the oil companies' name. We have recently met with the Executive Director of the Competition Commission, Mr LEAR. He gave an example: in Australia, it took


a committee of more than 10 people half a year to investigate such a matter just to gain some inklings. These are multinational mega corporations and if they are involved in collusive pricing how would their collusion be so easily uncovered by us ordinary people and Legislative Council Members? Yet one cannot help feeling that often after deducting discounts for fuel cards or credit cards, the prices charged by various oil companies are exactly the same. Is it because of over-competition that makes their prices the same or is it because they have no competition so prices are the same? No one knows. Therefore, I hope Secretary Prof CHEUNG or the Environment Bureau will not give a rash answer, saying they have not noticed anything wrong with the oil companies, because it is not what people have experienced. Moreover, I would like to express some opinions for the communities which use centralized domestic liquefied petroleum gas (LPG). Compared to town gas, LPG prices are way lacking transparency. The fuel surcharge of town gas is adjusted monthly and has dropped 40% so far. Let me give an example. Communities such as Heng Fa Chuen or Tai Po Centre house a lot of residents. These households which use centralized domestic LPG feel that the fuel surcharge is adjusted once every three months but the ongoing problem is that it goes up quickly but comes down slowly and there are more increases than decreases. They asked Members if they could access the data of two years ago. There is actually no way to do so. Therefore, I hope that even the Government does not carry out any survey, is it possible to set up some mechanisms to increase the transparency of the prices to dispel the suspicions of collusive pricing and lack of competition? Another aspect is the phasing out of diesel vehicles. There was more discussion on this issue last year. Recently we have obtained some figures. As at December last year, 21 000 diesel vehicles in total have been scrapped. As the representative of the labour sector I am very concerned about this. Would these car owners or drivers continue to work in this trade after their diesel vehicles have been scrapped? We have made some comparisons: 21 000 diesel vehicles had been scrapped but only 12 000 new diesel vehicles were purchased in the same period of time, meaning about 9 000 vehicles had just disappeared. If one vehicle means one "rice bowl" and one job, the disappearance of 9 000 diesel vehicles means 9 000 jobs lost. If we further divide them into subcategories, they are mainly light goods vehicles and medium goods vehicles. The jobs vanquished but where have those drivers gone? Of course, this industry is directly related to the market. To put it simply, it may be because it is difficult to bring home the bacon and make money.


6547

As a result, Secretary Prof Anthony CHEUNG, I really hope you can pay attention to this issue. In both passenger and goods transport, these drivers all face the same problem: under the monopoly of the MTR, even there are visitors and actual growth in the population of Hong Kong, all transport industries except the MTR are all crying for help and barely surviving. What is the most surprising point to us is that 10 years ago there were 1.3 million taxi passengers every day, but now the number has dropped to 1 million a day even though the economy has been good with a lot of tourists visiting Hong Kong. We understand that the Transport and Housing Bureau is conducting a Role and Positioning Review of modes of public transport. But I hope Secretary Prof CHEUNG can understand that in addition to the consultancy study, the Government should think about how to give concrete assistance to the many transport industry employees so that they can see prospects in their jobs with which they can support themselves and their families, unlike bus drivers who, upon learning that the South Island Line will commence service soon, expect 100 buses to cease providing service. It is even worse for the drivers of red minibus plying between Sai Wan and Mong Kok. They are instantly rendered unemployed and do not know what to do. I hope the Bureau can introduce a special policy, or study again how to instill confidence in people that professional drivers can feed their families. It is very important because now except the MTR Corporation Limited (MTRCL) continues to make profits, other modes of transport should thank god if they do not operate at a loss. Therefore, one of the ideas put forward by me is, apart from taxi charging fuel surcharge, can the Bureau broaden its mindset? The MTRCL earns a huge profit of $8 billion to $12 billion every year. I believe the profits of other modes of transport combined would not even make $1 billion, but the MTRCL alone can earn $8 billion to $12 billion. The Government gains more than $3 billion in dividends a year (excluding profits tax). Is it possible to allocate a certain portion from the dividends to set up a fund designated to support the development of other modes of transport? For example, when some modes of public transport need to use some information technology the Government can provide funding as an incentive. It can avoid the current situation that the Government wanted to do a good deed and had introduced the concession for elderly to travel on minibus at $2 but once it is implemented around 20% to 30% of the small fleet owners claimed they cannot afford those kinds of accounting programs provided by the Octopus company. It is indeed quite sad. Being the majority shareholder of the MTRCL, the Government receives more than $3 billion in dividends. Can it


allocate some money to set up a fund designated to give support to the development of other modes of transport? I think the Government can consider this. Otherwise the bus companies would only apply for a fare raise every year claiming they suffer losses while the MTRCL continues to increase its fares despite its massive profits. People find this situation most dissatisfying. For these reasons, I hope that the Secretary will not only conduct a study, but also provide concrete support to make employees of the transport industry confident about the prospects of this trade and their jobs. At the same time, he should show the citizens that the SAR Government uses the large sum of money the MTRCL earns from them to contribute to the transport industry instead of accounting it to the coffers. It at least will provide the entire public transport industry with sustainable and multiple options. Besides subsidizing the use of information technology, the Government can consider tackling the oil prices. Each time the reasons cited by the bus companies in their applications for a fare rise are increases in wages and fuel cost. Then can the Government consider making use of the dividends to curb oil prices from going up? Or for example, taxi and bus service providers would also want to respond to the needs of the community by providing barrier-free taxis and minibuses. But it costs money to replace vehicles. Can the dividends be used for such purposes so as to respond to society's needs? I believe these ideas are all worth consideration. Of course, the monopoly of the MTRCL involves other problems but they should be discussed on other occasions. Lastly, as I see the Secretary for Development, Mr Paul CHAN, is present here, I would like to make an appeal again. As regards the scheme of importing workers for work across various projects which may be suggested by the civil service team in his Bureau, I have consulted many trade unions and employees and they all pointed to the same problem: they do not blindly oppose any scheme but in reality it is impossible to monitor. When a contractor has imported 100 workers who can be deployed across projects, those workers would be fully exploited by the contractor. It is not only impossible for the Government to monitor overtime work, but also the contractor would use these 100 imported workers as an excuse to tell local workers that "we have enough manpower and we do not need you today; and we can tell the sub-contractor to hire fewer hands". Not only can the Government not monitor whether the contractors have overused them, meaning exploited them, but also it will not be able to stop the contractors from directly killing the employment opportunities of local workers by exploiting imported workers. I would like to repeat some figures here.


6549

Macao has imported a substantial number of workers. The Macao Federation of Trade Unions told us that in the past four years, the median wage of all local workers has risen sharply from $10,000 to $15,000. But the median wage of local workers in the Macao construction industry has surpassed that of the imported workers by $1,000 to $3,000. It means that two or three years after the workers are imported, it will become apparent that their wages will stop to grow for a long time. Actually everyone should be more patient. Taking the bar benders and formworkers trained by the Construction Industry Council as an example, in the last four years, I have noticed that the registered number of these skilled workers has grown 30% to 40% and among them there is no lack of young workers under 30 years of age. And so I hope the Secretary can be more patient and work harder with everyone for the sake of Hong Kong. (THE PRESIDENT resumed the Chair) I so submit. MR ABRAHAM SHEK: President, like the Chief Executive's previous two policy addresses, his Policy Address this year also devotes decent length to the housing and land issues from paragraphs 61 to 108. Nonetheless, people suspect if the Chief Executive is at his wits' end in his effort to address the housing needs of the people. Obviously, the Policy Address has failed to strike a chord with the 270 000 applicants in the queue for public rental housing (PRH) units, the 110 000 household applicants for Home Ownership Scheme (HOS) flats and 86 400 households living in sub-divided flats ― they just could not find any relief from the cliché of a barely reachable vision that they will be housed better and better with the implementation of the Long Term Housing Strategy. They hope to see the light at the end of the tunnel. However, with the Chief Executive's address on housing this year, it is only another train coming from the opposite direction. Regarding subsidized housing, both the production volume and completion date of PRH units and HOS flats have not lived up to expectations. According to the Administration, the Housing Authority (HA) has rolled out only 9 900 PRH units in 2014-2015, which is 20% lower than the estimated volume of 12 700


units, and the number of applicants on the Waiting List for PRH units has already surpassed 270 000 as of December 2014. Meanwhile, the HA has received more than 110 000 applications ― an over-subscription by over 51 times ― for the 2 160 new HOS flat. Unlike private developers, this situation is not something the Administration should be proud of. While the Administration has set a total housing supply target of 480 000 units, including 200 000 PRH units and 90 000 subsidized sale flats, for the 10-year period from 2015 to 2025, the question is whether the Administration is able to meet the targets without delay ― we have seen delay now ― the Administration has yet to convince the skeptic public that it is capable of doing so. President, from PRH units to HOS flats to private flats, Hong Kong has a long-established housing ladder for citizens to move upward step by step to improve their living conditions. To fix the defunct housing ladder, the key is to be down to earth by increasing the supply of PRH units, HOS flats and affordable private flats instead of indulging in playing tricks of complicating matters that are already complicated enough. Regarding private housing, while the Administration has proudly announced that 15 700 private flats were completed last year, which is an eight-year high, residential property prices, in particular that of small and medium sized flats, have continued to soar. As I have reiterated many times, the whole problem is about the policy of high land prices that the Government has never faced squarely. Last month, the Secretary for Development told the Panel on Development that the Government would no longer pursue the policy of high land prices. Was it an auspice of a favourable change? I hope the Secretary will keep his words so as to provide more leeway for developers to roll out more affordable private flats to the market. President, through a five-year-old, the Chief Executive tells Hong Kong people that increasing land supply will take a much longer time to realize than his tenure in office. While some obstacles, such as the unexceptionally strong opposition from the community and non-cooperation movement initiated by the pan-democrats, are beyond the Government's control and can be regarded as excusable, government bureaucracy, however, is not equally pardonable.


6551

A case in point is the cumbersome land exchange and lease modification process. Although the Pilot Scheme for Arbitration on Land Premium is a good attempt to facilitate early agreement between the Administration and the applicants for lease modification or land exchange on land premium payable, the acid test for the Pilot Scheme is whether the Lands Department will provide clear and transparent criteria for accepting or rejecting the use of arbitration. This is pivotal as arbitration requires the consent of two contracting parties. If either party does not agree to enter into arbitration, the existing mechanism shall remain. Another wild card is the Town Planning Board (TPB). Last week, the High Court ruled that the TPB's restrictions imposed on the draft Outline Zoning Plans for Wan Chai, Yau Ma Tei, Mong Kok and East Kowloon were invalid as the TPB was found to have failed to follow fair procedures and not duly listened to The Real Estate Developers Association of Hong Kong's presentation. This case draws the public into questioning if the TPB has performed its role in considering applications for planning permission and amendments to plans. As a rule of thumb, a relaxation of certain planning restrictions, especially building heights, to allow higher plot ratios as permitted under the Buildings Ordinance is the quickest way to increase the supply of housing units. While developers are willing and able to boost supply in this way, will the TPB serve as an obstacle? It is now time for the Government to review the outdated TPB Guidelines and its structure. Perhaps, an immediate case is to have the TPB install an independent secretariat and a non-official chairman. President, with property prices continuing to rise, the Administration says it will continue to take actions as necessary to help stabilize the property market. I hereby warn the Government to think twice before launching any further round of intervention, given the Special Stamp Duty (SSD), Buyer's Stamp Duty and ad valorem Stamp Duty have been proven ineffective with overall home prices soared by almost 60% since the introduction of the SSD. Some economists have also indicated that any measures to target smaller-sized flats could drive home purchasers to even smaller flats ― that would be an absurd scenario against the Chief Executive's wish that people would gradually be housed in a better environment. The Government must be aware that it is not that the demand for small-sized flats is strong; it is just that the demand for affordable flats is robust. What the Government has to do is to increase the supply on all fronts.


President, I would like to thank the Chief Executive for giving a straight answer to the construction industry's call for relaxation of importing skilled labour in an appropriate manner to deal with the looming problem of a severe shortage and ageing of skilled workers in Hong Kong. While importation of labour is expedient, the long-term solution lies in enhanced training for skilled workers and the industry's outlook that is favourable to attract new blood and retain talents ― the former requires the Construction Industry Council's efforts while the latter entails the Government's commitment to constant investment in capital works projects. Finally, President, if the problem of a severe shortage and ageing of skilled workers is considered an adversity to the construction industry and Hong Kong's economic development, then the continued stalemate of the Legislative Council in vetting and approving capital works projects is a catastrophe not only to the construction industry, but also society at large. Thank you. PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Does any other Member wish to speak? MR LEUNG KWOK-HUNG (in Cantonese): President, this session is certainly a key area of administration. It is also an area in which LEUNG Chun-ying had made a lot of input before he was elected. First of all, while he actually did not say anything in this Policy Address, I wish to put questions to him in relation to a few areas. The first is about environmental issues. I will not talk about other problems. I remember that for two years in a row I had filibustered over the arrangement for switching fuels upon entry into the port of Hong Kong ― I will not talk about other problems, and I will only talk about the port facing us now ― The story goes like this: A government official once came up with an idea. He said that we should attract more cruise liners to Hong Kong, especially as a cruise terminal has been built. He said that it is necessary for us to attract more cruise liners to Hong Kong in order to compete with the world, but if these cruise liners are required to switch to less polluting fuels when entering Hong Kong, that would undermine our competitiveness. I had filibustered here for two years in a row, and you should have heard me say this many times, but it is really an endless wait before the Government legislates on it. Members, tell me, has LEUNG Chun-ying done anything at all?


6553

I wonder if he has often told Secretary WONG Kam-sing to push ahead with "three landfills and one incinerator" that has caused the Secretary big headaches and so, the Secretary has failed to do even such an easy job. Or is it because Secretary Gregory SO and Financial Secretary John TSANG had said that this could not be done for it would have impacts on the economy? So, they have failed to do their job in this area, never mind; and they have also failed to do their job in respect of light pollution, never mind. You have often criticized filibustering by the opposition camp for causing miseries to Hong Kong people in their living. But I am right here waiting! I am waiting for you to take actions and get everything properly done. They have failed to do their job in respect of the switch of fuels when entering Hong Kong, light pollution, and so on. This is one point. In other words, he has proved to be incompetent in his work, for he could not even complete the easiest tasks. Then how can he achieve anything when handling the more complicated tasks? The second area, which has to do with Secretary Paul CHAN, concerns the land issue. We are wasting time and a great deal of resources in identifying land. In fact, it is not the case that Hong Kong does not have land, but some of the land is left idle and unused. Simply enough, with regard to the Disneyland on Lantau, back in those years Denise YUE ― I do not remember what her post was, and I was not a Member of the Legislative Council then ― She said that we had to spend some money carrying out reclamation in order to obtain land to tempt the Disneyland to set up shop there. I have no idea if that place is Siu Ho Wan, and that site is still left idling in the sun now. It has been almost a decade now and yet, it has not been put to any use. Buddy, the Shanghai Disneyland will be opening soon. You spent tens of billion dollars on the reclamation works there for no reason and then let this site lie there under the sun. Secretary WONG Kam-sing, did you not say that there was no land for developing a food waste recycling centre? Go and ask them for land! How come there is no land? The truth is that they are waiting for the Disneyland to make a decision on whether or not the Disneyland will use that site. The Disneyland is hesitant. After the opening of the Shanghai Disneyland, will the Hong Kong Disneyland still has business? They are not sure about it and so, this site has to lie there bathing in the sun. So, it is often said that there is no land, and in the case of North East New Territories (NENT), for instance, as I have said countless times, it turns out that while you have developed such a large quantity of land in NENT, only 6% of it will be used for housing development and worse still, housing units


will be developed at a ratio of 6:4. Yet, buddy, you are telling Hong Kong people that there is not sufficient land to develop housing units. For conscience sake, do you consider this acceptable at all? And, there is the third area, and I have talked about it many times. Instead of robbing the poor and causing disturbances to the villagers, you had better … "Uncle Four" is now saying that he will donate land at Tai Hang Sai, sounding as if this is a magnanimous imperial favour granted by him. I have said this many times. The Government should invoke Article 105 of the Basic Law to expropriate land from these land hoarders, landlords, or people hoarding land in the real estate sector. They have used the land for storing old containers, growing grass ― Secretary CHAN seems to have a piece of land used for growing grass, too. He said that he would go there for fun if he has time. Does he play the game of "going into the grasslands and turning himself into a bandit" there? He gave a reply so happily, saying that he has this lot where he can go for fun, but the grass there has already grown to be chest-high. The Secretary has done the same. What makes him fit to say to the four major plutocrats that they have occupied land in the New Territories with the purpose of obtaining compensation and exchanging their land for the right of development when the Government starts developing NENT. Had he performed his duties faithfully and given that this is a deep-rooted conflict as referred to by LEUNG Chun-ying, he would have long expropriated their land in accordance with Article 105 of the Basic Law and made compensation based on the market price. The amount of compensation made at market price would not kill him anyway. Now, the land is used for storage of containers and for playing the game of "going into the grasslands and turning into bandits", right? If they hoarded the land but did not put it to any use, and even if they claimed that the land is for growing tangerine trees, there would still be a way to work out the amount of compensation. So, had LEUNG Chun-ying had the guts to invoke Article 105 of the Basic Law and acted as courageously as he did before he formally took up this post of an "eunuch" on 25 March 2012, he would have accomplished this task long ago but he did not have the guts to do so and he, therefore, asked "Uncle Four" to put up a Hula show and give a performance before us, telling us that our real estate developers are willing to donate land. Does he have any ability in administration? Does he lack the legal basis to do it? He simply did not do it. So, it is a waste of time talking about the land problem.


6555

Let me say this once again. There used to be four major housing estates in Hong Kong. I always play football at the football ground in Ho Man Tin and if we look diagonally across from there, we will see that luxurious residential flats are built all over the place which used to be the Valley Road Estate. In North Point, the North Point Estate, which was formerly the Java Estate, has turned into luxurious residential flats owned by LI Ka-shing; and there were also Wong Chuk Hang Estate and Ho Man Tin Estate. These four major housing estates have all turned into land for private housing. How can the Government have sufficient land to build housing flats for the poor? Is this not putting things upside down? Is this not totally confusing the order of things? Members, coming to this juncture, I have to talk about transport. Transport is a hard-hit area. President, I have said this many times. Our Directors of Bureaux and Secretaries of Departments still think that the development of a few more roads to enable drivers to drive at faster speeds or shorten their journeys can help promote the economy, but this is a waste of time. Concerning the 12th Five Year Plan of the Guangdong Province, as I have said many times, why is our overall transport planning ineffective? The reason is that the problems that we seek to address by making investments domestically are problems that we noticed a decade or so or even two decades ago, and there are inadequacies. For example, with regard to the privatization of the three tunnels, the Government has not thought about solving the problem. Traffic congestion is already an everyday phenomenon in Hong Kong domestically and yet, measures have been taken to increase the flow of inbound vehicles. The transport problem in Hong Kong has reflected that the Government has never given any consideration to the well-being of Hong Kong people, including identifying solutions to the transport problem from the angle of reducing pollution. On the contrary, "white elephant" projects have been developed to encourage more people to come to Hong Kong. For example, will there be visitors after the completion of the Hong Kong-Zhuhai-Macao Bridge (HZMB)? If there will be visitors, how will the problems of traffic congestion and pollution be resolved in Hong Kong? The Government has never thought about this; nor has it provided statistics. President, Liantang, the Express Rail Link (XRL), and the HZMB are like a big nullah. Is there so much "water" flowing down from the Mainland to it? So, let me tell Members this: Today, the pro-government camp has very much enjoyed the pleasure of chiding me, accusing "Long Hair" for holding up development. They will regret it when seeing these "white elephants" and


wiping their tears in the future. I would like to ask the Secretary for Transport and Housing whether he has a budget to hire people as actors, telling them to drive to Hong Kong from Macao, Zhuhai and Guangdong to make sure that there will be drivers using the HZMB? Does he have this budget? Does he have a hidden agenda? I am asking you this, Anthony CHEUNG. In all conscience, do you think there will be sufficient traffic flow from the Guangdong Province to fill up various boundary control points? I do not see it. Second, why should he dance to the tune played by other people? Is it because under the 12th Five Year Plan or all different kinds of measures in the Mainland, whether at the national or provincial level, or the level of special administrative regions, municipalities, towns, and so on, it is always the case that a multiplier effect can be produced so long as construction works are carried out to build these "white elephants"? But this will not benefit the people, for it only enables you to make a fortune from resumption of land, from making fraudulent claims for construction fees, and from concocting various pretexts. The Guangdong Province is certainly working actively to develop these projects whereas our Government is entirely devoid of bargaining power. When other people have dug a nullah connecting to the boundary, we provide support for the nullah to be connected to Hong Kong. So, the XRL is downright a laughing stock. The problems of cost overrun and co-location of clearance have remained unresolved. In the Legislative Council back then, we only tried to cause some slight delay and had yet started to filibuster but we were already taken to task. Now that more than half of the XRL project is completed, buddy, do you not feel ashamed? At various panels you have accused the opposition camp of holding up Hong Kong from moving ahead, do you not feel ashamed? During the administration of Hong Kong over the last 17 years, from the era of TUNG Chee-hwa to Donald TSANG and then LEUNG Chun-ying, for everything that made us gnash our teeth whenever we talked about it and caused great repugnance among us, which was not a devil's baby conceived and nurtured by you? What I mean is that had you not voted in support of them back then, these devil's babies would not have been born, right? Do not "eat at a place and defecate at the the same place". How dare you still scold people every day here! President, on the transport problem, I wonder if LEUNG Chun-ying has mobility problem himself as he raised the issue of accessibility when he took office. He said that after assuming office, he would ensure that the elderly and persons with disabilities in Hong Kong would not encounter transport problems wherever they go. Has he done it? Secretary Prof Anthony CHEUNG has 10


6557

options, and is it that he has done the eleventh one? He has not done anything. For all the jobs that LEUNG Chun-ying had undertaken to do to benefit Hong Kong people during the election, he has failed to deliver on both the major ones and the minor ones. The only thing that he has done is to use words to substitute actions. He has used words to substitute actions. Dr CHIANG Lai-wan, do you understand it? It means that if you said that you would like to go to Japan, the next minute you are in Japan viewing Sakura because under LEUNG Chun-ying's way of administration with a time tunnel, words can be used to substitute actions, right? Simply enough, what has he done in this respect? Now that nothing has been done effectively. President, you must know that if we cannot solve a problem, we should move on to the next one. You should have this experience in your childhood! When a father made his son recite a passage in Gu Wen Ping Zhu (《古文評註》) (Commentary and explanation of ancient Chinese articles) or Gu Wen Guan Zhi (《古文觀止》) (An anthology of classical Chinese essays), the son told his father that he did not know how to spell the English word "difficulty". When the father paid all his attention to teaching his son the spelling of the English word, he forgot that passage in Gu Wen Guan Zhi. LEUNG Chun-ying is exactly like this. The word "difficulty" is awesome indeed; it is an invincible English word. Members, he is now saying that this Innovation and Traumatology Bureau is invincible, telling you to pass it quickly, for Hong Kong will run into luck as soon as it is passed. Buddy, I would feel ashamed myself in not chiding him for this. Let me ask you this: Fanny LAW had, with much patience, tried to talk us into it, sitting there for 100 hours and telling us that without the Innovation and Traumatology Bureau, the consequences would be fatal, and she played fast and loose with this as she no longer paid attention to us and saw no need to talk to us any further once the proposal was negatived. Then we naturally thought that the Innovation and Traumatology Bureau should have been died of the trauma experienced by it. However, although LEUNG Chun-ying did not say much about it in the Policy Address as he only gnashed his teeth when talking about the Undergrad, the Innovation and Traumatology Bureau suddenly sprang up to the surface of the water again, buddy. Frankly speaking, let me ask you this: Dr CHIANG Lai-wan, how can you help him? Has he told you about this secret key during the last two years? Has he told you how good this Innovation and Traumatology Bureau is? No. I have checked on the Internet. He has not said anything. Fanny LAW has once said, to this effect, "I visited the Science


Park in 2013. I started out as an Administrative Officer (AO) and I am a quick learner. I have made acquaintance with a lot of people and learnt a lot of things and now, I find this very important." In 2012 you said that the consequences of not passing it would be fatal; in 2013 you went to the Science Park to receive the "reward" and you put on a "medal" to become the Chairperson of the Science Park. It was only one year afterwards that you said that you found it very important. You were not serious, were you? If, after I negatived the proposal, you went to the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA), would you then go for the making of a spaceship to Saturn? This is a waste of time. People say that one should take things as they come, but he does not act this way. He knows only to shirk his responsibility when he cannot turn in his homework. Members, this Innovation and Traumatology Bureau is a full manifestation of the Government's incompetence and shamelessness, right? It has failed to do everything and so, it keeps on taking up new jobs, producing this Innovation and Traumatology Bureau to start a quarrel. Let me tell you this: LEUNG Chun-ying will certainly say, "Let us remember what these Members have done. My inability to do everything, including my gastroenteritis, have to do with them." Who on earth will care to stop you from doing anything? Let me take this opportunity to ask you this: After you, LEUNG Chun-ying, were defeated last time, when have you explained the specific details of the Innovation and Traumatology Bureau? Who have you approached? Why was TIEN Chang-lin's report not viable? Why has the Cyberport turned into a property development project? You must explain all these. If you do not explain all of these, how can I have confidence? It is just a game of Cussec, President. I have no idea why every bet would turn out to be wrong, and this is really a shocking record in the game theory as every bet he made is always wrong. Asia Television Limited (ATV) … Everyone has made a choice, except that you alone refused to issue an licence. But buddy, we are talking about innovation now. By innovation, it means that whoever is smart and whoever has a good idea should be given a chance to try. Let us not talk about technology and just talk about innovation. I wish to ask: If the staff of ATV are said to be creative even when they are starving because as part of the rescue action, they had produced this one and only one programme, which showed that they have great creativity, I would like to ask you people from the pro-government camp this: Why do you not go and kill LEUNG Chun-ying? You did not support him in that case though. Why could he "cross out" Ricky WONG all by himself? How can I have confidence now? Right? Every bet he made invariably turned out to be just the opposite.


6559

President, many people have said that it is very expensive to set up a Policy Bureau at some $30 million. No, this is not right. Who would say that the pilots' salaries in the United States are expensive? The fact is that the fighter planes operated by the American pilots are expensive. Now that you are given some $30 million as remuneration and this will further involve an expenditure of at least $30 billion and this $30 billion is a big problem. Do you understand this? We must look farther when looking at the accounts. Insofar as this Innovation and Traumatology Bureau is concerned, they have given us only part of the picture. There is no logic to speak of, and no justifications have been provided. All they have said is mere common sense, and what is the point of telling us that "mothers are women"? This is meaningless. When mother is sick, she should be given medical treatment. What is the point of saying "mothers are women"? She must be sent to hospital, and that is the right thing to do. President, tell me, is he a bad son? When people ask about your ailing mother, you tell them that "mothers are women", thinking that you have answered the question. President, I originally planned to go on reprimanding them. Insofar as this regime is concerned, I cannot say anything to it apart from reprimanding it. I must reprimand it until it gives a response and speaks the truth. But I have to stop here for a while in order to leave 10 minutes for myself to speak on issues relating to the constitutional system. Let me tell you this, LEUNG Chun-ying: Do not think that you can, by fanning the flames, make people think that you have been held up by us. I now challenge you to this: If you can explain to us what the Innovation and Technology Bureau will do and compile a report just as TIEN Chang-lin did, I would have long given you the money. Would you like TIEN Chang-lin and Jack MA to come over to you, LEUNG Chun-ying, to bring you good luck? Think about this: The report on technology compiled by TIEN Chang-lin prompted TUNG Chee-hwa to make provisions for carrying out the relevant work and then the "dot.com shares" were created, and after much speculation, the Cyberport was turned into a property development project, which is shocking. Who has LEUNG Chun-ying asked to compile a report? Could it be Jasper TSANG? President, frankly speaking, if he asks you to compile a Jasper TSANG's report, I might probably approve the provision of funding for it. But he did not ask you to do it, buddy, and he is talking nonsense but pretending that it is the secret key. There is nothing I can do. The Chief Executive is talking nonsense while Members take it as the secret key. It beats me. That is it.


PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Does any other Member wish to speak? DR CHIANG LAI-WAN (in Cantonese): President, as the Government is only applying for a provision of some $20 million, we really hope that Members from the opposition camp will approve the funding application for the Innovation and Technology Bureau smoothly at the additional meetings to be held on the Valentine's Day the day after tomorrow. We hope the Government will, after obtaining the funding of some $20 million, submit a detailed plan and tell us the future duties of the Bureau when they submit a further funding application to the Legislative Council in the future. I hope Members will support the funding applications. President, I noticed that the two Secretaries are both present today, which is really good. As we all know, the current problem of property prices and housing supply in Hong Kong is a Gordian knot. The property prices in Hong Kong have remained persistently high and the supply of residential units is insufficient to meet the demand. Although real estate developers have their own lands, they are not able to construct any buildings. They did not sell the completed ones either. Currently, some rental units provided by the Hong Kong Housing Authority (HA) are offered for sale; the Home Ownership Scheme flats provided by the Hong Kong Housing Society (HKHS) become luxurious apartments; and even though the Urban Renewal Authority (URA) has a large amount of money amounting to over $20 billion at present, it cannot make acquisitions of buildings. As a result, there is an increasing number of old buildings and a worsening problem of subdivided flats. So, President, how should we untie the Gordian knot? As time is limited, I will make good use of the time and try to explain that in two to three minutes. I suggest the two Secretaries work together and think about it. As we all know, the existing HA and HKHS should actually be merged as their responsibilities are almost completely the same now and there is no point duplicating their functions. Moreover, we all know that because of some policy issues, the URA literally cannot compare with private real estate developers in terms of acquisition and construction of housing units. The latter also adopts a much more skilful tactic in the acquisition of old buildings. Since the URA cannot carry out land resumption, will the Government consider allocating some land lots to these two Bureaux at reasonable prices in the future? In fact, it is better than selling the land solely to real estate developers, right?


6561

We all know that when a lot is sold to a real estate developer after it has successfully acquired a building which is constructed on that lot, it will definitely try to make a profit. For instance, the respective revenues from land sales for the Government in 2013 and 2014 were $57.4 billion and $46 billion. Yet, as we can see, the profit made by real estate developers last year nearly amounted to over $100 billion, which was just the profit of several large-scale developers, and it was a really huge amount. Let us think about this. In that profit amounting to over $100 billion, a large part of it actually came from property development. I have already tried to separate the computations. Another example is the land adjacent to the Science Park. What was the per-square-foot price when the Government sold that piece of land? It was $4,000 per square foot. However, what is the per-square-foot price now? It is around $15,000 to $16,000 per square foot! If one third of the price is the land premium, it seems that real estate developers at least readily made a profit on another third of the price. In other words, the annual profit made by the Government is only tens of billion dollars to $100 billion at present. Why do we not reserve the land instead? Therefore, the two Secretaries really have to do some calculations. President, can the Government make that profit as well? The two Secretaries consider it may not be possible, but I think it is very simple indeed. We should adopt the approach used in 2000 and temporarily stop including buildings (sic) in the Application List. It will do the trick, right? By doing so, we can solve the problem within a certain period of time. I therefore hope that they can think about it carefully and do not immediately include a site in the Application List once there is land available. It will be even better to impose temporary control on that. As stated by Mr LIANG Guangda, former Mayor of Zhuhai, the Government itself should have the largest land reserve. Zhuhai therefore became the developer with the largest reserve and one of the most beautiful cities in the Mainland with remarkable development now. Although people may tell me that, "Ann, some issues are not that simple.", I simply wish to say that society itself is very simple indeed. Only that we sometimes complicate the situation. I so submit. PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Does any other Member wish to speak? (No Member indicated a wish to speak)


PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): If no Member wishes to speak, I will invite three public officers to speak. On the basis of 15-minute speaking time for each officer, they may speak for up to a total of 45 minutes. SECRETARY FOR THE ENVIRONMENT (in Cantonese): President and Honourable Members, I thank Members for their views. I will respond to several aspects including air quality, waste disposal, nature conservation, measures to combat climate change and energy efficiency as follows. In respect of improving air quality, the Government is now co-ordinating inter-departmental efforts in jointly pressing ahead with the implementation of various initiatives of "A Clean Air Plan for Hong Kong". After launching a series of new initiatives in recent years, we have been examining the relevant data to observe their effectiveness. From the objective perspective, the air quality of Hong Kong has shown continuous improvement. In the five years between 2010 and 2014, the data of general air quality monitoring stations has reflected a decline ranging from 4% to 11% respectively in the four major types of air pollutants, namely respirable suspended particulates, nitrogen oxides, nitrogen dioxide and sulphur dioxide. And the data of roadside air quality monitoring stations has even reflected a decline ranging from 10% to 21% in these four major types of air pollutants. Certainly, we will stay on high alert because the concentration level of ozone has risen by 18% in the same period. It implies a need for us to step up our effort in addressing the challenge posed by regional air pollution jointly with the Guangdong Province in order to protect public health. In 2015, we will progressively introduce new emission reduction initiatives. The concrete plan includes the following measures: The first one is to control emissions from ocean-going vessels. Marine vessels have become the largest emission source of respirable suspended particulates, nitrogen oxides and sulphur dioxide. Subsequent to the regulation of the sulphur content of fuel used by local vessels last year, this year, we will make ocean-going vessels our specific target, including container ships and cruise liners. They all run on residual oil with an average sulphur content of 2.6%. In order to improve the air quality of such port areas as Kwai Chung, we will introduce a new law this year to mandate ocean-going vessels to switch fuel while at berth, namely switching to the use of fuel with sulphur content not more than 0.5% while at berth.


6563

In terms of reducing vehicle emissions, first, in March last year, we introduced an incentive-cum-regulatory approach with the aim of phasing out pre-Euro IV diesel commercial vehicles by end 2019. Over 21 000 diesel commercial vehicles of pre-Euro, Euro I to Euro III standards had been scrapped in Hong Kong by the end of last year. In addition, a roadside remote sensing system to screen petrol and liquefied petroleum gas (LPG) vehicles with excessive emission has been launched since September last year and some 136 000 vehicles were checked by end December last year. These measures can actually help reduce emissions from vehicles and improve the roadside air quality. In such a macro environment, we have long been adopting diversified methods to improve the roadside air quality in urban areas. In the busy corridors in Causeway Bay, Central and Mong Kok with franchised bus services, they can account for up to 40% of the traffic flow. The Government has been working with the franchised bus companies to set up low emission zones in these three districts by restricting access to only low-emission buses in these zones. We shall report the specific arrangements to the Panel on Environmental Affairs of the Legislative Council this March. In parallel, the Government has fully subsidized the franchised bus companies to procure 36 single-deck electric buses for trials to assess their operational efficiency and performance in local conditions. The first batch of electric buses will commence operation progressively starting from the middle of this year. Moreover, to reduce the air pollution arising from the emissions from non-road mobile machinery, we shall introduce a new law with a view to implementing an emission-control system for non-road mobile machinery newly supplied for local use starting from June this year. We already submitted the new legislative proposal to the Legislative Council in January. Furthermore, regarding the Extension of Cleaner Production Partnership Programme, the Environmental Protection Department (EPD), in collaboration with the Economic and Information Commission of Guangdong Province, launched a Cleaner Production Partnership Programme in 2008 to encourage and facilitate Hong Kong-owned factories in both Hong Kong and the Pearl River Delta Region in adopting cleaner production technologies and practices, so as to improve the regional environment, including air quality.


In the light of the encouraging environmental benefits brought by the Partnership Programme and positive feedback from the industries, we have earmarked $150 million for extending it for five years to 2020. Apart from continuing to provide funding support for participating factories to carry out on-site improvement assessments and demonstration projects, we will support the relevant promotion and publicity activities. We will further brief the Panel on Environmental Affairs by end February this year. As for waste management, first, municipal solid waste charging is the greatest concern of Members. In line with the commitments under the Blueprint for Sustainable Use of Resource, the Government is progressively launching various measures with a multi-pronged approach, so as to move forward to our target of reducing waste by 40% in a decade. In terms of waste reduction at source, municipal solid waste charging is one of the key policies, and the relevant preparatory work has also been started. We will introduce the framework plan of the scheme to the Panel on Environmental Affairs soon. Moreover, apart from the Plastic Shopping Bag Charging fully implemented with effect from 1 April this year, we will actively take forward a series of producer responsibility schemes in this Legislative Session, including submitting the legislative proposals of the producer responsibility scheme on waste electrical and electronic equipment, and continue with the preparatory work of the producer responsibility scheme on glass beverage bottles. In addition, we will also commence projects in support of waste reduction and recycling such as the "Community Green Stations" as preparation and ancillary measures for municipal solid waste charging. Regarding waste treatment, to promote the sustainable development of the industry, the Government has earmarked $1 billion to launch a Recycling Fund, with a view to promoting the sustainable use, recovery and recycling of waste by facilitating the upgrading of the operational quality, capabilities and efficiency of the recycling industry. The Panel on Environmental Affairs of the Legislative Council has indicated support for the establishment of the Recycling Fund. We are eager to launch the Fund soon after funding approval from the Legislative Council is obtained. With the co-ordination of the Steering Committee to Promote the Sustainable Development of the Recycling Industry chaired by the Chief Secretary for Administration, we have taken forward various measures to


6565

promote the recycling industry, including providing infrastructure such as land sites and dedicated berths in Public Cargo Working Areas, strengthening the training and development of the industry's workforce, encouraging research and investment in relevant technologies, and fostering community support for clean recycling and enhancing the collection network of recyclables. As to the reduction of food waste, in addition to publicity programmes which serve to mobilize the whole community, quantifiable targets and achievements are also available for the "Food Wise Hong Kong" campaign. For example, at present, about 400 organizations and trade associations have signed our charter. Individual business operators have reduced their food waste by 15% or more on average in a year. Furthermore, through the Environment and Conservation Fund, we offered a funding of more than $10 million last year so that suitable resources would be made available to support eight non-governmental organizations in properly collecting edible surplus food for distribution, and it was anticipated that 800 tonnes of food could be distributed to the needy. This year, the Fund will continue to step up its effort in supporting waste reduction and actions in the form of distribution of surplus food. In addition, we will also launch a new "Food Wise Eateries" scheme this year. Participating eateries will offer choice of portion on their menus, and pass on the benefit to their customers by setting competitive prices in order to encourage people to make an appropriate choice of meals in smaller portions. In respect of turning food waste into energy, with the support of Members, the contract for the Organic Waste Treatment Facilities, known as the food waste facility in short, at Siu Ho Wan of North Lantau has been awarded. The plant is expected to be commissioned in two years. Furthermore, the three strategic landfills currently in operation are equipped with extraction facilities to recycle landfill gas in order to capitalize on renewable energy. Through the generators at landfills, it provides electricity for on-site daily usage and is used as a source of heat energy for leachate treatment at landfills. In addition, since 2007, surplus landfill gas at the North East New Territories landfill has started to be exported to the industrial centre of Towngas in Tai Po as an alternative form of energy. In order to further capitalize on surplus landfill gas as an alternative form of energy, the EPD and the contractor of the South East New Territories landfill entered into a supplemental agreement


in December last year, under which Towngas would provide facilities to convert surplus landfill gas into synthetic natural gas to be fed into the supply grid of Towngas at the Tseng Lan Shue Offtake Station through dedicated pipes with a view to maximizing the use of urban renewable energy. As to the sludge treatment facility in Tuen Mun, trial operation is now in progress. We anticipate that it will come into operation in the first quarter this year. The energy recovered in the process will be turned into electricity through the generator of the facility. In addition to catering for the daily operation needs of the facility, its surplus portion measuring 2 megawatt will be exported to the public power grid. As regards green procurement, the Government has taken the lead in promoting recycling and reuse by adopting a green procurement policy and encouraged public organizations and the private sector to follow. We have been closely monitoring the market situation and making preparations to expand the existing green procurement list, thereby further strengthening green procurement in order to promote recycling, reuse, and so on. Our major tasks in nature conversation include biodiversity, countryside environment and marine parks. In the past period of time, we, together with the relevant stakeholders including scholars, experts, green groups and other relevant parities, negotiated and joined hands with the Steering Committee and Working Group to formulate the Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan for Hong Kong. Our aim is to conduct a territory-wide consultation exercise this year, with a view to taking forward the maiden strategy and action plan for enhancing ecological conservation and the relevant environmental biodiversity in Hong Kong. In addition, we have four key areas of work in relation to nature or countryside conservation. Apart from increasing the size of marine parks, we will assess the suitability of "enclaves" against a set of established principles and criteria for incorporation into country parks. There have been past precedents in this regard, in which the overall area of country parks has been slightly increased. Moreover, after the incorporation of Sai Wan into the country park, a management plan has come into effect. We have adopted a new way of thinking when exploring ways to implement this plan with the villagers and relevant parties, with a view to enhancing countryside conservation and promoting


6567

ecotourism. Furthermore, more opportunities of collaboration can be created for the adjoining countryside outside country parks. The Government and relevant organizations should capitalize on these forces and bodies in society in order to help preserve the environment and beautiful scenery of the countryside. We are prepared to adopt innovative approaches with an open mind, so as to ensure better conservation and use of the countryside environment in the overall interest of Hong Kong. In terms of combating climate change and energy efficiency, we will continue to adopt multi-pronged measures to reduce greenhouse gas emissions in Hong Kong. Our measures include introducing different initiatives with the relevant departments in order to enhance the energy efficiency of buildings, promote green road transport, strengthen waste-to-energy facilities and improve the fuel mix for future power generation, so as to achieve our carbon intensity reduction target of 50% to 60% by 2020 when compared with the 2005 level. As regards improving the fuel mix for power generation, in the review of the future development of the electricity market in Hong Kong to be conducted soon, we will give an account of the results of the consultation on future fuel mix for electricity generation conducted last year and the directions identified by the Government. Furthermore, we, in collaboration with public organizations and the relevant bodies, will adopt proactive measures to promote energy efficiency and green building, and encourage members of the public and all sectors of the community to practice energy conservation together, so as to reduce the overall electricity demand of Hong Kong. The Government will lead by example by setting an electricity saving target for government buildings subsequent to the target set in 2009. In the coming five years, the electricity consumption by government buildings will further drop by 5%, with an estimated annual saving of 70 million kilowatt-hour in electricity consumption. Lastly, I wish to point out that the Task Force on External Lighting has completed its analysis of the views received in the earlier exercise for engaging stakeholders and the public on the proposal to regulate external lighting, and will submit its report and recommendations to the Government in the coming months. We shall report the Government's response and measures to regulate external lighting to the Panel on Environmental Affairs.


