A 12/13-4
Legislative Council
Agenda
Wednesday 31 October 2012 at 11:00 am
I. Tabling of Papers
| 1. | No. 10 | - | Construction Workers Registration Authority
Annual Report 2011-2012 |
| (to be presented by Secretary for Development)
| |||
| 2. | No. 11 | - | Electrical and Mechanical Services Trading Fund
Annual Report 2011/12