In the year ahead, we will still face a number of environmental challenges. We hope Members will continue to support our work. Together we shall develop Hong Kong into a greener city with higher quality of living. Thank you, President. SECRETARY FOR TRANSPORT AND HOUSING (in Cantonese): President, I have to thank the 30 Members enormously for their expression of views on housing and transport. In respect of housing, first, I have to state that the fundamental policy of the Government is to help the grassroots to move into public housing, to enable low- and middle-income households with affordability to buy homes, and to stabilize the private-sector property market. As for additional housing supply, public housing is in the majority, and in the public housing provided, about 70% of the flats are public rental housing (PRH). The Government will not make all people purchase their own homes, yet we need to respond to the home ownership need of some of the low- and middle-income families in society. Given the prevailing serious supply-demand imbalance, it is an uphill task long term to resolve the structural housing problem. Despite the cries for more housing construction by the Government every day and the targets of supplying 30 000 to 40 000 public housing units, we should understand that these targets cannot be realized with a wave of a magic wand. The collective commitment of society is required. We need to balance the needs and interests of various sectors in making the difficult but necessary decisions on what to give and what to take, so that sites will be vacated to realize the overall supply targets of constructing 480 000 units in the next 10 years. We cannot afford indecisiveness. If we do not take the first, second and third steps courageously, we will not achieve the ultimate target. I understand that haste brings no success, yet our society does not allow us to wait. In the face of the fervent housing demand in society, the Government cannot be slack, so it must grasp every hectare of land. For if an additional 50 or 100 units can be constructed, the housing need of 50 or 100 families will be met, and if the construction can be completed a year earlier, they can benefit a year earlier. In addition to speeding up the construction of additional PRH and subsidized sale flats, we will facilitate the circulation of public housing under the supply-led policy, so as to suppress the abusive use of public housing resources.


6569

In the Long Term Housing Strategy announced last December, approaches to further enhance subsidized home ownership were proposed. In this connection, the Chief Executive proposed in the Policy Address that the Housing Authority (HA) will introduce the home ownership pilot scheme for Green Form applicants. Under the scheme, the authorities will identify suitable flats among PRH under construction for sale to Green Form applicants living in public housing. The HA has started examining the detailed arrangements for implementing the idea, including the application requirements, the pricing mechanism, the resale arrangement and the criteria for site identification, and so on. Different views have been expressed on this idea in society. We have heard these views, so we will first launch the pilot scheme which involves a small number of units to assess the effectiveness and impact of the scheme. I must stress that though public housing flats will be sold at a price lower than that of Home Ownership Scheme (HOS) flats under the pilot scheme, public housing flats will not be sold at dirt cheap prices. President, as for private housing, we notice that property prices started rising since the middle of last year. Had the Government not introduced the two rounds of demand-side management measures at the end of 2012 and in early 2013 respectively, the property market might have grown more white-hot by now, posing grave risks to the stability of the macro-economy and financial system of Hong Kong. The rising trend in the property market is driven by the low interest rate and quantitative easing in the prevailing international environment. In fact, Hong Kong is not the only city facing this environment, for other major cities like London and Sydney are also facing the same situation. In the past year, the property prices of the two cities have risen dramatically. The Government is concerned about the situation of the property market, and it will take necessary measures to stabilize the property market when necessary. Regarding households living in undesirable conditions, we have pointed out repeatedly that public housing is the primary solution to address their housing needs. When we found sites, we will definitely use them for the construction of public housing but not certain kinds of transitional housing. Hence, I implore all districts to support the public housing projects proposed and will not "say no" to our proposals arbitrarily. On the part of the Government, various departments should enhance their co-ordination to work on proper transport and community facility support. Regarding the setting up of a licensing or landlord registration system for subdivided flats, the Government will not pursue this in view of the lack of support for the proposal in society. However, the safety risks posed by


subdivided flats should not be overlooked. The Buildings Department will make continued efforts to step up its enforcement against irregularities involving building and fire safety. Some Members proposed allowing HOS flats owners to sublet their flats without paying land premium as a means to increase the supply of rental housing. Yet some other Members opposed the proposal. I would like to point out that HOS flats are subsidized housing before a payment of land premium is made. The policy objective of the Government in providing subsidized home ownership is to assist the recipients to improve their living conditions, and their flats are for self-occupation. If HOS owners are allowed to rent out their flats without paying land premium, it will involve a significant policy change. We have to consider this cautiously in the legal context, and in terms of policy and operation. As I have said, I will not emphatically refuse to examine this proposal immediately, yet it does not mean that I will act hastily. In the midst of high rentals, there are calls in the Legislative Council for the implementation of rental control. However, rental control has aroused great controversy in society and there is no consensus among various sectors. Moreover, rental control is comparable to a double-bladed sword. According to the past experience in Hong Kong and many certified studies overseas, rental control may bring about some unexpected consequences, which include a decrease in supply of rental flats, additional difficulties in renting flats for the disadvantaged, higher rents imposed by landlords, selectiveness of landlords in choosing tenants and a lower incentive to maintain and repair rental units properly, and so on. In view of the tight housing supply in Hong Kong currently, the introduction of rental control may backfire, causing tenants in general to suffer before they can actually benefit from it. After weighing the pros and cons, the Government considers it inappropriate to introduce rental control. President, as for transport, the primary policy of the Government is public transport based. In other words, public transport will be accorded priority, railway will form the backbone of the system, reliance on private vehicles will be reduced, road resources will be fully utilized, and green transport, walkability and a cycling-friendly environment will be proposed. Regarding the many transport infrastructure projects which have fallen behind schedule and faced increasing costs, the Government is gravely concerned. We will enhance the project monitoring mechanism and effort of the


6571

Highways Department (HyD). For the Hong Kong Section of the Guangzhou-Shenzhen-Hong Kong Express Rail Link (XRL), the Transport and Housing Bureau attaches great importance to the various observations and recommendations stated in the Report of the Hong Kong Section of the Guangzhou-Shenzhen-Hong Kong Express Rail Link Independent Expert Panel. We will proactively follow up the relevant recommendations and negotiate with the MTR Corporation Limited (MTRCL) and the relevant parties on the arrangements for implementing the recommendations, particularly on project monitoring and reporting. We will continue to endeavour to form a diversified public transport system, so that the public can enjoy efficient services and reasonable modal choices. Although railway is the backbone of the transport system, it does not mean that "railway will have dominance". The MTRCL is an international brand. It should not be criticized for developing businesses outside Hong Kong, yet this should definitely be carried out on the premise of maintaining its business base in Hong Kong and giving priority to maintaining good local railway network services and development. The Government understands the public's concern about the services and fares of the MTR. In respect of services, the Government requires the MTRCL to make suitable investment in maintenance and repairs of the system and in the replacement of trains, which also include the Light Rail system, to ensure the safety and reliability of railway services. On the other hand, the authorities will increase the manpower of the Electrical and Mechanical Services Department to carry out effective monitoring on the safety of railway. The Government will give regard to the views expressed in society to explore with the MTRCL ways to further enhance the fare system to achieve the principle of Fair Fare. Although the Government will not consider conducting the Fourth Comprehensive Transport Study in the short term, we will strive for resources for launching the Public Transport Strategy Study within this year. The Study will review the roles and positioning of public transport services other than heavy rail, including franchised buses, Light Rail, public light buses, tram, taxis and ferries, and so on, to ensure these transport services can complement each other in their functions, and maintain an efficient, diversified, balanced and sustainable development ecology.


President, we will continue to carry out bus route rationalization to enhance the efficiency of the bus network, to ease traffic congestion and to improve roadside air quality. In the past two years, we completed the district bus route rationalization in North District, Tuen Mun, Shatin, Tai Po, Tsing Yi and Yuen Long. Moreover, bus-bus interchanges have been set up in Tuen Mun Road and toll plaza of Tsing Sha Road, and attractive interchange combination, interchange discounts, and much better supporting facilities are provided. We will continue moving forward in this direction. A number of Members are concerned about parking spaces. The parking policy of the Government mainly includes two perspectives. For commercial vehicles, or what we usually call the "working vehicles", having regard to the traffic condition of individual districts and views of the trade and the districts concerned, we provide a suitable number of parking spaces in various districts to cater for the needs and development of the trade. As for private cars, the Government provides a suitable number of parking spaces to cope with the demand on the premise that this will not encourage passengers taking public transport to switch to private cars, and resulting in an increase in private cars and worsening traffic congestion. We will expand and enhance the public transport services continuously to reduce the public's reliance on private cars. The Government will also review in due course standards relating to parking spaces under the Hong Kong Planning Standards and Guidelines. On the premise of not affecting road safety and other road users, the Transport Department will set up additional on-street parking spaces at suitable locations, and will request developers to include an appropriate number of public parking spaces in suitable development projects. Under the policy on walkability, we will continue implementing the "cycling-friendly" environment in new towns and new development areas and review the traffic condition in bicycle restricted zones throughout the territory. We will also enhance existing cycling tracks and parking facilities for bicycles, and step up our efforts in the promotion and education of cycling safety. Under the Universal Accessibility Programme, we are proactively taking forward 211 items on retrofitting barrier-free access facilities on public walkways under the maintenance of the HyD. It is expected that 80% of the items will be completed in phases in the next four years.


6573

At the same time, we are taking forward "hillside escalator links" items which have been confirmed to be technically feasible and are given higher priority. Among the 18 items on the priority list of proposals, the construction of two items has commenced, whereas the preliminary engineering feasibility studies of ten proposals have been completed, and various stages of surveying, design and preparation are underway. Moreover, in certain districts with busy passenger flow, including Yuen Long, Mong Kok and Causeway Bay, we are implementing pedestrian environment improvement measures to cope with the specific situation of individual districts. President, housing and transport are issues closely related to people's livelihood. The Government will continue to listen to the views of the communities and the Legislative Council. We will keep abreast of the times and respond to the development need of society according to the priorities we set for our policies and resource implications. With these remarks, I implore Members to support the Motion of Thanks. SECRETARY FOR DEVELOPMENT (in Cantonese): President, Honourable Members, I thank the 30-odd Members for their speeches. I will elaborate and give a response on the polices and measures in relation to land, planning and development. Land and housing are livelihood issues which currently constitute the greatest concern to Hong Kong society. In the Policy Address this year, the Chief Executive has given an account of the progress of a series of measures on land supply for the short, medium and long terms, and this fully shows that the current-term Government is averting the supply-demand imbalance progressively in Hong Kong. To make better preparations for meeting the housing targets and eliminate a major bottleneck impeding the long-term development of Hong Kong, the Government will continue to adopt a multi-pronged approach to increase land supply for the short, medium and long terms. In the wake of the Asian financial turmoil, the supply of land has been halted for a few years in Hong Kong. Faced with the pressing demands for land for various uses at present, the Government is actively taking forward major land use planning and development plans, but it is going to take a rather long time to materialize these plans given the need to conduct full consultations and go


through various statutory processes and established procedures. Given the time constraint, I cannot explain these plans one by one here, but I can say that whether it is Kwu Tung North New Development Area (NDA), Fanling North NDA, Hung Shui Kiu NDA and Tung Chung NDA extension, we are pressing ahead with all these developments in full steam. We are also actively conducting a review on ways to convert brownfield sites to more optimal uses through comprehensive planning and provision of infrastructures. Besides, the planning studies on New Territories North, rock caverns and underground space have already commenced, but the studies on reclamation and artificial islands have been slightly delayed due to the non-cooperation movement in the Legislative Council. To increase and expedite land supply in the short term, we actually do not have a magic wand to conjure up land for housing construction without arousing controversies at all. We can only take a down-to-earth approach and implement various measures on land supply in the short, medium and long terms in line with the overall land supply blueprint put forward in the 2013 Policy Address. The most immediate and effective way in the short and medium terms is to make more optimal use of the developed areas in the existing urban areas and new towns, as well as the nearby land in the vicinity of existing infrastructure, through land use reviews and increasing development intensity where planning terms permit. The Planning Department has conducted reviews over the whole territory on land currently vacant, under Short Term Tenancies or different short-term use, and also land for Government, Institution or Community and other government uses, as well as Green Belt (GB) sites. The reviews have identified in total some 150 potential housing sites, most of which may be made available for housing development in the five years of 2014-2015 to 2018-2019 for providing over 210 000 flats (over 70% for public housing units), subject to timely amendments to their respective statutory plans for change of land use or increase in development intensity. Statutory plan amendments had already been initiated in respect of 45 or about one third of these sites as at early February this year. About 40 000 residential units are expected to be provided and among these 45 sites, 20 have completed the statutory rezoning procedures. Apart from the said 150 sites, among the sites provided by the various initiatives to increase land supply announced in the 2013 Policy Address, 42 sites to be made available in the short-to-medium term for residential use have been


6575

zoned or undergoing the rezoning procedures as at early February this year. These sites, 38 of which can be readily used for residential purpose, can provide about 39 000 housing units in total. To appropriately increase the development intensity, except for the north shore of Hong Kong Island and Kowloon Peninsula which are more densely populated, the maximum domestic plot ratios that can be allowed for housing sites located in the other Density Zones can be raised generally by about 20% where planning terms permit. Since this Government took office, the Town Planning Board (TPB) has approved applications to relax the development intensity of 26 housing sites, leading to an additional supply of about 3 500 units. In fact, President, given changes in the socio-economic conditions, the public may have different expectations for the planning of land development at different times. For example, since the moving out of the old airport in 1998, the Kai Tak Development (KTD) has undergone different stages of planning and public engagement. The scale of residential development, which was first planned to accommodate over 200 000 people, has been reduced to provide housing for only 90 000 people. There is a keen demand for housing in Hong Kong society now, and there are views ― including views from Members of the Legislative Council ― that the ratio of housing sites and the intensity are on the low side in the KTD. In fact, the Government conducted a study to review afresh the planning of the KTD in 2014, in the hope that the development intensity can be increased in the KTD. Preliminary results of the study showed that the KTD can provide no less than 6 800 additional residential flats and no less than 430 000 sq m of additional commercial floor space. In this connection, we are currently exploring the feasibility of further increasing the residential development intensity and floor space in the KTD. In the coming year, we will continue to take forward the relevant statutory plan amendments and other necessary procedures as planned. However, as the Government has repeatedly emphasized, the provision of sufficient land to meet the housing supply targets for the next decade is a challenging task for both the Government and the community. An integral part of the land supply process is the support and understanding rendered by the District Councils, local districts and residents. President, I wish to take this opportunity to respond to some of the views and misconceptions held by a number of Members in their speeches earlier on.


Mr WU Chi-wai and Mr James TO have raised concerns over the proposal of engaging the Urban Renewal Authority (URA) in the supply of subsidized sale flats. All along, the redevelopment projects of the URA have targeted the private sector and there are some differences in the materials and prices of their flats when compared to the general Home Ownership Scheme (HOS) standards. Therefore, the subsidized sale flats provided by the URA may not necessarily have to follow the HOS in pricing, and the target buyers may also be different. As for the concrete proposals and details, further discussions will be held pending proposals from the URA Board. We noted the financial implications that may be caused to the URA by its provision of subsidized sale flats. The Government has all along supported the work of the URA through such arrangements as injection of funds, land premium exemption and land grant for the URA's development. The Government will give due consideration to the proposals of the URA after receiving them. Mr Frederick FUNG has confused a lot of facts when he spoke on the GB sites, artificial islands and the target of providing 480 000 flats in a decade. Mr FUNG said earlier that these 480 000 flats will come from 150 GB sites and artificial islands but it will take two decades for the artificial islands to be completed. I wish to point out that among these 150 sites, only about 70 are GB sites which can provide about some 80 000 flats, with over 70% of them being public housing. In fact, such information has been set out clearly in various papers that we provided to the Legislative Council before. As I said earlier on, these 150 sites, together with the rezoned sites provided by various initiatives in the 2013 Policy Address, are the sources of land for providing those 480 000 flats. But these sites aside, there are also other sources, including some new development areas. If the flats can be completed smoothly, we may be able to meet some supply targets of the early stages. On the other hand, artificial islands are absolutely not intended to be a source of land for achieving the housing target of developing 480 000 residential units. As regards the rezoning of GB sites, Mr FUNG mentioned earlier a GB site in Sham Shui Po, and I think he was referring to Yin Ping Road. President, this site at Yin Ping Road used to be a cottage area where squatter huts were erected or there may be cottage workshops. After the occupants of these huts had moved out or were allocated housing units and after the workshops had moved out, it naturally became a place without inhabitants and production activities, and after trees were planted there, this place then became a GB site.


6577

As we can see from its history, it is unlikely to find any valuable and old tree there. In fact, we will conduct surveys on trees when rezoning land. But President, for these places located in the proximity of transport infrastructure in the urban area, such as the site in question which used to be a cottage area, is it right not to consider rezoning them for developing housing for the people? In this connection, I must ask: While Members urged the Government to increase the supply of public and private housing on the one hand, they blindly opposed the Government's land rezoning work on the other. Are they fighting for the interest of the people or are they actually hypocritical? President, Mr SIN Chung-kai and Dr Kenneth CHAN mentioned two sites earlier on, one at Tung Tao Court, Shau Kei Wan and the other at Braemar Hill, North Point. The site at Tung Tao Court, Shau Kei Wan has a small area, and we had repeatedly made consideration and conducted many rounds of internal discussion in reaching a decision on whether or not to put up this site for sale. We decided to put it up for sale at the time because of tight short-term land supply, especially in the urban area, and many members of the public have also expressed the wish to live in the urban area if possible. The zoning of this site is appropriate and rezoning is not necessary, and we have, more than once before, sold land of an area even smaller than this site at Tung Tao Court, Shau Kei Wan. So, in the end, we maintained the decision to put up this site for sale, though the flats to be provided is not large in number. But as Secretary Prof Anthony CHEUNG said earlier on, the provision of dozens of flats would mean solving the housing problem for dozens of families. If the construction of housing flats can be completed one year ahead of schedule, we could solve the housing problem of dozens of families one year earlier. Regarding the site at Braemar Hill, North Point, Mr SIN Chung-kai told me to go there to take a minibus. President, though not recently, I actually did go there to take a minibus, and I know that place very well. When we plan to change the land use, we have a comprehensive plan to be carried out by stages. At present, this site has no pressing need for rezoning. My colleagues and I will certainly fully consult the district and the DC and also co-operate with other departments to find a way to address the traffic situation there which is a concern to Members. President, Dr Kenneth CHAN and Mr Abraham SHEK mentioned earlier the TPB procedures. They also mentioned a lawsuit in which the TPB is involved. As these judicial proceedings have yet been completed, it is inappropriate for me to make any comment here.


Mr YIU Si-wing enquired about the progress of the redevelopment of industrial buildings or their conversion into hotels. I can tell him that as at end-December 2014, 19 applications in total were approved for redevelopment and wholesale conversion of industrial buildings under the revitalization measures, involving about 3 600 hotel rooms. As for the several hotel sites at Kai Tak, they will be put up for sale by stages starting from 2015-2016. Mr CHAN Hak-kan urged me to "repay my debts" earlier on. He cited some figures on the production volume of private housing. But I hope Mr CHAN will understand that the statistics on the production volume and supply of private housing are compiled by the Transport and Housing Bureau. The Development Bureau is responsible for land resources and my job, which has to do with land supply, is to endeavour to provide land for private housing, so that when these sites are made available, the flats to be provided can achieve our target. Our target for this financial year is 18 800 flats, whereas that for the last financial year was 20 000 flats. President, the land supplied for private housing this year can provide about 20 000-odd flats, which has exceeded the target for this year. With regard to last year's figure, if we include the number of additional flats in Lohas Park approved by the TPB recently, the land supplied for private housing last year should provide about 18 000 flats. Therefore, if we add up the numbers of two years, we have largely achieved the target. President, Miss CHAN Yuen-han mentioned earlier a residential care home for the elderly at Shek Tsai Leng in the North East New Territories (NENT) NDA and agricultural resite. From her speech I deeply understand that even the very experienced Members may not know very well the Government's operation. In spite of this, I do believe that when handling this problem, Miss CHAN could appreciate the initiatives and efforts made by our colleagues in the Development Bureau and relevant departments under the Bureau in resolving the problem. As for the allegation that planning is meant to serve the real estate corporations, I must say that this allegation is grossly unfounded. Members actually should take a considerable share of responsibility for the spread of this allegation.


6579

President, Dr KWOK Ka-ki mentioned the unused land earlier on. In this Council I have repeatedly given explanations on this. It is regrettable that Dr KWOK has still ignored these objective facts and continued to tell his own story. The figures cited by Mr LEUNG Kwok-hung on the NENT NDA are also biased. Given the time constraint, I will not waste time refuting the viewpoints of these Members. In response to the concern expressed by Mr TANG Ka-piu and Mr POON Siu-ping over the importation of labour, I can tell the two Members that we will strictly enforce the law and perform our gate-keeping role, in order to protect the rights and interests of workers. Workers will be imported on the overriding premise of giving priority to the employment of local workers, safeguarding their income levels as well as promoting training of the local workforce for joining the industries. We must appreciate the characteristic of the construction industry of comprising work of sequential phases. If foreign workers are not imported in a timely manner, hence causing delays to works projects, the current jobs of local workers would actually be affected as well. President, in view of the pressing housing demand of Hong Kong people, especially the many people on the Waiting List for public rental housing whose living conditions are desperately in need of improvement, it is necessary for various sectors of the community to put the overall housing needs in Hong Kong before their own interests. Whether there can be timely rezoning of land for developing public and private housing and an appropriate increase in the development intensity actually depends on close co-operation from the DCs and locals in joining hands with the Government to overcome difficulties and take forward housing and land development in the short and medium terms at full steam. I have noticed the concern expressed by a number of Members earlier over the transport problems. We will work closely with the relevant government departments and endeavour to ensure that the increase in the provision of housing land and development intensity will not bring unacceptable impacts on such areas as transport and the environment. Thank you, President. PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): The second debate session has ended.


We now proceed to the third debate session. The debate themes are "Poverty Alleviation, Welfare and Medical Services, Elderly Care and Public Health". This session covers six policy areas, which are Poverty Alleviation, Welfare Services; Support for Ethnic Minorities and the Disadvantaged; Elderly Care; Health Services; and Food Safety and Environmental Hygiene. Members who wish to speak in this session will please press the "Request to speak" button. MR CHEUNG KWOK-CHE (in Cantonese): President, in the first paragraph of the Introduction to the Policy Address this year, the Chief Executive pointed out that there are "… a host of opportunities, but there are choices we have to make". Hong Kong is indeed a place full of opportunities, unfortunately, the Government often lacks the courage to carry out bold reforms, so often, it could not seize the opportunities, and even disregarded public opinions and the reality, thus making the wrong choices. The first paragraph of the Introduction to the Policy Address also says that on people's livelihood, we have to choose "between reforms and clinging to the status quo". However, often, the Government chooses the latter, so often, social welfare issues cannot be dealt with in a timely manner. In response to the Motion of Thanks this year, I have proposed an amendment related to universal retirement protection to express my regret over the conservative attitude of the existing Government. President, if we look in retrospect at the late 1970s, various trade unions, labour groups and political groups in Hong Kong already demanded the establishment of a central provident fund and lobbied for a retirement protection system, so as to protect the living of retired workers. As early as 1991, the Hong Kong Social Security Society drafted the Tripartite Contributions Scheme for Old Age Protection Scheme, under which it was proposed that a sustainable retirement protection system be established by way of tripartite contributions by the labour side, employer side and the Government. From 1992 to 1994, the Government published two papers to carry out consultations on the introduction of retirement protection, and it even put forward the specific proposal of establishing an Old Age Pension Scheme. Unfortunately, due to the strong opposition by the business sector and Beijing's concern over the fiscal implications for the SAR after the reunification in 1997, the Old Age Pension Scheme was aborted. As a result, the proposal was changed to the present Mandatory Provident Fund (MPF) System, which is operated entirely by the private sector.


6581

It is widely acknowledged that the MPF System, which is one of the existing "three pillars", is not highly effective and the hard-earned money of the public is eroded by high management charges. The arrangement of using contributions to offset severance and long service payments also seriously affects life after retirement. Given the threats posed by financial crises, market fluctuations may also make the hard-earned MPF savings come to naught. Last year, it was widely rumoured that the policy address would honour the promise made by LEUNG Chun-ying during the election, that is, to abolish the offsetting mechanism under MPF. However, even this year, no response could be seen, so this is most disappointing. Since the MPF System is widely considered to be ineffective and cannot protect the living of the public after retirement, and the great majority of employers and employees also resist making additional contributions or the levy of taxes, why not simply put part of, or even all of, the MPF contributions into universal retirement protection? The current-term Government asked Prof Nelson CHOW to conduct a study on retirement protection in Hong Kong and this is a good start. At any rate, it is desirable that the Government is willing to carry out a public consultation on retirement protection. Notwithstanding this, public opinion is already very clear. In 2012, a survey conducted by the Centre for Social Policy Studies of the Department of Applied Social Sciences of The Hong Kong Polytechnic University showed that more than 94% of the respondents agreed with the establishment of a universal retirement protection system. Almost 70% of the respondents were dissatisfied with the existence of a means test for elderly people receiving Comprehensive Social Security Assistance (CSSA), which makes it impossible for elderly people to enjoy any protection in retirement. If the Government puts the focus of the consultation on future universal retirement protection on whether the system should be universal or otherwise, not only would this arouse doubts about whether or not the Government is still dilly-dallying, it would even arouse concern about whether or not the Government is rejecting public opinion and bent on high-handedly introducing an assets test for the future retirement protection scheme. As a Government committed and willing to improve people's livelihood, it should actively consider how to solve the problem of sustainability of its retirement protection scheme, rather than succumbing to the pressure of trade associations and capitalists and citing this as the reason for putting off social reforms. A member of the study team, Prof WONG Yu-cheung, pointed out in a public forum that so long as the Government is willing to increase profits tax by


1%, and assuming that the conditions in respect of the labour force and the ageing population remain unchanged, the retirement protection proposal designed by Prof CHOW would never "go bust". Whether or not universal retirement protection can be introduced in Hong Kong is actually a matter of the Government being unwilling to take action rather than being unable to take action. President, although the Government has earmarked $50 billion for retirement protection purposes, it has not made clear how it will use this sum of money. In view of the elderly people now in deep water, I cannot but express my regret. As Prof CHOW said, a few years later, the labour force will begin to shrink and very soon, we will lose sufficient demographic dividend for making contributions to universal retirement protection. I call on the Government to summon up the resolve to act in a timely manner and propose a concrete universal retirement protection scheme for society to decide on within this year. Otherwise, if we missed this final opportunity, it would be too late by then. Retirement protection is linked to the issue of the taxation system in Hong Kong. In fact, the Government keeps stressing that it has insufficient resources, and that coupled with the problem of an ageing population in Hong Kong, by 2040, elderly people aged 65 years or more will account for one third of the total population, standing at some 2.6 million, so by then, it is possible that government revenue may decrease as a result of the shrinking labour force, so the Government would indeed no longer be able to rely on land sales to fund its recurrent expenditures. If the existing taxation system cannot support future public expenditures, a tax reform should be introduced in the future to implement a taxation system based on the principle of equitable distribution, so as to ease the financial pressure on the Government. An equitable taxation system should be based on the principle of "earning more, paying more" by levying more tax on people who profited from their assets, rather than targeting impoverished members of the public earning low incomes. For example, corporate progressive profits tax should be charged, progressive salaries tax should be levied on high-income people and capital gains tax or tax on dividend income of significant amounts should be imposed on people who profited from their investments. In this way, even as the need to redistribute wealth in society is addressed, the regular revenues of the Government can also be increased and as a result, various government expenditures can be met. In addition, the "mission impossible" of universal retirement protection can also be carried out in a sound manner.


6583

President, due to population ageing, the issue arousing the greatest concern is that of residential care services. As usual, the Government failed to address squarely the problem of insufficient residential care services for the elderly and it even simply recapped the pledge of providing 5 000 subsidized residential care places made in the policy address last year. According to the information of the Social Welfare Department, the number of people waiting for a place in residential care homes for the elderly stands at 31 000 ― I reiterate that it is 31 000 ― so the supply is seriously inadequate and many elderly people passed away before they could get a place. Last year, there were about 5 000 such people. The increase of newcomers in the queue has outpaced the number of new residential care places, so the waiting time is growing increasingly longer. Unfortunately, the Government has not carried out any planning on the construction of residential care homes in response to population ageing in various districts in the future, so this is really disappointing. As regards the residential care service voucher proposed in the Policy Address, it would only continue to push users to the private market. However, at present, the quality of private residential care home services varies greatly and government regulation of private residential care homes is lax. Elderly people cannot get any service quality assurance and the service voucher only serves to make government figures presentable, but more elderly people will be driven into dismal conditions. I stress that I oppose the commercialization of social welfare services. The Government should assume greater responsibility by immediately formulating a long-term plan on the construction of subsidized residential care homes, reviewing the Residential Care Homes (Elderly Persons) Ordinance and strengthening the regulation of residential care home services, so as to protect the interests of elderly people. In addition, in the Policy Address, it is said that the Government will continue to enhance residential care services for persons with disabilities and allocate more resources to hostels for moderately mentally handicapped persons. Increasing the number of residential care places for persons with disabilities has always been a subject of concern to the social welfare sector. However, on such problems as how the resources can be increased, what the rate of increase should be, how the effectiveness will be like, whether or not the problem of waiting time can be solved, and so on, no account has been given, so I ask the Government to give a clear account of the long-term measures in this regard.


This year, the Government finally agrees to introducing early identification and intervention for students with special education needs (SEN). Although the goal we have been lobbying for years is late in being attained, this is still better than not attaining it at all, so anyway, the sector can find some consolation in this. However, SEN students need services more than this. Many parents and students are in deep water. At present, tailor-made programmes ― IEP ― are not available to SEN students, so they encounter considerable difficulties in learning. If the learning effectiveness of SEN students is unsatisfactory, not only would the prime time for learning be wasted, the resources allocated by the Government would also fail to achieve the expected results. At present, many advanced regions overseas also provide this facility called Individualized Education Programmes but it is still not available to SEN students in this world-city called Hong Kong, where people are just working separately using the limited resources. The Policy Address this year also says that the launch of "a cash grant for ordinary schools with relatively more students with special educational needs (SEN) and financial needs" will be considered, "so that a designated teacher can be deployed to co-ordinate matters relating to SEN support …". This policy ought to be a cause for celebration because someone is designated to specifically formulate Individualized Education Programmes for SEN students. However, if we think about it carefully, we will find that this is very absurd. The designation of co-ordinators is intended to co-ordinate the needs of SEN students in their schools, but why must it be schools with more students with financial needs that can get the cash grant? Why can only schools with more SEN students benefit from it? Does it mean that schools with fewer SEN students do not need any IEP? Education is a human right and is not related to poverty alleviation at all. To assess education needs according to the assets and number of people is an entirely wrong concept. In addition, the problem related to SEN cannot be solved merely by the provision of funds. Only a fair and just society is the genuine cure. SEN students have to cope with a public examination system the standards of which are the same as that for ordinary students and the Government has not made any adjustments accordingly on account of their abilities. Rather, the same assessment yardstick is applied, so their performance vary greatly as a matter of course. Not only does this deal blows to their confidence, ultimately, this will also indirectly deprive them of opportunities to learn and pursue further studies. Therefore, I propose that legislation be enacted on IEP, so as to carry out


6585

planning on the long-term study and even career of SEN students. Therefore, I demand that a proposal benefiting all SEN students be formulated to establish an effective and equitable learning environment, so as to truly assist SEN students and their parents. President, if we review this year's overall social welfare policy, it can be said that it offers nothing to write home about. The Low-income Working Family Allowance gave rise to some pleasant surprises last year but by rehashing it this year, the purpose of boosting the sense of well-being can hardly be served. However, if the number of poor people can be reduced as quickly as possible, this is still desirable. In the past decade or so, there has been a lack of planning on social welfare and Members have actually raised this issue a number of times. The Government should publish a white paper on social welfare in Hong Kong akin to the last one in 1991, or a Five Year Plan for Social Welfare Development in Hong Kong, the last of which was published in 1998. However, it must by no means publish anything akin to the Report on Long-term Social Welfare Planning in Hong Kong published several years ago, which has drawn severe criticisms from the social welfare sector. Hong Kong society needs planning, and it is even more necessary to plan elderly services up to 2060 and make preparations early for the problem of an ageing population, so as to prepare for a rainy day. When carrying out planning, it is all the more necessary to alleviate the problem of wealth disparity. In the past four decades, the Gini Coefficient has only gone up without ever coming down. The most recent figure is 0.537 in 2011, which reflects the situation of an extremely uneven distribution of wealth in society. If the Government wants to face the problem squarely and deal with it at root, it should set a target on poverty elimination, rather than solely relying on the passive approach of using hypocritical rhetoric to shirk the responsibility. So far, the Government still lacks any holistic plan on social welfare and the same is true of other policies. For example, on manpower resources, since the Government lacks any plan, it is now proposed that the insufficient labour force as a result of an ageing population be supplemented by the importation of workers. However, at the same time, the construction industry was earlier on exposed to have carried out false recruitments. This policy on imported workers has posed threats to the means of living of local workers. Now that a large number of infrastructure projects have been completed, local workers may have to face the problem of unemployment again, so this reflects the fact that the incumbent Government has not given any consideration to manpower resources in the long term.


In addition, it is rumoured that the Government plans to examine the preparation of a list for the admission of talents and that the category of social workers can also be found thereon. I wish to point out that given the present pace of development in social welfare services, the supply of social work professionals will outpace the demand in the next decade. Moreover, the registration requirements for local social workers are different from those on the Mainland, so social workers trained on the Mainland cannot be registered locally. The Government should carry out careful assessments and must not create social conflicts. In the face of a decline in labour force, the Government cannot go about looking for manpower indiscriminately for the sake of making up the numbers. On the contrary, it should start with trades which have this particular need, focus on training local workers and offer additional training or university programmes for industries with such a need, so as to set up another career ladder and enhance the mobility of various types of jobs. I propose that the Government should carry out long-term planning on manpower resources at an early date and conduct reviews regularly. In fact, it is possible to boost the labour force by means of other incentives, for example, by making improvements to the working hours and work environment, so as to attract Hong Kong people back to these industries. They are approaches worthy of consideration. This leads us to the issue of protection of workers' rights at present. Many workers have to work long hours and overtime frequently, so their health is affected and family life is compromised. However, in the Policy Address this year, no further account is given of the legislative timetable for standard working hours and the responsibility will be handed over to a committee again, as is the case of universal retirement protection, so the people of Hong Kong are greatly disappointed. Moreover, the measures to unleash the potential of the local labour force mentioned in the Policy Address amount only to subsidizing child care centres and kindergarten-cum-child care centres and increasing the number of subsidized places of extended hours service, so they are just better than nothing. However, the number of places in subsidized child care centres has not seen any increase for years and this is precisely the crux of the matter. At present, the number of places cannot meet the child care needs of over 50 000 new mothers every year and increasing the number of subsidized places of extended hours service to solve the problem of insufficient labour force is without doubt barking up the wrong tree. The most preferable approach in the long term is to increase the number of places in formal subsidized child care centres, so that more parents can go out to


6587

work with peace of mind. However, if there are practical difficulties in increasing the number of places, enhancing home-based child care service can be an interim solution. The proposal of changing the subsidy for home-based carers to a wage has been put forward. Even if the wage amounts only to the minimum wage, it still represents some sort of respect for home-based carers. Moreover, this sum of money in the form of wages would still be larger than a subsidy, so it is believed that it will be able to attract a certain number of women to take up the job of home-based carers. The Policy Address also says the Government will review the existing welfare arrangements to see if they have the effect of serving as a disincentive for older persons to continue working. Such a suggestion must be described by the word "outrageous", pure and simple. Is the Government suggesting to the community that elderly people would refrain from working for the sake of getting welfare benefits? At present, the welfare for elderly people is only like a saline drip that keeps elderly people from starving, so how can it be said that it would serve as a disincentive for older persons to continue working? Often, elderly people did not actually retire voluntarily; rather, it was society that rejected them for the lack of competitiveness, making it difficult for them to find jobs. Now, elderly people have been branded as being unwilling to work, so this is an extremely unfair criticism. Apart from specific policies, I also wish to put forward administration-related proposals at the level of the Government's overall administration. At present, the tenure of the Chief Executive is five years and even if he secures a second term, it will only amount to 10 years. However, if the Government does not do a proper job of long-term planning at various levels, Hong Kong's future development can only depend on the personal will and preferences of the Chief Executive. During the administration lasting five or 10 years of each term of Government, the policies are not founded on the wishes of the public or any long-term vision, so the development of social policies can only change unpredictably with the changes in Government. When past Governments formulated social policies, they were all very short-sighted. This is probably because it would take more than a decade for long-term plans to come to fruition, so this is far too slow. In politics, what matters is instant results, so if it is not possible for them to bring about achievements in the short term, there is a lack of incentive. Coupled with the traditional mindset of "do less, err less", all past policy addresses were not far-sighted ones, nor could they bring about planning at an early date.


Only two years are left of the current-term Government. If it sticks to its old style of administration, can it take Hong Kong forward? For this reason, I believe that policy planning is essential. It is only with planning that adequate preparations can be made for the future and such planning should set goals that span at least 30 years. In addition, although public opinion will change as the Government makes progress, unless major problems have arisen, there is no need to carry out any review afresh. Each Government should follow the long-term directions charted by previous Governments as far as possible and continue to take them forward. At the same time, fine tuning should be done having regard to the prevailing circumstances. Hong Kong's development faces many difficulties. The Government should try to think from a macro perspective to see how its actual ability in administration can be improved. If all problems are eventually only referred to one person for decision making, the entire policy making process would be quite slow and the power would be overly concentrated in the hands of one person and rests with this person, so of course, this is an unhealthy situation. At the same time, the time and energy of human beings are indeed limited rather than boundless. Therefore, the most important thing is to carry out planning properly and the division of labour among various departments would come naturally. Take housing as an example, I believe that as the present Long Term Housing Strategy only lays down the housing policy for the next decade, it is totally insufficient to cope with the demand reflected by the Waiting List for public rental housing, as the number of applications has broken through the 260 000 mark. This has not factored in the planned flat production target that could not be attained due to other uncertainties that delayed construction projects. Therefore, the planning on housing should set goals that span at least 30 years and even as land is being sought, an elderly-friendly approach should be adopted in urban planning and building construction. For this reason, various departments, for example, the Labour and Welfare Bureau, should also work in collaboration to ensure that various types of people can have a dwelling place in the future. Of course, the matter of the utmost importance in the Policy Address this year is constitutional development in Hong Kong. The Policy Address talks about constitutional development right from the beginning, a major departure from last year, as mention of this was made only close to the end. It can thus be seen how great the importance attached by the Government to constitutional development is. However, this year, the public is only reminded mechanically


6589

of the need for constitutional development to follow the decision of the National People's Congress (NPC) and the Basic Law, so that the power of this small circle called the Nominating Committee to screen candidates can be retained. For this reason, we really cannot have any optimism about the passage of the constitutional reform proposal. The Umbrella Movement last year demonstrated clearly what the public want. However, it can be seen in the Policy Address that the Government has not shown any respect for such public opinion and it is bent on having its way. When facing the queries of the public, it cites the decision of the NPC and Basic Law to fend off the flaks. In fact, the Government also knows that it lacks sound justifications, or else it would not tell the public to "pocket it first". I demand that the Government make a submission to the NPC to ask it to withdraw the 31 August Decision made last year and reactivate the "Five-step Process" of constitutional reform, so as to take a correct step in the history of Hong Kong. Lastly, President, to sum up the Policy Address this year, it can be regarded as devoid of novelty and many of the ideas could be found in the policy address last year, or it just maintains the existing policies. This is just new wine in an old bottle and there is not any idea or policy planning, so this is truly disappointing. Although the Policy Address points out that there is now a host of opportunities before us, what I can see is the Government staying in the same old rut and missing reform opportunities. The Government keeps saying that we have to make choices but what I can see is the Government being dilatory and disregarding public opinions. The Government stresses that democracy has to be taken forward but what we find in reality is the Government shrinking back, evading public opinions and violating public justice. For this reason, I have proposed an amendment to express my regrets and support negativing the Motion of Thanks. I also strongly demand that from now on, the Government do a proper job of planning in various aspects instead of treating the symptoms but not getting to the root of the problem, patching up only when it finds problems. What it needs to do is to care about the needs of the people actively and implement universal retirement protection. President, I so submit.


MISS CHAN YUEN-HAN (in Cantonese): President, I think I am greatly inspired by the remarks made by Secretary Paul CHAN just now. I have made a lot of efforts to follow up the planning work of the past 20 years and examine the present problem of the Government, that is, why the Government has met so many objections during the planning and development processes which have given rise to disputes in society, including the views expressed by a number of people in this regard during the Occupy Central action. Just now he said that even a veteran Member did not understand what the Government did. I do not mind him making such a comment. Why? Because what we think is exactly the views in the community. What I do mind is ― perhaps I need to criticize the Secretary sharply ― is he actually clear about the problems we are discussing? Has he summed up the problems arisen from the whole planned development? Has he ever considered that in the development process, he seemed to shovel away our original mode of economy completely as though he was operating a bulldozer? Land is important. It is the most important resource in social planning as a whole. If the Secretary listens to the views in the community in such a way, how is he going to lead the Development Bureau in developing Hong Kong? President, I do not mind other people's criticisms. I am often criticized by other people. Nevertheless, regarding this Secretary who is given charge of such an important task in Hong Kong, I mind about the attitude held by him. President, owing to the time constraint, I would like to focus my discussion on one point, which is retirement protection. Recently, I have watched a South Korean television programme. What is its title? It has an interesting title called "Grandpas over Flowers". The programme is about a group of elderly people who travel here and there wildly in retirement. A broadcaster in China has paid for the copyright of this programme to borrow its concept. Europe has also bought its concept in a television programme called "Better Later than Never". That means it is better having something than waiting. In other words, it does not matter if something comes late. What matters most is that it comes eventually. This is a suitable description of retirement protection today. In my view, to enable the elderly to go backpacking here and there happily, there must be some strong factors supporting it, including good health, financial strength and property assets which make them carefree. Otherwise, how can they travel everywhere and have fun? Let us take a look at the Government's


6591

efforts in retirement protection. First of all, I make my positive and direct commendation of the Government for its willingness to earmark $50 billion for retirement protection. I have a high opinion on this. However, since the Government intends to evade this issue, it looks like a missile with no guidance, having no idea what the target is. Of course, I later took a closer look. Maybe the Government merely wants to make some minor repairs. It may be so, I do not know. In my opinion, if the Government finds it difficult to make any decision at the moment on the grounds that all along, there have been both support and objection in society, such a view of the Government is outdated. The discussion on retirement protection started as early as some 30 years ago. Whenever it was brought up by the Government or the community, there would be such comments like, where does the money come from? Why do I need to make contributions? Why should there be a means test? There are always these questions. They are there all the time. When we face the industrial and business sectors as well as academics and the labour sector, they all have their own views on these questions. As such, what should be done? These questions have lingered over the past 30 years. If the Government still does not resolve them now, I wonder how the Government can live up to the expectations of our next generation. Frankly speaking, we, including the Secretary ― needless to talk about the Secretary, whose life is free from worries ― that is, we in this generation are okay. The question is, what about the next generation? When the population ages, what if the people in employment cannot afford too many welfare expenditures? The Government has not considered this point at all. As a matter of fact, when the Government engaged Prof Nelson CHOW to conduct a study, we were very happy. Prof CHOW was very pleased to do it, and he completed the study report seriously and meticulously. Finally, when he put forward the proposal, those including business groups and the Hong Kong Federation of Trade Unions (FTU) … At that time I, who represented the FTU, already stated that we should not have any more disagreement or bother about other things. We should entirely focus our development on the proposal made by Prof Nelson CHOW and jointly solve the problem which has been stalled and remained unsolved for decades. Otherwise, we would let down the elderly now and our next generation in the future.


Hence, what I would like to say is, if the Secretary wishes to forge a consensus, even if he tries to work it out for 30 more years, during which he becomes a great-great-great-grandfather, frankly speaking, he may still be unable to make it. Indeed, how can the problem be fixed so that I may live like the elderly in "Grandpas over Flowers"? President, I think the Government should not delay any further. It is meaningless to delay any further. It should earnestly put forward a full proposal. I would like to warn the Government that if we still fail to make good preparations for retirement protection despite the adequate and prosperous conditions we enjoy today, should the conditions take a turn for the worse later, the Government will have to face an even bigger expenditure on Comprehensive Social Security Assistance which will be borne by every member of the public in the territory. President, once again, I expect the current-term Government to stage a good show for us this time and really put forward a proposal to resolve the matter of retirement protection. President, I so submit. DR HELENA WONG (in Cantonese): President, food safety is a grave concern to citizens, so I wish to talk about this topic, too. Last year in Taiwan, edible oil was polluted by waste oil, bringing a "food storm" to both Hong Kong and Taiwan. Now the incident has slightly calmed down but the Government has to consult the public as soon as possible to formulate ways of regulation in order to ensure the quality of edible oil so that people can feel safe consuming it. I suggest improving the regulation in three aspects, namely: first, to immediately establish a registration system of waste oil recyclers such that restaurants can hand over waste oil only to recognized recyclers which have put in place a tracking mechanism to eliminate the chance of undesirable parties reusing waste oil in the food chain; second, to add identifiable elements to waste oil, such as colours or special smells, to allow consumers or the industry easy identification of inedible oil; and third, to strictly control the import, export and re-export of waste oil, in particular transaction records must be kept for the Government to trace the whereabouts of waste oil in order to prevent it from re-entering the food chain. I hope the Government can expedite the related work.


6593

Moreover, I have also noticed that in the policy agenda of this Policy Address, the Government has accepted a suggestion made by the Democratic Party, which also responded to the Husi Incident in which McDonald's used expired food ingredients. The Government knows that we and the public are very much concerned about the safety of imported cooked meat and whether an effective control mechanism is in place. We hope the Food and Health Bureau can expeditiously conduct consultation and relevant legislative work. However, in terms of food safety, we had read the Policy Address in full but did not see the Government has any plan to deal with the problem of heavy metal content in food. Last Wednesday, as I did not see this issue being addressed in the Policy Address, I asked an oral question whether the law regulating the content of heavy metals in food was outdated and whether the Government had any plans to revise the law. At the time (last week) Secretary Dr KO Wing-man disclosed that the Government had planned to initiate amendment of the Food Adulteration (Metallic Contamination) Regulations (the Regulations), and had started some preparatory work. Consultation on the Regulations will be carried out this year. We hope the Government can speed up the work in this regard. The current Regulations have been in use for over 30 years. Why have I particularly raised this point? Actually many Members or citizens do not really know what harms food containing heavy metals does to our body. The existing Regulations are completely divorced from international standards. The standards for maximum permitted concentration of certain metals present in specified foods are far laxer than the relevant standards set by the Codex Alimentarious Commission. For example, the maximum permitted concentration of lead as prescribed in the Regulations is 6 mg per kg, which is much higher than the international standard of 0.1 mg per kg. In other words, the Hong Kong standard is 60 times in excess of the international one. We are using an outdated gauge to measure. Even if the Centre for Food Safety (CFS) indicated that the heavy metal content in certain foods has not exceeded the Hong Kong standard, it is indeed already 60 times above the international standard. It is most horrifying. I have no idea why the Government can tolerate this for 30 years without keeping abreast of the times to review whether the measurement of food safety has become divorced from international norms. Even the Mainland or Taiwan would not use such a set of outdated standards. It is entirely unacceptable to the people of Hong Kong.


Some say, "Heavy metals in food are above the limit. Whether we eat it or not eat it, either way we are doomed. Whatever!" Honestly, does everyone know what harms an excessive amount of lead above the standard does to the human body? It can cause premature birth, affect the growth of cerebral nerves in children as well as cardiovascular and kidney functions. President, therefore I hope the Government can speed up the amendment of the law without further procrastination. The Community Food Watch of the Democratic Party tested some vegetables and mushroom samples at the beginning of this year and discovered that the heavy metal content in some samples exceeded the standards. Subsequently we had met with the CFS officials. We requested the Food and Health Bureau to strengthen the deployment of manpower to visit the Mainland and it is imperative to conduct surprise inspections at vegetable farms which supply vegetables to Hong Kong, instead of waiting for the Mainland government units to arrange for visits. Without a surprise inspection mechanism, the Mainland Authorities will "beautify" these vegetable farms before inspection and it is impossible to ascertain whether the water and soil of the vegetable farms are contaminated. Moreover, at the panel I had also requested the Secretary to arrange for Members to travel to the Mainland to inspect these vegetable farms and pig farms supplying produce to Hong Kong. Sadly the authorities could not make such arrangements. We are also aware that an Amendment Ordinance about pesticide was passed on 1 August last year. Since then the CFS has been making great efforts in sample testing vegetables and has gradually discovered many vegetables supplied by the Mainland and occasionally by foreign countries contained pesticide, meaning the content is above the standards. Among them the pesticide content in a sample of green string beans exceeded the standards by 44 times. President, is it not alarming? As a result, we hope the CFS can strengthen sampling inspections, but at the same time we really need to think about why vegetables containing excessive pesticide can so easily pass the test? Some vegetables found to contain excessive pesticide by the CFS or the Vegetable Marketing Organization came from Mainland vegetable farms which are unknown and unregistered. What channels did these vegetables go through to enter Hong Kong and become a dish on our table? Accordingly, I think the Food and Environmental Hygiene Department (FEHD) or Food and Health Bureau should consider how to improve


6595

the vegetable screening mechanism conducted at the Man Kam To Food Control Office, and study together with the Custom and Excise Department and the Police how to facilitate the mechanism to better guard the gate. Certainly, the crucial part is we can send our officials to the Mainland to gain understanding of the situations. I had tested some mushrooms bought in Hung Hom and found out that they contained heavy metals. Then I met with officials of the CFS and requested the Government to carry out a research study on mushroom to examine its heavy metal content. After making such a call twice, I was glad to see that the CFS released the test results of dried mushrooms yesterday. Two dried mushroom samples were detected with cadmium at levels exceeding the limit; they are Wai Yuen Tong dried mushroom and First Edible Nest dried mushroom, which are both from the Mainland. These tests are very important because ordinary people, for example the Democratic Party, are very poor and cannot afford to conduct all kinds of case studies. It is what the Government should do. I hope the Government can take a more active approach to following up these matters, because at Chinese New Year a lot of people like to make braised mushrooms at home or buy one or two boxes as gifts. Regarding food that people consume often, whether it is vegetables, mushroom, meat or cooked food, we hope the Government can allocate appropriate resources to the FEHD and CFS to better guard the gate of food safety. Talking about avian flu, everyone is concerned about whether influenza A and avian flu will attack Hong Kong on two fronts. Apart from strengthening the timely release of information on influenza A, to prevent avian flu, I think the Government should seriously consider permanently terminating the import of chicken from the Mainland and only preserving chicken farms in Hong Kong to supply the local market for full self-sufficiency. The reason is not that I personally have any interest in the industry. I do not know any chicken farmers and have no investment in chicken farming at all. I make this suggestion because I have no conflict of interest. On the one hand we can support the development of local agriculture. On the other hand, regarding the transport of live chickens across the border, the Mainland standards are beyond our control. How frequent can Hong Kong officials inspect the Mainland chicken farms? As a matter of fact, avian flu remains rampant on the Mainland and will enter its peak soon. Many Mainland cities have stopped the sale of live chickens. The condition in Guangdong is pretty serious too. Why do we take such a big risk to import live chickens from the Mainland?


In addition, if live chickens in the Mainland contract diseases, live chickens in Hong Kong will be infected or affected as well, rendering their sale impossible. There is a lack of premises for the separation and wholesale of live chickens in Hong Kong. Currently the sole location is the Cheung Sha Wan Temporary Wholesale Poultry Market, whereas the Ta Kwu Ling Checkpoint is set up only as a temporary measure. Residents in Cheung Sha Wan used to not hold any disagreement to the Temporary Wholesale Poultry Market located in the vicinity as there were not so many people living there. But the district has become one of the "four little dragons", where there is a heavy concentration of middle-class residents. Why is the wholesale market still located in the district? That is why I think the Government, instead of spending money to hire a consultant to do a research report and dragging on this matter for more than 10 years since 1997 without any decision made, should make up its mind expeditiously in order to first protect the local chicken farming industry and second, to reduce the chance of avian flu from entering Hong Kong via imported live chickens from the Mainland. President, after talking a lot about food, I would also like to talk about gender issues. I have noticed that the Policy Address has made very little mention of women and gender issues. But I welcome the Government having accepted the long-time proposal of the Democratic Party to adopt the Gender Mainstreaming Checklist across the board in all bureaux and departments. In the past, only the Labour and Welfare Bureau selected some departments to use the Gender Mainstreaming Checklist. I think it is good that the practice can be extended to all departments. This commands commendation. But my biggest worry is that officials in various departments may not understand how to use the checklist after they are provided with it. This is another issue. Therefore, I believe the key remains in providing civil servants, people-in-charge at bureau or department levels and Gender Focal Points with adequate training on gender sensitivity. Furthermore, an even more crucial task concerns the Census and Statistics Department. Without any detailed and meticulous statistics and analysis of gender, it is impossible for all departments to make gender evaluation when designing services and devising laws and any services to determine whether the services will aggravate or alleviate gender inequality. Therefore, we hope the Government can invest resources in gender statistics to collect comprehensive and exhaustive gender data for the use of all departments and citizens.


6597

President, I am particularly concerned about child care services. Since the Secretary issued the Report of the Task Force on Population Policy, the message we have received from the Government is that there is a need to release women labour force and hence there is consideration to increase child care services. However, I regard child care service as a citizen's right. And certainly releasing women labour force is the concern of some women. But we think that the measures proposed in the Policy Address are not adequate to improve the existing child care services to meet the needs of people. I believe the job which needs to be done properly in the 18 districts now is for the Government to make very detailed planning and identify the needs of different districts for various types of child care services and collect data on supply, shortage and the number of people on the waiting list. If such planning is not properly done, it is impossible to satisfy the needs of women or families in the districts for child care services. President, I so submit. DR KWOK KA-KI (in Cantonese): President, as we are debating the healthcare policies here, I would like to tell Members that as at midnight last night, 247 people in total were admitted to the intensive care unit because of influenza and the death toll was 164. History keeps on repeating itself and most unfortunately, it has again repeated in winter this year. When we are here discussing how the Government should draw up plans for the future healthcare services and when the Government is pressing ahead with the Voluntary Health Insurance Scheme (VHIS) in full steam, we seem to have found that many loopholes and shortcomings actually still exist. As Members may have noticed, the VHIS aims to encourage and assist the public to receive healthcare services in the future through insurance. But as we all understand, all places in the world or the World Health Organization or even any developed country has made it very clear that the greatest challenge they now face is not about channelling resources, efforts and time to tertiary healthcare services. What we need to do is to dedicate efforts and resources to primary and secondary services, namely, preventive medicine and primary care. However, if we take a closer look at the Policy Address this year, we will find that all these have fallen through.


As we can see from this serious influenza outbreak, we are different from other Asian countries in that the vaccination rate of all Hong Kong people is 14% and in respect of the high-risk groups, the rate is 40% for elderly aged above 65. At the same time, we have also seen an influenza epidemic taking place in Taiwan, and the number of deaths as at last week was three, compared to over 140 in Hong Kong at the time. According to the statistics in Taiwan, their vaccination rate is close to 80%. This is precisely an area that has been neglected and handled erroneously over the years in our healthcare policies. Whether in respect of grass-roots women, such as women health centres or elderly health centres, or grass-roots students, such as general surveys on the needs of students with special learning disabilities, what the Government has done is far from adequate. Do not think that it means we are doing a very good job in respect of hospitals. Some time ago, patients were required to wait for 24 hours at the Tuen Mun Hospital, and the bed occupancy rate at the Queen Elizabeth Hospital was as high as 122%. The Government will certainly tell Members that there will be many new hospitals in the future, including the Tin Shui Wai Hospital, Kai Tak Hospital, and so on. But we must not be misled by these figures. In 2014, the bed-population ratio was 3.79 beds per thousand population; and by 2021, even if we factor in the number of additional beds to be provided by the Government, the ratio will be down to 3.72 beds and it will further drop to 3.59 beds in 2026. As Members all know, in the 1980s, there was a Medical Development Advisory Committee. As the former Government or the past colonial Government stated very clearly, the target was 4.2 beds per thousand population. Were Dr Harry FANG still alive and when he read these figures and learnt that the Government has not only failed to make any improvement over the last few decades but has even retrogressed, I believe he would certainly feel very depressed. As we all know, the emergency admission rate among elderly aged above 65 is eight times higher than that of people under 65 years of age. This is the figure provided by the Hospital Authority. Therefore, based on the actual demand for hospital beds, a shortage of 4 700 hospital beds is envisaged in 2021; and by 2026, if calculation is made on this basis, there will be a shortage of 10 000 hospital beds. President, when we think that we can be complacent, that our death rate of women or infants is comparatively low and that we can talk about these proudly, our healthcare system is, most unfortunately, riddled with problems.


6599

I have this one last point. The Government said this year that it would further provide dental service for the elderly. To me, this is even more saddening because the Government has proposed to expand its dental service which has long been criticized to cover elderly aged over 80. The average life expectancy of males in Hong Kong is 81.6 years whereas that of females is about 86 years. In other words, a man in Hong Kong may have the luck to be cared for by the Government and to be provided with this service through the Community Care Fund, enjoying dental service just once and receiving this gift from the Government before he passed away. The Government has indeed hurt our feelings very badly. I so submit. Thank you, President. MR STEVEN HO (in Cantonese): President, on behalf of the Democratic Alliance for the Betterment and Progress of Hong Kong (DAB), I speak on policies relating to food safety, environmental hygiene and the agriculture and fisheries industry in the Policy Address. President, a new year has just begun, yet many food establishments and shops have taken the lead or stolen the start to increase prices. The public will find everything expensive when they go shopping. It is in stark contrast to the situation in public markets, where the Government is the principal landlord. Since stall tenants have benefited from the rental freeze and rent concession policies over the years, they can set cheaper prices for their goods to stimulate the turnover rate, hoping they can make a small profit from the monstrous sales despite the low profit margin. In fact, stall tenants are not the only party to benefit, for residents living in the vicinity of these public markets have also benefited. Since most of these residents are grassroots, they consider public markets a good place to buy fresh food and groceries. More importantly, they can make frequent visits to these markets to chat with their friends and pass time, establishing a relatively strong bonding. The Government and the Central Government often mention the establishment of a harmonious society, this is thus an indispensable link. In these public markets, small tenants are running an array of businesses, and they provide many job opportunities to the grassroots. However, in recent years, market tenants have to face increasing operating costs and intensifying competition from supermarkets and large-scale chain stores. Their operation has


become increasingly difficult. We hope that the Government will allocate additional resources to improving the operating environment and speed up the enhancement projects of markets, such as replacement of walls, upgrading of drainage and ventilation systems, and so on. At the same time, the Government may consider and examine the feasibility of lowering the threshold for the installation of air conditioning, as well as the arrangement for paying air conditioning charges. I think there is room for discussion with the Government in these aspects. It is expected that with the enhancement of the conditions of these markets, more people, young people in particular, will be attracted to patronize them more frequently. Some time ago, the Food and Health Bureau engaged a consultancy to assist in developing proposals for improving the operating environment of public markets, which include reducing the number of stalls and altering the layout of existing stalls. The DAB is extremely concerned about this. We hope that in the course of enhancing public markets and adjusting rentals, the Government will communicate more with the traders. It is particularly so with the proposal of reducing the number of stalls which I have just mentioned, for I believe this project will not be an easy task. Will the reduction in stall number result in the moving out of any stall owners? In the future planning of new towns, particularly for new towns to be established in the North East New Territories, will the Government consider adopting new approaches for the new markets, so that when tenants of existing markets see improvement in the operating environment, they will consider accepting the change? I think this approach may minimize conflicts. As for food safety, many incidents happened last year. The two relatively significant food incidents were the Shanghai Husi incident and the poor-quality lard oil incident of Taiwan. They have shattered the public confidence in the food safety monitoring system of Hong Kong. Moreover, upon the implementation of the regulations on pesticides residues in food, the supply and food safety of vegetables imported from the Mainland have become a cause of concern to some members in society. Regarding the Shanghai Husi incident I mentioned earlier, I seldom patronize the food establishments involved before the incident was uncovered. On the contrary, after the outbreak of the incident, I do patronize it. I think the persons concerned will usually be particularly cautious after such incidents, so it may be safer to patronize them at that time. The incident has prompted them to change


6601

their operating practice, and they have become more careful in every aspect. Yet do we want to see that food establishments will only pay attention to food safety after such incidents? No. The Government may work harder in this respect. It should pay more attention to the safety of other daily necessities of the public, which we usually refer to as firewood, rice, cooking oil, salt, soy sauce, vinegar and tea, and conduct more checks. A Member has raised concern about food like dried mushrooms and dried scallops earlier. I certainly agree that these items warrant attention, yet I think we must deal with the essential items first. The Government has planned to step up regulation of the safety of edible oil and the recycling of used cooking oil, increase the number of food samples taken at the import, wholesale and retail levels for testing and expand the scope of food safety tests done by the Government Laboratory to support new testing items introduced for stepping up regulation of food. We strongly welcome such measures. In fact, I have mentioned other supporting measures and expressed my views on communication with the public earlier. We hope the Government will raise the standard and contingency response capacity of food safety testing. It should also reinforce its communication and co-ordination with the industry and make proactive efforts in enhancing the food safety monitoring regime of Hong Kong and the Food Safety Ordinance. Yet, at the same time, it should observe carefully whether such measures will bring about negative impacts on food prices and supply. For food safety will after all be meaningless if there is a shortage of supply. Earlier on, I heard a Member ask whether spot checks would be carried out in the Mainland. Does it mean checking the plants in the Mainland? I should not have discussed this issue in this session, for this falls under the scope of politics. If departments of Hong Kong conduct spot checks on Mainland plants according to the Food Safety Ordinance and collect food samples for testing, what can they do when the food is tested to be problematic? Can they actually close the plant? Besides, can the Food Safety Ordinance of Hong Kong be invoked in the Mainland? If yes, by the same token, will laws of the Mainland be invoked Hong Kong? This will affect the foundation of "one country, two systems". Therefore, Members must consider different aspects in expressing their opinions, and there are areas which should not be touched. We may co-operate with other regions in food safety and effect co-ordination through feasible approaches, yet we should by all means avoid escalating the issue to the political level, for it is impracticable.


Now, I will talk about columbaria. Obviously, there is a serious shortage of public columbaria. On the other hand, private columbaria have been operating illegally for a long time, causing serious nuisances to residents, whereas the public who have purchased illegal niches can hardly get any protection. In the face of the increasingly buoyant demand for columbaria of the public, the Government has actively identified sites in various districts to increase the supply of public columbarium niches and examined ways to tighten the regulation of private columbaria. At present, columbaria are divided into public and private operation. However, the Government has not yet made any long-term planning on the ratio and positioning of public and private columbaria, which means it has not found out the percentage of population which will use public columbaria and the percentage which will afford buying private columbarium niches nearer to the urban areas. But since the Government has no planning, the supply of the two sources can hardly be co-ordinated, thus creating uncertainties in supply. Therefore, the Government should make long-term market planning for public and private columbaria to ensure stable supply. At the same time, we consider that the Government should draw reference from practices adopted by many overseas regions of introducing a community compensation mechanism. According to such practices, the construction or expansion of new columbaria, public or private, should be complemented by environmental improvement proposals catering for the needs of the neighbouring communities, such as beautification and greening of living environment and additional community facilities. Society should also discuss whether local residents should be accorded priority in the allocation of niches in public columbaria within their districts. Why should the authorities adopt such practices? Concerning the establishment of public or private columbaria in a certain district, the opposition of local residents may not carry much weight ― the establishment of public columbaria is certainly under better control ― for this is after all an issue concerning Hong Kong as a whole, as in the case of the expansion of the three landfills and the construction of an incinerator. However, after the establishment of columbaria, the authorities must offer psychological compensation to show understanding for the residents as follow-up. More often than not, the Government will only tender apologies and find excuses to shirk its responsibility in handling those problems. Residents are often told to seek assistance from the Home Affairs Bureau or the Labour and Welfare Bureau. In fact, the Government may appoint an official of a higher rank to link up the several Policy Bureux to address existing problems. Such practices will at least


6603

let the public feel more comfortable, so that when the Government puts forth specific views, they will not be seized by their presumptions, and will on the contrary be more rational in handling these controversial issues. As for the agriculture and fisheries industry, first of all, I would like to thank the Chief Executive and the SAR Government for including the agriculture and fisheries industry in the Policy Address for three years in a row with "non-negative messages". In the first year, it introduced the Sustainable Fisheries Development Fund amounting to $500 million. In the second year, it announced the plan to conduct a consultation on the agricultural industry. In the third year, it launched the consultation, and the consultation is still ongoing. I understand that the successful implementation of a policy cannot be achieved overnight, yet the performance of the Government has all along been very poor. I am not referring to the current-term Government, for the performance in the past 20 years, including the time under the British-Hong Kong Government, had been undesirable. I am young, so I cannot pursue the former terms of Government for their poor performance, yet I can press the current-term Government, so I think the Government will have a hard time. No matter how, the consultation on the New Agricultural Policy is a starting point for the agriculture and fisheries industry, even though I have heard negative views expressed by different people. What are some of the negative views? For instance, the authorities have not included the livestock industry in the consultation. It is very true. The trade asked me whether they were not regarded as part of the agricultural industry. They of course are part of the agricultural industry, are they not? As for all the criticisms and views expressed, I will mention them in the public consultation on the New Agricultural Policy for discussion. I must raise a few points here, for there is a number of questions which definitely should not be evaded. The Government must formulate long-term and even inter-departmental policies in these aspects. First, it is about the livestock industry which I mentioned just now. In fact, I often talk about the sustainable development of the livestock industry. Take live chickens as an example. The trade expressed that the relocation of chicken farms is impossible. Yet government officials tell them that it is feasible and they only need to follow the relocation guidelines. The point is that no place in Hong Kong can fulfil all the requirements set out in the relocation guidelines, so the guidelines are useless. Development is necessary to a society. Secretary Paul CHAN needs to identify sites for the construction of flats or planning, such as in the North East New Territories, Yuen Long South or Hung Shui Kiu, and so on, setting a specified


percentage of sites for housing and another percentage for farming, and so on. The authorities may resume sites of livestock farms during land resumption exercises. In that case, do the authorities mean to force these farms to close down? It is unacceptable. Has the Government ever considered the sustainable development of these farms? Some Members stated earlier that it was necessary for Hong Kong to protect its live chicken industry. The existing practice is extremely unfair to them. Hence, the Government must think of a brand new approach, including a similar approach adopted by Singapore. Singapore also has livestock farms, how do they deal with the conflicts between the public and the livestock industry? Some people say that live chickens kept in Hong Kong are mainly for consumption, yet chickens in Singapore are mainly raised for their eggs. If so, will the authorities guide and encourage more farmers to raise chickens for eggs? There is also the concern about earning a living. If the diet of the public can be changed to consume more local eggs, farmers may maintain a living. I think further studies can be carried out in this respect. Second, it is about the sustainable development of the fisheries industry. Certainly, in the first year, the Government introduced the Sustainable Fisheries Development Fund amounting to $500 million. Yet this measure might have been launched in response to the trawling ban in Hong Kong waters implemented in 2012, bringing the issue to a higher level that entailed spending on studies of new fisheries projects. Nonetheless, the Government has not maintained frequent communication with the Administration of Ocean and Fisheries of the Mainland or the State Oceanic Administration over the years, and the minimal communication carried out has not covered the mutual support and integrated development of the fisheries industries of the two places. I think there is inadequacy in this aspect. As for the agricultural policy, it has been taken forward and the consultation has been carried out. Will the authorities introduce a new set of policy on the sustainable development of the fisheries industry? I think the Government must work on this. Third, it is about the plight of workers engaging in the agriculture and fisheries industry. Over the years, these workers have no way to take out insurance, and their lives are left to fate. Every year, when the typhoon season comes, I will become anxious. I will go visiting these people after typhoons or after the red or black rainstorm warnings to check out the loss of crops they suffered. As the French word "déjà vu" describes, it is so familiar as I must do it every year. In fact, is there anything we can do to reduce the loss in this aspect? Or is it possible to offer some compensation for their loss? To those engaging in


6605

farming, it takes two months to grow vegetables. It will take them 21 days even for the shortest period of water culture vegetables, and for traditional farming, it will take two months before they can harvest. If a typhoon strikes right before the harvest, all the crops may be destroyed. The Government has put in place a mechanism to provide emergency relief to them, giving them a few hundred dollars for purchasing seeds and fertilizers. But it is impracticable. They have spent a few months and efforts to grow the crops, and if they have to spend another two months before getting the harvest, how can they earn a living? It seems that not much can be done in terms of insurance. Besides, there may be problems involving development, which is discussed in the previous session. Some owners may not use their sites for farming after purchasing the land. They may surround their sites with wire mesh and the sites are left to fill with weeds. On the other hand, the Government has failed to make long-term planning on the direction for irrigation. Members may look at the case of Japan, where there is the Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries, and in the case of the Mainland, the Ministry of Agriculture is responsible for the regulation of irrigation. These authorities will carry out studies to examine whether the practice adopted on a certain site will affect the water supply of its neighbouring sites and obstruct the irrigation of other sites. However, this is not a standard practice in Hong Kong, and such studies may be conducted on certain occasions but not on others. I have seen a case where the water gate was surrounded by wire mesh. Before that, farmers needed only walk five minutes to open or close the water gate, but after the water gate was blocked, farmers had to make a detour of a 45-minute walk to another water gate. In fact, the Government should inform the owner of the arrangement for maintaining water supply before the owner surrounds the site or at the sale of the site. Water resource is a public asset, so it should not be made a private possession by enclosing a certain site. The Government must done something to address this issue. This is the third point. The fourth point is about the concern expressed by some members of the public about the New Agricultural Policy, that is, how quality farm sites outside the Agricultural Park (Agri-Park) should be handled and protected? Many people have asked the Government, "Do you mean to settle the issue by simply asking all farmers in the New Territories to move into the Agri-Park?" The Government has explained a number of times that it is not the case, and that many other issues have to be addressed. However, I am afraid Secretary Dr KO Wing-man may not have full control over the issue and may not address it within the purview of his Policy Bureau, for the issue after all involves the purview of


the Development Bureau. In what ways can these 4 000 hectares of quality farmland be protected, so that it will not be used for housing purpose by people with ulterior motives? Certainly, housing is an important concern, yet a certain amount of agricultural sites must be kept, so that original owners may pursue sustainable development of the agricultural industry. The Government cannot evade the several problems just mentioned. (THE PRESIDENT'S DEPUTY, MR ANDREW LEUNG, took the Chair) Therefore, I hope the Government will carry out consultation on the several points just mentioned, and more so, it should escalate these issues to a higher level and deal with them. Some time ago, a senior told me that the period before a man leave this world can be divided into three stages. At the first stage, his life deteriorates yearly; at the second stage, it deteriorates monthly, and at the third stage, it deteriorates daily. Now, I think my health is deteriorating yearly. Having said that, I feel content with the present stage for I still have a dozen to 20 years to live. However, when a person reaches the stage where his health deteriorates monthly, it will be unacceptable that no additional effort is made to maintain his health. There may be some difference between industries and life. However, I think the comparison is applicable to many aspects in Hong Kong. What problems do I think fit the comparison? Housing is a case in point. Back then, we had done nothing but allowed the Government to stop the construction of Home Ownership Scheme flats and public housing flats. When we watch the news reports on television today, reports on the increase in property price are no longer based on the comparison on a yearly basis but increases in percentage points on a monthly basis. The problem is very serious. As such, we are now making strenuous efforts to identify sites. Regarding the agriculture and fisheries industry, I will still say that the industry is at a stage of yearly deterioration due to certain measures implemented by the Government currently. In other words, the industry is at a relatively early stage. Let me take elderly care services as another example, and will Secretary Matthew CHEUNG please pay attention to this. I do a lot of work at the district level. Perhaps I am not quite popular now, and no one recognizes me when I walk around to conduct inspections. I had played chess with an old man, chatted with a female lift operator and kids, and they told me that three elderly homes in


6607

Yuen Long had closed down. Later, when I chatted with the social workers, they told me that they all had to rush to those elderly homes to do registration for the elderly and relocate them to different elderly homes. Buddy, places in other elderly homes may also be filled up. Secretary, I am not the speaker for this policy area and I am not at all well versed in these issues, yet what I have heard in the district makes me aware that the problem is worsening. There were three elderly homes closing down in six months, and I think several hundreds of elderly residents were affected. Does the Secretary consider the problem serious? Yet, I am only referring to the situation in an individual district. Yuen Long will be a key area for future land development to the Government, and I think these incidents will continue to happen. Therefore, even though I am not responsible for welfare in the DAB, I hope Secretary Matthew CHEUNG will pay attention to these aspects. In the days ahead, I do not wish to see any industry in Hong Kong falling into the stage of monthly deterioration or daily deterioration. Deputy President, I so submit. MR TOMMY CHEUNG (in Cantonese): Deputy President, the consultancy study on improving the operating environment of public markets commissioned by the Government has been completed. The study has given a clear positioning to public markets and made many improvement recommendations. However, when I heard the Chief Executive state in the Policy Address that a trial run would be first conducted in representative markets, I became worried that the authorities would be taking things slow again. I understand that many recommendations made by the consultant involve considerable changes and also renovation takes time. But improvement to the operating environment of public markets has been discussed for a fairly long time and it has gained almost unanimous support across political parties and groupings in the Legislative Council in the last 10 years. We hope the authorities will implement as soon as possible the proposals over which a consensus has been reached, such as introduction of fresh air into and provision of air conditioning in markets, instead of being entangled over the question of whether there is an adequate percentage of supportive market stalls. We believe that if the authorities are willing to bear the air conditioning cost of the common areas, most stall operators will gladly lend it their support.


We have estimated that if the authorities are to renovate markets based on all the recommendations of the consultant, they have to make a stronger financial commitment. In this regard, I remind the Administration not to use this as an excuse to increase rents but proactively redeploy resources to facilitate the renovation. When the operating environment of markets has been improved, more people will visit them, and when tenants enjoy more business, even if the Government increases the rents they will be reluctant to move out, nor will they oppose it. Deputy President, right now the rents are high and the authorities should actively vacate more operating space for small businesses so as to stimulate the local community economy and create more local employment opportunities. Therefore, I have often expressed that, apart from speedily renovating public markets, the Government should set up shopping malls or markets for small and medium enterprises and micro enterprises in areas where most grassroots populate, in order to challenge the monopoly of supermarkets or The Link REIT. As a matter of fact, in recent years the industry has been growing more and more disgruntled with the high operating costs as well as over-regulation, which have worsened the business environment. The most apparent example is that it has become increasingly difficult to apply for licences requiring the approval of the District Councils or consultation of the public. I have received many complaints from the industry about taking a lot of time to apply for a liquor licence as the Liquor Licensing Board has significantly tightened the licensing conditions. The industry has also expressed that it is extremely time-consuming to obtain the approval for open air cafes with a slim chance of success. Deputy President, when the Government just adheres to populism and people tend to hop onto the bandwagon, it is getting harder and harder for small businesses to survive. I urge the authorities to not forget the role of maintaining a balance: it should assume the responsibility of promoting the economy and securing jobs in addition to the functions of regulation and monitoring. Therefore, the authorities should strive to remove obstacles for small businesses by streamlining the application procedures of various licences (A phone rang in the Chamber) … Are they telling me to call it a day? Oh, it is Mr Steven HO. … By streamlining the application procedures of various licences, such as allowing outside seating accommodation permission to be attached to the provisional restaurant licence.


6609

Deputy President, Mr Steven HO is leaving with his phone. The Food and Hygiene Bureau has mentioned in the consultation paper on the New Agricultural Policy that we need to promote the diversity of local food supply so as to reduce our reliance on imported food. I very much agree with it. We have had discussions on this topic at the Panel on Food Safety and Environmental Hygiene over the years. Sadly when I read the consultation paper I found that the authorities only talked about agriculture and have forgotten about the fisheries and live poultry industries. I would like to reiterate that our stringent and professional food monitoring and examination system has won a good reputation, thus providing a guarantee of quality and safety of our local food. Also we have had many years of experience of influenza prevention which have earned us more success compared to the Mainland and recently Taiwan and overseas. The authorities should not hastily give up the brand we have spent years building up and should formulate a forward-looking and long-term agricultural and fisheries policy to achieve modernization and high value-added development, thereby salvaging Hong Kong's reputation as the gourmet capital. Secretary, I wish to mention in passing that there have not been live squabs, geese and ducks for sale for a long time ― I mean geese, ducks and squabs, not chicken. I hope you can give a positive feedback about this. Otherwise, our good name as the gourmet capital will soon be replaced ― I think right now Guangzhou can pretty much replace us. For this reason, I hope the Secretary will stop wasting efforts discussing whether or not to phase out the live poultry trade. Instead the Government should actively seek a solution, such as looking for places at the border to set up quarantine camps for Mainland live chickens which will be allowed entry after the quarantine results are available. Or the Government can propose to the Mainland for the implementation of co-location arrangements in Shenzhen to lower the risk of cross-infection and avoid unnecessary loss. As regards Secretary Mathew CHEUNG's speech, I will take my time to express my views on matters related to his bureau in the fourth debate session tomorrow. Thank you, Deputy President. MR POON SIU-PING (in Cantonese): Deputy President, as the common saying goes, "There is no harm in using the same old trick as long as it works.". The Government pledged in 2008-2009 to set aside $50 billion from the fiscal reserves to support the implementation of the Voluntary Health Insurance Scheme


(VHIS). Time flies and we are stepping into the seventh year, but this sum of $50 billion remains intact and implementation is still nowhere in sight. This year's Policy Address again claims that the Financial Secretary has been asked to earmark $50 billion to provide for citizens' future needs after retirement, a situation which is almost identical to the financing of the VHIS. I do not subscribe to the statement that the sum of $50 billion serves to provide for future needs because in reality, the problems are right there before our eyes. Judging from past experience, I do not think that a mere sum of $50 billion without a specific direction and concrete timetable will make people feel the Government's sincerity and determination in taking forward retirement protection. Last August, Prof Nelson CHOW and his research team mapped out proposals in the report on the Future Development of Retirement Protection in Hong Kong. The Policy Address holds the view that there are divergent views on the issue in the community, and looks forward to rational and pragmatic discussions with a view to arriving at a community consensus. When the Government is determined to take forward policies, it will never wait for the community to arrive at a consensus. The discussion on universal retirement protection in society has lasted more than a decade. The key to whether universal retirement protection can be implemented in Hong Kong lies in the attitude of the Government. I expect the Government to drum up the courage as demonstrated in the Chief Executive's statement in the Policy Address that "The current-term Government is committed to putting an end to the long-standing shortage of land supply" when addressing the issue of people's retirement protection, break the bottleneck and resolve problems jointly with all sectors of the community, put forward and implement proposals for the detailed operation of retirement protection, and abolish the offsetting mechanism of MPF. At the end of last year, the Government published a consultation document on the VHIS, further presenting a proposal which was "not appealing enough but would be a pity if abandoned" for public consultation. Today, I am not going to dwell in detail on the proposals of the VHIS. But I must point out that the Government's proposals in the VHIS consultation do not appeal to those young people and adults aged below 40, while to those aged above 40, the insurance premium is high. A tax concession of about $400 will not be able to attract young people to join the VHIS. And to those high-risk individuals in the older age groups, the premium which often exceeds $10,000 is also discouraging. I think the current proposals in the Government's consultation document do not meet the expectations of the public at large.


6611

As to other policies on medical benefits, I can only describe them as a "patchy fix". One example is the elderly dental service. At present, more than 400 000 elderly persons are Old Age Living Allowance recipients, but the new initiative only benefits those aged above 80. The number of beneficiaries is too small. The existing annual amount of Elderly Health Care Voucher is $2,000 only, which is unable to meet the expensive costs of dental service. Another example is the $800 million earmarked for the introduction of Residential Care Service Voucher for the Elderly. Just as the Pilot Scheme on Community Care Service Voucher for the Elderly launched the year before last, these new initiatives will certainly benefit some people. But faced with the problem of an ageing population in Hong Kong, we must also conduct a comprehensive policy review. And instead of waiting indefinitely for the community to reach a consensus on universal retirement protection, we must put words into action. Deputy President, I so submit. MR CHRISTOPHER CHEUNG (in Cantonese): Deputy President, the current-term Government has all along attached top priority to poverty alleviation. After the Chief Executive took office, the first poverty line of Hong Kong was set in 2013. In the policy address last year, the Low-income Working Family Allowance (LIFA) was introduced to provide support for low-income families, particularly those with children, to plug the gaps in the welfare system. After the repeated filibusters staged by Members in the Finance Committee, the funding application was eventually passed last month. According to the announcement of the Government, the rising trend of poverty population in recent years was arrested in 2013, and the poverty population dropped to less than 1 million, that is, 970 000. Last year, the Government took bold actions in poverty alleviation. In addition to the introduction of the LIFA, it implemented a number of measures including allowances for grass-roots children and students in need in participating exchange programmes and hostel accommodation, and loans for undergraduate students, and so on. The authorities will continue working through the Community Care Fund (CCF) to implement eight new assistance programmes and incorporate seven original programmes into the Government's regular assistance programme. We hope that Members from the pan-democratic camp, who always claim to be


concerned about people's livelihood, will stop the filibuster, so that the implementation of these measures benefiting the public will not be delayed any further, for any delay will jeopardize the interest of the general public. One may say at a glance that the poverty alleviation measures and support for the disadvantaged proposed in the Policy Address this year are less comprehensive in comparison with those proposed last year. In fact, the Policy Address this year focuses on the enhancement and reinforcement of measures introduced last year, where improvement has been proposed to existing schemes like the Work Incentive Transport Subsidy Scheme and the Student Finance Assistance Scheme, and measures targeting the needs of persons with disabilities, the mentally ill and student with special education needs. One point should be noted, that is, the authorities are enhancing the supporting network. On the other hand, the CCF has helped introducing new pilot programmes. But in the absence of co-ordination among programmes, users may be confused and fail to get the suitable support. In view of this, the Government's proposal in the Policy Agenda to explore setting up a centralized platform to provide one-stop administrative service is indeed a pressing need. The unlawful Occupy Central incident last year switched the focus of society to the youth problem. In fact, the so-called youth problem should not be simplified to focus on one issue. Take the youths at risk whom I am concerned about as an example. They seem to be a group requiring special care from social workers, yet according to my personal experience, if we communicate with them sincerely, they are more than willing to share their ideas and experiences. More often than not, they just lack the confidence and motivation, which is usually linked with poverty and community support. I hope the Government will continue stepping up its work in this aspect. As for elderly care service, in tandem with population ageing, retirement protection has become the hottest topic in recent years, and it is proposed in the Policy Address that $50 billion be earmarked for retirement protection. Although the Commission on Poverty is studying the study report submitted by the research team led by Prof Nelson CHOW some time ago, the Business and Professional Alliance for Hong Kong (BPA) doubts the financial sustainability of a universal retirement protection scheme. In our view, further enhancement of the existing pillars under the social security system will be sufficient to provide protection to the elderly in need.


6613

I am more concerned about Hong Kong elderly living in the Mainland. With the increasing exchanges between Hong Kong and the Mainland, many elderly people of Hong Kong are living or are considering to live in the Mainland. Yet the existing welfare support offered by the authorities fail to cope with this trend. The existing Guangdong Scheme is only applicable to the "fruit grant", and the Government says it is examining the feasibility of expanding the scope to cover the Old Age Living Allowance but it has no plan to expand the scope of application of the scheme to other provinces. The BPA urges the Government to consider speeding up the process of lifting the relevant restrictions, so that elderly people living in the Mainland may enjoy equal welfare benefits. I would like to point out that there are around 1.2 million permanent residents in Hong Kong whose hometown is in Fujian. They may choose to settle in Fujian when they grow old. Yet by now, unlike the elderly settled in the Guangdong Province, these elderly people cannot collect their "fruit grant" direct in their place of settlement but have to return to Hong Kong and stay for a few months every year to maintain eligibility for the allowance. I have criticized the authorities for this unfair treatment. Regrettably, two years have passed, the authorities still turn a deaf ear to this request and no improvement has been made. Is this hard-heartedness a characteristic of administration of the current-term Government? I hope the Secretary will stop finding excuses and take actions immediately. He should introduce a "Fujian Scheme" at once to allow the elderly returning to Fujian in their twilight years to enjoy equal welfare benefits. The authorities should by all means avoid giving people the impression that there is discrimination against provincial origins. Later, I will invite the Secretary to visit Fujian with me to listen to the views of the elderly who have settled down there. It is pointed out in the Policy Address that the authorities are preparing the Elderly Services Programme Plan, considering various major elderly service items from a macroscopic perspective, and planning to submit a report in mid-2016. The BPA agrees that a rationalization of various services is necessary, yet it hopes that the Government will not only function as a researcher during this period. It should make continued efforts to enhance other items concurrently, particularly on the enhancement of community care services, so as to minimize the pressure on the public healthcare system and the residential care system in the long run.


The title of the Policy Address this year is to "Pursue Democracy, Boost the Economy, Improve People's Livelihood". I am glad that the directions of administration of the Government match with that of the BPA, and we hope that the relevant work will be implemented as soon as possible. Deputy President, I so submit. PROF JOSEPH LEE (in Cantonese): Deputy President, in this session, I will first talk about health services and then issues about the elderly. The part concerning healthcare in this Policy Address is actually the same as before, putting the emphasis on treatment. I have already talked about this in the past 10 years, and this is the eleventh year. There are more than 7 million people in Hong Kong. Do most of them suffer from illnesses? Actually, no. I believe only a small number of them suffer from illnesses and need hospitalization, or what we call, "tertiary services". Yet the past policy addresses have focused on treatment. Never mind if you are sick. If you fall ill, just go to see a doctor. The Government will provide treatment services. This is of course important, but under such an approach, about 7 million healthy people really do not receive much attention. Why? This Policy Address points out that since there are long queues for the existing public healthcare services ― not counting the recent influenza which has caused the hospital beds to be fully occupied ― the Government will later provide additional beds, additional operating theatres, additional manpower, additional specialist out-patient services, additional general out-patient services as well as additional beds in the accident and emergency departments. All these fall under tertiary services. Will such an approach lead to another question, that is, will it make more people go to see a doctor once they feel slightly unwell? Of course, I feel that it is not good to do so. When people fall ill, they should go to see a doctor by all means. However, we have the responsibility to tell members of the public that the best thing to do is to maintain good health rather than going to see a doctor. The Chief Executive talks about providing such additional public services in this part of the Policy Address. The injection of resources is desirable, but what will be done next? He made no mention of that. Certainly, the Secretary will say that there is no need to worry. We have the health insurance scheme which will attract a group of people to take out


6615

insurance, thereby diverting them to private hospitals without using public services. Those in need of tertiary or in-patient services in the public sector will thus receive such services more quickly. In fact, this is an interesting point. Secretary, I think some Honourable colleagues will ask, is health insurance practicable? Can we really take out such insurance? Can it really result in diversion? I am not going to discuss these questions tonight. We will discuss them in the panel meetings. Nevertheless, after making this proposal, does the Secretary have such a view that actually, regarding the "dual-track system" mentioned by him ― that means treatment and in-patient service under tertiary care ― a "dual-track system" has been implemented for tertiary in-patient service, so it is available in public-sector healthcare. As regards private-sector healthcare, members of the public who find it affordable will patronize private-sector healthcare. This is an ideal approach. Yet the problem is, during the implementation, charges levied by private hospitals are unclear, and they may not have good governance either. If there are any accidents, complaints and that sort, people may not have much confidence in them. The Secretary said that there is no need to worry. He has another paper on regulation of private hospitals, including measures to ensure transparency of hospital charges and strengthen their governance. After such work mentioned by the Secretary is done, actually only tertiary care has been enhanced. After such enhancement, will members of the public feel more assured to go to private hospitals and become more convinced that there will be no problem in using public healthcare services because a lot of services have been added in public hospitals? That is not the case because the Secretary has not solved the most basic problem, which is the manpower problem. Even if he has carried out these measures, will a group of professionals, such as nurses, doctors, allied health staff and other teams of workers, be available shortly to engage in this matter and expand the service capacity? Since the Secretary has said so, members of the public will have expectations, thinking that after they have bought insurance and when they go to the private hospitals, they will readily get a place for medical consultation and will be able to choose a good doctor; when members of the public go to the public sector, since they do not have the financial ability, they will be able to see a doctor very quickly after waiting for a short time.


However, Secretary, please look at the current influenza situation. There is indeed a 150% hospitalization rate for the general wards which are all full. It is because public healthcare in Hong Kong is very special, in that hospital beds can be added incessantly if need be. When the manpower estimate is not accurate, the Secretary would say again that there is no need to worry. They have a Human Resources Committee which will probably release a report later in the second or third quarter of the year. Hence, what is said in this Policy Address has put the emphasis on treatment, but the problems just accumulate without being solved. Let me see. Given this Policy Address, I wonder how the Financial Secretary will commit additional resources in accordance with what is said in the Policy Address when he prepares the Budget. I will surely see ― that is the case every year ― a large amount of resources added for tertiary services. What will be the result after resources are added? If the provision of additional resources is not complemented by long-term manpower planning, front-line staff will be caught between a rock and a hard place. This is not the first time I have made this remark. Such a situation often occurs. The Secretary knows that sitting here, he has got to listen for a while. So I speak as I wish, while he listens and works as he wishes. Every time it is the same. The question is, the problems remain unsolved. Even if the Secretary puts the emphasis on treatment and enhances the tertiary services, if there are insufficient supporting measures to achieve such enhancement, eventually all the additional items mentioned will only add to the workload of the front-line staff. Failing to increase the relevant support, it will result in the people's disappointment and continuous conflicts between front-line staff and members of the public. In fact, the whole policy on health services should not only attend to patients. People who are not ill are equally important. This time the Secretary said that a screening programme will be implemented, and the screening will apply to inborn errors of metabolism. We certainly welcome that, as in the case when it was mentioned last time that a colorectal cancer screening programme would be conducted, but here comes the question again. While it refers to inborn errors of metabolism, what we have been talking about in the sector is rare diseases. Rare diseases cover a wide scope under which inborn errors of metabolism are one of the categories. The Secretary said that there will be a screening programme. We certainly welcome it, but actually there are many different types of inborn errors of metabolism. There are countless numbers of them.


6617

Secretary, for which types of diseases will screening be conducted? After the screening, will there be any supporting facilities? Suppose we find out from the tests that there is something wrong with certain DNAs or genes. How will we help the patients? Of course, we agree that if this is carried out under secondary care, and if the purpose of screening is early identification of problems, then an injection of resources will facilitate patients in recovering and rehabilitating as soon as possible so that they will use tertiary services less. This is the approach for secondary care and the main purpose of the screening programme. However, we hope that the Secretary will clarify what is meant by inborn errors of metabolism here, and why rare diseases mentioned by us are not included. This is about secondary care. Besides, when the Secretary mentioned secondary care in the paper, he indicated that resources would be injected into Child Assessment Centres. Of course parents will love it. At present, the number of children has vastly increased. After birth, they will be taken to, say, the assessment centre in Arran Street. Deputy President, that is, we would see whether a child can put a square object into a hole, whether he can read a certain word and then press the right button, something like that. It is good if we can identify any problem at the early stage. If we can identify the problem earlier, we may then observe whether the child is undergoing normal development. We may find experts, such as clinical psychologists, speech therapists and audio therapists, to help it speed up recovery close to the normal condition. This is good. However, after this service has been added, does the Department of Health (DH) have enough manpower? In fact, there are not too many such experts. For example, an audiologist will check a person's ability to hear sounds. If my memory is correct, there are only five audiologists in the clusters of the whole Hospital Authority. That means each … actually I was just kidding. An audiologist does not merely check a person's ability to hear sounds. The process is rather complicated. Can five people diagnose more than 1 million people? I do not know. It is good that the Secretary would beef up these services. We support it, but we also need to pay attention to whether there are such human resources to attain these goals. Are they attainable in actual operation? Otherwise, there will be long queues again. The authorities say that more services have been put in place, but when members of the public go to seek such services, it turns out that no place is available and they have to wait, so they will come back and scold


the Secretary. I am most reluctant to see the Secretary being criticized see the time. This is not desirable. I think the Secretary needs to pay attention to this part. What is meant by primary services? To the whole society, primary care is the most important. It is not only so in Hong Kong. It is the same in other places. It is hoped that people will live in good health and happiness. All along, our nurses have been trained to help patients who need treatment to recover from their illnesses during the treatment process. This is our job, but not everyone is ill. Hence, it has been the aim of our training to help the healthy people to maintain their health, and we hope this can be achieved through our efforts in health promotion, health education and preventive care. However, I did not see any mention of this in the Policy Address. I could see only one point … perhaps the Secretary will say that regarding mental health, additional beds will be provided. However, Secretary, mental health refers to the normal people. Frankly speaking, sitting here for three days, those who are originally very healthy will develop mental problems as well, as they have to stay here to listen to our endless speeches. We can move around freely, but the Secretary cannot. It is quite miserable to be obliged to sit here. The Secretary will be sitting here for a while, but we may choose not to listen. Such a mental state may be unhealthy too. We have the responsibility to enable people in normal health to pay attention to their overall life balance. This kind of health promotion and health education is very important. It will be fine if they have no problem. Yet the Secretary will say, we have a Review Committee on Mental Health to do this kind of work. However, the Review Committee on Mental Health basically diagnoses patients rather than looking after healthy people. I do not think we should solely rely on it. I hope the Secretary will step up efforts in health promotion and health education at the primary and basic level. Basically, now we only rely on the HD and NGOs to do such work, but the conditions under which they do such work are miserable. They lack resources and are short of manpower. How can we expect a few organizations with limited resources to promote the health messages to make about 7 million people change their living habits so that they will achieve a healthy balance with a reduced need for treatment and will not fall ill? This part is actually blank in the whole Policy Address, which is disappointing.


6619

Of course, I have been saying the same thing every year. We are merely a tape recorder. Nevertheless, I still wish to make the Government understand that we should not just treat the head when there is a headache and treat the leg when there is a leg pain, thinking that the provision of additional hospital beds will solve the problem of long queues at hospitals. We hope that the whole society will be a healthy society, not a society which will only give treatment for illnesses. If our society merely strives for treatment, such a society is indeed rather sick. So, Hong Kong may be rather sick right now, but never mind. We who are engaged in health work have the responsibility to make Hong Kong stay healthy. This is an important point which I hope the Secretary will take note of. Secretary, what I have been talking about are hackneyed topics. Lastly, all the issues I have mentioned, be it in-patient service at the tertiary level, screening at the secondary level or health promotion at the primary level, require manpower. I hope the Secretary will study what types of manpower we need. I just came back from my class. The lesson which I taught was about human resources planning, which is a very significant subject. If we do not have a rough indicator, it will be difficult to conduct planning. Let me take public hospitals as an example. We recognize a fact ― the Secretary came from a public hospital. He has worked there before, so he probably knows about it ― in each medical ward there were originally only 36 beds, but since it is now the peak of the influenza season, the patients admitted may take up 50-odd beds. The average occupancy rate of hospital beds for the whole year may reach 150%. The resources and manpower injected into hospital wards, be it nurses, doctors or allied health staff, should in fact be calculated on the basis of 150%. The calculation should not be made on the basis of 36 beds simply because on average there are 36 beds. This is one of the indicators that can reflect the workload of front-line staff and thus enable the authorities to know more accurately how much manpower is needed in the public healthcare system, including nurses, doctors and allied health staff. When manpower is to be increased later, it will take time to provide training. It is not a big problem for private hospitals. Why? The charges levied by private hospitals already include the cost of assigning one nurse to look after six patients. It is unlike the situation in public hospitals, where one nurse has to look after 12 patients. Besides, private hospitals may refuse to admit new cases. Someone may ask the Secretary, "Is health insurance going to be implemented this way?" If private hospitals do not admit new cases, the insurance will be useless if no places are available. A characteristic of private hospitals is that they may


absolutely refuse to admit any new case. So long as all the 36 beds are occupied, they may put up the "full" sign and stop admitting any more cases. In this way, they can really maintain their standard of service. There can be no comparison. However, the Secretary needs to strike a balance on this matter. This part, I believe, is also a hackneyed issue. Nonetheless, lastly, I would like to draw the Secretary's attention to one point. On the entire healthcare policy, including in-patient service at the tertiary level, the screening programme and specialist healthcare at the secondary level and health promotion at the primary level, what is the Secretary's view? Some people say, "Dr KO wishes to promote a healthcare policy which belongs to welfarism." No problem. If that is the case, we will go back to the "dual-track system" and stop saying that private hospitals and public hospitals are the same. If they are the same, how can we attract people to take out health insurance and divert them to private hospitals? However, if the Secretary says "no", he adopts an approach which belongs more to liberalism, what does that mean? Rich people will have the chance to choose better hospitals and receive better treatment. The quality of service of private hospitals is at the upper level, whereas that of the public-sector healthcare is at the lower level. This does not mean which one is of a higher or lower quality, but there is a difference. Then we will have a clear idea. Moreover, regarding the screening programme at the secondary level, actually after a screening test is carried out, a lot of supporting facilities are needed. After I have undergone a screening test, do I need to consult a private doctor or private speech therapist? It is rather expensive. If I do not seek medical consultation, what should I do? For example, now the colorectal cancer screening programme has yet to be implemented. It costs $10 to have a faeces test. If it is found out from the test that there may be something wrong, what will be done next? Do I then need to go to a public hospital to wait for insertion of a tube through my anus ― sorry, Deputy President, this is the layman's expression. That means colonoscopy. Or should I go to see a private doctor? I remember Dr LEUNG Ka-lau once mentioned that private doctors have to recover the cost which is not low. After the test, if there is no supporting facility, what should I do? Does the Secretary adopt a healthcare system under welfarism, or healthcare services under liberalism which are market-oriented? This point warrants clarification.


6621

Lastly, about primary care. If the primary care which we are discussing refers to health promotion, health education and preventive care, is that a personal responsibility or the Government's duty? If it is a personal responsibility, then there is no need to take care of it. Just let the people handle it themselves. The Government should not deal with it. Members of the public had better not fall ill. That is it. Is that so? All these should be taken into account in the overall policies on healthcare and health services. Regrettably, I did not see any such traces in this Policy Address. It is simply a presentation. Something has been added, and that is it. I consider that generally speaking, it is not favourable to Hong Kong's long-term development. This is the 11th year that I speak on the policy address here. I guess what I have said is more or less the same. Why? As one could see, the Government did not make any big change in this regard. Of course, if the Secretary, being a doctor, considers that it is right to put the emphasis on treatment, I will not challenge his view at all. However, being a nurse, I hold that the overall healthcare policy should not only emphasize treatment. There are other things as well. Our emphasis should be put on health, and health does not simply mean not being ill. Rather, a person needs to be healthy as a whole in every aspect. Sitting here, the Secretary and I have to face each other for three whole days. It will really impair our mental health, but it has nothing to do with diseases. We hope that efforts and attention will be given to this. On this part, Secretary, I think I have already said enough, since I have also talked about it on other occasions. Yet I hope this Policy Address will not just focus the discussion on this part because if discussion is only made on this part, as I have mentioned earlier ― Deputy President, I am a bit long-winded. The Financial Secretary also allocates money in this way. In other words, the health of 6 million to 7 million people has been neglected at the primary and secondary levels. This is exactly what we do not wish to see. Speaking of this, both Secretaries have mentioned that the number of elderly people has increased. Actually, let me tell the two Secretaries, when people grow old, their bodily functions may not necessarily break down. It is only that their functions will slow down. When their functions slow down, if we make better efforts in primary care to make their functions slow down not so soon, then their functions will not break down immediately. In fact, they may not necessarily need hospitalization. Hence, in this regard, I need to commend Secretary Matthew CHEUNG. He proposed community-based measures with residential care homes for the elderly (RCHEs) serving as the backup. Such work was then complemented by the healthcare vouchers put forward by Secretary for Food and


Health Dr KO Wing-man. This was originally a good initiative. However, it happened that our report was released yesterday, and this major report was covered in the newspapers. The situation in RCHEs is indeed depressing. I also feel sorry for the elderly in RCHEs. To be admitted to an RCHE, the elderly have to wait for allocation, and more than 5 000 people passed away while waiting for such allocation. Speaking of healthcare vouchers, healthcare vouchers were originally well-intentioned. However, records seem to tell us that 75% of the people who had registered did not use them. I have pointed out long ago that the original intention of introducing healthcare vouchers was to let old people in need use this sum of money every year to improve their health. To improve their health, what they need is more than medical consultation. When they are ill, they need to consult a doctor, but they may also use the vouchers when they are fine. This is a matter of education. If this part fails, how can we deliver such elderly care service which is so-called community-based with RCHEs serving as the backup? It seems everyone is saying that RCHEs are unable to do this. (THE PRESIDENT resumed the Chair) Actually the Secretary knows very well what to do on this front, and he also has the heart to do it. When we discuss community-based service, we are mainly talking about one thing, that is, to enable the elderly to live in good health and safety in the community. In respect of health and safety, the community care vouchers introduced by the Secretary are useful. However, the scope of the present community care vouchers seems to be confined to simple tasks carried out by NGOs, such as meal delivery, bathing and visits pertaining to their domestic life, which may not be useful. As I have pointed out, when people grow old, their bodily functions will slow down. Old people need to adapt to that. If we pay them more visits, conduct more health consultations and basic health checks, offer them advice and remind them to take their medicines, this type of work will make them feel more assured, and such work can be carried out in the community. It seems that the healthcare vouchers still have not achieved such an effect. This is the first point. The second point is about the dental issue. The Secretaries are very nice. Both Secretaries have mentioned that dental care service will be introduced for old people aged above 80. Actually I have an opposite view.


6623

Secretary, take my father as an example. Approaching the age of 90, he indeed does not have too many teeth left. I suggested that he go to fix his teeth, but he asked what was the point of fixing them, since he was going to leave this world soon. This is certainly his own view. It is not that I do not care about him, but in his opinion, he is already over 80. Even if his teeth are fixed, they will not be of much use. Why did the Secretary not think in the other way round? Try reverse thinking. Can this plan not be directed at people over 80? I know the Secretary will say that we do not have enough dentists and manpower to do it. In that case, can we try to apply it to the group aged between 65 and 70? This group of old people is suitable, as they have started to age. President, I am not referring to you. I refer to that group of people who are about to age. Their teeth begin to fall off. They have no money, yet they need to go to see a dentist. After they have had their teeth fixed, their teeth will stay in good shape for the next 10 years. Being able to eat comfortably at ease, they need not go to see a doctor and need not reside in RCHEs either. That is desirable. Can we give this some thought instead of solely counting on figures? In fact, we may come up with other solutions behind the figures on this front. The dental issue is a big topic. We know it is impossible to solve the dental problem promptly after we have just made some casual talk in the Legislative Council. Dentistry is not my field, and the number of dentists is relatively small, but can we make such efforts now? If we help them with this, it will help to maintain their health in the long run, and this can be achieved in the community. This is a relatively important part. Matters relating to residential care service vouchers and allocation of RCHE places are not the main areas of my discussion, so I will not talk too much, leaving them to discussion by other Honourable colleagues. Nevertheless, in this regard, what should be done? It is a rather difficult problem, and right now this matter also involves a lot of loopholes in law. The law provides that RCHEs shall take care of the elderly, but as we know, the existing RCHEs are not quite satisfactory. Accordingly, the elderly are divided into four categories. Those in the first category are ambulant, whereas those in the last category are bedridden. However, there may be all kinds of situations in RCHEs at the moment. As such, if the Government sticks to the view that for every 60 residents, there should be one nurse, and if no nurse is available, two health workers will do, then the overall healthcare quality will worsen. If it worsens, eventually the problem will go back to the Policy Bureau, and the Secretary will be criticized for inadequate provision of residential care places and poor quality of service. Coming back to the law, of course, the Secretary may say, no, Prof Joseph LEE, if we review the law now, many RCHEs will close down, and


there will be big trouble. I am not requesting to tighten or relax the law. Instead, in this respect, I wish to see how improvements can be made to the quality of RCHEs to achieve more satisfactory results and prevent people from exploiting loopholes in law which will make the elderly suffer. Even though the Government has public RCHEs as backup, this backup is caught in its own trouble. This is distressing. The waiting list for public RCHEs of the Government does not work either. It does not work at all. On the other hand, how can elderly care service attract young people to join the industry so that the elderly will feel more assured to reside in residential care homes? May be … the Secretary has an elite team which should be able to think up a way to deal with this problem and assist in the deliberation. However, there is no particular mention of this point in this Policy Address. As I have some speaking time left, President, I would like to revisit an earlier point. As our Public Accounts Committee has mentioned, we hope that we will be able to enjoy our twilight years when we are old. The views of the two Directors of Bureaux and the Secretary of Department also convey their wish for the elderly to enjoy their twilight years in the community. Actually this long speech of mine is similar to what I said a few years ago. Given the choice, old people may wish to spend their last days at home. The End-of-Life Care Programme which we are discussing now is a very effective programme. Its accomplishment is that apart from giving old people and their family members appropriate support at home, for example, through the visiting nurses, doctors and carers who help to relieve the elderly people's pain when they are sick, it also enables the elderly to stay with their families without the need to return to the hospital. Frankly speaking, for those elderly people who have occupied hospital beds, there will be a lot of things to follow up after their discharge from the hospital. We really need to think about this carefully. While we keep talking about "ageing in place", we should also talk about "dying in place". In fact, spending one's last days at home, or what we call "dying in place", is not any new concept. It has existed for a long time. The Policy Bureau should consider providing resources to help the old people whom it can serve. The End-of-Life Care Programme mentioned by me just now is simply a programme, but it is a very good programme. We call it a good programme because the participants consider that it can provide the service they need. Of course, we cannot request legislation for the implementation of this kind of service, but at least we could give the elderly a choice and fulfil the wish of those who would like to spend their last days with their families. It will be great if we can achieve this.


6625

Nevertheless, Secretary, it is just my empty talk. The question is, the Secretary needs to know the manpower and supporting facilities required. All these services need to be delivered on the spot, and on-the-spot services are costly. I guess Secretary Dr KO Wing-man knows it too. It is similar to the issue of mental health which we have discussed. Take a mental patient as an example. If his condition is stable, we can place him in a residential care home, but if we place him in a residential care home, he will need on-the-spot services which are very expensive. We need resources. It is great to talk about ideals, but I hope the Policy Bureau can really make it in the end. In closing, I would like to talk about the elderly. Actually many elderly people who have retired, that means those who are aged 60-something to 70, are rather energetic and competent. I just noticed that a daytime kindergarten was trying to recruit someone to work from 8 am to 8 pm, but no one applied for the job ― the post is not kindergarten teacher. Why not find the elderly people to do these jobs? Then they may receive some wages and have some work to do. They also have the experience. Why not go ahead with it? Hence, the Government has merely made empty talk on the silver hair market which has not yet been explored, and there is a vast amount of human resources in it that can provide assistance. President, that is all for my speech. Thank you. MR TANG KA-PIU (in Cantonese): We will discuss elderly care and poverty alleviation in this session. The Chief Secretary for Administration is in the Chamber, and I believe she plays a co-ordinating role in the Commission on Poverty (CoP). Regarding issues which are a grave concern to Members, I believe these include the $50 billion retirement protection fund or startup fund as mentioned by Miss CHAN Yuen-han earlier. We all say that the $50 billion fund is a sincerity deposit. The Secretary also says that it is a political commitment to demonstrate the determination of the Government to implement the scheme. However, we should learn from previous experience. Secretary Dr KO Wing-man has already demonstrated a similar case. In 2009, $50 billion was earmarked for the setting up of the health insurance fund, yet it took the authorities six years to decide to take forward the scheme. Besides, only some $4 billion out of the $50 billion was spent eventually and the use of the remaining fund is not yet known. What


worries us most is that the present fund will suffer the same fate like the health insurance fund, which may eventually be used as "double pay" for recipients of Comprehensive Social Security Assistance (CSSA) or an increase in the Old Age Living Allowance (OALA) by 10%. In fact, I believe both the elderly and other organizations striving for retirement protection consider that the implementation of retirement protection can brook no delay. Why am I saying this? For after 2018, the labour force of Hong Kong will pass its peak or its demographic dividend will start decreasing. We should capitalize on the satisfactory economy in the next few years to introduce the scheme promptly. If the authorities do not introduce the scheme now, when will it be implemented? We can note whether the Government is sincere in taking forward the scheme according to the consultation period it states in the Policy Address. We definitely do not mind letting the CoP take a leading role and consult Hong Kong society, the public and organizations on certain proposals. However, we find it strange that the Government has to launch the consultation in the fourth quarter of 2015. Why can the CoP not conduct the consultation in the second quarter right after the announcement of the Budget? Perhaps the Chief Secretary has spent much effort in the proposal on universal suffrage and she may not carry out the two tasks concurrently, yet Secretary Matthew CHEUNG who is famous for his industry should be able to share her workload. So, why should it start the consultation in the fourth quarter? If the Government has to handle the constitutional reform in the second quarter, it may start the consultation in the third quarter, why does it have to wait till the fourth quarter to start it? Now, the relevant report has been completed and it has been discussed for some time. We worry that the CoP will eventually start the nine-month consultation on 31 December 2015, which will rightly fall on the time of the Legislative Council Election. Since the CoP may need another year to compile the report, the issue may eventually be left to the Government of the next term. Will the consultation come to this pass? I hope the Secretary will respond to this later. In fact, the elderly do not worry much about this. Honestly, when I work in the districts and meet with elderly of 70 to 80 years of age, they sing praises of the SAR Government, for they have at least benefited from the increased elderly benefits under the OALA, the health care voucher scheme and many other schemes. However, many people aged 50 to 60 are very anxious. They have


6627

joined MPF schemes and the balance seems to be good, with around $200,000. Yet when they are asked how long the $200,000 balance can sustain their living after their retirement at 60 or 65, they become anxious. They will do the calculation immediately and find out that the balance can only support their living for four or five years. If their children borrow that sum from them as down payment for home purchase after getting married, the balance of $200,000 will be used up. In that case, how can they ensure the security of their living, and how can they have peace of mind? Does it mean that all wage earners in the low-to-middle class will have to apply for CSSA five years into retirement? Do they have to live in such misery? The Chief Secretary for Administration used to be the Director of Social Welfare, so she must understand full well the labelling effect of CSSA, and the situation has not improved much over the past decade or so. This topic of applying for CSSA five years into retirement remains a taboo to many elderly people or people approaching retirement. In reality, not many people can afford supporting themselves and sparing part of their income to support their parents at the same time. Therefore, I hope the Chief Secretary and the Secretary will commence the consultation on retirement protection as soon as possible and come up with proposals expeditiously. It does not matter what kind of proposal it will be. What is important is that the proposal is recognized and accepted by the public, and it is considered to have been formulated according to objective criteria. The authorities may propose using any of such proposals. I think by doing so, the authorities will have at least been responsible to the public. I hope the Chief Secretary and the Secretary will heed my views. Elderly care is another cause of concern to me. In the past two years, I have been the Deputy Chairman of the Joint-Subcommittee of the Long-term Care Policy and a member of the Panel on Welfare Services. I have seen some front-line civil servants of the Social Welfare Department or the Bureau making strenuous efforts to identify sites for the construction of residential care homes. They have worked very hard, yet some plans have been delayed due to the non-cooperation movement. Yesterday, it was pointed out in the report of the Public Accounts Committee that there were around 31 000 applicants on the Central Waiting List for subsidized long-term care services, but the number of subsidized residential care places was only 26 000. In terms of figures alone, the authorities will have


to provide 5 000 additional subsidized places in elderly homes. I have the impression that an average of around 100 places can be provided in each elderly home. In other words, the authorities have to build 50 elderly homes in a few years. Yet I recall that four to five applications for the construction of elderly homes are submitted to the Legislative Council every year at most. How should this problem be tackled? Twenty years later, the elderly population in Hong Kong will be doubled. What should we do by then? This is a mission impossible. Eventually, the Legislative Council will have to criticize the authorities every year like this year, stating that 5 700 elder applicants have died during the wait and no one knows how many will die next year during the wait. Regarding this mission impossible, many members engaging in elderly care services in the welfare sector have pointed out that the Government should concentrate its resources on enhancing community care services. At present, the Government provides subsidies to certain elderly care service providers in providing home care services. The cost for home care service is $4,000-odd per person on average, yet the average cost for a residential care place in elderly homes is $12,000 to $13,000. In terms of costs, we know that home care services are better. Besides, the elderly will be unwilling to live in elderly homes. If so, why has the Government failed to do a proper job in this area all along? In fact, the relevant schemes have been implemented for a long time. Yet, I have been told by those service providers that the Government will invite new tenders every several years for the services they are providing, so they cannot be sure if they will continue to be the service provider three years later, and this uncertainty has prompted all the staff to feel worried. Since we all want to take care of the elderly, why can the Government not formulate some matching measures for better development of community care services for the elderly, which is an important aspect? Since the Government has failed to develop proper policies in this respect, the elderly will eventually be left with no choice but apply and wait for places in elderly homes. I know that the Government has commissioned the Elderly Commission to carry out some work, yet the Government has suddenly launched the residential care service voucher. Many co-workers responsible for elderly care services have pointed out, since the value of community care service vouchers is now set at $5,800, and the value for residential care service voucher is set at $11,000, this will undoubtedly prompt the elderly to switch to apply for elderly homes in order to receive the residential care service voucher of a higher amount. Against this background, the development of community care services for the elderly will be


6629

affected. Therefore, I hope the authorities will think thoroughly if they agree with the necessity to ensure work on community care services for the elderly is done properly, for there are many inadequacies in the work in this area at present. I hope that the Government will make good planning for community care arrangements in its future work, so as to build up the confidence of the elderly, the welfare sector and co-workers intending to join the sector, letting them know that the Government is determined to enhance the work on community care services for the elderly. I so submit. MR CHAN CHI-CHUEN (in Cantonese): President, the theme of this session is poverty alleviation, elderly care and hygiene. In fact, they cover such issues as birth, senility, illness and death. Nowadays, life has become increasingly hard for Hong Kong people. While we are alive, we can find no place to live due to the high property prices and rents; and when we die, we have no place to rest in peace due to a shortage of niches. Several days ago, at a panel meeting, we realized that we would not only have no place to rest in peace when we die. The Government has even raised the cremation fee from $1,000 to some $6,000 to rob people of their money, thus leading to the joint condemnation of the Government by the six major sects or parties. Look at our Government. It attempts to get Hong Kong people to die a bad death. Some Members even said that we had better die early because the cremation fee will be increased in phases in three years. It is therefore not surprising that some young people held up placards that read "Do not want to be Hongkongers again in our next life" in procession. A panel in relation to minimum wage held a meeting yesterday. The words from a member of the public present at the meeting gave much insight. He asked those who attended the meeting when LEUNG Chun-ying was most concerned about livelihood issues. The answer was that when he condemned Members for filibuster, he was most concerned about livelihood issues. He would say filibuster had done harm to people's livelihood. If the LEUNG Chun-ying Administration did care about livelihood issues, it would not have held them captive as bargaining chips, nor would it have bent on having its own way and forced through the "three landfills and one incinerator" proposal and the Innovation and Technology Bureau (ITB) proposed by him first, thus causing a


delay in granting the Low-income Working Family Allowance for 18 months even though it has now been approved. The civil service pay adjustment was approved at the end of last month, thus allowing civil servants to get their new pay in time before the Lunar New Year. However, a staff member from the Hospital Authority (HA) told me that as the HA had to undergo additional verification procedures, they would not be able to get their new pay before the Lunar New Year. Friends here can see that even though the deliberation on the fisheries loan funds had entered its final stage, the Government could still withdraw this item to make way for the ITB. This is when LEUNG Chun-ying is most concerned about people's livelihood. Among the aspects in relation to poverty alleviation and elderly care in the Policy Address, what concerns us most is certainly the Government earmarking $50 billion for retirement protection uses. President, as you are aware, for the Budget delivered in these two years, the People Power and the League of Social Democrats have demanded universal retirement protection. Eventually, LEUNG Chun-ying proposed in this year's Policy Address to earmark $50 billion for improving the protection for needy citizens after retirement. A reporter asked "Long Hair" whether he would stop filibustering over the Budget as his demand had been met. I believe there is no need to ask "Long Hair". Those fighting for universal retirement protection across the territory will not be satisfied because LEUNG Chun-ying spoke of a consultation on retirement protection instead of universal retirement protection. This implies that retirement protection will be subject to an assets test in the future. Although the Government has now earmarked a fund of $50 billion for those needy elderly, its use is not specified, nor is it a fund earmarked for specified retirement protection or pension purposes. According to a group fighting for universal retirement protection, the absence of policies for the establishment of a fund, be it temporary or otherwise, will render the funding concerned futile. Alternatively, it may be called a "variant fund". LEUNG Chun-ying's election pledge is to provide retirement protection to people in their old age instead of those in poverty. The former should not be subject to any assets test. In fact, in respect of the Policy Address, the People Power has suggested that the authorities should study the establishment of a seed fund in the form of a special fund earmarked for specified purposes or for universal retirement protection, remove the system of Old Age Living Allowance


6631

(OALA) and advise on the review period for the payment rate of the new scheme, rather than handing out a "sincerity deposit" casually to be put back in the drawer or transferred to a new account. LEUNG Chun-ying announced in paragraph 117 of the Policy Address that a consultation would be conducted on retirement protection. Subsequently, he stressed in paragraph 118 that the Government would face increasing fiscal pressure in the medium to long terms, and reiterated that the so-called traditional values cherished by our community included focusing social resources on helping those most in need. Prudent financial management is the pet phrase of both the Chief Secretary for Administration and the Financial Secretary, meaning that they are against universal retirement protection in their mind, and they even speak it out. For this reason, given that the existing upper asset limit for the OALA of $2,200 is about $210,000, many people are worried that the so-called retirement protection may be subject to even more stringent conditions, making it "retirement protection for disaster victims" or "retirement protection for refugees" instead of universal retirement protection. During the Occupy movement, LEUNG Chun-ying pointed out that one of the reasons for ruling out civil nomination was the concern about the emergence of the so-called populism, worried that those earning an income less than $14,000 would turn Hong Kong into a welfare society, thus affecting the protection of the interest of the middle and upper classes. The consultation conducted by the Government and this provision of $50 billion seem to be the light at the end of the tunnel for universal retirement protection for which we have been fighting over the years, but it is actually a means to smother aspirations. Speaking of the OALA issue, I must take this opportunity to reflect the situation to the Secretary because a number of elderly people have repeatedly urged me to sincerely ask the Secretary to relax the upper limit of the assets test. Members also understand that the so-called assets limit now in place does not mean much because as long as you have a lot of family members or trust them, you can do some asset transfer operations. Even if you live in a luxury home, your residence will not be accounted in the total amount of assets as long as it is for your own occupation. However, according to some singleton elderly women, they are unable to make a transfer of assets, nor will they transfer their assets to distant relatives or friends. They are thus barred from applying for the allowance as their total amount of assets is slightly above the limit. Some couples quarrel as they are kept in the dark as to their partner's assets. Some


people even get divorced in order to apply for the OALA. The reason is that following the divorce of a couple, at least one of them will become an eligible applicant. After drawing lessons from such experience and gauging different opinions in the community, can the Government truly incorporate public views? In fact, all major political parties opined that the upper limit of $180,000 was way too stringent back then. It seemed that the Liberal Party proposed to relax it to $800,000, while the DAB proposed an upper limit of $300,000. I hope that if a review is to be conducted now, the relevant limit will be relaxed by several folds. You are often worried that LI Ka-shing will be eligible to draw the allowance. But even if the assets limit is relaxed to $500,000 or $1 million, LI Ka-shing will still not be eligible. As to residential care for the elderly, this year's Policy Address has earmarked $800 million for launching a pilot scheme under which a total of 3 000 residential care service vouchers for the elderly will be issued in the coming three years. Subsequent to the Pilot Scheme on Community Care Service Voucher for the Elderly, this year's Policy Address has introduced this new initiative. Its concept is to allow the elderly to choose directly the service they wish through government funding, so as to offer them flexibility. However, as Members are aware, at present, actually many elderly persons would rather wait for residential care homes for the elderly (RCHEs) or nursing homes subsidized by the Government. Here I will not quote the number of elderly on the waiting list who passed away before getting a place. The Secretary may again say that it is because those elderly are picky. If they are not picky, in fact, they can be allocated a place within certain months. Why do the elderly have so little confidence in private residential care homes? Because there are honestly a lot of real-life examples and messages circulating among the elderly, revealing the varying quality, unsatisfactory environment and lack of supervision of private residential care homes. I personally have also heard at the Complaints Division of the Legislative Council that apart from the varying quality of these residential care homes, some wicked service providers even asked the elderly who had excreted to treat them to a roasted goose in return for a change of napkin. Their behaviour is really nasty. I hope the Government can expand the funding for RCHEs, make sure that subsidized or even private residential care homes are subject to stringent supervision by the Government in order to ensure that the elderly service they provide is qualified, and improve the compensation packages of the staff and the life of the elderly through subsidizing RCHEs.


6633

If the Government really cares about people's livelihood, it should not be worried about welfare frauds by people from the outset. Public funds should certainly be used in a prudent manner, but my emphasis is on the mindset of the authorities. It should not assume from the outset that people will commit welfare frauds, the amount of allowance offered is more than what they need or that they will abuse it. In this session, we discuss issues of birth, senility, illness and death. Judging from the criticisms made by a number of colleagues, our Government has failed to put step into the shoes of Hong Kong people and think from the angle of how they face birth, senility, illness and death. Maybe the reason is that your life has gone out of step with the general public as you often stay in the office. When people are alive, they dare not fall ill. And now they even cannot die a good death when they leave this world. It is only because of all this that they come to the conclusion that they do not want to be Hongkongers again in their next life. MR LEUNG CHE-CHEUNG (in Cantonese): President, in respect of the section on welfare in the Policy Address, I wish to talk about the topic of universal retirement protection. In terms of welfare initiatives, this year, the community still focuses on the retirement protection system that has been under discussion for many years. Regarding the Chief Executive's statement and decision on retirement protection this year, we can only say that we have a mix of joy and sorrow. Our joy certainly comes from seeing the Government being able to provide for future needs by earmarking $50 billion, which can be regarded as a big step forward. And our sorrow is that the Government remains hesitant and fails to make prompt decisions. A consultation exercise will be conducted only in the latter half of the year. As Prof Nelson CHOW said, Hong Kong has a long way to go before it can implement and take forward retirement protection. However, in retrospect, when the Government introduced the Mandatory Provident Fund (MPF) System back then, from the motion proposed in 1995 to its implementation in December 2000, the process had lasted almost six years. Even now, amendments are constantly made to the MPF, which has been in operation for 15 years, let alone a retirement protection scheme covering a wider spectrum. In fact, it is hard in reality to think up a perfect policy beneficial to people which is also in keeping with public interest at one stroke. Hence, the DAB thinks that the Government should look for an easy way out if it intends to take forward universal retirement protection expeditiously.


In 2011, we put forward the proposal of "retirement protection annuity", under which an additional cash allowance of a higher amount will be granted on the basis of the existing Old Age Living Allowance in order to support those elderly who are in greater poverty. And the greatest merit of this three-tier protection option is that revisions can be made to fit in the existing welfare system. As members of the public already have some knowledge of the policy, the Government can save the substantial explanatory effort and does not need to spend time and effort to conduct further studies. Hence, the objective of implementing the universal retirement protection scheme can be achieved as early as possible. On the other hand, as it will benefit all eligible elderly persons who have reached the age of 65, of whom those in greater need will be granted a higher amount of allowance, community resources will be distributed and used on a rational basis. In addition, the proposal only involves public finances and a simple financing process, thus making it readily acceptable to the public. In our opinion, after this option has been in operation for a period of time, it can be reviewed and refined in the light of the actual situation so that it will better accommodate the changing circumstances and needs of society. In fact, in the face of the ageing problem in Hong Kong, the initiatives serve more than the purpose of providing financial assistance. Recently, I have read a newspaper report about delays in rescue of the elderly. A filial son in his 60's had long been taking care of his 80-year-old mother. About two weeks ago, the mother lost her footing in the washroom. When the son attempted to come to her rescue, he accidentally slipped. As a result, both of them were left in a coma in the washroom without being discovered for days. It was not until odour of putrefaction came out from the flat that this tragedy in which the elderly pair died due to delay in rescue was discovered. At present, the elderly population has been ageing in Hong Kong. The proportion of people aged above 65 will rise markedly from 13% in 2010 to 28% by 2039. By that time, there will be one elderly person in every four people. In other words, in the future, elderly persons are everywhere to be seen in Hong Kong. It is believed that such home accidents and incidents of delay in rescue among the elderly will happen from time to time. The Government must expeditiously plan Hong Kong as an elderly-friendly city. Both indoor and outdoor infrastructure must cater for the everyday needs of the elderly. I think the most urgent need which the Government can meet in a short time frame is to draw up a comprehensive elderly housing design, mandating the retrofitting of handrails and life-lines which can


6635

make instant emergency calls to security guards, and so on, in the washrooms of all old and new estates. Certainly, security guards of estates are duty-bound to pay extra attention to flats with elderly members and keep track of their daily movement. It is believed that these measures can prevent more similar accidents involving delay in rescue from happening. President, regarding the issue of child care, the elderly and children are the group that requires the greatest care. And nurturing children as future leaders of society is particularly the obligation of the Government, which has absolutely no excuse to shirk it. Although the Government has put forward a series of initiatives in this year's Policy Address to enhance child care services, including extending the service hours of child care centres and providing additional aided full-day child care places, and so on, but the places still cannot meet the actual needs. The demand is most acute for care services targeting children aged zero to three. As shown by the information of the Social Welfare Department, in 2012-2013, the utilization rate of child care centres amounted to 99% to 100%. Some residents of the districts have told me that on holidays or general holidays, they often have to seek help here and there as they are unable to get someone to look after their children. I have learnt that given the serious shortage of formal nursery services, many parents have resorted to the assistance of home-based child carers. However, as all home-based child carers are of part-time nature with an hourly rate of $18 to $22 only, they do not differ much from volunteers. Most importantly, as the majority of them are housewives themselves, they will naturally put their own families first. According to some women who have employed home-based child carers, as the child carers need to go home to prepare meals, they will often refuse to stay till the evening. Sometimes, as the child carers have arranged activities for their own children who are on school holidays, they will apply for urgent leave. As a result, those women who employ them have frequently had their schedule upset and need to submit leave applications to their companies at short notice. Other home-based child carers subsequently chosen by them have also behaved in a similar way. Eventually, they have simply quit their jobs to become full-time carers of their sons at home. It is thus evident improvement is needed for the ancillary measures of child care. The Government should first increase the places of child care centres in various districts and provide care services with time flexibility, so that working parents can keep their mind on their work. The intent of the Neighbourhood


Support Child Care Project is good in that home-based child carers can serve to fill the child care service gap. However, the quality of services must be adjusted such as by raising the hourly rate for child carers to make them value their job, thereby enhancing the standard and quality of services and preventing them from taking leave or leaving early whenever they wish. Moreover, pinpointing some districts with a greater demand for child care services, such as Yuen Long and Tuen Mun, the authorities may consider leasing out the vacant flats on the lower floors of public estates within the districts at low rents to social enterprises or local organizations for operating child care services, so as to provide night or non-emergency care services, thereby truly catering for the needs of working parents. President, in respect of unleashing the labour force of women, I also think that the reason for such a huge demand for child care services is simply that many women hope to continue with their career after giving birth to children. Apart from earning more money, they are also reluctant to get too detached from society. However, unless those women have sufficient means to employ foreign domestic helpers or the assistance of family members, it seems not at all easy for the grassroots or those who lack the support of relatives or friends to achieve this goal. According to a recent news report, in 2013, the labour force participation rate of local working-age women, namely those aged between 25 and 54, was 71.6% only, lower than the 80% recorded in such countries as Sweden, Canada, France and the United States. As reported, the higher rate of working women in these countries can be attributed to the relatively more active and notable support measures implemented by their governments. In Australia or European countries, a number of sizable enterprises have offered half-time positions, allowing mothers to work three days a week. Some enterprises even allow them to work from ten to four, so that they can have spare time to take care of their children. Although half-time or part-time positions are available in Hong Kong, many of them are jobs requiring a lower level of skill, such as handing out leaflets and cleaning work. And the supply of half-time or part-time positions requiring more professional training and higher academic qualifications is literally few and far between. As a result, those better qualified mothers often have to make a choice between work and family. Hence, the Government should review afresh the existing policy on labour force, introduce half-time positions for those women who wish to continue with their career by making reference to overseas experience, and study the feasibility of spearheading the initiatives in government


6637

departments as models for private enterprises in order to achieve the objective of actually unleashing the labour force of women, thus allowing these mothers to work and meet family obligations. I so submit. MR MICHAEL TIEN (in Cantonese): President, I have put on these clothes to attend the meeting today to tender my early Chinese New Year wishes to you, Honourable colleagues in the Legislative Council, Secretaries of Departments, Directors of Bureaux and all Hong Kong people. May the Hong Kong community be full of joy with the main stakeholders in society being amicable and peaceful in the coming Year of the Goat. President, after the delivery of the Policy Address, I would like to ask, how many young people do you think have read it or expressed concern about it? The reason is, I do not think the Government understands young people very well, and young people do not quite understand the Government either. The Youth Development Fund proposed in the Policy Address is a typical example. This Fund looks pretty on the surface, but it is devoid of substance, and the amount of funding allocated is only $300 million. Moreover, it will be operated by NGOs. The concept is really difficult to comprehend because it is not a charity project, and with laymen leading the professionals, it will easily give rise to mismatch of resources and manpower. I believe it may not be doing a disservice out of good intentions, but I think such good intentions will probably fail to achieve any good result. Just look at the HK$1 billion Hong Kong Young Entrepreneurs Foundation which will be set up as announced by Jack MA, the Chairman of the Alibaba Group, after the Policy Address was delivered. In terms of both operation and contents, the Youth Development Fund of the Special Administrative Region (SAR) Government is no match for it. Alibaba's fund will inject capital in the form of investment into new enterprises established by young people in Hong Kong. The investment return will be ploughed back into the fund for making sustainable investments in new and old projects. This can effectively assist young people in developing high value-added start-ups in the long run. I also concur with some Members' criticism that the Government's approach in proposing a one-off Youth Development Fund with just a small amount of funding is merely scratching the surface. It will only encourage


start-ups of low value-added operation. Should the Government consider co-operating with private enterprises instead of NGOs? For example, a number of private equity funds have made remarkable performance on this front. Jack MA once said, if you believe in the future, believe in the youth; if you want to grasp the future, invest in the youth. I absolutely agree with this point. Earlier on, I attended the Mobile Technology Festival of the City University of Hong Kong (CityU), where the students exhibited their accomplishments in the creation of mobile Apps. Among them, the one which introduces the Chiropractic Doctors' Association of Hong Kong has received much praise from overseas countries. There are numerous other outstanding mobile Apps which may create the next legend like Twitter or Facebook anytime. Dr Ray CHEUNG, the Director of Apps Lab of the CityU, remarked that the establishment of an Innovation and Technology Bureau in Hong Kong could help young people to industrialize innovative technologies and launch them onto the market, thereby connecting the business sector and the industry through the Government's Policy Bureaux. Most importantly, the whole society can push forward the significant development potential of innovative technologies. Regrettably, as Hong Kong lacks a dedicated Policy Bureau responsible for the development of innovative technologies, our talents are wasted. After completing their studies in mobile Apps, this group of students have splendid ideas, but what will be their next step? Therefore I really feel sad, and I do not understand why Members in the pan-democratic camp are still filibustering ― it seems there is not a single pan-democratic Member in the Chamber right now. How come? In filibustering to stall the establishment of the Innovation and Technology Bureau (ITB), they have not only drained away public coffers and time. What is more distressing is that they have dragged down a group of young talents who have ambitions and cherish hopes in the future of Hong Kong, hindering their progress and upward movement. Now many young people are either pessimistic about the ITB getting the green light, or feel desperate about the future technological development in Hong Kong. As I have mentioned some time ago, my sweet granddaughter is six months old. I have not seen her for two weeks already. How does it have anything to do with this matter? Because my daughter and my son-in-law wished to engage in tech start-ups. Noticing the present dilatory situation in Hong Kong, two weeks ago they went to San Francisco with my granddaughter.


6639

As I have learnt, more than 300 conventions on various types of innovative technologies are held in San Francisco every year. There is also a great abundance of capital, and people from all parts of the world will go there to seek opportunities. So it can be said that opportunities are available all over the place. I said to them, "Our ITB is going to be set up soon. There will be such opportunities in Hong Kong." She said to me with a smile, "Do you think I have not watched the television? You have held one meeting after another. So far there is not the slightest sign of progress. It certainly will not get the green light this year, and I am afraid it will not make it next year either. What else can you tell me?" I was speechless. Even Mr Charles Peter MOK said that the ITB could make up for the blank policy on innovation and technology in Hong Kong for the past 12 years. Hence, this illustrates the current deteriorating relationship between the executive and the legislature in Hong Kong. Basically, the filibuster launched by the pan-democratic camp is directed against individuals rather than being based on facts. We need to do some thinking. Now it does not happen only in contentious issues. Actually a number of pan-democratic Members also inwardly consider innovative technology desirable, but why did the situation turn out to be such a mess? Did the Government make efforts to break the ice? Is there any way to make them sit down for a discussion together so that for those things which they actually agree in their mind the Hong Kong sorely needs, they will facilitate their passage instead of being personal against the Chief Executive? I believe this can be achieved only by the Chief Executive himself. With regard to education, in the report card for education this year, I will give a score of 100 for progress and 50 for administration. The number of new measures can be counted with just one hand. All the commitments to education have fallen short of expectations: the number of graduate teachers is not sufficient; the standard of English did not receive much attention; free early childhood education has yet to be implemented; vocational education did not see any breakthrough; and students' pressure has not been addressed. I hope the Secretary will be less complacent about himself. It is more important to make the people in society feel good. I remember that when the Chief Executive ran for election, he pledged to strengthen the English proficiency of Hong Kong people, especially students, so as to maintain and enhance the competitiveness of Hong Kong. In this year's Policy Address, I could not find the word "English". I really could not find it. No such word can be found. In my view, even if it


could spare only one line, it should still talk about the progress to convey a symbolic meaning. Regrettably, there is nothing. It is said that we will face the world and interface with China. It is also said that we will contend with the Four Little Dragons of Asia in terms of competitiveness. In the matter of bi-literacy and tri-lingualism, actually how are we getting on with spoken and written English? If the standard of English in Hong Kong is poor, it will affect Hong Kong's image as an international city. When foreigners come to Hong Kong and read the English on the signs, they will laugh their head off. "Mind your head" becomes "Beware of your head". That means be careful, you still have a head. What will be their opinion? Human resources companies have relayed that resumes written by young people are full of mistakes, and when they speak in English during job interviews, they stammer. What has happened? In the past 10 years, the attainment rate of Primary Three students in English Language in the Territory-wide System Assessment has risen only 4%, whereas that of Primary Six students has risen 2%. The situation of Secondary Three students is even worse. The attainment rate has increased by only 0.7% in the past decade. The score of university graduates in the International English Language Testing System has increased by just 0.2 points in the past 10 years, which is lower than that of Singapore. In our view ― I have acted as the Chairman of the Standing Committee on Language Education and Research before ― to attain good results in English teaching in Hong Kong, as Hong Kong does not have the language environment of an English speaking society, we must enhance students' interest in English since childhood rather than forcing them to learn English. Expatriate teachers are recognized for their competence in enhancing students' interest in English with their own approach. I have discussed this with many expatriate teachers. They consider that at present, with only one expatriate teacher in each primary school, there is not much they can do. All their efforts are distracted and expended in vain. They think that if there is one more expatriate teacher in each primary school, at least they can change the entire language environment in Primary One and Primary Two, and an additional sum of $400 million may be needed each year. I asked the Secretary why he did not consider that. Do you know how the Secretary replied to me? His reply was, there is no problem with our English standard. I do not find any problem. It is not bad that we have only one expatriate teacher now. We have engaged such and such an expert to conduct a study. We hold that there is absolutely no problem in having one expatriate teacher in each primary school. Why do we need to do more work? I said,


6641

only the Secretary feels good. The report written by the expert is by no means objective. Please show me some figures. In comparison with Singapore and other countries, what figures do we have to show to other people? He did not respond to me at all. On matters of poverty alleviation and welfare, as well as retirement protection, I would like to talk about the poverty alleviation policy with which the LEUNG Chun-ying Administration is greatly concerned. Let me first declare that I am a member of the Commission on Poverty (CoP). In 2013, the current-term Government finally set the poverty line and addressed squarely the poverty problem which has prevailed for years. Such an act of courage is commendable. After identifying the group of people in need in society, it should formulate a policy to help them get rid of poverty. A smart government will not merely distribute all the surplus in the Treasury to members of the public. Instead, it will think about how best to allocate with restraint the limited resources to the needy in society so as to achieve the maximum effectiveness. The biggest sum of money involved in this Policy Address is the $50 billion earmarked for retirement protection. If praises are to be sung of this Policy Address, we should praise the Government, especially the Chief Secretary for Administration who chairs our commission. As I could see, the Government has backbone in this initiative. Despite the endless slogans chanted for universal retirement protection in the community, the Government still stands firm and does not waver or succumb amid the populist cries which confuse the policy principle of retirement protection. If Members have read the research report prepared by Prof Nelson CHOW's team, they will note that the problem of elderly poverty is discussed in the second chapter. Besides, this policy was discussed in the CoP. Obviously, the original purpose of introducing retirement protection is poverty alleviation. It is not any basic right or interest. Universal retirement protection, which takes no account of the affordability of the Government and the community as well as sustainability, is unrealistic. President, many people have no grievance about how money is collected, but a lot of them place much importance on its distribution. I believe the community will be willing to share the cost if money is distributed only to the elderly in poverty. However, if it is distributed to all the old people in the territory, I guess no one will truly concur or agree. Members do not think that the President or I should receive it, do they? I do not need it, and I do not want to receive it either. I am worried that to secure people's votes, the populist Members will simply act against their conscience and deceive the whole world,


packaging universal retirement protection as sugar-coated poison. The New People's Party has a very clear stand based on a principle which is in fact compatible with the view of the Democratic Alliance for the Betterment and Progress of Hong Kong mentioned by Mr LEUNG Che-cheung earlier. We propose a three-tier retirement benefit scheme. Apart from the existing "fruit grant" and Old Age Living Allowance, we propose a third-tier retirement benefit of $3,600 monthly (calculated as at today) which old people may receive provided that they pass the means test. Being a member of the CoP, I have noted that the current-term Government really wishes to help the poor people, but I hope that the Government and the Chief Secretary can think twice and act wise in the end to ensure proper use of public coffers. President, now I would like to talk about a current problem which I have noticed in the Government's administration, that is, each Policy Bureau would just mind their own business. When the Chief Executive looked for land for housing production, everyone applauded. Secretary Paul CHAN mooted the proposal on artificial islands in the central waters. He made no mention of any ancillary transport facilities and only advised that there would be a feeder service. No one knew whether the feeder service mentioned by him referred to ferry or what. It sounded like it would do as long as there would be a feeder service connecting to Hong Kong Island. In the end, he was questioned by all the Members as to how much money the construction of artificial islands would cost, what would be the cost-effectiveness and what advantages it would bring to Hong Kong. Meanwhile, Secretary Prof Anthony CHEUNG knows very well that the West Rail Line has already reached its full capacity. He said that after the commissioning of the Shatin to Central Link, an extra 10% capacity will be available. However, it will later be linked up to Tuen Mun Pier, and Hung Shui Kiu Station will be constructed for use by 100 000-odd people. It will also be connected to the Northern Link to facilitate more people in crossing the border or travelling to New Territories East. This extra 10% will be used up in an instant. Everyone knows that the West Rail Line will be exhausted in 2025. I asked Secretary Prof Anthony CHEUNG how the next cross-harbour tunnel would be handled. I suggested connecting the artificial island off Lantau from Tuen Mun to Hong Kong Island. In this way, the problem would be solved. He said, no way, because the artificial island had not been endorsed yet. The project had not even come into being. If he rashly came forward to say that there would be a cross-harbour tunnel, he would be slammed for sure. I suggested that he discusses it with Secretary Paul CHAN. One Secretary got an


6643

island with no railway line, while the other one wanted to have a railway line but did not know how to connect it, and he had no idea how to meet the construction cost either. I got both of them into a discussion with me. I said that after the construction of the artificial island, basically the returns from development could be provided to the MTR Corporation Limited (MTRCL). It was highly possible that the Government could build a railway line to Tuen Mun without paying a penny. The adoption of such an approach would create a synergy effect. If the two Policy Bureaux can put forward a project together, at least the nine directly elected Members from New Territories West would not vote against the artificial island. It would not lead to the present stalemate, and then the Government would not need to withdraw the proposal, having no idea as to what to do. Fortunately, it seems that they finally got the message across to the Chief Executive, who eventually included in the Policy Address consideration on the provision of transport infrastructure to link it up to Hong Kong Island West and New Territories West. Why would I, an ordinary elected Member, need to do so much work which should have been done by the Government itself? Hence, Secretary, I am speaking from the bottom of my heart. The present problem is, the Transport and Housing Bureau is under the purview of the Chief Secretary for Administration, while the Development Bureau is under the supervision of the Financial Secretary. I really wonder how much they have communicated with each other. As a matter of fact, we are well aware that development, housing and transport are closely related. Further thoughts on the structure, in my opinion, are very important. President, the last thing I would like to talk about is also related to transport. The existing policy which accords priority to railway is supported by many people, but we also know that we cannot let the MTRCL dominate the market because there should be diversified choices in Hong Kong, and ancillary transport facilities on the road are very important. Every time the MTR had a service breakdown, what came to its rescue during those couple of hours? Buses. Moreover, a lot of routes are not covered by railway. For this reason, road traffic is an issue which must be handled in the long run, but so far the Government has not come up with any report which comprehensively reviews the road traffic. Recently, the Transport Advisory Committee (TAC) has put forward proposals on various aspects, such as fines, but they are unable to solve the problem. It proposes to increase the first registration tax for motor vehicles.


However, Hong Kong is a free society. There is nothing wrong in buying cars. Why levy a tax and increase the tax time and again to make me unable to buy a car? Many people do not drive their cars to work on weekdays. They only drive their cars to travel around and visit relatives during weekends. Yet the authorities are going to punish them? In fact, there is nothing wrong in buying cars. Should any accident happen, it is attributable to the driver's attitude in driving, but the TAC did not mention anything about that. President, 10 years ago, the average speed on roads in the urban areas in Hong Kong was 25.6 km per hour, and 10 years later, it was 22.7 km per hour, that means 3 km less. Accordingly, if it decreases by 3 km every 10 years, we may deduce that 70 years from now, there will be no need for road-based transport modes such as buses and other vehicles to operate in Hong Kong, for all the roads are jammed. In overseas countries, on the contrary, the average speeds of vehicles have all increased in the past five years. In other words, the approach of giving priority to public buses, light buses or public vehicles in road use is currently implemented around the world. Why is Hong Kong so afraid of doing it? Private cars go into the busy road sections during rush hours. The Government must start to consider how to impose a fee. Sooner or later, this will happen. It cannot be evaded. Ten years ago, measures such as restricted areas or electronic road pricing could not be implemented. Now it is time we drummed up the courage. As you could see, in many other countries which do not deal with this problem, what happens when the private cars all go into the busy road sections during rush hours? A complete gridlock. Please drum up some courage. At present, vehicles travel slower and slower, while bus passengers take an increasingly longer time to reach their destinations. Society is changing. I think there is support for this matter. Hence, President, I hope the SAR Government will review afresh policies which used to meet resistance before. Should it bring up and review afresh such policies today, and seriously set out to resolve the latent problems which are intensifying now? Thank you, President. I so submit. MR FRANKIE YICK (in Cantonese): President, the Chief Executive says in the Policy Address that the authorities have earmarked $50 billion to be used for enhancing the retirement protection for people in need. If the sum is used properly and not for making "indiscriminate handouts", the Liberal Party will not oppose it.


6645

In the face of the ageing population, the Liberal Party understands that retirement protection is a very important social issue. Any proposal must be financially viable and sustainable, and most important of all, it should achieve the target of using social resources properly to help the people most in need. Since society has divergent views on retirement protection schemes, the Liberal Party supports the Government in first enhancing the existing social security system and established pillars for providing retirement protection like the Mandatory Provident Fund System. We are glad that the authorities have made a number of undertakings in the Policy Address this year on elderly care services and support for students with special education needs and persons with disabilities, and so on. However, the Liberal Party hopes that the Government will devise long-term planning when it formulates various welfare policies. The authorities should deduce the future demands based on current figures. It should assess the capacity of service provision based on this deduction and then make long-term arrangements like manpower training and land planning. Some time ago, the Elderly Commission finally stated that it would consider factors like demographic figures, health conditions, life expectancy, standard of living, participation in labour market and financial capacity in formulating the Elderly Services Programme Plan. This is a remedial approach. We hope that the Government will deduce the demands for elderly care services in the short, medium and long terms and formulate corresponding plans to ensure that community care services and residential care services for the elderly can meet the demands of society. President, in all discussions on welfare policies, we will ask where the money will come. The Government always uses financial viability as an excuse for not making long-term commitment to public services and welfare benefits, or it may target taxpayers as the source of funding. In fact, the coffers are now inundated with cash, so it is not a matter of money but the lack of commitment on the part of the Government. In that case, the Government should accept the proposal of the Liberal Party on using the foreign currency reserve of over $3,000 billion. In 2013, the Exchange Fund posted an investment gain of HK$75.9 billion. The Hong Kong Monetary Authority said that the investment return for 2014 was $43.6 billion and the average return rate for the past five years was 2.6%. That means the authorities need only allocate part of the investment return of the Exchange Fund to welfare items to enable more people in need to benefit.


Lastly, I would like to stress that the Liberal Party supports concentrating resources of the welfare system on helping people who need it most, where abusive use must not be tolerated. Therefore, the Liberal Party hopes that the Government will make active efforts to plug the loopholes of the welfare system, which include studying the proposal of capping the benefit period for CSSA unemployed payment for able-bodied adults with working ability and reviewing the policy on well-off public housing tenants to combat abusive use of public housing resources. President, I so submit. MR CHAN KIN-POR (in Cantonese): President, the consultation on the Voluntary Health Insurance Scheme (VHIS) will come to an end in mid-March this year. The insurance industry is still striving for a sustainable proposal that is acceptable to various sectors. Over the past three years, the insurance industry has been discussing with the Food and Health Bureau on an ongoing basis and eventually drew up 12 Minimum Requirements to perfect the health insurance products. For example, we have formulated a Standard Plan and provided better protection for policyholders. We are basically supportive of the VHIS. There are only two problems which remain unresolved. First, the Food and Health Bureau did not keep the promise made by the Government of the last term to use the $50 billion set aside for offering discounts to first-time and long-term policyholders (except the high risk pool). As a result, it fails to attract young and healthy people to join the VHIS. The VHIS has prescribed 12 Minimum Requirements to provide better protection with wider coverage which will, however, definitely be reflected in the premiums. According to the estimate of the Government's consultant, the average annual standard premium is $3,600. Yet, the amount of $3,600 is calculated by using the prices in 2012 while the VHIS will be implemented in 2017 at the earliest. Since medical expenses have increased continuously every year at a rate higher than inflation, there will be an increase in premiums every year. The premiums of health insurance by that time will far exceed the estimate of 2012. Meanwhile, the older the policyholders are, the more they have to pay in premium. For example, the consultant's estimated premium for


6647

people aged 45 to 49 is $4,750. If the premium is increased by 6% every year, it will become $6,350 when the VHIS is implemented. Together with a margin of 45% in the estimate of the consultant, the premium may increase to $9,200. If we look at the example of people aged 60 to 64, the consultant's estimated premium is $6,900. Together with the annual premium increase, it will then become $9,232. When we factor into this the margin, the maximum premium will be around $13,000. The premiums are really expensive. If the Government does not provide sufficient financial incentives for health insurance, including the previous promise of offering discounts to first-time and long-term policyholders, and only provide a tax deduction of several hundred dollars instead, it will definitely be difficult to attract young and healthy people to join the VHIS. The rationale behind insurance is risk sharing. The VHIS will be sustainable only if there are healthy and young people joining the VHIS one after another to share the risks. It will be difficult to remain sustainable if there are only high-risk people joining the VHIS. Another unresolved problem is that the insurance industry is allowed to offer only standard health insurance products which comply with the 12 Minimum Requirements. As a result, those low-cost health insurance plans with lower benefit limits cannot be offered on the market. I hope the Government will understand that the recommendation made by the Food and Health Bureau actually intervenes in the market direct with the visible hand, such that members of the public cannot choose health insurance plans according to their own needs and financial capacity. The Food and Health Bureau considers that the protection of low-cost health insurance plans is insufficient which, even if some people take out such insurance policies, are actually useless. Therefore, it wants to stipulate that insurance companies can only offer health insurance plans which comply with the 12 Minimum Requirements so as to protect the public. However, it turned out to be doing a disservice out of good intentions as the problem itself is very complicated. There are currently a total of 185 (sic) individual health insurance policies in Hong Kong, half of which have an annual premium of less than $3,000. These are what we call the low-cost health insurance and it reflects that there is a


strong demand in the market. Members may ask why there are so many people taking out those low-cost health insurance policies which cannot provide sufficient protection? In fact, according to the analysis of the insurance industry, there are at least several groups of people who need to take out these low-cost insurance policies. The first group is those policyholders who took out health insurance years ago. As time went by, however, the benefit limits can no longer cover the expenses. Therefore, they take out another low-cost health insurance policy to increase the benefit limits and cover the expenses. This is why there are a considerable number of people currently in Hong Kong who have taken out several insurance policies. The second group is the employees of small and medium enterprises who are each covered by one health insurance policy taken out by their employers. These employees considered that the protection is insufficient and therefore took out another low-cost insurance policy to increase the coverage. The third group is patients with chronic diseases. As existing illnesses are not covered by insurance, they can only take out low-cost insurance policies to cover diseases which they do not have. The fourth group is young people with limited financial means who believe their chances of falling ill are small. Therefore, they first take out low-cost health insurance policies and will consider increasing the benefit limits when necessary in the future. I, therefore, wish Members could understand that because of various reasons, the public has a really strong demand for low-cost insurance policies. If the Government mandatorily prohibits the public who cannot afford expensive standard plans from taking out low-cost insurance policies, they can only return to public hospitals when they fall ill. There may be hundreds of thousands of them. By then, the number of people waiting at public hospitals will increase drastically instead, which completely defeats the purpose of the VHIS. Meanwhile, if low-cost insurance policies are not available, small and medium companies can hardly compete with large companies. In the end, large insurance companies may monopolize the health insurance market. I think none of us would like to see that outcome. In fact, the insurance industry has discussed the VHIS for years and solved numerous problems. We are actually only one step from success and I hope the Food and Health Bureau can seriously consider the views of the insurance industry. First, the Government should use the $50 billion earmarked to offer


6649

discounts to first-time and long-term policyholders such that healthy and young people will also be willing to take out health insurance policies and share the risks, thereby actually achieving sustainable development of the VHIS. Second, the Government should abolish the mandatory requirement that insurance companies can only offer insurance products which comply with the 12 Minimum Requirements so as to allow free competition in the market. However, in order to protect the consumers, the Government can make it mandatory for insurance companies to provide clear and full disclosure of the differences in protection between low-cost products and standard products to the consumers. Actually, there is another option. The 12 Minimum Requirements can serve as a blueprint for the insurance industry. Apart from one or two items which will drastically increase the premiums, thereby making the VHIS practically unable to remain sustainable, the insurance sector can make an undertaking on complying with all the requirements before a specific date, which will be subject to supervision by an Independent Insurance Authority. This suggestion will not only allow members of the public to enjoy most of the benefits of standard plans, but also pre-empt a drastic increase in premiums. Therefore, I think the Government should take this proposal into consideration. Lastly, I hope the Food and Health Bureau can take an open attitude to discuss with the insurance sector and draw on collective wisdom such that we can strive for a health insurance system with better protection, premiums and transparency for members of the public. I so submit. MR CHAN HAN-PAN (in Cantonese): President, I will talk about medical services in this session. Right now medical services in Hong Kong face an imbalance between software and hardware, as evidenced by the outbreak of influenza this year. Since mid-December, our hospitals have been overloaded for many weeks. Some specialties have to loan beds to general medicine patients. Some even have to borrow beds from nearby hospitals or other hospital clusters. It is evident that there is an acute problem of software-hardware imbalance. The hospitals have adopted some measures to cope with the situation, for example, providing special allowances to encourage some healthcare workers to work overtime, or hiring some nursing students as


short-term workers as an opportunity for them to work in the hospital. We would like to take this opportunity to express our heartfelt thanks to all the healthcare workers. They have held fast to their jobs under such immense pressure. I hope they will take care of themselves. Some citizens especially reminded me to ask the Secretary to take care of his health as he has been occupied with a heavy workload lately. As regards public medical services, we may not be able to solve the problems with hardware shortly but we can look ahead and envisage some solutions. For example, the Government will develop an acute general hospital at Kai Tak. A joint replacement centre will be set up and the General Out-patient Clinic Public-Private Partnership will be launched in the New Territories East Cluster. The redevelopment and expansion of the Tin Shui Wai Hospital, the United Christian Hospital and the Kwong Wah Hospital will soon be carried out. We can foresee new services to be offered by many public hospitals but healthcare manpower remains our biggest concern because we know and as Mr CHAN Kin-por has just mentioned, the Government will introduce the Voluntary Health Insurance Scheme. Then many doctors will easily join the private market. Doctors within the public-sector healthcare system may switch to private practice, resulting in public hospitals becoming a training base and citizens the guinea pigs when using public medical services. On the other hand, we have also noticed that the Hospital Authority (HA) is working on manpower planning. We hope the HA will pay special attention to increasing resources for disadvantaged clusters and hospitals. Take the Tuen Mun Hospital in the East New Territories Cluster as an example. I know a doctor who works in the HA but has chosen not to work at the Tuen Mun Hospital even though he lives in Tuen Mun. He said it is because the resources there are very limited and its reputation slightly not so good, so he would rather travel a long way every morning to work at a hospital in another cluster. I hope the HA can support some weaker clusters when making manpower planning for the future so as to help them improve and prevent manpower imbalances in some hospitals. Today I mainly wish to talk about Chinese medical practice and Chinese medicine. The Chief Executive pointed out a highlight in the Policy Address last year, which was to set up a Chinese medicine hospital. The industry was thrilled as we have been waiting for it for so many years. Regardless of how this Chinese medicine hospital will be developed or if it will be developed, finally


6651

we have a goal to look forward to. This year the Policy Address switches the attention to Chinese medicine. The Government actually made a proposal to the utmost disappointment of the industry, which is to set up a Hong Kong Chinese Materia Medica Standards (HKCMMS) testing centre. We believe it is the wrong focus. What is HKCMMS? Maybe most people do not really understand it; they just know that it is some advanced technology but are not very sure about what it really is. Regarding Chinese medicine, HKCMMS can be used for certification or spectrum test, especially the raw materials of Chinese medicine. What is the use of HKCMMS as an academic research? As a matter of fact, the research on the raw materials of Chinese medicine serves some academic purposes but not much actual application. It is because Hong Kong is not a place of origin of crude drugs; how can a scientific analysis of crude drugs help the industry? The industry is not going to use it. Why will they not use it? The reason is the herbs we get at Chinese medicine dispensaries are called "prepared drugs in pieces" (飲片), which are processed crude drugs, while HKCMMS is about the study of raw materials. People may still be confused and do not understand the difference between the two. Let me give an example. Chinese knotweed (何首烏) itself may be toxic and must undergo processes such as being cooked in salt or candied to remove the toxins. But HKCMMS does not study the crude drugs that we are consuming; rather it deals with academic analyses and examinations on the raw materials, which serves no useful purpose for the crude drugs which people and the industry are using. The research is not about the spectrums or the uses of the crude drugs but its raw materials. Hong Kong is not the origin of the raw materials, so what is the point of the study? Therefore, the industry thinks that the Government has placed the wrong focus; HKCMMS is absolutely not what they want. Moreover, regarding the subject of research of HKCMMS, China has a way more sophisticated and comprehensive pharmacopoeia, that is China Pharmacopoeia. Basically the industry is following the pharmacopoeia so what is the use for the Government to propose setting up HKCMMS? And HKCMMS is a set of very high standards. We often exchange views with the industry and they said the Government's intention is too highbrow to be shared, doing things that they do not quite understand the rationale. Of course, HKCMMS does have its use, which is for academic purposes as I have just mentioned.


What are the problems faced by the development of Chinese medicine or Chinese medical practice? I believe what needs to be done urgently is to assist the restructuring of the industry, tackle the registration of medicine, amend the ordinance and confront the reality. Back then when the Government was to set up a Chinese Medicine Port in Hong Kong, the standards were set very high. We felt it was strange and wondered what the reasons were. Compared with the national standards, ours may be remarkably higher. The outcome is higher standards may not be so desirable, because now there are more than 8 000 crude drugs which have not yet been registered for over 10 years. For example, the household brand Yuen Kut Lam Herbal Tea (源吉林萬應甘和茶) has been selling for almost 100 years but now it faces the problem of not being able to register as it does not meet the tall requirements set by the Government. If it cannot be registered, will it disappear? Come on, Yuen Kut Lam Herbal Tea is national intangible cultural heritage; yet it will vanish under the Hong Kong registration system. We can say that war does not kill these Chinese medicines; our system does. I think it is rather absurd and ridiculous. Therefore, I hope the Government can face the reality. Most pharmaceutical companies for Chinese medicine are small and medium enterprises. Suddenly they are asked to meet all kinds of requirements, which are impossible to them. And the Government may ask them to invest a large sum of money to achieve Good Manufacturing Practices or do other testings. But the companies do not see how big the market can be as their medicines cannot access the Mainland market. For this reason, we hope the Government can help them create a common market with the Mainland. The Government sometimes wants these pharmaceutical companies to quickly and properly develop but it is how the saying goes "a sampan could not pose as a gunboat". I hope the Government can exert more efforts to help them. The Democratic Alliance for the Betterment and Progress of Hong Kong has two suggestions for the Secretary: first, to establish a Chinese medicine development fund to support the restructuring of the industry; and second, to break into the Mainland and explore a common market. We also hope the Secretary can listen to the views expressed by the industry at the panel meetings. I still have some time left. I hope in the future ― granting the opportunity or when the seats in the Legislative Council change ― the Chinese medicine industry really wants to have their own representative in the Legislative Council as the Chinese medical practice and Chinese medicine encompass vast


6653

knowledge. They hope it can be done. Actually, there is already a good foundation for the development of Chinese medicine in Hong Kong. As Macao has signed many co-operation agreements with the Mainland, I hope the development of Chinese medicine in Hong Kong will not be surpassed by that in Macao due to our stagnant management. President, I so submit. MR VINCENT FANG (in Cantonese): President, in the policy address last year, the Chief Executive mentioned that the Government would continue to enhance the quality of public healthcare services, including the construction of new hospitals, and the expansion and redevelopment of existing hospitals, and so on. The Liberal Party supported those projects at that time, yet we at the same time raised another concern, that is, how the software could dovetail with the enhancement in hardware, given the serious manpower shortage of medical practitioners and nursing staff in the public-sector healthcare system of Hong Kong. Prof Joseph LEE strongly agreed with this point. Consequently, the Liberal Party then worked together with the Democratic Party and published a proposal titled "Proposal on alleviating the shortage of medical practitioners in the public health care system of Hong Kong" (紓緩香港公共醫療系統的醫生不足問題建議書). The proposal had been submitted to the Food and Health Bureau, the Hospital Authority (HA) and the Medical Council of Hong Kong (MCHK). The Food and Health Bureau and the HA agreed with the content of our proposal, yet they responded that the arrangement relating to relaxing the requirement for non-local medical practitioners under limited registration in practice in the public healthcare system should be referred to the MCHK. We then wrote to the MCHK to request a meeting with them, and it has been nearly nine months since then, but regrettably, the MCHK has not yet responded to this. Although the Policy Address this year has only responded briefly to our proposal, I am glad about that. For it is evident that the Chief Executive is sincere in improving people's livelihood. On the contrary, the MCHK, an organization with the so-called professional autonomy, has turned a deaf ear to our request.


(THE PRESIDENT'S DEPUTY, MR ANDREW LEUNG, took the Chair) Members, whether they use public healthcare services or not, will realize the great demand for public healthcare service of the general public every winter during the peak of the flu season. Regarding the flu outbreak this year, 164 people have died as of yesterday, and 90% of the patients are the elderly and the chronically ill. In view of the great service demand, manpower shortage and increasing life expectancy, the pressure on public healthcare service will keep increasing. This year, the Policy Address has increased the care items for the elderly. Moreover, the authorities will actively examine increasing the number of subsidized undergraduate places in medicine, dentistry and other specialities. The Liberal Party welcomes these initiatives, hence, we give the Chief Executive a score of 60 in terms of people's livelihood in the Policy Address. However, students taking up these additional school places can only join the services by 2025 or even 2029. Does it then mean that we have to continue waiting for eight to 10 hours at the accident and emergency departments in the next 10 years? Medical practitioners with limited registration are only allowed to work for specified employers, mainly the HA and universities. Their services definitely will not affect the private healthcare market and can be adjusted according to demand. When the supply of medical practitioners is sufficient, the authorities may reduce the number of practitioners to be recruited, thus this is an extremely flexible supplementary agreement. In fact, all private medical systems around the world are geared towards industrialization, particularly in aesthetic medicine and medical tourism. A number of countries in Asia are making vigorous efforts in developing these two areas. In Singapore, Thailand, Taiwan, Japan and Korea, rapid development has been achieved in these areas in recent years. The development has brought impetus for the industrialization of the medical sector and attracted quality tourists with high spending power. This is precisely the point Honourable colleagues have mentioned repeatedly in these two days. In the past, due to the archaic laws on private healthcare facilities now in effect, it is extremely difficult to promote the industrialization of the healthcare sector. Secretary Dr KO Wing-man is in the Chamber now, so I have to point out that his present proposal on reviewing the regulation of private healthcare institutions is an extremely


6655

courageous move. Although it is at the consultation stage, we in the Liberal Party support such regulation, for comprehensive legislation is necessary for promoting the healthy development of the industry. However, we hope that in the future legislative exercise, the Government will accept more views from the business sector. If the issue is considered merely from the perspective of the medical profession or professional autonomy of the industry, it may not be possible to identify ways to promote industrialization. Lastly, I would like to talk about food supply. Recently, an official from the Department of Health had spoken on flu in open, stating that contact with live chickens would sharply increase the risk of contracting avian flu. I think the comment of this official is much too arbitrary. May I ask him how many cases among the 247 flu cases recorded this year are associated with contact with live chickens? Since the outbreak of avian flu in the year of reunification, the number of avian flu cases contracted in Hong Kong is basically zero, whereas the number of deaths is only five to six. The Secretary said that the authorities would appoint a consultancy again to examine whether it is suitable to retain the live poultry trade in Hong Kong. I hereby advise the Secretary to save the tens of million dollars for the consultation. When the former Government conducted a consultant study on centralizing the slaughtering of live poultry, I already said that the proposal was impracticable due to the high operating cost in Hong Kong. As a result, despite the Government's offer to grant the use of the site at $1, no tender was submitted. Earlier on, some Members have voiced loudly for a ban on live chicken import. Recently, some people proposed that Hong Kong should adopt the close-door policy and become self-reliant on the supply of food and daily necessities, and loud calls were heard in this Council. Yet we all know that this is a tactic to canvass for votes and strive for government funding. Hong Kong is a densely populated and modern city, and there is a serious shortage of labour, thus it is utterly impossible for Hong Kong to return to an economy led mainly by the agriculture and fisheries industry. Besides, given the globalization of economy and visitor flow, every country has to import food from places around the world. Hong Kong should draw up a set of standards for food safety testing commensurate with the international standards, so as to ensure that all imported food is suitable for consumption by Hong Kong people.


Deputy President, I hope Members will not lose their mind merely because of the thought that "the more outspoken I am, the more coverage I will get from the media". I hope the Secretary and the team led by him will make continued efforts to ensure food safety for Hong Kong people. Please remember, never try to surpass the United Kingdom and catch up with the United States in setting these standards, otherwise, we may have to venture into space to do the sourcing. I so submit. Thank you, Deputy President. MR RONNY TONG (in Cantonese): Deputy President, I would like to talk about the poverty alleviation policy. The speech I deliver today on topics covered in this session is actually closely related to the population policy to be discussed in the next session. However, since no Member raised his hand to speak, I had better speak first. Deputy President, I am concerned about the nurturing of young people. Deputy President, as everyone knows, one of the most important aspects of poverty alleviation is the prevention of inter-generational poverty and increasing social mobility. Deputy President, I am talking about basic knowledge and common sense, not rocket science. We who grew up in the 1950s or the 1960s have similar experiences. I believe the Chief Secretary and the Deputy President, and certainly LEUNG Chun-ying, have experienced growing up in poor or not well-off families but today, they all have career achievements in their own right. However, young people in Hong Kong are less fortunate than we were. Deputy President, the lack of mobility and even the emergence of a downward movement trend in society can undoubtedly be traced back to the era of Donald TSANG. So, the blame cannot be put entirely on LEUNG Chun-ying. However, as the Chief Executive, he was actually duty-bound to make improvements when he saw the woes experienced by the last-term Government or social woes confronting Hong Kong. Deputy President, LEUNG Chun-ying, who is considered to be a learned man with wits, is not unaware of these situations. He should actually know very well the basic measures of poverty alleviation and eradication I mentioned just now. Deputy President, I found the Manifesto for the Chief Executive Election (One Heart, One Vision) at the bottom of a drawer last night. I did not have a chance to ask LEUNG Chun-ying what he meant by the righteous course in


6657

mentioning "steering the righteous course". However, I am convinced that when it comes to nurturing young people in the context of poverty alleviation ― in the words used by the Government ― knowing how to catch fish is the ultimate method to get rid of poverty. With the Deputy President's permission, I will read out a few paragraphs from the Chief Executive's Manifesto for the Chief Executive Election, so that Members can revisit the remarks made by LEUNG Chun-ying when he ran in the Chief Executive Election. Deputy President, in mentioning his vision and the situation at that time, LEUNG Chun-ying was quoted as saying in paragraph 4 in page 1 that "the proportion of Hong Kong's population aged 15 or above who has received tertiary education or above remains at a low level of 23.8%. This is not favourable to Hong Kong's development as a knowledge-based economy.". Deputy President, this reflects that LEUNG Chun-ying's understanding of the situation of young people in Hong Kong at that time can be applied to helping young people get rid of poverty. In talking about education goals, LEUNG Chun-ying pointed out that "the government has the responsibility to provide equal opportunities for access to education. No student within the relevant age groups should be denied schooling for financial reasons, and extra support for students in disadvantaged groups should be provided". In paragraph 7, he went on to say that "education should not be viewed as an expense but rather an investment in our future". Deputy President, his claim that education is an investment is really pretentious. Today, we cannot help asking this question: How much investment has LEUNG Chun-ying made in education after taking office? Deputy President, let me read out from another page regarding higher education. In paragraph 16, LEUNG Chun-ying pointed out that "the Government will broaden the articulation pathways for secondary school graduates … and more subsidized tertiary education opportunities (for both degree and diploma courses) and private university places in Hong Kong". In paragraph 19, he said that the Government would "consider allowing more flexible repayment terms for graduates". In paragraph 22, he undertook to "re-launch the Matching Fund to encourage community investment in higher education", and in paragraph 23, he said "the Government will examine the feasibility of establishing a high-calibre private university and entrench Hong Kong's role as the region's education hub". Deputy President, although this is the third year into LEUNG Chun-ying's rule, he has never honoured his pledge made in the Manifesto. To put it bluntly, he will not take any further action after making remarks.


Deputy President, when we read the Policy Address delivered by LEUNG Chun-ying this year, we may examine at the same time whether or not he has mentioned anything about getting rid of poverty when it comes to poverty alleviation as well as suggesting ways to help young people master fishing skills or pursue higher education. Deputy President, I have looked up the entire Manifesto and found that not a single word was mentioned about all these issues. As regards youth education and development, paragraph 155 of the Policy Address is the only paragraph in which the provision of university education for young people is mentioned. It says, "The community colleges of University Grants Committee funded institutions have experienced rapid growth and some have accumulated large surpluses. We will ask the institutions to critically review their financial position and consider ways to use their surpluses to benefit their students, such as lowering tuition fees and offering scholarships or bursaries for underprivileged students." Deputy President, this is the only paragraph in which LEUNG Chun-ying touched on higher education for young people. However, Members can see that he has shirked all his responsibilities. He pointed out that since the tertiary institutions had accumulated large surpluses, efforts should be made by them, not him. Deputy President, I have just read out excerpts from his Manifesto, and his words are still ringing in my ears. Did he not say that he will encourage the establishment of a private university? Did he not propose increasing the number of subsidized places? How many additional subsidized places have been provided since he took office three years ago? Actually, about one or two weeks ago before the release of the Policy Address, I heard a piece of news which has yet to be confirmed regarding the plan of the SAR Government to reduce the amount of subsidy for non-local students. It was quite comforting to hear the news as I thought that he finally decided to slash the amount of subsidy for non-local students and allocate the resources to subsidizing needy students instead because he had been moved by his conscience. I could never have imagined that this issue is not mentioned in the Policy Address from beginning to end. Instead of saying that nothing can be done now or efforts will be made next year or enough efforts were already made last year, he has not done anything because he has nothing to do with it, and the tertiary institutions have accumulated too many surpluses.


6659

Deputy President, it has been pointed out repeatedly by Members, including me, in this Council that the number of subsidized university places should be increased in order to help needy students. Deputy President, this proposal is put forward by Members almost annually, and motions relating to this question have been passed in this Council, too. Nevertheless, the Government has still turned a deaf ear to our calls. Deputy President, you may take a look at the figures for the past couple of years. The numbers of non-local students were 10 300, 17 900, 20 900 and 26 600 in 2009-2010, 2010-2011, 2011-2012 and 2012-2013 respectively. Deputy President, do such increases reflect the gradual decrease of opportunities for Hong Kong students, including needy students? I say this because I cannot see any marked increase in the number of local university places. I am not talking about local community culture or Hong Kong property for Hong Kong people. I only wish to discuss a very simple idea. Neither am I ostracizing non-local students. I only wish to point out that, insofar as the allocation of resources is concerned ― using the words of the Chief Executive during his election campaign ― resources should be spent on our young people. Why did the Government not do so? Had resources been spent on young people, there should be more rather than fewer opportunities for local students, particularly needy students, to receive tertiary education. Deputy President, what was the Chief Executive actually talking about all the time in the Policy Address? He only kept on saying that young people should visit the Mainland more often for more exchanges and collaboration, or local schools should even match up with Mainland schools as sister schools. Deputy President, all this is not the right cure. I do not understand why the Chief Executive considers it more important for local students to visit the Mainland for exchanges with Mainland students than investing in young people to enable them to receive higher education. Deputy President, I am not saying that exchanges with the Mainland are not important. I am only saying that since the Chief Executive has put his heart and soul into all these things, why did he not honour his pledge made during the election campaign by making more efforts for the needy students? Thank you, Deputy President. DEPUTY PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Does any other Member wish to speak? (No Member indicated a wish to speak)


DEPUTY PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): I will invite three public officers to speak. On the basis of 15-minute speaking time for each officer, they may speak for up to a total of 45 minutes. Chief Secretary for Administration, please speak. CHIEF SECRETARY FOR ADMINISTRATION (in Cantonese): Deputy President, this debate session covers such areas as poverty alleviation, welfare, medical services, elderly care and public health. I thank the 18 Members for speaking and making valuable suggestions. Nine of them have mentioned the subject of retirement protection. As Chairman of the Commission on Poverty (CoP), I will focus on explaining the overall measures adopted by the SAR Government for poverty alleviation in my speech and respond to the questions about retirement protection. Afterwards, the Secretary for Labour and Welfare and the Secretary for Food and Health will give concrete responses in regard to their respective policy areas. Poverty alleviation is one of the major policy initiatives of the current-term Government which has been implemented in the past two and a half years on a continuous basis. For example, the Government first enhanced the Work Incentive Transport Subsidy Scheme as early as January 2013 and implemented the Old Age Living Allowance (OALA) in April of the same year. The latter benefited over 420 000 elderly persons and incurred an additional recurrent expenditure of around $6 billion. With the collaboration with the CoP, the Chief Executive announced the Government's blueprint for poverty alleviation in the 2014 Policy Address, covering numerous measures which benefited different groups of people in need. Among those measures, the Low-income Working Family Allowance (LIFA), which incurs around $3 billion of public money each year, is another major welfare initiative introduced by the Government subsequent to the implementation of the OALA. The introduction of two major social security measures within one term of office of the Government fully demonstrates that the SAR Government is determined and committed to addressing the problem of poverty. Among the Members who spoke on the poverty alleviation effort, if we exclude the opinions on retirement protection, there were actually just a few Members who commented on the poverty alleviation effort of the SAR Government. Among them, both Mr Christopher CHEUNG and Mr Michael TIEN approved of the incumbent Government's efforts in poverty alleviation. Even Mr CHEUNG Kwok-che, who represents the social welfare sector, only


6661

described the poverty alleviation measures proposed in the 2015 Policy Address as "ordinary". This situation is significantly different from the previous one where Members usually made severe criticisms of the Government for not devoting adequate efforts to alleviating poverty. Mr Ronny TONG mentioned just now that the focus of poverty alleviation efforts should be, in fact, nurturing the next generation and providing them with more upward mobility opportunities, thereby achieving the purpose of preventing poverty. Although I completely agree with this idea, perhaps Mr TONG has been forgetful as most of the measures to nurture young people mentioned by him just now were, in fact, proposed by the Chief Executive in the previous Policy Address. In the 2014 Policy Address, the Chief Executive devoted a whole chapter, entitled "Nurture the Next Generation", to proposing initiatives covering education, employment and whole-person development. These initiatives are being implemented one by one, including enhancing support for life planning as well as education and career guidance services for secondary students, developing and promoting vocational education and training, and improving access to higher education, such as providing 2 000 additional places for publicly-funded local undergraduate programmes and granting subsidies to needy students who pursue studies in Mainland universities. Some measures proposed in the 2015 Policy Address, as mentioned by Mr TONG just now, are simply building on those initiatives for further development. I hope Mr TONG can, if possible, refer to the measures of nurturing young people in the 2014 Policy Address as well as the implementation of these measures as stated in the Policy Agenda of this year. However, specific measures related to the youth policy and youth work of the SAR Government will be discussed in detail in the next debate session. Apart from implementing measures to alleviate poverty, the poverty alleviation effort of the incumbent Government also attaches great importance to argumentation. The setting of the poverty line and conduct of an analysis of the poverty situation in Hong Kong annually not only facilitate us in offering suitable remedies for the problems with a better understanding of the current situation, but also enable us to evaluate the effectiveness of our work in an objective manner. The poverty situation of Hong Kong in 2013, which was released at the end of last year, clearly indicated that there had been a significant improvement in the poverty situation as compared with 2012. After the recurrent cash intervention, the poor population in Hong Kong decreased from 1.02 million in 2012 to 970 000 in 2013 while the poverty rate dropped from 15.7% to 14.5%. Both figures reached five-year record lows. Among different age groups, the


improvement in the elders aged 65 and above was the most noticeable. The elderly poverty rate dropped drastically from the poverty rate of 44.9% before policy intervention in 2013 to the post-intervention rate of 30.5%, representing a drop of 14.4% which was significantly larger than the drop of 10.2% in 2012 after policy intervention. Such an improvement was mainly attributable to the full implementation of the OALA which improved the livelihood of over 420 000 elderly persons in need. The poverty line analysis in 2013 once again indicated that working households not receiving Comprehensive Social Security Assistance (CSSA) could not benefit from the existing recurrent cash welfare measures provided by the Government, which amounted to around 140 000 households. When compared with the data in 2012, it only represented a slight decrease of 1.9%, that is, 2 800 households. There were only 1.2 working members on average in these households and almost 30% of their members were children and students. Their living burden was therefore really heavy. The LIFA proposed in the policy address last year was especially established for these families. The Finance Committee of the Legislative Council approved the funding for the relevant scheme in mid-January this year. As the funding was approved six months later than expected, the Labour and Welfare Bureau is now making preparations at full speed for the implementation of the scheme which is expected to be rolled out within one and a half years. It is estimated that 200 000 low-income families with 710 000 people, including more than 170 000 children and students, can benefit from the LIFA. The CoP will, through the annual update of the poverty line analysis, continue to monitor the poverty situation of Hong Kong, evaluate the effectiveness of poverty alleviation initiatives and further carry out other studies based on the poverty line analysis, such as the Poverty Situation Report on Disability released at the end of last year. Other than the policy measures implemented by the Government, the Community Care Fund (CCF) is another major component of the poverty alleviation effort. Since its establishment in 2011, the CCF has launched 27 programmes and benefited more than 870 000 people, fully fulfilling its function of plugging gaps in the existing system. Ten of these programmes which were proved to be significantly effective were incorporated into the Government's regular assistance programme. These programmes incur a recurrent expenditure of around $800 million every year. Subject to the Government's resource availability, we will continue to consider incorporating other programmes proved effective in poverty alleviation into the Government's regular work.


6663

Subsequent to the Government's injection of $15 billion into the CCF in June 2013, we have additional resources to launch more assistance programmes and pilot schemes to help those caught in financial difficulties, and to continue the implementation of programmes proved to be effective but had yet to be incorporated into the Government's regular assistance programme for the time being so that assistance could be provided to the needy continuously. The CCF rolled out a total of four new programmes in 2014 and relaunched the "One-off living subsidy for low-income households not living in public housing and not receiving CSSA" programme earlier this year. The CCF will expand the coverage of the Elderly Dental Assistance Programme later this year to benefit more elderly persons. In response to the proposals made by the Chief Executive in the Policy Address, the CCF will soon start exploring a number of new programmes, including the provision of a one-off special subsidy for primary and secondary students on full grant under the School Textbook Assistance Scheme in the next school year before the implementation of the LIFA. Nine Members have mentioned retirement protection, which is also one of the major initiatives of the 2015 Police Address. Deputy President, retirement protection is an important and complicated public policy issue which should take into account various factors, such as the people's livelihood in our community, public finances and economic development. Given that the universal retirement protection scheme is an extremely controversial topic in society, it is very likely that the discussion on retirement protection will become another political issue. From a more personal perspective, the issue of retirement protection for the elderly is a struggle between sense and sensibilities. Two days ago, when Miss CHAN Yuen-han and I attended a New Year's Eve dinner organized by the Hong Kong Federation of Trade Unions for the elderly, some elders told me that they hoped the Government could launch some non-means-tested retirement protection schemes which could benefit everyone so that they could have peace of mind and enjoy their twilight years. Although I was moved by their wishes, I rationally know that as public resources are limited, the Government is responsible for distributing resources in a sensible manner and spend public money on assisting the elderly who are most in need. Deputy President, although members of the community have discussed the subject of retirement protection for many years, so far we have yet to reach a consensus on the way forward. Nevertheless, the incumbent Government has not evaded the issue. Given that the Chief Executive had proposed in the Election Manifesto that the Government should study how to introduce short-,


medium- and long-term measures to improve the present social security and retirement protection systems, the CoP commissioned a team led by Prof Nelson CHOW in May 2013 to conduct a study on the "Future development of retirement protection in Hong Kong". The research report was submitted to the CoP in August last year, which was subsequently released in full for the public's reference. After the release of the report prepared by Prof CHOW's team, extensive discussions were induced in the community with divergent views. Some people believed that retirement protection is the basic right of the elderly instead of welfare, and supported the "demo-grants" proposed by the consultancy team and other non-means-tested schemes with a uniform payment rate. Yet, a considerable number of people considered that resources should be allocated to the elderly in need and opposed any non-means-tested proposals. They have also expressed concerns and doubts about various critical problems, such as who will be paying, impact on public finances as well as the sustainability and practicability of the proposals. Therefore, the views on this subject in the community are different from what Mr CHEUNG Kwok-che has described as "unanimous support for universal retirement protection". Even for Members who spoke in the debate today, we noticed that they actually had a serious disagreement over retirement protection. Insofar as the arguments concerning retirement protection stated in the Policy Address are concerned, the Chief Executive has highlighted several key points for addressing the issue. I would like to briefly explain them to all Members. First of all, we believe that the primary consideration of exploring retirement protection should be providing better protection for the twilight years of the elderly in need. Although I have previously stated that as indicated by the 2013 poverty line analysis which was released at the end of last year, there was a significant improvement in the poverty rate of the elderly as compared with 2012, the incumbent Government should enhance the livelihood protection and welfare for the 285 000 elderly people who are still living below the poverty line. Second, the Government is responsible for explaining the relevant principle of administration when addressing this complicated issue. To begin with, the incumbent Government adopts the previous principle of welfare policy to encourage young people and adults to become self-reliant while allocating social security and welfare to help those who cannot provide for themselves. Another relevant principle is public finance management. As Hong Kong implements a


6665

low tax policy and public resources are limited, the Government must be extremely careful with the allocation of resources. The Working Group on Long-Term Fiscal Planning appointed by the Financial Secretary published a report early last year. It pointed out that with the ageing population, even if we provide the existing welfare and medical services as the basic measures without any enhancement, the ageing population and inflation alone may lead to a structural deficit around 10 years later. Therefore, not only do we have to address the extra financial commitment arising from enhancing the retirement protection of the elderly and social security measures, we also have to secure funds for the existing systems. Regardless of whether we will adopt the funding proposals of amassing contributions by employers and employees, increasing taxes or introducing new taxes, the community must fully understand the pros and cons of each proposal, including its sustainability, affordability and robustness as well as the impact on the long-term development of Hong Kong. Third, we hope that the subsequent public consultation can be conducted on a rational, pragmatic and comprehensive basis with a view to forging a consensus and mapping out the way forward. Some people believed that the Government had already taken a preconceived stance of opposing the universal retirement protection proposal before commencing the public consultation. I would like to point out that the CoP is still discussing how the consultation should be conducted and members basically agreed that the Government can clearly explain in the consultation document its views on the future development of retirement protection. Meanwhile, however, the Government should allow room for discussion in the community on various proposals, including the universal retirement protection proposal. Moreover, members considered that as this issue has been discussed in society for many years and the consultancy team led by Prof Nelson CHOW has also provided a solid basis for discussion, the consultation document should therefore put forward concrete proposals for public discussion. As stated in the Policy Address, the Chief Executive has asked the Financial Secretary to earmark $50 billion for the financial commitments in the proposal formulated after the public consultation. This fully indicates the sincerity and determination of the Government to enhance the arrangement for retirement protection. The CoP just held a meeting early this month to follow up on the discussion on the consultation exercise. Mr TANG Ka-piu asked why the public consultation will not be commenced until the fourth quarter. Given that the Census and Statistics Department will release the updated population and labour


force projections sometime in the middle of this year, members agreed to make use of the latest projection figures and the projection method adopted in the report submitted by the consultancy team to update the financial assessment of the relevant proposals. Members also agreed to extending the projection period to 50 years. The CoP will set up a working group later to make preparations for the consultation exercise. Having considered the lead time required for preparing the consultation document, the CoP expected the public consultation to be launched in the fourth quarter of this year. As the issue is complicated and the public consultation has yet to commence, we oppose any proposal requiring the Government's commitment at the present stage to implementing universal retirement protection. With these remarks, Deputy President, I urge Members to support the Policy Address of this year. Thank you, Deputy President. SECRETARY FOR LABOUR AND WELFARE (in Cantonese): Deputy President, I thank the 18 Honourable Members for the speeches delivered by them just now. I will focus on giving responses to elderly care and other areas of welfare. With poverty alleviation, elderly care and support for the disadvantaged made the key policy initiatives of the current-term Government, the Labour and Welfare Bureau has been pulling out all the stops to formulate policies conducive to people's livelihood by adopting a proactive and pragmatic strategy to provide more targeted and better services and sparing no effort in building a caring and inclusive society. In order to promote active ageing, we will enhance support for the Elder Academy Scheme in terms of finance, curriculum development, training for trainers and district network for the sustainable development of the Scheme to encourage elderly people to actively take part in community affairs, continue contributing to society and lead a fruitful elderly life. Furthermore, the Government is making arrangements at full speed to extend the Public Transport Fare Concession Scheme for the Elderly and Eligible Persons with Disabilities, also known as the $2 concessionary elderly fare scheme, to green minibuses. The Scheme is expected to be extended to the first batch of approximately 380 routes, or about 78% of the total number of routes, at the end of next month. It is hoped that the second phase can be launched two or three months after the extension of the Scheme to the first batch of green minibuses.


6667

On the provision of appropriate support for the frail elderly, the Government will, as usual, fully implement the policy objective of promoting "ageing in place as the core, institutional care as back-up" and continue to allocate resources to increasing the number of subsidized care services and upgrading the existing standard of services. Among others, the Government will provide an additional 230 or so day care places in 2014-2015. Starting from next month, 1 500 enhanced home and community care places will come into full operation one after another. As for the number of subsidized places, an additional 1 580 places will be provided from 2014-2015 to 2016-2017. The Elderly Commission, which is studying the feasibility of introducing vouchers for residential care service for the elderly, is expected to submit a report in the middle of this year. Meanwhile, the Government has earmarked approximately $800 million for the launch of 3 000 vouchers in total within three years from 2015-2016 to 2017-2018, with a view to providing an additional 5 000 subsidized residential care places during the tenure of the current-term Government. In the face of a rapidly ageing population in Hong Kong, there has been an increasing demand for elderly services. The Elderly Commission is fully committed to the Elderly Services Programme Plan and is expected to submit a report in the middle of next year. On the provision of support for the disadvantaged, the Government is concerned about the needs of people with disabilities and has continued to make efforts on many fronts to enhance support for people with disabilities and their carers. The Government will launch a pilot scheme to invite non-governmental organizations operating subvented pre-school rehabilitation services to provide on-site rehabilitation services in kindergartens or kindergarten-cum-child care centres. We will also increase the social worker manpower of subvented Parents/Relatives Resource Centres to provide more systematic training and more opportunities for experience sharing. As regards mental wellness, the Government has continued to provide additional resources to the Integrated Community Centres for Mental Wellness. To date, resources of over $250 million per annum have been allocated to these Centres. In 2015-2016, the Government will enhance the manpower in the


Integrated Community Centres for Mental Wellness while enhancing support for ex-mentally ill persons living in the community, persons with suspected mental health problems, their families/carers and local residents. Meanwhile, we will explore the implementation of a pilot project for trained ex-mentally ill persons to serve as peer supporters in the Community Psychiatric Services units to share their recovery experience. Pinpointing the needs of persons with autism, we will implement a pilot project to provide their parents/carers with support and training. The project will also provide professional training for service providers of persons with autism. Concerned about the greater support required by users of rehabilitation services due to the ageing population, the Government has, over the past two years, provided an additional $160 million or so in recurrent expenditure to enhance services for users of elderly services. In the year ahead, the Government will increase the manpower of long stay care homes for ex-mentally ill persons and enhance the allied health services of hostels for moderately mentally handicapped persons to provide care and support for ageing service users. The funding application for the Low-income Working Family Allowance was passed by the Finance Committee of the Legislative Council on 16 January. The Labour and Welfare Bureau is now carrying out the relevant preparatory work at full steam in the hope that the scheme can be launched in the second quarter of the following year. In the interim, the Government will invite the Community Care Fund to consider granting a one-off special allowance in 2015-2016 to primary and secondary students eligible for full grant under the Textbooks Assistance Scheme prior to the implementation of the Low-income Working Family Allowance. A number of Honourable Members have pointed out the importance of planning. This I fully agree. On planning in the medium-to-longer term, the Labour and Welfare Bureau and the social welfare sector are actively taking forward approximately 60 projects under the Special Scheme on Privately Owned Sites for Welfare Uses. It is planned that an additional 9 000 or so elderly service places can be provided in the next five to 10 years, with around 7 000 and 2 000 being residential and day care places respectively. Meanwhile, approximately 8 000 rehabilitation places will be provided, of which 2 000 or so


6669

will be used for residential purposes and the rest will be used for day training. I believe these places will definitely greatly ameliorate the existing waiting time and improve the delivery of services. This policy can be described as a breakthrough, too. On the other hand, we have adopted a new mindset in launching the Navigation Scheme for Young Persons in Care Services to provide 1 000 places in total in the next few years to encourage young people to join the workforce of elderly and rehabilitation care services. Enrolment is expected to open in the second half of this year. There have been calls from Members for enhancement of child care services. In fact, a series of measures to enhance child care services has been unveiled in the Policy Address this year. From 2015-2016 onwards, additional places of Extended Hours Service will be provided progressively in phases at aided child care centres and kindergarten-cum-child care centres in districts with high demand. As a result, the overall number of places will see a four-fold increase from around 1 200 at present to 6 200-odd. Furthermore, about 100 additional aided long full-day child care places will be provided in 2017-2018. Furthermore, we will invite non-governmental welfare organizations to establish work-based child care centres through the Special Scheme on Privately Owned Sites for Welfare Uses, as mentioned just now, and two such organizations have responded positively. Besides, the Government will explore the feasibility of providing in the proposed Government Complex in Tseung Kwan O, on a pilot basis, child care places for staff members. We will also launch a pilot project to help grandparents become well-trained child carers in a home setting and commission a consultancy study in 2015-2016 to advise on the long-term development of child care services. On women affairs, I thank Dr Helena WONG for her positive appraisal of the Government's decision and her call for all government bureaux and departments to, starting from 2015-2016, make reference to the Gender Mainstreaming Checklist in formulating major government policies and initiatives. This decision illustrates that the Government attaches great importance to gender equality and women's well-being. The Government will also enhance training for civil servants with regard to their sensitivity to gender viewpoints.


As regards the call made by Mr Christopher CHEUNG for the Government to extend the Guangdong Scheme for the Old Age Living Allowance, also known as the "fruit grant", to cover the Fujian Province, I would like to explain here that the Guangdong Scheme is founded on the uniqueness of Hong Kong and the Guangdong Province, including their geographical, cultural, transport, economic and family factors. Although we have no plan to extend the Scheme to other provinces at the present stage, we will sum up our experience gained in the Guangdong Scheme in due course and chart our way forward in the long term. During the process, we will definitely explore the feasibility of extending the Scheme to other provinces, including the Fujian Province. Deputy President, the Policy Address this year clearly illustrates the positive and proactive attitude taken by the SAR Government in welfare and fully demonstrates its sincerity and commitment. With these remarks, I hope Members will support this year's Policy Address. Thank you. SECRETARY FOR FOOD AND HEALTH (in Cantonese): Deputy President, I thank Honourable Members for the views expressed and suggestions made by them in the panel meetings held previously and the debate today with regard to food safety and medical and health services. I would like to spend the rest of the time on responding to a host of policies related to food safety and relevant matters in the first part and policies related to medical and health services in the second. Firstly, on the New Agricultural Policy, the current-term Government pays great attention to the development of agricultural policies. Insofar as the New Agricultural Policy is concerned, a public consultation is being conducted on the establishment of an Agricultural Park and a Sustainable Agriculture Development Fund helping farmers move up the value chain, expanding the marketing of local agricultural products and brand building. Two Honourable Members have expressed views on agricultural policies, including Mr Tommy CHEUNG, who mentioned that Hong Kong's ability to produce quality produce should be taken seriously. In this respect, I would like to point out that the implementation of the New Agricultural Policy is precisely in response to the aspirations for quality agriculture and local agricultural products. Mr Steven HO mentioned that, despite our mention of the agricultural policy, it


6671

appeared that the development of the poultry and fisheries industries had not been mentioned this time around. I hope the Honourable Member can understand, and I think he should have noted, that when it comes to the development of the fisheries industry, the Government has been taking forward policies related to the development of fisheries in a gradual and orderly manner having regard to the various recommendations made earlier by the Committee on Sustainable Fisheries, including the Sustainable Fisheries Development Fund proposed in the policy addresses delivered before the current-term Government. I hope Honourable Members and various sectors of the community can support the New Agricultural Policy and actively promote the modernization and sustainable development of local agriculture. I will also consider the collected views and formulate proposals and implement plans having regard to the disposable resources and required permissions. On fisheries development, we have to say a few words about the Fisheries Development Loan Fund (the Fund). Earlier, we proposed to the Finance Committee that the approved commitment for the Fund be increased from $290 million to $1.1 billion and, at the same time, around $400 million be set aside for providing loans to inshore trawlers. In view of the progress of scrutiny of this funding proposal by the Finance Committee in January 2015 and having regard to the Lunar New Year holidays, the Government subsequently proposed revising the cut-off date for according priority to dealing with loan applications made by inshore trawlers and decided to withdraw its funding application temporarily. We understand and appreciate that it is the hope of the fisheries industry for the Fund to receive funding at an early date. Therefore, the authorities will submit the revised funding proposal expeditiously to strive for an early passage of the relevant funding application. Several Members have expressed concern about an avian flu outbreak and the supply chain of local live chickens. On reducing the risk of an avian flu outbreak, we will, as in the past, adopt a comprehensive prevention and surveillance programme to reduce the risk of an epidemic outbreak in Hong Kong. Late last year, Mainland chickens were tested positive for H7N9 in Hong Kong. As a result, the Cheung Sha Wan Temporary Wholesale Poultry Market was closed for operation temporarily for 21 days, thereby affecting the supply of live chickens from the Mainland to Hong Kong. With the passage of time, however, the Cheung Sha Wan Temporary Wholesale Poultry Market was reopened on 22 January, with the supply of live poultry from the Mainland


commencing on 10 February, too. We hope to strive for full resumption of supply of live poultry from the Mainland to Hong Kong expeditiously while ensuring the safety of live poultry supplied by the Mainland to Hong Kong. On the other hand, some Members, including Dr Helena WONG and Mr Tommy CHEUNG, have raised questions about the self-sufficiency of live chickens in Hong Kong. I have to give an explanation here. I think Members are aware that there are avian flu outbreaks even in advanced countries, including European countries and some Southeast Asian countries, despite their high degree of biosafety. This illustrates that no matter how well a place has performed, there is no guarantee of zero risk. However, Hong Kong is different from other places in that we still have a supply chain of live chickens. Such being the case, we have to work in collaboration with the industry and the Government before this supply chain can be protected. In this respect, we can note from the repercussions triggered in the community (including the losses incurred by the industry) whenever live chickens are tested positive for the avian flu that Members appear to be unable to accept that we will actually face certain risks and have to pay a price in order to maintain the supply chain of live chickens. Such being the case, the Government is preparing to commission a consultancy to examine whether or not the sale of live poultry should be retained in Hong Kong in the future. Here, I have to emphasize again that the Government has no preset decision. The decision to commission a consultancy report is attributed to Hong Kong's supply chain, not purely to the risks posed by avian flu. Members must understand that we have actually exerted our utmost to minimize the risk in Hong Kong. Notwithstanding this, I wonder if the community is psychologically prepared for the impacts produced during the suspension of supply of live poultry due to the risks faced by us and is willing to pay the price. It is precisely for this reason that this policy has to be reviewed again from time to time. Regarding the regulation of nutrition and health claims for food for infants and young children and the policy on reducing the intake of salt and sugar in food, a public consultation is being conducted on the regulation of nutrition and health claims for formula products and prepackaged food for infants and young children under the age of 36 months. I note that during the consultation period, except for some questions raised by the industry on specific operation, people are generally supportive of this direction.


6673

On the other hand, we have noted that, compared with infectious diseases, the health threat posed by non-communicable diseases to society as a whole is even greater. Therefore, the Government will devise and implement a strategic plan for encouraging reduced intake of salt and sugar in food so as to promote a healthy diet. On overall food safety and detection, we have planned to expand the Food Safety Laboratory in Pok Fu Lam to enhance its detection capability and efficiency to complement our efforts in upgrading overall food safety in Hong Kong. A consultation at the district level is now being conducted on this proposal. I hope people in local districts can appreciate the importance of this project in ensuring food safety for the general public and render us support by all means. Regarding Members' concern about the safety of edible oil and the recycling of waste cooking oil locally, we have decided that a public consultation be held in the first half of this year on these two issues. The Centre for Food Safety will also step up sample testing of edible oil imported from various places. Regarding the mention of the regulation of cooked meat and heavy metal by Dr Helena WONG, I am actually very pleased with her attention to this matter. We have made it clear that efforts in these several areas will be activated to strengthen the regulatory framework on this front by all means. Insofar as the columbarium policy is concerned, we will continue to exert all efforts to complement the efforts of the Legislative Council in scrutinizing the Private Columbaria Bill in the hope that the relevant licensing regime can be implemented expeditiously for enhanced regulation of private columbaria. We have embarked on consultations one after another on the 24 sites for columbarium development in the 18 districts. Last year, the North District Council and the Tuen Mun District Council were consulted separately for their views on the sites in Sandy Ridge and Chai Wan, which will altogether provide some 225 000 new niches. After the release of the Policy Address, the Tuen Mun District Council and the North District Council were separately consulted on the two sites in Tsang Tsui and Wo Hop Shek, too. With the completion of the construction of columbaria on these two sites, 204 000 niches in total can be provided. Hence, the four programmes will altogether provide more than 400 000 niches. We hope various political parties and relevant district organizations can continue to support these programmes, such that other columbarium programmes can pass


through District Councils and the Legislative Council for completion early. Certainly, we will continue to strive to implement and promote burials which are more environmentally-friendly among members of the public. As regards public markets, a consultancy study was commissioned earlier on ways to enhance the business environment of public markets, and some recommendations have been made by the consultancy on the functions and positioning of public markets. After listening to the views of the relevant subcommittee in January this year, we will formulate preliminary proposals in the next several months and listen to the views of the stall operators and other stakeholders. Certainly, we understand Members' concern. We also hope to upgrade the operating environment of small business operators through the enhancement programme. On this front, we will continue to collaborate with the relevant subcommittee and then implement the relevant plan step by step. I now turn to medical and health services in the second part. In respect of medical and health services, Hong Kong has a healthcare system encompassing both public and private sectors, with the former assuming a key role. Moreover, we have always attached great importance to the development of medical and health services in Hong Kong. We certainly disagree with Dr KWOK Ka-ki who pointed out in his amendment that the Chief Executive failed to respond to people's demand for an overhaul of the public healthcare services. Actually, the SAR Government is constantly reviewing the demand for and development of healthcare services in Hong Kong, and will adopt appropriate measures to upgrade the quality and quantity of our healthcare system overall. In August 2013, the Steering Committee on Review of Hospital Authority was set up to conduct a comprehensive review of the operation of the Hospital Authority (HA). So far, eight meetings have been convened by the Steering Committee to review the institutional structure of the HA. When a report is submitted on the recommendations in due course, I hope Members can see that we will give a full response to the views expressed by the public and other stakeholders, including front-line staff members, on the HA's existing operation and utilization of resources. On healthcare manpower planning, a strategic study has been conducted on healthcare manpower planning and professional development with the goal of completing the Strategic Review on Healthcare Manpower Planning and Professional Development by 2015. Meanwhile, we are, as Mr Vincent FANG


6675

should have already noted, actively studying increasing the number of publicly-funded degree places in medicine, dentistry and other health disciplines in the 2016-2017 to 2018-2019 funding cycle for universities. As regards Mr FANG's concern about the issue of doctors from overseas, I am very pleased that the Honourable Member also noted our collaboration with the Medical Council of Hong Kong to relax the requirements in several aspects, including the number of examination sittings and the internship requirement after passing the examination, in the hope that the medical practitioners with limited registration mechanism can achieve greater effectiveness later to help us boost our healthcare manpower during the transitional period. On the enhancement of healthcare services, besides reviewing the public healthcare services and making healthcare manpower planning, we will also implement a series of measures in 2015-2016 to enhance healthcare services. These measures definitely include increasing the number of hospital beds, number of sessions and some operation theatre facilities. Nevertheless, I will not go into the details here. On major works projects, as Members are aware, the Chief Executive has announced in the Policy Address this year the construction of a new acute hospital in Kai Tak. Other expansion and redevelopment projects are also being carried out in the United Christian Hospital, Kwai Chung Hospital, Kwong Wah Hospital and the Queen Mary Hospital. The construction of new hospitals, including the Tin Shui Wai Hospital and the Hong Kong Children's Hospital, is also in good progress. Furthermore, in the year to come, the HA will allocate approximately $1 billion to subsidize 1 360 or so minor works for clinic expansion, increasing the number of hospital beds and improving other healthcare facilities. As regards the regulation of private healthcare facilities and the Voluntary Health Insurance Scheme (VHIS), as we all know, a consultation was already launched in late December on these two issues. I am very pleased to take note of the proposal put forward by Mr CHAN Kin-por, a representative of the insurance industry, on how the industry can collaborate with the Government to strive to implement the VHIS. I reiterate that we will listen to the views of the industry and continue to work with it in the hope that the relevant Scheme can be implemented.


Regarding Members' concern about how the Government will spend the $50 billion mentioned earlier, although we know that the VHIS proposed this time around might not exhaust the entire sum, I would like to reiterate that, in addition to the $50 billion, other schemes (including public-private partnership and tax rebate arrangements) will be put in place to help us take forward the VHIS. Prof Joseph LEE mentioned that preventive medicine should be taken seriously. Meanwhile, I believe Prof LEE must have also noted that the Government has actually proposed some screenings in several areas, including screenings for colorectal cancer and metabolic disorders in newborns. We will collaborate with the profession and take primary healthcare and preventive medicine very seriously. As regards the elderly dental service, the Government put forward a new proposal this year to extend the elderly dental service subsidized by the Community Care Fund to elderly persons aged 80 or above who are also Old Age Living Allowance recipients. I certainly take note of Members' opinion that this service is in general inadequate. Nevertheless, I would like to reiterate that the major consideration in launching this measure at this stage is manpower resources, such as the limited number of dentists. The present proposal, under which elderly persons aged 80 or above are covered, actually covers 130 000 elderly people. Through the provision of this service to this age group, we hope to extend the service to other age groups as well. On Chinese medicine, Mr CHAN Han-pan expressed in particular his hope that we could listen to some of the difficulties encountered by the sector. Meanwhile, I am very pleased to note that Mr CHAN is aware of our efforts in launching a programme on the Hong Kong Chinese Materia Medica Standards and setting up a testing centre. Hence, in the year to come, besides launching a testing centre programme, we will also continue to take forward a pilot scheme under the HA on making proper preparations for the mode of providing Chinese medicine in-patient services in Hong Kong long term, so that a mode of operation suitable for Hong Kong can be adopted if the proposal on building a Chinese medicine hospital can really be implemented in the future. On mental health, Members should be aware that a Steering Committee is already making such effort. Improvements in certain aspects have been proposed in the Policy Address as well. As regards Members' concern that the


6677

Government has merely provided some healthcare services in disregard of publicity and the importance of emphasizing mental health among the public, the Department of Health will launch a territory-wide public education and publicity campaign next year to dovetail with the non-governmental organizations and district organizations in promoting the importance of mental health and mental wellness. On influenza, many Members are concerned that the peak seasons are quite acute this year. On the one hand, we will continue to provide proper in-hospital treatment and, on the other, we will heed good advice by enhancing the transparency of risks communication and dissemination of information by all means. I hope Members can note that the HA has formulated overall contingency measures ahead of the peak seasons of providing services against influenza in winter by providing 205 additional hospital beds in 2014-2015 and another 250 additional hospital beds in 2015-2016. To cope with the peak seasons of influenza in winter, 282 additional hospital beds will also be provided for a six-month period. The HA has striven to ensure that we can cope with the peak seasons of influenza through manpower deployment, and so on. I wish to point out that if the HA is under extreme pressure to provide services, we do not rule out the possibility of slighting postponing the provision of non-emergency services and meeting the present need for services first by all means. Considering the antigenic drift of the H3N2 virus which has resulted in reduced effectiveness of the current vaccine available against H3N2, we have explained to the public that the H3N2 vaccine, despite its relatively low protection, can still offer extra protection in some measure to encourage high-risk persons to be vaccinated. On the other hand, we will endeavour to procure vaccines which can offer protection against the antigen of influenza viruses, but they might not be available until April. An expert committee set up under the Centre for Health Protection will decide who will receive vaccination or be accorded priority for vaccination and make proper efforts and planning. Deputy President, I hope Members can take note of the fact that we have comprehensive plans on food safety and related areas as well as healthcare services. These plans will be implemented in a gradual and orderly manner to promote the healthcare system and food safety. I hope Honourable Members can support this Policy Address and other related measures. Thank you, Deputy President.


DEPUTY PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): The third debate session has ended. We now proceed to the fourth debate session. The debate themes are "Population, Education, Manpower, Youth, Arts and Culture and Sports". This session covers the following six policy areas: Population Policy, Education, Manpower, Youth, Arts and Culture and Sports. Members who wish to speak in this session will please press the "Request to speak" button. DR CHIANG LAI-WAN (in Cantonese): On behalf of the Democratic Alliance for the Betterment and Progress of Hong Kong (DAB), I will speak on areas related to the manpower policy outlined in the Policy Address and support the Motion of Thanks proposed by Mr Andrew LEUNG. (THE PRESIDENT resumed the Chair) According to the projection currently made by the Government on manpower resources, although Hong Kong's total population is growing at a slow rate of 0.6% on average per annum, the workforce is expected to peak at 3.71 million in 2018 and then drop progressively to 3.52 million in 2041. This means that the workforce will gradually decrease while the elderly population continues to grow. In other words, one young person may most probably have to support two elderly persons. I believe the Government is very much concerned about this issue. This is why the Chief Executive has proposed a five-pronged strategy in the Policy Address with "Optimizing Our Population for the Future" as the goal for the future, including "Fostering a Supportive Environment for Forming and Raising Families" and "Active Ageing", in order to address the new challenges brought by demographic changes. As we all know, the birth rate in Hong Kong has continued to remain at a low level in the past decade between 0.9% and 1.3%, or one child to every two persons, which is completely incompatible with the population "replacement rate". Some young people I know appear to prefer late marriage or even remaining single. Why? I have been told by many of them that more than


6679

$1 million will invariably be incurred for raising a child. If better planning is required, several million dollars might have to be spent on nurturing a child. What policy does the Government have on this front? I happened to meet a pregnant woman who told me that the expenses should be more than that because there were many spending items even before the birth of a child. She said that the expenses on prenatal checks, including ultrasonic and blood tests and amniocentesis, and the purchase of new maternity clothes were very high. In this respect, has the Government taken young mothers into consideration? Not only does a young mother have to take care of her future child, but she also has to look after two elderly family members, and adding to this her parents-in-law, one young couple might very probably have to look after four elderly members in the family. Hence, many young people dare not start a family even if they wish to. They just hope that the Government can give them a helping hand. How can the Government offer them assistance? In my opinion, although the Government is often haunted by the poverty alleviation and elderly problems, it should look farther ahead by considering the growing burden on the next generation. When we talk about environmental protection, we will say that more resources should be kept for the next generation for the sake of Planet Earth. Given that resources are most practical, will the Government consider setting up a baby fund for our next generation when the coffers have abundant money now? Our basic concept is that a bank account should be set up by the Government for every eligible child and a considerable amount of funds be injected as savings on an annual basis. It is hoped that returns can be accumulated through investment of the funds, and adequate money will thus become available for the children to make down payments for flat purchases when they grow up or meet such expenses as university tuition fees. I believe this concept of setting up a baby fund can alleviate the burden on families in raising children and give young parents a greater incentive for childbirth. If the Government really hopes to encourage childbirth among the public, please take some practical actions. I would like to point out that, in addition to setting up a baby fund, life planning has been taken more and more seriously by society as well as the Government. For instance, the Chief Executive announced in the policy address last year that the Government had decided to deploy one teacher to each school to provide relevant counselling or courses on life planning. Actually, many people


consider that there is no need for the Government to do so because young people know how to making planning for themselves. Honestly, as we all know, some parents with a relatively high standard of educational attainment know how to think farther ahead for their children and even help them plan for their future. For instance, as Members might also be aware, there is recently a radio commercial about a father telling his son that he will be sent to a prestigious school or even abroad to sit for a pilot licence examination. The audience will definitely not realize that the parents in the commercial are actually making preparations for their baby until they hear it cry. If parents can give young people a helping hand and provide them with a stepping stone, their path ahead will certainly be easier. However, as we also know, since some grass-roots parents are already unable to take care of their own life because they have to toil, how can they have the time to plan for their children? Hence, it is incumbent upon the Government to help young people to make life planning. Although many teachers are responsible for counselling in schools, what sort of counselling do they provide? Apart from vocational counselling, honestly, we can see that they might be unable to fully understand even their own life planning. Hence, I hope that the Bureau can provide more specialized training for them and, what is more, find out the effectiveness of the training on an annual basis. For instance, through requesting the schools concerned to review the relevant programmes annually, the Bureau can find out the effectiveness of the programme, so that it can constantly enhance the policy related to life planning, thus enabling young people to truly and clearly understand their own interests and have an idea of the global trend. So, they will know what jobs are suitable for them when they leave school several years later. At present, quite a number of young people cannot find a job after leaving school because they have chosen the wrong subjects to study. Sometimes, a post may attract thousands of young people, but only dozens of job vacancies are available. This has thus prevented young people from earning more. It is also one of the major factors hindering their upward mobility. Besides life planning, the DAB also welcomes the allocation of funding by the Government to the provision of more opportunities for exchanges and collaboration between local and Mainland students, thus encouraging young students in Hong Kong to be forward-looking, to look farther away and to better understand the situation in the Mainland. Insofar as young people are concerned, the offer of one more opportunity of exchange in the Mainland when they attend secondary schools will help broaden their vision.


6681

Furthermore, we welcome the construction of four additional youth hostels to be rented out to young people at 60% of the market rate, in order to help alleviate their pressure of making rental payments. I so submit. DR LAM TAI-FAI (in Cantonese): President, the development of education is an articulated train of links, with universities, secondary schools, primary schools and kindergartens each playing an equally important role. All along, the many discontents in the primary education sector with the Government over the unfair and unreasonable establishment and rank structure of primary schools have led to the accumulation of enormous grievances. Both the primary school and education sectors have, over the years, continued to make demands on the Government, launch campaigns and give explanations in a bid to urge it to address the establishment of primary schools squarely. Nevertheless, the Education Bureau has continued to turn a blind eye to this matter with persistent indifference, thereby dealing a serious blow to the morale and development of primary school teachers. As a result, quite a number of teachers, especially the young ones, have decided to quit or not to join the ranks of primary school teachers for concerns about the reality and their prospects. President, it is mentioned in paragraph 154 of the Policy Address this year that the Government will progressively increase the graduate teacher ratio in primary schools over the next three years from 50% to 65% to attract more talents to join the teaching force of primary education. However, the Government has not yet come up with a concrete plan and timetable to state clearly when the graduate teacher ratio in primary schools can be brought on par with that in secondary schools. President, nearly all primary teachers are now degree holders, but still they are not offered or do not enjoy the remuneration to which graduate teachers are entitled. For instance, although the remuneration for primary school principals is 30% lower than that for secondary school principals, they have to meet the same standard of qualification certification and academic requirements, as well as the same working hours, responsibilities, and even pressure. However, the remuneration for primary school principals is much lower. Hence, in all senses and sensibilities, I very much hope that the Government can give a clear explanation to the primary education sector expeditiously and address this unfair phenomenon immediately. President, Chief Executive LEUNG Chun-ying has pledged in his Election Manifesto to implement 15-year free education expeditiously. Although he did not state clearly in his Manifesto when 15-year free education would be


implemented other than the reference to "expeditiously", I believe the public and parents would interpret the word "expeditiously" as "immediately after taking office" or "in a couple of years". I believe parents would definitely not interpret "expeditiously" as the last year of his term of office or after his being re-elected. Actually, no one can tell if he can be re-elected for another term. Perhaps many parents do not wish to see him re-elected. In his first policy address, the Chief Executive indicated that a select committee would be set up to study this matter. In his second policy address, he mentioned that the select committee was studying how three-year free kindergarten education could be implemented in concrete terms. In this year's Policy Address, he mentioned that proposals would be put forward in the middle of this year. President, the Chief Executive did not follow the good examples. Instead, he followed the example of Mr Albert CHAN in launching a filibuster, staging filibusters repeatedly, and making repeated attempts to procrastinate on the matter as well as "cooking congee without rice". Honestly, if Members consider it wrong for Mr Albert CHAN to filibuster and condemn him for his disgusting behaviour and impeding social development, then according to the same standard, Members should also condemn LEUNG Chun-ying for his disgusting behaviour and impeding the development of 15-year free education. President, if the Chief Executive has no intention to implement 15-year free education now, or he realizes that it is simply impossible to do so or his pledge made during the election was a dishonoured cheque, I very much hope that he can tell parents and members of the public frankly instead of giving them hope or letting them down in the future. President, I detest badly the politicization of education, but Secretary Eddie NG has recently been found politicizing education. I also found a commentary published in his blog the other day most disgusting. Actually, he still has a large number of unresolved problems in education or perhaps he does not know what to do to solve them. However, I do not understand why he stirred up troubles for no reason by naming and criticizing Mr IP Kin-yuen for failing to stop other Members from filibustering, saying that he should be held responsible for the failure of enabling the $100 million funding application for the "Implementation of the Fourth Strategy on Information Technology in Education" to be passed according to schedule. Honestly, President, I might accept it if other Bureau Directors criticized Mr IP Kin-yuen, but Secretary Eddie NG is indeed not qualified to criticize others over this incident, not because he knows nothing about or is not at all versed in education, but because he as a Bureau Director has failed to lobby Chief Executive LEUNG Chun-ying personally and stop him from turning a blind eye to the well-being of the education sector by withdrawing the


6683

education item to give way to the setting up of an Innovation and Technology Bureau. Who is he to criticize Mr IP Kin-yuen if he is unable and has not exerted his best and performed his duty to stop this from happening? President, although it has been more than 17 years since the reunification of Hong Kong, many people, including quite many Mainland leaders, have criticized that the hearts of Hong Kong people, particularly those of young people and students, have not yet returned, saying they do not know anything about the nation, understand the national state, identify with their own national status, comply with the Basic Law and support the Government. Instead, they confront the Government all the time. Some people put the blame on foreign forces for their intervention as well as individual media for fanning speculation and corrupting our young people. President, judging from the current social phenomenon and political situation, I share these views. Actually, not all the hearts of Hong Kong people have returned. Many opinion surveys reveal that the confidence of young people in the governments of the two places has continued to fall. I hope that the Government can face the reality and seriously find out the real reasons for the failure of the hearts of the people to return. Members must not deceive themselves and others by making up some meaningless excuses. President, I consider the Government's efforts made over the years in the wake of the reunification in youth development and education not good enough, or else the current situation would not have arisen. Such efforts must be revised in the future. President, national education as a proper subject was entrusted wrongly to Secretary Eddie NG for promotion. Eventually, it was overturned by him. It is sad and regrettable that Chinese people do not have the opportunity to receive formal national education in an open and above-board manner. It is hard to convince the public that Secretary Eddie NG should not be held accountable for making such a serious mistake. It is mentioned in paragraph 157 of the Policy Address this year that a subsidy will be provided for students to join at least one Mainland exchange programme each in the primary and secondary stages. May I ask if such programmes can enable students to gain a complete picture of the nation and fully understand the national state? I think it is absolutely out of the question. President, I would like to make an analogy to illustrate the current relationship between the Government and young people, which can be compared to the relationship between students and teachers in schools. If a teacher criticizes a


student every day for his behaviour or even refuses to teach him, but the teacher does not set a good example himself because of his poor teaching method, attitude, behaviour and relationship with other students, the student will definitely stir up troubles in class. This will affect not only the performance of the student, but also the teaching quality of the teacher. What is more, the quality of reception of other students in class will be affected, too. If the teacher only knows how to put the blame on the student without conducting a self-review or coming up with any solution to improve his relationship with the student, how will the student identify with and trust the teacher? The situation is like the incumbent Government. On the one hand, it criticizes young people and students all the time but, on the other, fails to set a good example by building credibility, demonstrating its ability in administration and assisting the public in resolving their livelihood and financial problems. Instead, it likes to behave like parents in dealing with youth affairs in a high-handed manner by lambasting, confronting and suppressing young people all the time. As a result, their relationship will only worsen by the day. How will young people believe in the Government? How will the former have confidence in the latter? How can Hong Kong develop in a healthy manner should a succession gap appear because of the absence of future successors of society? I very much hope that the Government can give up its mindset of supremacy ― it should not criticize others for making mistakes but insist that it is right; it should not request others to conduct a self-review without getting itself to do the same; it should not criticize others all the time but refrain from making self-criticisms. It should make more contact with young people from different strata, abandon its inherent mindset, formulate afresh some breakthrough youth policies, and appoint suitable persons to enforce policies. Only in doing so will there be a chance for the relationship between both parties to be mended and improved. President, I so submit. MR TONY TSE (in Cantonese): President, quite many people used to think that, so long as they could receive higher education or obtain a university graduation certificate, they would secure a certificate in hand that guaranteed a good pathway and a bright career and future.


6685

Undoubtedly, young people used to have more opportunities to give play to their potentials in society. It was not difficult for them to get ahead so long as they worked hard. However, with the passage of time and changes in the economic environment, more and more young people have the opportunities to receive university education. Furthermore, the number of university places has been on the increase, and the Government has also planned to increase the number of university places from 15 000 per annum now to 25 000 per annum in 2016. Hence, young graduates will definitely face keener competition in both society and employment. If parents and young people still stick to the mindset of "treating university graduates like elites", thinking that their prospects are guaranteed, they are not facing the reality and having a clear idea of their situations. Quite a number of people are worried that the young generation will feel discouraged and develop discontents and grievances against society when they find that the challenge they face is a far cry from their expectation. To address this problem, it is imperative for the Government to formulate corresponding policies and measures. Instead of giving consideration to the horizontal development of the expansion of places only, vertical consideration should be given to career development in a consistent manner. By "vertical development ", it is meant a consistent process from school education to in-school and workplace training, and even lifelong learning. Some young people have recently said that office rentals are so exorbitant that they have become an obstacle to graduates aspiring to business start-ups. They hope the Government can make reference to the practice of Singapore in allocating space on university campuses for use by business starters as an incubation base, so that graduates or prospective graduates can rent the space as offices at a low price. Such assistance is particularly important to young people engaging in culture and creative arts, and I believe young people, universities and society as a whole will stand to benefit, too. So, this win-win proposal is worth consideration. President, Hong Kong is a knowledge-based economy where there is a free flow of talents and information. Since Hong Kong people have to face competition at home and abroad, we must upgrade ourselves from time to time. Although the Government introduced the Continuing Education Fund (CEF) years ago to help aspiring young people upgrade themselves, the scope of the CEF is quite narrow, and its amount of subsidy is relatively small, too.


Moreover, professionals and technical staff cannot benefit from it. I hope the Government can step up its efforts on this front by increasing the amount of subsidy and expanding its scope to help aspirants upgrade themselves. As regards the importation of foreign labour, I consider it a temporary relief which cannot solve the problem at root. In order to ameliorate the manpower shortage problem facing the construction industry, it is most important to provide proper training for local professional and technical staff while making proper planning for their employment after graduation by creating job opportunities for them. Nevertheless, the filibusters staged by Members have delayed the rolling forward of construction projects, thereby directly undermining the interest of the practitioners concerned. Members staging the filibusters should be held responsible for this. Thank you, President. MRS REGINA IP (in Cantonese): President, education is the largest spending item of the Government's expenditure. Its annual expenditure amounts to some $70 billion, which is also an area that has recorded the largest increase since the reunification. But since the implementation of the New Senior Secondary (NSS) academic structure, the results are rather worrying. Although a few paragraphs of the Policy Address have offered piecemeal responses to certain education issues, a full account of the views and expectations in respect of education is absent. I know that a mid-term review of the NSS academic structure by the Education Bureau is now in progress. Here I wish to point out and share with Members several major issues. First, I have gone through the report released by the Education Commission in 2000. Its objective is right, indicating the intention to enable all students to bring their potential into play. Meanwhile, it also points out that while nurturing talents on the one hand, it will not sacrifice academic standards on the other. In other words, its objective is to nurture talents and maintain minimum standards at the same time. This is entirely right. But what are the results? In fact, we just cannot bear seeing the effects in many aspects. The Education Bureau and the Hong Kong Examinations and Assessment Authority (HKEAA) have rectified themselves after listening to the views of a number of teachers and principals. One notable example is Chinese Language. It is not known based on whose advice the Education Bureau decided that


6687

Chinese Language should be taught as a foreign language. Since 2007, prescribed texts have ceased to be included in examinations. And as prescribed texts ceased to be included in examinations from 2007 onwards, it means that prescribed texts had not been taught for several years prior to 2007. As a result, every year, the HKEAA's comment on the Chinese Language subject is that candidates have mixed up different figures and confused historical facts, candidates sitting for the examination on Chinese History have turned red guards into red shirt protesters and made numerous errors in their choice of Chinese characters. For example, the Chinese word "類" in "有教無類" is wrongly written as "累" in "疲累", "朝廷" is wrongly written as "庭" in "庭園", and "君主專政" is wrongly written as "尊" in "尊卑". Their standard is so low that even tutorial centres have remarked that the students are ungrammatical and illogical in sentence writing, making quite a number of errors in their choice of Chinese characters. I believe the HKEAA and the Education Bureau have rectified themselves due to an excessive number of similar complaints. This year, the teaching of 12 prescribed texts will resume, but they only account for 6% or 7% of the score of the Chinese Language subject. I have learnt that the questions in examination papers aim to enhance the humanistic qualities of students. But the absence of prescribed texts will deprive students of exposure to idioms and classic stories. In this case, how can they develop humanistic qualities? Secretary, I have something to share with you. Do you know how the foreigners learn Chinese? Foreigners value the history of Chinese language very much. A Canadian scholar has authored the Outline of Classical Chinese Grammar. How do they learn classical Chinese? According to this Canadian scholar, Chinese is a "principal vehicle" of East Asian culture. I do not know how it should be translated into Chinese. Should it be rendered as "工具" (tool)? It means the principal media of the entire East Asian culture. In Asia, apart from the Chinese language, the Japanese and Korean languages are also influenced by Hanyu. They appreciate our Chinese language very much, but the Government has nonetheless abandoned prescribed texts, thus leading to a decline in Chinese proficiency. If children know nothing about the historical stories of their own nation, how will they feel proud of their nation, national origin and culture? Having realized this, the Government has now resumed the teaching of 12 prescribed texts. But compared with the 26 prescribed texts tested in the former A Level examination, or even the 40 to 50 prescribed texts taught from O Level to A Level back in my school days, the requirement has been much lowered.


Nevertheless, can a substantial reduction in the requirement assist students' learning? The answer is "No". Their results are poor, and the Chinese Language subject is regarded as the "deadly subject", with a passing rate of just over 50%. Hence, the Government also knows that something has gone wrong. What about the situation of another key subject, Mathematics? Core Mathematics is a new course of the NSS academic structure. This compulsory Mathematics subject does not cover calculus. If students wish to take advanced level Mathematics, they have to elect either M1 or M2. As a result, a number of university professors teaching Computer Engineering have told me that certain students admitted to their department do not have the required proficiency in Mathematics. This is yet another pitiful phenomenon because it is commonly known that although Asian students are outperformed by their foreign counterparts in English and their proficiency in Chinese is declining, their proficiency in Mathematics has been good all along. A teacher has told me that in substantially reducing the requirement of Mathematics, the Education Bureau aims to facilitate teachers in teaching and achieving mass education, so that students will find it easier to master the subject. In fact, this is a path leading to self-destruction. Certainly, some education officers have given me another side of the story, that our students have performed well in a number of assessments such as PISA and various international examinations relating to reading literacy and mathematical abilities, indicating that our elites are still crème de la crème. But the Secretary also knows the truth. Are such outstanding results attained by these elites attributed to their own schools? Certainly not. Parents whose children are studying in government schools or aided schools have told me that they spend more on tutorial fees than the cost of studying in government schools. Furthermore, there is one more interesting measure under the NSS academic structure. Certainly, it is because the curriculum officers, having studied a lot of education theories, have re-constructed a number of subjects by applying such theories as "re-constructionism". As a result, Business, Accounting and Financial Studies have been combined into one subject. Teachers used to teach either Principles of Accounts or Financial Studies, but now the three subjects have been combined into one, thus giving rise to the BAFS Concern Group. Some teachers who met with me, including a teacher surnamed MAK and another female teacher, burst into tears while talking to me. The


6689

subject that they used to teach has become one third of the curriculum. It has not only resulted in inadequate time for learning, but also the students' shallow knowledge of Business, Accounting and Financial Studies. In addition, the authorities have also introduced additional courses of Combined Science and Integrated Science, all leading to a substantial decline in standards without any effectiveness. If students wish to study medicine, they are required to elect two of the subjects such as Physics and Chemistry. Hence, if they elect Combined Science, namely the combination of one subject and two "half subjects", basically they will not be able to meet the requirement. As a number of students are worried that they will make a wrong choice of subjects, an issue that arises from the NSS academic structure is life planning. They are required to decide their choice of subjects at the senior or even junior secondary level, and if they make a wrong choice of subjects, they will not be able to secure admission to universities. Moreover, it is highly likely that Category A NSS subjects are based on the idea of the Education Commission back then, that a difficult curriculum is unnecessary as there is no relationship between ancient and modern times. It is the common opinion of officers of the Education Bureau that we should not provide a detailed description of the past but a brief one of the present, is it not? For this reason, they think that practical subjects which are not severed from modern life should be taught. For example, many students will elect Tourism and Hospitality Studies. However, many of the NSS subjects, be they Category A or B, are elected by a few students only. Their effectiveness is thus called into question. Also, the report of the Education Commission has proposed to widen students' knowledge structure. But after talking to a number of university professors or secondary school teachers, I realized that in fact, under the NSS academic structure, students mainly elect "4+2", namely taking four core subjects and two elective subjects. Of the elective subjects, Economics naturally tops the list, followed by Biology and Chemistry. The reason is that many students hope to study medicine at university. Business, Accounting and Financial Studies are also elected by many. Together with Physics and Geography, these several subjects are most popular. As a result, other subjects are left out in the cold, and the situation of humanities subjects is particularly disastrous. Since the implementation of the NSS academic structure, there has been a continual drop in the number of students taking Chinese History, History, Literature in English or Chinese Literature. Only some 2 000 students have taken Chinese Literature,


while the number of students taking Literature in English has even dropped to some 300. In our society, students cultivated by such an education system only uphold utilitarianism and know how to cope with the tasks on hand, with no humanistic qualities developed. In this case, how can we cultivate students to take a forward looking attitude and rise to challenges with breadth of vision and mind? I know that the Secretary is now conducting a survey across the school sector. But I think the review of the NSS academic structure conducted by him seeks only to make some fine-tuning with no intention to effect any major changes to Liberal Studies. Nevertheless, I sincerely hope that officers of the Education Bureau will not find good advice harsh to the ear and refuse to listen to others when they have power in hand. There is an actual need for them to conduct a review. We in the New People's Party will submit our views by the end of the review of the NSS academic structure on 28 February. In order to enhance the humanistic qualities of students, strengthen their knowledge of the history, culture and tradition of the nation and widen their knowledge structure, we suggest that the existing four compulsory subjects be reduced to three, namely Chinese Language, English Language and Mathematics. In fact, Liberal Studies can just be changed into an elective subject. In those days, the decision of the authorities to make Liberal Studies a compulsory subject also once triggered great controversies. Three Key Learning Areas including humanities subjects were introduced subsequently. Students may elect one subject from the four subjects of Chinese History, History, Chinese Literature and Literature in English. Others include Sciences and Higher Mathematics. Students may choose one subject from Sciences and advanced and high-order Mathematics, and then choose one more subject from Social Studies and Business including Liberal Studies. As a result, the majority of students will still elect six subjects, while students with better performance or those who wish to take more Science subjects as they are interested in studying medicine may elect more subjects. We hold that this structure is more in keeping with the future social development of Hong Kong. I hope the Education Bureau will not consider Liberal Studies its golden brand or a tiger's tail that should never be pulled, literally rejecting all proposals received regardless of their content. President, I so submit. As to other constitutional issues and youth matters, I will leave them to the next session as I have not had a meal yet.


6691

MS EMILY LAU (in Cantonese): President, I have had my dinner already. I would like to talk about an issue about which many Hong Kong people are worried, and it also relates to the alma mater of the President. Today, I have just written to Dr LEONG Che-hung, the Chairman of The Council of the University of Hong Kong (The Council), to express that the Democratic Party and I are quite shocked, disappointed and worried about the many commentaries and reports attacking Prof Johannes CHAN, the former Dean of the Faculty of Law of the University of Hong Kong (HKU). The President also knows that Article 137 of the Basic Law ensures educational institutions to retain their autonomy and enjoy academic freedom. However, these core values are now being challenged. The Policy Address has not mentioned the protection in this regard and the Chief Executive has only attacked university students. President, I believe you must have also noticed that on 2 February, Prof Johannes CHAN wrote an article in the Ming Pao Daily News, stating that he is worried about the trend of imposing political suppression on academic freedom. He said to this effect, "The appointment of vice-president is an internal affair of the HKU, but since last November, pro-leftist newspapers have made incessant efforts to attempt to pressurize the University and prevent outspoken academics from joining the leadership. Once this practice permeates the system, all other universities will face political interference in their senior appointments and subject to Cultural Revolution-style persecution. Can Hong Kong still attract talents then" ― this is what Mrs Regina IP said earlier ― "University is a place where different thoughts are challenged and converge. The success of an university lies in its persistence in upholding academic freedom and freedom of speech, and intellectuals are commended for their uprightness in not succumbing to authority." He also said, again to this effect, "It is disappointing that newspapers are reduced to mere political tools, and such political suppression will only destroy Hong Kong's core values and make the future of 'one country, two systems' even gloomier." President, this article was published on 3 February, and three days later, that is, 6 February, Mr CHENG Kai-ming ― I am told by some members of the media that he is a leftist academic ― wrote an article in the Economic Journal to express that the attacks against Prof Johannes launched by leftist newspapers and various parties were unacceptable. President, Mr CHENG said in the newspaper article that, to this effect, "Johannes CHAN has made devoted and strenuous efforts to facilitate China in drawing reference from overseas experience", and "over the years, thanks to the promotion by Johannes CHAN, the Faculty of Law


has provided the legal sector on the Mainland with a lot of experience and training. Many judges and officers in the legal departments have experienced the course on common law provided by the Faculty of Law". He said that he had noticed many leaders and seniors in the law academic sector accord high respect to Prof CHAN, and that many people who have attended his class feel honoured to a student of Prof CHAN. President, for this reason, Prof CHENG thinks that Johannes CHAN has made an enormous contribution to the development of law in Hong Kong and on the Mainland. However, Johannes CHAN has now come under severe attacks by a batch of leftists, and as Kevin LAU Chun-to said a few days ago, the attacks came not only from the media but also from SAR officials. Prof CHENG pointed out in his article that these people have adopted logic which only they can understand, that is, "the Occupy Central movement is a movement mobilized by external forces to besiege China, so Benny TAI is an enemy; and since Johannes CHAN is in the pro-democracy camp and the opposition, he must be supporting Benny TAI behind the scene; and this brings them to the conclusion that the Faculty of Law is the base of the opposition camp". President, they may not trust the other people, yet they should at least trust Prof CHENG Kai-ming, should they not? Prof CHENG also said, we had never thought that on Chinese soil, a world-renowned institution like the Faculty of Law and its professor would suddenly become the target of a smear campaign just for political purposes, one which was merely based on glib deduction and purely political perception regardless of the truth and the social reality and culture of Hong Kong. President, I am very much furious about such practice. Besides, as Kevin LAU has pointed out, he has been clearly told recently that Johannes CHAN is not the only one to be dealt with, when the terms of office of LEUNG Che-hung, the Chairman, and other members of The Council expire, LEUNG Chun-ying would appoint his trusted followers to take over The Council, so that when Benny TAI is convicted and sentenced by the Court, he would be fired to serve as a warning to all the others. By then, the advice to "root out the weeds" stated in the People's Daily Overseas Edition will be fulfilled. After that, the remark of LI Yuanchao, Vice Chairman of the State, of "the best is yet to come" will be realized by rounds of persecution. Kevin LAU said that such practices would destroy the achievements made by the HKU over the century.


6693

President, many people in this Chamber, including your goodself, and the Chief Secretary for Administration, are graduates of the HKU. In the midst of the present incident, the Chief Executive has only made a brief comment: "We have not intervened in the HKU". As for Kevin LAU's statement that someone has called The Council and requested it to veto the decision by the selection committee which suggested CHAN be the next Vice-President, some denied and some said they have not heard of that. President, what is my suggestion for handling the case? Today, I wrote to the Chairman of The Council, LEONG Che-hung. I did not ask him to follow our practice, I only asked him to follow the practice adopted by The Council in the past. On 25 July 2000, The Council passed a resolution and YANG Ti-liang, the then incumbent Chairman of The Council made a solemn statement that The Council had set up an independent investigation panel according to Statute XIX2A of the Arrangement of Statutes to investigate the incident involving TUNG Che-hwa sending Andrew LO to intervene in Robert CHUNG's survey. The President should remember the list of appointees to the panel. At that time, the three-member panel was appointed and led by Justice Noel Power, a non-permanent Judge of the Court of Final Appeal, and included Ronny WONG, a Senior Counsel and former Bar Association chairman, and Pamela CHAN, chief executive of the Consumer Council. The panel was given the power to summon witnesses and the hearings were held in the HKU ― I had attended the hearings for a number of days to listen to the testimony ― and live broadcast of the entire process was provided on television. President, in view of the development of the present incident, where a number of people have made open statements, I hope Chairman LEONG Che-hung, a former colleague of ours, will do a benevolent act for the HKU and for Hong Kong by appointing an investigation panel to inquire into the incident. I do not believe, nor do I agree, that the Legislative Council should investigate the incident. President, I respect the independence and autonomy of the HKU, thus I hope that The Council will convene a meeting as soon as possible. By then, we can listen to those views. Since so many people have expressed their views openly, we may see who are from the executive authorities, and whether any of them is the latest version of Andrew LO or an official of a higher rank. According to Kevin LAU, a government official of an extremely high ranking had called members of The Council. President, two Members of the Legislative Council, Mr Abraham SHEK and Mr Martin LIAO, are also members on The Council.


We think that the HKU is very important to Hong Kong. HKU is facing the most severe challenge since the Andrew LO incident. I also welcome the authorities to take the initiative to come forward to clarify the incident, stating what they have done and said to cause so many people to think that LEUNG Chun-ying and even the SAR Government would not want Johannes CHAN to be the Vice-President of the HKU. On the other hand, why have we not been able to notice the great contribution made by Johannes CHAN as mentioned by CHENG Kai-ming? President, I am not sure if Hong Kong can ride over this storm. When our core values are shattered once and again, I think the Government will definitely provoke a public outcry. President, I have brought up the issue here for I hope the authorities will come forward to make a clarification as soon as possible and I think it is absolutely necessary for the HKU to appoint an investigation panel. I hope the HKU will invite a respectable Judge in retirement to lead the panel in identifying the backstage manipulator, sending a clear message to society of stopping intervening in the HKU and ceasing to shatter our core values. MR YIU SI-WING (in Cantonese): President, the Policy Address this year has put forward five major measures in relation to the population policy, in order to address the new challenges brought by demographic changes. Particularly, to address the problem of labour shortage, the Policy Address encourages the extension of retirement age and this, I welcome. In Hong Kong, there is currently no statutory retirement age, and to show its sincerity, the Government has taken the lead to extend the retirement age to 65 for some civil servants. However, relying on the Government alone for implementation of this measure will achieve only a limited effect. The key lies in encouraging enterprises to follow suit. I suggest that tax concessions can be provided as an incentive for employers to extend the retirement age of their employees according to the situation, and at the same time, co-operation can be fostered with non-profit-making organizations to provide employment support and training services for the elderly. This can further unleash the potential of the local labour force while alleviating the burden on the Government in providing welfare benefits for the elderly and better still, increasing tax revenue. To enable students to practise what they have learnt, the Policy Address proposes to further promote vocational education. This is a policy worthy of implementation. Nowadays, many young people do not have a good understanding of many trades and industries. They are unwilling to join these


6695

trades and industries while the parents also have biased views on vocational training. In fact, suitable vocational training can be of great help to the career development of young people. For example, the 120 graduates of the Chinese Cuisine Training Institute each year have a placement rate exceeding 90%. These graduates are much sought after by employers and offered a starting salary of more than $10,000, and it is easier for them to secure employment than university graduates in general. Apart from attaching importance to university education, the Government should work in concert with vocational training institutes to further study ways to improve the existing vocational training courses in the light of the labour shortage in different trades and industries, and encourage students who do not stand a high chance of admission to universities to choose to study in vocational training institutes. By learning theories on the one hand and receiving internship training on the other, young people can build up their confidence in joining the relevant industries and this can also allay employers' concern about the lack of experience on the part of these newcomers to the industries. I think this policy is worth promotion. In respect of workers' income, the Policy Address proposes that the Statutory Minimum Wage rate be increased to $32.5 per hour. I am very much concerned about the increase in the operational costs in various trades and industries brought by the minimum wage. It will drive up rents and even cause inflation. An excessively high inflation will hit the general public the hardest, especially the frail elderly who do not have an income and who rely on their meagre savings. Therefore, the Government cannot only seek to increase the minimum wage in the face of pressure and even carry out a review annually to the neglect of the operational difficulties of the small and medium enterprises and the inflation problem to be faced by most members of the public. Another issue which is more devastating than the minimum wage is standard working hours mentioned in the Policy Address. I think the service sector, especially the tourism industry, will be hit the hardest by standard working hours. As we all know, when visitors travel on a package tour, they certainly expect the escorts or the tour guides to be readily available to provide services to them at all times. Even if an accident occurred in the middle of the night, visitors will definitely seek help from the escort. From the angle of the visitors and escorts, they consider this a normal way of work in service provision. As the escorts or tour guides need to provide service for the visitors anytime, and they are considered to be providing round-the-clock service, so according to judgments made in similar cases in other industries, with the addition of the minimum wage, employers will have to meet extremely exorbitant expenses.


Therefore, it is difficult to implement standard working hours in the tourism industry. If we suggest that the tourism industry or certain individual trades and industries be exempted, this would be unfair to other trades and industries. For these reasons, I hope that the Government can think twice and will not introduce standard working hours rashly. Therefore, I resolutely oppose legislating for standard working hours. The Policy Address also proposes that consideration be given to further enhancing the Supplementary Labour Scheme and allowing the importation of skilled workers. The policy will be relaxed by allowing the imported workers to work across various public sector works projects, rather than working in only one project under the current requirement. This is to ensure that there will be sufficient construction workers to provide support, in order to guarantee the completion of various infrastructure projects on schedule. This is a pragmatic proposal. I strongly support that the arrangement for importation of foreign workers be appropriately relaxed without affecting the bargaining power of local workers, in order to mitigate the existing problem of not being able to hire workers in the construction industry and some obnoxious industries. This is a pragmatic approach. President, the Policy Address this year also mentions that continuous efforts will be made to fine-tune the existing exchange and internship programmes for young people, I support this. The industries in Hong Kong are rather homogenous and young people who graduated from universities may not be able to practise what they have learnt. On the contrary, the Mainland is a huge market where university students can have more options of career development. It is pragmatic of the Government to allocate resources to providing local young people with exchange and internship opportunities on the Mainland. This will enable young people to have more understanding of the actual situation of Mainland organizations and enterprises and hence more choices in the future. Recently, Jack MA of Alibaba has proactively proposed the establishment of a fund to assist young people in Hong Kong to start up businesses. This is proof that we have quite a lot of opportunities. If young people in Hong Kong can gain some better understanding of the Mainland market and broaden their vision and upgrade themselves through platforms in the Mainland or overseas set up with investments by major Mainland enterprises, they would be able to truly go beyond Hong Kong and engage themselves globally. President, I so submit.


6697

MR SIN CHUNG-KAI (in Cantonese): It seems that the series of pledges made by the Chief Executive in relation to the policy on labour in his 2012 Policy Address now remain in a state of procrastination, without even the smallest sign of materialization. In fact, in terms of implementation of these initiatives, only paternity leave for men has been put into practice. But it is just a symbolic offer of three days, less than the five-day entitlement of the Civil Service. Moreover, the conduct of a review of the minimum wage once every two years has also failed to catch up with inflation. In fact, at a hearing of a panel, I also asked the Secretary about this. The Secretary just repeated things like the flexibility of conducting a review once every two years, which seemed to greatly fall short of the expectations of the public and the labour sector. We hope that a review can be conducted once every year. Nevertheless, one certain thing is that the law provides that a review should be conducted at least once every two years. I hope the Secretary will actively respond to us after gaining some understanding. I would like to talk about two issues later, namely standard working hours and the offsetting arrangement of the Mandatory Provident Fund (MPF). But before coming to these two issues, I wish to talk about foreign labour. I know that many from the business sector in the Legislative Council have stressed the need to import labour. The authorities also often stress that in view of the project delays caused by the shortage of workers, there is a need to import labour. However, this is more or less a piecemeal approach, which will adversely affect Hong Kong and those young people who are interested in joining the industry. According to the information of the Construction Industry Council, in recent years, the number of registered workers have risen by 100 000 from five years ago ― surely this is just the number of registered workers, and we should take note of the actual number of workers. However, what concerns us is the average age of 46. The average ages of those who joined the construction industry in 2012 and 2013 were 40 and 38 respectively. It seems to be a sign that they are getting younger. The shortage of labour in the industry has pushed up wages, and an appealing remuneration will encourage people to switch trades. We can see that in the past couple of years, a number of people have started their career in the construction industry. This figure is not the best, but it seems to show certain signs of improvement. If the Government can step up its efforts in promoting training and a change of trades, I believe it will do some good in this regard.


We may take a look at the figure of 2007. The number of registered workers is 220 000, while that in 2013 is 320 000. The shortage of workers can be attributed to several factors. First, can countercyclical measures be adopted for the Government's public works projects? Otherwise, the demand will be pushed up when there is a shortage of workers. The construction output is currently at its record high, and this high level of output is cyclical. The authorities should exercise wider control on works projects, so that arrangements can be made to take forward these projects more smoothly. In short, they die of either starvation or overwork. I hope the Secretary can … maybe it is not the duty of the Secretary for Labour and Welfare. Rather, the Secretary for Development should gain some understanding of the situation in order to exercise control on project arrangements. The second aspect is about standard working hours. It seems that the current progress is disappointing. As estimated by the consultancy report of the Standard Working Hours Committee, close to 730 000 employees work overtime for five hours a week, of which 70% are uncompensated, a situation which is alarming. Although the authorities often stress the importance of family-friendly policies ― but in fact, colleagues of this Council as well as government officials are the ones who work overtime most often ― in reality, the issue of standard working hours is making slow progress. LEUNG Chun-ying indicated in his 2012 Election Manifesto his intention to set up a special committee comprising government officials, representatives of labour unions and employers' associations, academics and community leaders to jointly examine ways to take forward legislative proposals on standard working hours and set out its duties and coverage, taking into account employees' overtime work conditions and arrangements. Nevertheless, as we can see, the Government has now completed the groundwork relating to the establishment of the committee, but the latter part involving enactment of legislation seems to be nowhere in sight. Dr LEUNG Che-hung is currently the President of the Hong Kong University Alumni Association. I do not know if he is occupied more with the recruitment of Vice-President than attending to the work on standard working hours. Dr LEUNG Che-hung has indicated that a proposal will be submitted to the Government by March next year, namely by the end of his term of office. However, given the current progress, it seems that the legislative exercise cannot be completed by the end of this Legislative Session. I do not know whether it can be done in the remaining one-year term of office of LEUNG Chun-ying after


6699

the next Legislative Council Election if it cannot be completed by the end of this Legislative Session. It seems that this part of the Manifesto stands a four-fifth chance of failure to come into practice. I hope the Secretary can expeditiously offer an explanation next time, or tell us the progress and whether he has set any target or if he has any confidence in successfully taking forward the legislative proposals within this Legislative Session when he gives a reply later on. Lastly, I wish to briefly talk about the offsetting arrangement of the MPF. In fact, it is more appropriate to discuss this issue here than in the session about financial affairs because this is a labour issue. Another pledge made by LEUNG Chun-ying during the election is to progressively reduce the proportion of accrued benefits attributed to employer's contribution in the MPF account that can be applied by the employer to offset long service or severance payments. But to our disappointment, to date, it is believed that the relevant policy expected to be implemented by the end of this Legislative Session will meet an even grimmer fate than that of standard working hours. Last year, CHAN Ka-keung already indicated that the abolition of the mechanism would increase their operating costs and have adverse impact on their budget, thus causing pressure for small and medium enterprises. And at a meeting of the Panel on Financial Affairs the other day, it was also pointed out that there was no sign of consensus on the ways to proceed with the abolition of the offsetting arrangement of the MPF, implying that the Government will not abolish the relevant arrangement. As shown by the information, over the years, the proportion of withdrawal by contributors for offsetting purposes is close to 40%, an amount even higher than that withdrawn for retirement reasons. The purpose of the MPF is to offer protection for retirement life. But when they have accumulated savings through the MPF, such savings are nonetheless used for offsetting purposes. Hence, this is a major issue. I hope the Secretary can step up his effort in achieving abolition of the offsetting arrangement of the MPF in the coming one and a half years. I so submit. MR MA FUNG-KWOK (in Cantonese): President, in the first paragraph of the chapter on culture, leisure and municipal services in the Policy Address, the Chief Executive pointed out that the SAR Government had proposed to this Council the establishment of a Culture Bureau with dedicated responsibility for promoting the


development of cultural services and cultural industries in Hong Kong. However, due to the filibuster tactic employed by some Legislative Council Members, it was forced to withdraw the proposal. This means that he has mildly and indirectly given an account of the reasons for giving up the proposal of establishing a Culture Bureau. Regarding this decision, I feel somewhat disappointed and helpless. In fact, the Chief Executive put forward the proposal of establishing a Technology Bureau and a Culture Bureau in his Election Manifesto and last year, the proposal of establishing an Innovation and Technology Bureau was also put forward. So far, this latter proposal has been continually held up in the Finance Committee by some filibustering Members, so there is still no knowing if it can be approved before 14 February. For this reason, I find it understandable that the Government has put aside the idea of establishing a Culture Bureau. Nevertheless, I hope the Government will understand that generally, the cultural and arts sector still hopes that a dedicated Policy Bureau can be established to co-ordinate cultural initiatives of the Government. In fact, the cultural functions of the Government are currently distributed among various Policy Bureaux and government departments, so on the promotion of local culture, twice the effort has to be made to get half of the result. In contrast, in recent years, other neighbouring regions have been actively promoting the development of culture and sports to enhance their soft power, in the hope of making cultural, arts and sports activities their new areas of economic growth. For this reason, I hope that when the SAR Government reconsiders the establishment of a dedicated Policy Bureau in the future to co-ordinate cultural affairs, it should make reference to the experience of such countries as Korea, where the Korean Ministry of Culture, Sports and Tourism was established to reorganize its cultural, sports and tourism efforts to bring about synergy in these three areas. President, one of the long-standing, major and difficult obstacles in local cultural and sports development is the serious shortage of venues. It is undeniable that in recent years, the Government has put forward a number of proposals and plans to expand the scope of culture and sports, including the West Kowloon Cultural District now under development and the Multi-purpose Sports Complex at Kai Tak now under planning. In addition, the construction of the East Kowloon Cultural Centre is also in the pipeline; the Hong Kong Arts Development Council (ADC) has been given subsidies to convert an industrial building in Wong Chuk Hang into art studios, and the revitalization of restored


6701

landfills for the development of recreational facilities is also in the pipeline. The sector affirms, supports and looks forward to this series of measures. It is hoped that when building these facilities, the needs of the sector can be taken into account and appropriate arrangements made to meet their needs. In particular, with regard to the standards of the facilities in these venues, they have to meet the needs of sports activities, so that more competitive events can be held. Take the Multi-purpose Sports Complex at Kai Tak as an example, when carrying out planning, is it possible to consider in earnest the organization of annual marathons, bicycle races and motorcar races on the roads at its periphery? In addition, can consideration be given to developing the waters nearby into a water sports centre? President, the Policy Address this year says that investments will continue to be made in sites for culture and sports, for example, reserving certain floor area in a site at Aberdeen for the promotion of arts and culture by the ADC; and the Sports Commission has also decided to set up a working group to gauge the demand for sports facilities. I strongly support these measures conducive to the provision of space. However, the problem of insufficient space for the development of culture and sports has actually troubled the sector for many years and such a demand, in particular, the demand of the public ― since health consciousness among the public has been raised and the ageing of the population has also given rise to some additional demands ― I think that although many measures are already in place, the vigour of such efforts still needs to be boosted. For example, how can we make optimal use of the Lok Ma Chau Loop, so that the local cultural and creative industry will be able to use it? How can we make use of existing vacant school premises or make available some sports venues in schools, so that local and district sports groups and cultural groups can use them? I hope the Government can also consider these issues seriously. In addition, in respect of software, this year, the Policy Address also introduced some additional support measures in respect of sports, for example, expanding the School Sports Programme Co-ordinators scheme and commissioning a consultancy study on how to support disabled athletes and promote sports participation by people with disabilities in a more comprehensive manner. I think they all highly deserve our affirmation. However, the sports sector actually hopes that a longer-term and all-encompassing sports policy can be introduced, particularly on how to carry out career planning for our athletes in terms of their learning, training, work and retirement, for example, by promoting the economic activities associated with sports events, so that they can gradually


be commercialized. In addition, it is also very important to support the elevation of the standards of our sports executives and enhance the organizational ability and development of sports organizations. In fact, the policy to promote sports in the community, to support elite sports and to develop Hong Kong into a prime destination for hosting major international sports events has been proposed for more than a decade and it is now time the effectiveness of this policy was reviewed and updated. Last year, the Legislative Council also passed my motion in this regard, in the hope that the Government can respond to the demands of the sports sector in earnest. Similarly, no review has been conducted or update made to the cultural policy for more than a decade, so it is hoped that the SAR Government can also conduct appropriate reviews of the cultural policy, so as to align it with local needs in cultural development. President, if we want to promote local cultural and sports development, I hope that the Government will not neglect the development situation in neighbouring regions. Since the commencement of the National 12th Five-Year Plan, the all-out development and flourishing of culture have been actively promoted. In the last five years, the progress made in cultural efforts and the cultural industry has been very swift and the achievements have been outstanding. With regard to cultural hardware, cultural venues have burgeoned. Take museums as an example, the total number of museums nationwide has now exceeded 4 000, a more than two-fold increase in a decade and the development of the cultural industry has become ever more vigorous. Investments, be it in music, films, animated cartoons or television, have been huge and the growth in economic efficiency has also been fast and sharp. To enable the industry or cultural and arts sector in Hong Kong to participate in all these at an early date is a very important arrangement. On culture and arts, in the face of the continual increase in the demand for culture and arts on the Mainland, there is also great scope for the cultural and arts sector in Hong Kong to participate and play a role. At the same time, such an opportunity should also be capitalized to publicize cultural and arts programmes with Hong Kong characteristics, so as to give play to the allure of Hong Kong as a city and gain access to more resources. Regrettably, the promotion of Hong Kong arts on the Mainland can still not be considered mature. Take the performing arts as an example, the participation of local art groups on the Mainland only remains at the level of exchanges and such opportunities cannot be considered numerous. On the one hand, local arts groups are still unfamiliar with the Mainland market; and on the other, they also lack connections with the


6703

Mainland. For this reason, the Government should strengthen its support for cultural exchanges as well as for local groups and members of the cultural sector, so as to strengthen their connections with the Mainland. Meanwhile, publicity can also be given to local arts and culture through the Hong Kong Offices on the Mainland and the nurture of local arts intermediaries to promote local arts groups and cultural programmes outside Hong Kong should also be considered. In addition, measures should also be adopted to encourage local arts groups to stage performances more often on the Mainland. Moreover, through CEPA, efforts should also be made to further streamline and relax the approval procedures, so as to assist local arts groups to enter the Mainland market. Besides, Hong Kong is a place where East meets West and it has been in touch and has had exchanges with other cultures for a long period of time. The Chief Executive has also expounded on this a number of times, pointing out that Hong Kong can play a "super-connector role" between the Mainland and the international community. I strongly agree with this point. I believe that apart from the financial industry or other industries, culture and arts can also perform the function in this regard and play the important role of helping Chinese culture go global. On sports, the State Council proposed the sports industry policy in October last year and nationwide fitness will be elevated to the level of a national development strategy. The goal is to plan and develop the industry into one with a value in excess of RMB 5,000 billion yuan by 2025. It is hoped that the area of sports venues per capita will reach 2 sq m and the number of people participating frequently in sports training would reach 500 million. The major initiatives proposed include promoting reforms on professional sports, encouraging the participation of social forces, enhancing sports facilities, enriching sports events, and so on. In addition, three major ball games, namely, football, basketball and volleyball, will be the major entry points of future endeavours, so it is expected that sports leagues and various types of matches will see vigorous development. In the face of the gradual development of various types of league matches on the Mainland, I believe it is worthwhile to consider working towards the organization of teams from Hong Kong to participate in such matches. On the one hand, this can give local athletes greater scope of professional development; and on the other, it is also hoped that through the participation of local teams in these matches, impetus can be added to sport spectatorship and participation in Hong Kong, thus enlivening the local sports scene and culture.


President, the potential of the sports industry cannot be downplayed. The commercialization of sports development is also the development strategy of a number of countries. How can Hong Kong tap into the opportunities presented by vigorous development of sports on the Mainland to promote the industrialization of local sports? For example, are there concessionary measures policy-wise to encourage the local business sector to become more involved in sports or sponsor sports activities? In addition, support for the development of the sports industry in terms of training, the supply of sports goods and equipment, venue operation and management, media promotion, insurance and sports medicine should also be strengthened. In particular, the media in Hong Kong already have some experience in the promotion and organization of major sports events, so the Government should consider nurturing the companies concerned to assist in local sports promotion and the organization of sports events, with a view to making better preparations and looking for development opportunities to enter the Mainland market. Looking ahead to the 13th Five-Year Plan, enhancing the soft power of the country and promoting cultural and sport initiatives will continue to be a focus of the Plan. I hope very much that the SAR Government can grasp the development situation on the Mainland and increase its investments in local culture and arts, so as to further take forward the development of local culture and sports. I so submit. MR POON SIU-PING (in Cantonese): President, in Hong Kong, industrial accidents lead to the death of one person on average every fortnight. In other words, since the delivery of the Policy Address, at least two employers have died in industrial accidents. Hong Kong is one of the most competitive economies with one of the highest per capita monthly incomes in the world, but industrial accidents cause the death of one person every fortnight. It is by no means acceptable to achieve this level of economic development at the expense of employees' lives. However, labour is merely mentioned in two small paragraphs of the Policy Address to the tune of 100 or so Chinese characters, and not a single word was mentioned of industrial safety. The development of the construction sector is highlighted in this year's Policy Address. During his visit to Shenzhen at the end of last month, Chief Executive LEUNG Chun-ying expressed high regard for Shenzhen's pace of


6705

development. Nevertheless, labour is indispensable to the development of the construction industry. The Chief Executive attaches importance only to the scale and pace of development by squeezing together the commencement of construction projects for public rental housing, hospitals, schools, public transport, and so on, and keeping them up to speed through labour importation. The Policy Address is indifferent to the high fatality rate of industrial accidents in Hong Kong. I have moved motions in this Council on two separate occasions for a debate on industrial safety, and I also highlighted the importance of paying attention to industrial safety during a consultative meeting with the Chief Executive in relation to the Policy Address. Regrettably, none of the ideas has been adopted. A mere 100 or so Chinese characters are dedicated to occupational safety in the Policy Agenda under the Policy Address, and the tone is hackneyed in illustrating the need to step up publicity, education and enforcement and enhance stakeholders' safety awareness. I express the utmost regrets about the neglect of industrial safety in the Policy Address. During Mr LEUNG Chun-ying's run for the office of Chief Executive three years ago, the part under "Employee Benefits" in his Manifesto was much more solid and concrete than the present Policy Address. During his run for the office, the Chief Executive promised to establish a special taskforce to undertake a study on improving protection for workers in high-risk occupations in relation to insurance, compensation for work injuries, therapy and rehabilitation. I call on the Chief Executive to expeditiously honour his promise. Labour importation is a sensitive initiative to the labour sector. Yet, the policy of labour importation for the construction industry, which has a direct bearing on employee benefits, is merely put under the section of "Development" in the Policy Address, as if it has nothing to do with the Labour and Welfare Bureau. I can only reiterate my view on the section of "Development" in the Policy Address to the Secretary for Labour and Welfare on this occasion. In my opinion, if no improvement is made to the industrial accident situation in the construction sector, there will be no way to attract the younger generation to join the sector. If the Bureau does not review the various outdated and faulty practices in the construction sector and evades the main reasons why young people are reluctant to join the industry, and merely emphasizes the need of labour importation to tackle the manpower shortage instead, it will fail to address the problem at root.


Apart from labour importation for the construction sector, it is mentioned in the Policy Agenda under "Importation of Labour" that the retail and catering sectors will "import labour on an appropriate, limited and targeted basis to relieve the manpower shortage of these sectors". After the delivery of the Policy Address, there has been extensive media coverage on the Hong Kong Government's preliminary list of imported talent encompassing more than 100 sectors, including social workers, accounting practitioners and teachers, and this has aroused wide public concern. Despite the Government's subsequent denial of the authenticity of the list, everything does come with a reason. Hence, I wish to reiterate here that the labour sector is not blindly opposed to labour importation. As a matter of fact, the labour sector had an agreement with the Government on labour importation earlier, and the current Supplementary Labour Scheme under the Labour Advisory Board is meant to handle applications for labour importation. Any proposal for labour importation should be processed under this mechanism. It is mentioned in paragraph 105 of the Policy Address that the Supplementary Labour Scheme will be enhanced to allow imported skilled workers to work across various public sector works projects. This will only result in imported skilled workers working in Hong Kong indefinitely, and the labour sector staunchly opposes it. In fact, with regard to labour importation, the Government has resorted to all sorts of pretexts nowadays, like the General Employment Policy, the Admission Scheme for Mainland Talents and Professionals and the Quality Migrant Admission Scheme, and places the relevant policy under the purview of the Security Bureau instead of the Labour and Welfare Bureau for unknown reasons, so it escapes monitoring by the labour sector. In my opinion, any talent admission scheme should be meant to attract top talents unavailable in Hong Kong. Yet, some may take advantage of such schemes to import cheap labour under the guise of admitting talents. Besides, I call on the Immigration Department to keep more detailed statistics on the salaries of and the posts held by those admitted under the current Admission Scheme for Mainland Talents and offer a breakdown of those earning less than $20,000 and the posts they hold, so as to better reflect the talents admission condition. President, in fact, labour force from outside is imported to Hong Kong on a daily basis, and by this I am referring to the 150 One-way Permit (OWP) holders who come to Hong Kong daily. In 2013, more than 45 000 people came to Hong Kong on OWPs. Given the labour force participation rate of 48% for


6707

OWP holders as suggested by the consultation document on population policy, more than 20 000 new entrants from outside join the labour market a year. Irrespective of the economic performance, the objective reality is that a huge amount of low-skilled labour force is imported to Hong Kong every year. Hence, the Government should make use of these new entrants, offer them appropriate training and make proper preparations to encourage them to join the workforce for the benefit of the society as a whole, instead of merely putting the cart before the horse by importing labour. Lastly, President, I need to add a word on legislating for standard working hours, which accounts for less than 50 Chinese characters in the Policy Address, and it reads "The Standard Working Hours Committee is promoting informed and in-depth discussion on the issue of working hours in the community with a view to helping the Government map out the way forward for the working hours policy.". This actually represents a retrogression from what is proposed in the Chief Executive's Manifesto, which reads "examine issues relating to … legislative proposals on standard working hours". In this connection, I also call for enactment of legislation for standard working hours by the Government as soon as possible. President, I so submit. MR TAM YIU-CHUNG (in Cantonese): President, it is an indisputable fact that Hong Kong has an ageing population. As the working population will continue to fall vis-à-vis the retiree population, it has become a matter of urgency to improve the retirement protection system. In the Policy Address this year, $50 billion has been earmarked for future universal retirement protection schemes. Meanwhile, the Commission on Poverty will further consult different sectors of the community, too. Some Members in this Council consider that universal retirement protection schemes should be implemented. However, retirement protection, no matter it is borne by government revenue or public contribution, implemented on the "pay-as-you-go" principle or in the form of personal accounts, will impose a burden on the public, particularly the employed. Hence, the Government is obliged to conduct in-depth and comprehensive consultations and seek a consensus before retirement protection schemes can hopefully be implemented in a steady manner.


According to the findings of the opinion surveys conducted by the Democratic Alliance for the Betterment and Progress of Hong Kong over the past three years on universal retirement protection, although more than 70% of the public agreed that a retirement protection system should be established, the number of those refusing to make contributions remained at more than half, and the number of relatively young people aged below 40 refusing to make any contribution remained high at 60%. Furthermore, more than half of the respondents considered that universal retirement protection should be subject to assets restrictions. It is evident that Hong Kong society is still full of conflicts over the establishment of a retirement protection system. Two years ago, the Legislative Council visited Taiwan and Japan to study their retirement protection systems. In Taiwan, a National Pension Scheme was introduced in 2008 to protect people who had never joined any social insurance scheme, including housewives and people not employed for any job. Nevertheless, each participant is required to meet 60% of the National Pension premium payment out of his own pocket, whereas the remaining 40% is to be borne by the Government. Moreover, the premium will continue to rise from 7.5% at present to 12%. Similarly, under the National Pension Scheme implemented in Japan, housewives and people not employed for any job are covered, and the insured are required to make contribution to the Scheme, too. In order to meet its rising social security expenses, Japan raised its consumption tax again last year to provide additional funding for its National Pension Scheme. It is thus evident that, without universal contributions and assets restrictions on recipients, the retirement protection system can simply not sustain. There is still a lack of confidence in society in the implementation of a retirement protection system in 2017. Hence, the Government should all the more make more efforts in designing the details and narrow the gap by all means in order to put forward a sustainable and affordable proposal. Before the implementation of universal retirement protection schemes, the Government should also conduct a review of the relevant allowances currently provided for the elderly, including improving the existing Old Age Allowance (OLA) system, abolishing the asset and income test for Normal Old Age Allowance applicants, allowing elderly recipients of the Disability Allowance to receive the OLA as well, and relaxing the assets restriction of the Old Age Living Allowance Scheme to benefit more elderly with financial difficulties. Thank you, President.


6709

MR CHUNG KWOK-PAN (in Cantonese): This debate session is dedicated to matters related to talents, population, and so on. President, the first thing I would like to say here is that, as everybody knows, population ageing in Hong Kong will become a rather grave problem two decades later, when probably 30% of the population reaches the retirement age. In addition, I wish to talk about young people. But first of all, I would talk about population ageing. With Hong Kong's low birth rate comes an ageing population as well as shortages of talents and labour force, which is a really serious problem. Therefore, I consider it appropriate for the Government to begin looking into the strategies and initiatives in relation to the population policy now. However, I take exception to the outcomes of the study or its effect. In the Policy Address, the Government proposes attracting the second generation of Hong Kong people who have emigrated overseas to return to Hong Kong and enhance the Admission Scheme for Mainland Talents and Professionals and the Quality Migrant Admission Scheme. In a press conference held this afternoon, the Immigration Department talked about how these schemes would be enhanced as well as the transparency or scoring system with regard to the initiative to attract overseas talents. We surely acknowledge their necessity, but does the existence of these schemes mean overseas people or talents will necessarily come to Hong Kong? In fact, they will do so only when there are development prospects in Hong Kong. President, as Members are aware, the current scope of industries in Hong Kong is very narrow. Even when it comes to attracting overseas talents to Hong Kong, are they merely talents for the finance, real estate, retail and tourism sectors? Given the narrow scope of industries in Hong Kong nowadays, talents may not opt to come to Hong Kong, President. Besides, there is one strange point. During the time of Occupy Central, Rita LAW of the Executive Council remarked that some of her friends were thinking about emigration. President, we not only fail to attract people to Hong Kong but also make Hong Kong people consider leaving instead. She said they are scared by young people. Are young people that terrible? I would talk about young people later on. Therefore, President, given an ageing population currently, there is actually a sector which looks forward to the Government's expeditious removal of obstacles to the admission of talents, namely the healthcare sector, in order to attract Hong Kong people's descendants who are overseas medical graduates to return to Hong Kong. As everybody knows, Hong Kong's ageing population


presents a huge demand for healthcare services in the future. As Dr KO Wing-man put it, at this stage, perhaps during the Chinese New Year, many of the elderly may be infected with influenza, resulting in long queues at clinics. Hence, this is an area where enhancement is badly needed, and the overseas Hong Kong people who should first be attracted back to Hong Kong are doctors. I hope the SAR Government ― the Secretary of Department is present ― will advise the Medical Council of Hong Kong to cease its protectionism in the interest of Hong Kong people. Hence, this is the area which I think should be liberalized as a matter of priority. Moreover, the Policy Address makes little mention of the lack of opportunities of upward movement for young people. At present, the most worrying point is whether the liberalization of talent admission will impede young people's upward movement, as reflected in some opinions in society. We already have a lot of university graduates who do not earn much in their first jobs. Even if they manage to find a job, they may now complain of not having much room for development and upward mobility. If the Government really admits other talents, will this result in reactions in other aspects? In fact, I met with President of the Hong Kong Institute of Certified Public Accountants yesterday. They stated that they were beginning to worry about, with 38 000 accountants in Hong Kong and more than 17 000 students pursuing studies on accountancy, making a total of 50 000 or so, the proposal in the Policy Address of drawing up a talent list. If their sector is included in the talent list, the competition will become very intense, so those 17 000 or so prospective accountancy graduates will become very worried about their prospects. Therefore, is the initiative to attract overseas talents as feasible as it is in theory? When it comes to practical implementation, will it make young people think that their future development is impeded by the policy concerned? President, the SAR Government has mentioned setting up a $300 million Youth Development Fund. This is surely a good initiative, because many young people may want to start their own businesses but lack money. However, the amount of the fund seems too small, because right after the Government's announcement on the fund, Jack MA proceeded to announce his intention of making a $1 billion donation. Given the $1 billion donation from a single enterprise and the SAR Government's substantial fiscal surplus nowadays, why does the Government not allocate more funds to encouraging young people to start their own businesses or try to do so?


6711

Nevertheless, it is not easy to start a business. Starting a business is particularly difficult for young people, who like to work it out based on some ideal concepts but actually do not have much experience or knowledge in business operation. Therefore, even with the availability of the Youth Development Fund, I hope the SAR Government will also offer a platform for co-operation with the business sector. There may be sufficient money or resources in the business sector, but those engaged in traditional trades and industries may not have new ideas or concepts to develop new undertakings. However, if young people have ideas but lack business experience, money and resources, and if the Government can match the two together, it will be much more better. At the same time, President, in the past, we saw a lot of room of development in Hong Kong when we were young, and we had dreams. It is very important to have dreams. Why is everyone aware of the huge room of development in China, which boosts an immense size? It is not that China has particularly more advantages or a better business environment, but that dreams are possible in China. Within 10 years or so, someone named Jack MA may float in the United States the company he founded, which holds more than $1 trillion worth of assets. He works his way to the top of China's list of the richest tycoons in 10 years or so, a successful example of how dreams may come true. Some friends of mine, aged 30 or so to 40, have said after going to Shanghai recently in search of development that they had never encountered such opportunities in Hong Kong when they were young, but now they are aware of Shanghai's wider room of development compared with Hong Kong. They do not want to return to Hong Kong because they can see the opportunities in many of the sectors in Shanghai nowadays, but not so in Hong Kong. Therefore, there is a need for Hong Kong to offer a quality business environment or breed more industries in order to create a perception that Hong Kong has room for development. There is also a need to create some dreams for young people, which is of the utmost importance. President, all of the top three billionaires in Hong Kong are from the real estate sector. As I have said many times, the worst thing about Hong Kong or the reason why it is perceived to have little room for development is that it is inadequate in terms of industrial diversification and economic development. If an economy develops well, industries abound and local young people have access to a lot of development options, overseas talents will then be attracted to come here, as in the case of Shanghai I mentioned just now.


Therefore, in the discussion on economic development yesterday, many Members proposed ways for the development of industries. Of course, Mr MA Fung-kwok talked about his film industry; Mr Steven HO talked about the agriculture and fisheries industry; and I definitely speak for my sector, namely the fashion industry. Hence, if the Government is really listening and proceeds to develop a variety of industries, I believe there will be room for development in the future. President, I have a little time left. As I said just now, all of the so-called top three billionaires in Hong Kong are mainly from the real estate sector, but among the biggest economies overseas ― which are very often our trading partners as well ― the top billionaires in Japan, Spain, France and Sweden are garment makers; the top billionaires in the United States and China are from the IT sector (technology and scientific research), but few are engaged in the real estate sector. Therefore, the SAR Government really needs to think about issues in this regard. The Innovation and Technology Bureau has to be established, but regrettably, I believe the relevant motion may not be passed on the Valentine's Day. However, any motion in relation to the fashion industry will surely pass. Hence, I hope the SAR Government will give serious thoughts to the development of creative industries so as to provide Hong Kong's young people with more different options. Thank you, President. I so submit. MR KWOK WAI-KEUNG (in Cantonese): President, every year, tens of thousands of eligible post-secondary students in Hong Kong fail to enrol in degree courses at universities because of insufficient university places. Some of them may take other paths, including associate degree or other professional programmes. Of course, given the frequent contact between the two places, many of them may choose to pursue studies in the Mainland, and this is gradually becoming a trend. Despite the Administration's claim that no record is available on the number of Hong Kong students pursuing studies in the Mainland, yet according to the Census and Statistics Department's 2011 Population Census, the estimated number of Hong Kong residents studying full-time tertiary education programmes in the Mainland amounted to 5 515 in 2011; and according to the information provided by the Ministry of Education of the People's Republic of China, the


6713

number of Hong Kong students studying in Mainland higher education institutions and research institutes was 11 155 in 2011-2012. The figures may not be that up to date, but there is still some value for reference. These young people of Hong Kong have to leave the environment with which they are familiar in order to pursue studies and live overseas, so they may invariably encounter various difficulties, and this requires attention of the SAR Government. In the policy addresses of these two years, the Chief Executive has devised a lot of initiatives in relation to pursuit of education on the Mainland. Among them, the Mainland University Study Subsidy Scheme (MUSSS) was proposed last year and will continue this year. I support the Scheme in principle since it addresses exactly the question I mentioned just now and helps to strengthen the support available to Hong Kong students pursuing studies in the Mainland. Nevertheless, however good the initiative is, it does not work well in implementation. I hope the Administration will not wait three years before carrying out a review. Instead, some comprehensive review and improvement should be made this year in order to benefit more students. Why am I saying this? The Subsidy Scheme supports needy Hong Kong students enrolled on bachelor's degree courses in the Mainland under the Scheme for the Admission of Hong Kong Students to Mainland Higher Education Institutions (Admission Scheme). A means-tested annual subsidy of $15,000 at full rate or $7,500 at half rate, depending on the need, is offered to each student. What is the biggest problem there? In fact, students heading to the Mainland under the Admission Scheme account for less than 30% of the Hong Kong students pursuing university studies in the Mainland as a whole. Towards the end of the application period for 2014-2015, only 263 students were granted the subsidy, far lower than the authorities' projection of 500. We may look at last year's policy address, which mentioned that the Subsidy Scheme is actually designed for students admitted under the Admission Scheme, and it is not subject to any quota and will benefit three cohorts of students. Given the absence of a quota, I thought it should be lavish enough to cover all eligible Hong Kong students pursuing studies in the Mainland, but that is not the case. Instead, it is only available to applicants under the Admission Scheme. Nowadays, there are more than one way to pursue studies in the


Mainland, say five or six, and the Admission Scheme is just one of them, a not so popular one for that matter. The reality is that the purse strings have somehow been tightened, so it is not as lavish as what a so-called quota-free scheme should be. To better understand Hong Kong students' knowledge of the Subsidy Scheme, the Hong Kong Youth Power Association conducted a questionnaire survey between October and November last year and managed to collect 793 questionnaires. Apart from identifying a rising trend in the number of students pursuing studies in the Mainland, the survey findings also reflected how much local students were unaware of the Subsidy Scheme, and hence the inadequate publicity effort. Among the eligible students who were admitted in September last year, more than half of the interviewees had no idea of the Subsidy Scheme; only 46 of them submitted applications, and more than 300 or 87% of them did not do so. Asked why they had not done so, 62% of the students said they were born a year earlier than their classmates, so they could not benefit from the scheme even though they were aware of it; and some students said they had no idea of the method of making applications. Despite the scheme's low number of applicants, the survey findings showed that 65% of the students were not granted the subsidy, and only nine and seven of those surveyed were granted full and half-rate subsidies respectively. Some students considered the application threshold too high, so the MUSSS failed to really benefit Hong Kong students pursuing studies in the Mainland. In addition, as many as 94% of the interviewees called on the authorities to relax the application requirements. I have the following suggestions with regard to the findings. First, publicity should be enhanced to enable more students to know about the MUSSS; second, to complement the major study pathways for students, those admitted under discretionary schemes should be included in the Subsidy Scheme; third, Hong Kong students currently pursuing studies in the Mainland should be given equal treatment by including sophomores who started school a year earlier, such that more will benefit from the subsidy. In passing, I have to mention that from the current students invited by us to the sharing session, we learnt that some Mainland institutions have cancelled their original scholarship or bursary schemes after the release of the news on the Subsidy Scheme, regardless of whether the students' applications are successful.


6715

Some people thought that only those granted the subsidy in Hong Kong may not apply for Mainland ones. Yet, that is not the case, sorry. When the Mainland learnt about this vetting mechanism, they cancelled everything across the board, regardless of the results of students' applications under the Subsidy Scheme. Students with unsuccessful applications will turn out to lose out on both fronts. I hope the authorities will take note of or strengthen internal communication. Next, I would go to the part on manpower. President, the key to a community's harmony and stability lies in its economic development and employment situation. Therefore, there have to be targets in the Government's work to offer sufficient jobs and employment support based on the actual needs of the public, with a view to making the development of human resources complete and driving the economy forward. Regrettably, the current Policy Address is silent on the protection of the rights of local employees, and not even a single word has been dedicated to a concern of the labour sector, namely the alignment of both statutory and public holidays as well as the abolition of the offsetting mechanism under Mandatory Provident Fund schemes. Wage earners all over Hong Kong and I are deeply disappointed by this. Even though the Policy Address has touched upon the issues always mentioned by us, including standard working hours, minimum wage, labour importation, and so on, the initiatives proposed and their details not only fail to inadequately address the actual needs of employees in general, but even run contrary to them. Let me talk about standard working hours first. This is what the Chief Executive's Manifesto reads, "A special committee comprising of government officials, representatives of labour unions and employers' associations, academics and community leaders will be set up to follow up on the study on standard working hours conducted by the current administration. This committee will examine issues relating to employees' overtime work conditions and arrangements as well as legislative proposals on standard working hours." The most important term therein is "legislative proposals". In a blink of an eye, the incumbent Government is already half way through its term, and the special committee has already been established, but how far has the promise of promoting legislation on standard working hours gone? The current Policy Address puts it rather lightly, "The Standard Working Hours Committee is promoting informed and in-depth discussion on the issue of working hours in the community with a view to helping the Government map out the way forward for the working hours policy." It remains at the levels of promotion and discussion after such a long time, so where is the promise of legislation? Should the


Government's policy on working hours not go in the direction of legislation? If the incumbent Government does not implement it, should it be left to the next one? Or is it nowhere to be found anymore? Has the fact that the current-term Government's failure to honour its pledge has become a secret that the Chief Executive cannot disclose? As far as I know, the two working groups under the Standard Working Hours Committee have concluded the public consultations and relevant statistical surveys on working hours, and prepared relevant reports the relevant mid-term review; but as expected, no clear timetable has been set out with regard to legislation for standard working hours. In this connection, I once again express my deep disappointment and feel sorry for the labour representatives in the Committee, because they have devoted enormous time and effort to negotiating with their employer counterparts, but it is still in a stalemate. On this occasion, apart from calling on the Administration to expeditiously submit the reports to this Council as a timely update for Members and the public on the work progress of the Standard Working Hours Committee, I also urge the SAR Government to begin the work on legislating for standard working hours as promised the soonest possible. This should brook no more delay. I would next talk about reviewing the minimum wage once a year. In the current Policy Address, the Chief Executive said the minimum wage rate will be raised to $32.5 an hour, an amount which is actually rather outdated. Since the introduction of the Statutory Minimum Wage in 2011, the Minimum Wage Commission will only review the amount every two years. For example, the currently proposed minimum wage level of $32.5 an hour was actually devised based on the data in 2013. As a point of concern, the number of employees earning less than $32.5 an hour between May and June 2013 stood at 255 000, which accounted for 8.7% of all employees in Hong Kong; but in the first half of this year, or prior to the increase of the minimum wage rate to the proposed level, the number of employees earning less than $32.5 an hour, that is those who benefitted from the new minimum wage level had dropped to 150 000. Furthermore, the amount will be in effect for almost two years. That is, the amount of $32.5 will apply from 2015 to 2017, and it will mean a lag of four full years by 2017. The severe lag of data can reflect how hard the life is for those earning the minimum wage rate.


6717

Undeniably, the wage levels of elementary workers have seen some growth thanks to the legislation for minimum wage. However, given this kind of lag as well as inflation and rising prices, an adjustment of the minimum wage rate to $32.5 represents an increase of a mere $2.5. The financial burden of elementary workers remains very heavy, and they even need to work long hours in order to make ends meet. This explains why the Hong Kong Federation of Trade Unions (FTU) has all along called on the Government to shorten the frequency of reviewing the minimum wage level from once every two years to once every year to ensure that the new level can cope with inflation and the financial pressure borne by elementary workers. I am really dissatisfied with the way our humble request in this regard is not addressed by the Policy Address. Lastly, the FTU voices its opposition here against any initiative to expand the importation of labour. All along, Members have minced no word by stating categorically that a mechanism has been put in place on labour importation, and that we will not accept any initiative bypassing the existing gate-keeping mechanism. Our objective is to ensure that every trade for which labour importation is needed must have something to do with the unavailability of manpower for relevant professions in Hong Kong. Without a gate-keeping mechanism, the "rice bowls" of local workers in Hong Kong are all set to be snatched up by their foreign counterparts, particularly given the substantial decline in the amount of infrastructure funding approved. We can foresee that the problem of underemployment will gradually surface in the coming few years. If there are initiatives which favour the importation of foreign workers but not their departure, we will be very worried as to how the "rice bowls" of local workers can be protected in the future. But regrettably, in the current Policy Address, the Government moots the idea of allowing imported skilled workers to work across various public sector works projects in the absence of any extensive consultation, in contrary to the past rule that imported skilled workers may only do a single type of work in the same project under the same contractor. This is direct deprivation of the rights and needs of local workers. Project delay is caused by many factors, and it cannot be attributed to not having enough skilled workers alone. In fact, workers abound in the construction sector. With appropriate training, they must be able to meet the demand of different types of skilled work. Nevertheless, if the Government likes to take the shortcut instead of making bread from flour by opening the gate for labour importation, it will be opening a Pandora's box. Infrastructure projects are launched every year, and it is easier to bring in foreign


workers than asking them away. If we do not offer local training but rely on labour importation long term, it will only become an excuse for contractors not to improve the working conditions and salary packages for local workers. As a result, there will be a vicious cycle in which local employment will become even more difficult, and there will be serious implications on the long-term development of the sectors. In this connection, I call on the Government to keep its promise and stand firm against the expansion of the importation of labour that bypasses the Labour Advisory Board, otherwise it will do an injustice to the local workers in general. Thank you, President. IR DR LO WAI-KWOK (in Cantonese): President, according to the document entitled "Population policy ― Strategies and Initiatives" released by the authorities in January, Hong Kong's population grew by only 0.6% per annum on average over the past decade, and its labour force is projected to start declining around 2018. Since population policy straddles a number of policy areas, including town planning, housing supply, economic development, education and training, immigration policies, and so on, to cope with the changes in Hong Kong's demographic structure, I suggest that the SAR Government set up an implementation framework dedicated to the population policy to work out some comprehensive projection and planning with regard to different aspects of the economy, the demand for various public services as well as the demand-supply situation for human resources in the short, medium and long terms and to timely review and adjust various policies for the sustainable development of Hong Kong's economy and society. In my opinion, the construction sector is a good instance to illustrate the importance of timely adjustments to the demand-supply situation of manpower. As those from the sector have pointed out, given the impact of the political disturbances in recent years on infrastructure project planning, a number of large projects will enter the peak construction period coincidentally this year or next, resulting in an acute manpower shortage. In a survey carried out in last November by the Hong Kong Construction Association and the Hong Kong Federation of Electrical and Mechanical Contractors on the construction sites where their members worked, there were respective manpower shortfalls in excess of 3 300 and 1 500 for both of them; on this basis, Hong Kong is projected


6719

to be short of around 12 500 construction workers and around 4 600 or so electrical and mechanical workers. However, another alarm which is ringing is that the filibusters and the non-cooperation movement initiated by some Members of this Council since last year have caused some serious implications on the vetting of new projects. If the next batch of projects fail to come on stream in time, the situation will go to another extreme, namely inadequate construction volume, and the livelihood of the 260 000 workers in the construction sector will then be seriously affected. In the sector's estimate, it takes an annual government expenditure in excess of $70 billion on public works projects, coupled with the private-sector counterpart, to make up a total of about $180 billion, an amount that is needed if workers' livelihood and the sector's development are to sustain. In the Construction Industry Alliance's estimate, if the unemployment rate of the construction sector soared to the 2003 level of 19%, more than 70 000 workers will lose their jobs. President, many friends in the engineering and construction sectors want government policies to be both flexible and forward-looking to address and solve the current manpower shortage of the construction sector and the demand-supply imbalance for some positions; continue the review of and enhancement to the Supplementary Labour Scheme; and appropriately relax the restriction on importation of labour taking into account the actual circumstances without compromising employment for local residents to cope with the needs during the peak construction period with a view to avoiding further project delay or cost overrun. Meanwhile, they should draw up a list and an order for project implementation based on Hong Kong's long-term infrastructure planning and priorities of works projects, work out the construction manpower demand-supply forecast with the sectors concerned as well as devise plans for enhanced skills training to attract new blood with a view to addressing the demand-supply gap of construction manpower, so as to stop the sector from falling into the dilemma of swinging between extreme oversupply or excessive demand. President, the focus of local manpower training is to create for the younger generation employment opportunities that are more diversified and promising. As the Chief Executive put it in this year's Policy Address, the authorities will set up a $300 million Youth Development Fund to support non-governmental organizations' effort to assist young people in starting their own businesses. I endorse the Government's establishment of the fund, but the initiative concerned should be put under the charge of organizations with experience in business operation, which in turn can offer appropriate guidance for young people aspiring


to starting their businesses. At the same time, the Government should join force with chambers of commerce or trade associations to organize more business-school partnership programmes, work experience programmes, and so on, to enhance young people's understanding of different trades and industries in preparation for their employment in the future. It should also encourage universities or professional bodies to introduce mentorship schemes to build up a professional and career ladder that facilitates the sustainable upward movement of working youths. With these remarks, President, I support Mr Andrew LEUNG's original motion. MR LEUNG YIU-CHUNG (in Cantonese): President, some people say that standard working hours will be a new battlefield for employers and employees. This remark is a reflection of the actual situation in some measure, for the major concerns which the labour sector has been striving for so far just fall on a few areas, including universal retirement protection, right to collective bargaining and standard working hours, and so on. Regrettably, despite the discussion on these issues over the years in nearly every year and every month, or even every day, the Government has been progressing at a snail's pace, or we can even say that no progress has been made at all. We understand that employers will be the greatest resistance in these issues, and the Government will surely say so. But I think this is definitely not the fact. President, why do I say so? From the perspective of employers, they will naturally think that arrangements protecting the interests and rights of employees will increase their burden and lead them into crises of redundancy and even closure. Yet, is this the reality? President, Members may recall that during the discussion on the prescription of a minimum wage, some people had also raised such worries, and it turned out that it was not the case. I recall the then incumbent Chief Executive TUNG Chee-hwa and many representatives of the business sector had made repeated comments that the prescription of a minimum wage would definitely lead to an increase in unemployment rate, which would be absolutely unfavourable to the labour sector. Back then, the gravest worry of the people was that the good deed would backfire, and they thus opposed it, unwilling to set up a minimum wage system.


6721

President, if my memory has not failed me, and as some Members mentioned earlier, four years have passed unnoticeably since the minimum wage system was set up. What were the unemployment rates for the past four years? I really want to ask Secretary Matthew CHEUNG this question. The Secretary has said a number of times that the unemployment rate now is extremely low, which can be interpreted as full employment where no one is unemployed. Moreover, will Secretary Matthew CHEUNG tell us whether any organization has closed down in the past four years as a result of the prescription of the minimum wage? As far as I know, the answer is none. President, it is evident that whenever an issue involving labour rights and interests is raised, employers will immediately consider this in terms of profits. Indeed, will the arrangement make the operation of employers very difficult? Not so in reality. Many subjects relating to labour welfare have been passed unnoticeably, which include the minimum wage mentioned by me earlier. Why could these subjects be passed eventually? The attitude of the Government is the key. If the Government adopts a proactive and ambitious attitude, there will be no problem. I recall that in the prescription of a minimum wage, Secretary Matthew CHEUNG was quite worried about the situation after such prescription, so he tried to persuade employers to adopt the practice voluntarily. Members should know that the persuasion approach at that time ended in a failure. The voluntary scheme introduced for a few trades was a complete failure. Eventually, the authorities could only resort to legislation. As for standard working hours, at present, the Government has stressed repeatedly that it will persuade and encourage employers to work on this aspect, and it will encourage employers to allow employees to have time for good rest and to care for their bodies and health, and so on. However, the reality tells us that this method of persuasion now adopted by the Government will not work. In reality, we notice that many workers have to work long hours and the situation is getting worse. President, Members may recall an example cited by me in the past. When I was still working in the former Legislative Council Building, a security officer came to find me. He told me in tears that he had not been an responsible husband. I asked him why and he said he had to work over 12 hours a day, and including the travelling time, he would be out for 14 to 15 hours every day. He could only stay home for seven to eight hours. Since he was tired after work, he


would go to sleep right after dinner and a bath, and he did not lead a proper life of husband and wife. He was unhappy about this and he kept crying when he recounted his miseries to me. I think his case is not an individual incident. In fact, we do not only need to have marriage life, we also need to have family life. Now, the Government has been urging parents to shoulder the role of nurturing children. Yet with such long hours of work, how can parents do so? The Government also encourages employees to enhance their work skills through further studies and attending skills training courses, yet how can they spare the time to do so? Take the catering industry as an example. If employees in the trade have to undergo training, it will be carried out either early in the morning or after work, yet such a practice is really inhuman. Therefore, I think there should be no more delay in prescribing standard working hours. Regrettably, in the Policy Address this year, the Chief Executive still adopts the procrastination approach in handling this issue, just conducting one study after another. This issue involves the lives of many people and disputes in many families, so there should be no more delay. I hope the authorities will address the problem as soon as possible. President, I so submit. PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Does any other Member wish to speak? MS STARRY LEE (in Cantonese): President, like a mirror, Occupy Central reflected how some young people in Hong Kong wrongly interpreted the Basic Law, how weak their national sentiment was, and how they allowed separatist consciousness, such as independence of Hong Kong, infiltrate their thinking. In the wake of Occupy Central, these questions were raised in society: Why did the students have such a weak national identity and national sentiment? Why could the idea of seeking independence of Hong Kong have a chance to germinate in the minds of the young people in Hong Kong? The conclusion drawn by the analyses made by quite a number of academics of the recent phenomena in Hong Kong is that a post-colonial phenomenon has emerged in Hong Kong. Colonialism is a process of


6723

denationalization. In order to achieve denationalization, the first and foremost task is to alienate colonized from the people or nation to which they originally belonged. Hong Kong was governed as a colony for a long time. The British must have taken into consideration the factor of denationalization in designing Hong Kong's social systems, including its education system. President, despite the fact that almost 17 years have passed since the reunification of Hong Kong, the colonial systems, including the education model, are still being used, thus making it difficult for national sentiments to be nurtured among students. After the reunification, the students should originally be able to have a certain degree of understanding of the nation and its state. For instance, they should have some basic understanding of the nation's political, economic and social conditions. However, this is not the case in reality. In Hong Kong, education on national conditions is absent from the primary and secondary curricula. Moreover, the timing for introducing national education was not right. As a result, the students' understanding of national conditions is relatively weak. During Occupy Central, this point was fully manifested in some of the statements made by the students. After the reunification, Chinese History education has shown signs of retrogression. We have been asked by many members of the communities these questions: Why was Chinese History not made a compulsory subject? Students must have some knowledge of Chinese history, must they not? In addition to these feelings of the general public, another actual example is the sharp drop in the number of students sitting for Chinese History public examinations. Many people in society have asked these similar questions: How should national sentiments be nurtured? Where do they come from? I have recently read an article written by Mr HO Hon-kuen, who has all along been advocating for making Chinese History a compulsory subject at junior secondary level. Mr HO said that Prof LUNG Ying-tai, who was then the Culture Minister of Taiwan, was a speaker at a seminar hosted by the Alumni Affairs Office of the University of Hong Kong a couple of years ago. During the questions and answers session open to the public, Mr HO put this question to her, "Prof LUNG, where did your national sentiments come from?" Prof LUNG replied, "They came from my understanding of and aspiration for Chinese culture, as well as the beautiful Tang and Song poetry." She continued, "Knowledge, emotion, will power and behaviour go hand in hand. National sentiments,


national identity, and the awareness and recognition of national identity cannot be developed instantly; instead, they must be nurtured wholeheartedly and internalized." Hence, President, in the final analysis, we must revert to the basic step. In the end, we must rely on Chinese History education to enable our students to get to know more about the nation and develop their national sentiments. As there have been calls by the Democratic Alliance for the Betterment and Progress of Hong Kong (DAB) for Chinese History to be made an independent, compulsory subject, this call is not made the first time today. Actually, it should not be a difficult task for the Education Bureau. Coupled with the fact that a relatively board consensus has already been reached in society, there is no need to allocate abundant resources and formulate a new Chinese History curriculum. I have no idea why the Secretary for Education has failed time and again to give a direct response to this question. Instead, he will invariably advance many excuses, such as Chinese History was already made a compulsory subject at junior secondary level in 2001, Chinese history is the essential learning content at junior secondary level, and on average about two periods per week must be devoted to studying Chinese history, and so on. In short, he has not replied direct as to whether or not Chinese History will be re-introduced as an independent, compulsory subject for all students at junior secondary level. President, Chinese History has been offered as an independent subject at Secondary One to Secondary Three level for three years in a row in only about 79% of secondary schools. In short, more than 20% of the secondary schools do not offer Chinese History as an independent and compulsory subject. Certainly, these secondary schools have their own ways to go about it, with some combining Chinese History and Western History, and some offering the History and Culture subject or the Integrated Humanities subject, and so on. President, young people all over the world must study their own national history. As Hong Kong is part of China, it stands to reason that our young people must know more about history and the Education Bureau must enhance the Chinese History curriculum. President, according to the data provided by the Education Bureau the other day in its reply to my written question, 26 790 students, representing 32.3% of the total number of day-school students, or one in every three secondary students, sat for the Chinese History paper in the last Hong Kong Certificate of Education Examination. However, the number of students sitting for the Chinese History paper in the Hong Kong Diploma for Secondary


6725

Education is a mere 6 318, representing about 10% of the day-school candidates. This means that only one in every 10 students sit for the Chinese History paper. Under the New Senior Secondary (NSS) academic structure, there has been a sharp drop in the proportion of candidates sitting for the Chinese History paper. This precisely reflects that Chinese History education at the junior secondary level cannot arouse the students' interest in selecting this subject at the senior secondary level. Certainly, in all fairness, many other factors should be taken into consideration as well. Just now, Mrs Regina IP pointed out that the number of students studying the Chinese History subject under the NSS academic structure was actually shrinking. In addition, students did not like choosing such subjects as World History and Literature. Certainly, this has something to do with the actual social conditions. Nevertheless, the Secretary still has to address squarely the problem of the substantial and continual fall in the number of students studying humanities subjects under the NSS academic structure. President, it is evident from Occupy Central that the communication between the SAR Government and young people has failed. While young people rely mainly on new media for the acquisition of information, the Government seldom publicizes its public policies through new media. In recent years, quite a number of public policies have failed to win recognition of the public, particularly young people. This precisely reflects that the communication between the Government and young people is not smooth. The Government must therefore conduct a thorough review and set up a high-level working group to study how to maintain good communication with young people, increase the proportion of young people joining advisory committees and disseminate information through multimedia or new media. However, it is most imperative for the Secretary or relevant government officials to reach out to schools or young groups direct or make exchanges with them through online platforms. Actually, they had repeatedly indicated that they could not conduct a dialogue with government officials when Occupy Central was going on. I hope the SAR Government can seriously consider and think and allow more government representatives to reach out to different communities, particularly young communities, to explain the public policies and communicate with them. In this way, their voices can reach out to the Government direct.


President, during the past six months, I contacted quite a number of representatives from early childhood education organizations, who had various demands for the 15-year free education to be implemented by the Government shortly. Actually, I have repeatedly relayed their views to the Secretary. To my understanding, the Government has not yet confirmed the ultimate direction for its specific policy. This is why I must reiterate several points here. Firstly, to provide the parents of young children with a variety of options for quality education services should be made the goal of free early childhood education. By a variety of options it means that the unique needs of parents must be met. Currently, Hong Kong's labour force situation is very tight. To release the labour force of women, the Government must, while implementing 15-year free education, ensure that reasonable resources are made available to whole-day kindergartens and those operating long full-day and on school holidays to enable dual-income parents to continue to compete in the market and enjoy the right to choose. Quality kindergarten teachers are indispensable to the provision of quality kindergarten education. Nevertheless, kindergarten teachers now feel very frustrated with the absence of a pay scale and a stable pay increment ladder. The President and Secretary should be impressed deeply by the striking scenes, akin to those appearing in the Ben-Hur film, of kindergarten teachers attending the public hearings held by the Legislative Council to voice their grievances to Members since their profession was not recognized. We in the DAB call on the Government to provide a professional ladder for kindergarten teachers while implementing 15-year free education by introducing a reasonable salary arrangement to offer protection to their career development. Even if 15-year free education is implemented, the problem of miscellaneous and tuition fees is still a concern to us. Although I have repeatedly relayed this problem to the Secretary, he would invariably respond that school sponsoring bodies must have a certain degree of flexibility in order to continue to provide a variety of early childhood education services. However, will such flexibility result in a waiver of tuition fees but the levying of a variety of miscellaneous fees, with the level of miscellaneous fees being higher than that of tuition fees? The reason is that kindergartens providing quality education might use different "tricks" to attract parents who actually have different needs. Should the Government fail to regulate miscellaneous fees in a reasonable manner while implementing 15-year free education, I am worried that the level of miscellaneous fees will be higher than that of tuition fees. Hence, parents and students will not actually be able to benefit from the 15-year free education.


6727

President, on the other hand, the existing arrangement adopted for kindergarten education does not take into account the problem of allocation of places. Although kindergartens are allowed to exercise full autonomy in allocation, what kindergarten education needs most is actually "a place nearby". After the implementation of 15-year free education, I hope the Education Bureau can play a role in planning and co-ordination in the allocation of kindergarten places. It is just not right to make parents unable to secure a place for their children even though they have attended interviews at five or 10 kindergartens. Fourthly, the needs of young children with learning diversity should be addressed. The support currently given to young children with learning diversity is indeed very limited. Moreover, the Education Bureau is not in charge. After the implementation of 15-year free education, we hope that kindergartens can receive more resources. In that case, the Education Bureau can naturally request these kindergartens to provide appropriate support for early identification of and intervention in young children with learning diversity to really meet their needs. President, the Policy Address this year has also followed up the policy for supporting young children with learning diversity. We welcome the numerous initiatives proposed by the Chief Executive in the Policy Address, including the provision of 1 400 or so additional places for subvented pre-school rehabilitation services, the strengthening of the manpower of the multidisciplinary healthcare teams of the Child Assessment Centres under the Department of Health, the offer of subsidy to low-income families to obtain outside services, the introduction of on-site rehabilitation services, and so on. Actually, a study report was already released by us a couple of years ago to make similar suggestions to the Government. We are grateful to the Government for taking on board some of the views expressed by us and the relevant panels of the Legislative Council. Nevertheless, even if 1 400 additional places are provided on top of the existing 6 200 pre-school rehabilitation places, they are still inadequate to meet the actual needs. According to the data provided by the Government, as at late 2013, 6 000 or so young children in total were still waiting for pre-school rehabilitation places. The relevant figure illustrates that, despite the increase in the number of places, early identification and early intervention are still mere slogans. Many children have already become primary students before receiving these services. Hence, as I emphasized just now, when 15-year free education is implemented, kindergarten teachers and schools must be responsible for and


capable of addressing the needs of students with learning diversity. Otherwise, students, particularly grass-roots children, will still be unable to receive assistance and improve their learning if they are still waiting for the relevant treatment. President, in the policy address last year, the Chief Executive announced the introduction of a Mainland University Study Subsidy Scheme (MUSSS) to subsidize Hong Kong students to study in universities on the Mainland. Under the MUSSS, each student who has passed the means test will receive either a full-rate subsidy of HK$15,000 per year or the half-rate subsidy of HK$7,500 per year. Nevertheless, the MUSSS has imposed a special restriction that only students accepted under the scheme for the Admission of Hong Kong Students to Mainland Higher Education Institutions are eligible. However, this is not the only channel through which Hong Kong students can study in universities on the Mainland. Other channels, including the Joint Entrance Examination (JEE) for Universities in the Mainland for Hong Kong and Macao, the JEE for the Jinan University and the Huaqiao University, or the submission of applications direct to individual universities, are also available. Actually, the number of students attending Mainland universities through various channels is around 10 000 per annum. The number of such students from Hong Kong has reportedly increased from around 11 000 in 2011 to 14 000 in February last year. The MUSSS has been open for applications since last year. By the closing of the first application period, 448 applications were received. Of the applications received, 263 young persons passed the means test to be eligible for either the full-rate or half-rate subsidy. Actually, the number of applicants represents only a handful of students attending universities on the Mainland. Should the Government wish to give further support to the students by providing them with a variety of opportunities of pursuing studies, it should relax the eligibility criteria to enable university students pursuing studies on the Mainland through other channels to have the same opportunities to receive subsidy. I believe the eligibility criteria, even if relaxed, will not drastically increase the Government's financial burden. I hope it can consider this proposal in earnest. Next, President, I would like to say a few words about life planning, which is one of the major initiatives announced by the Chief Executive last year. Actually, we have been monitoring the effectiveness of the relevant measures, too. My greatest concern is teacher training because life planning is a relatively novel idea in Hong Kong. Perhaps the Secretary for Education can explain clearly later on what concrete measures can be put in place to ensure teachers responsible for life planning can keep tabs on the pulse of the employment market


6729

on a regular basis and obtain a full picture of the actual information of each and every trade and industry as well as the progressive pathway, so that they can provide accurate information in discussing life planning with students. Furthermore, such information must be updated constantly, and exchanges must be enhanced, too. I remember very well that, during the previous questions and answers session of the Legislative Council, the Secretary merely said that some sharing sessions would be arranged to enable teachers to share their experience. In my opinion, the sharing sessions have failed to achieve the goal of enabling teachers responsible for life planning to accurately obtain a full picture of data on a regular basis. President, another initiative is to strengthen the Business-School Partnership Programme. Launched in 2005, this Programme has invited more organizations in the commercial and industrial sectors to participate since last year. To date, however, the number of partners in the business sector has only increased from 120 to 170. If I were asked whether I am dissatisfied with this figure, I would definitely give an answer in the affirmative because, of the 320 000 small and medium enterprises in Hong Kong, only 100-odd enterprises had responded to this Programme. The participation rate was indeed very low. We note that there is an actual need for more enterprises to provide young people with a variety of experiential opportunities or make more suggestions to them. Actually, there are around 60 000 to 70 000 senior secondary graduates every year. Although they may not join the labour market instantly, there is indeed an actual need for a variety of orientation or experiential programmes to be arranged for them in a timely manner. President, I hope the Government can step up its efforts in promoting business-school partnership and encourage more employers to participate in this Programme to enable more young people to be benefited. President, I so submit. SUSPENSION OF MEETING PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): I now suspend the meeting until 9 am tomorrow. Suspended accordingly at 10.23 pm.

official record of proceedings thursday,...

Documents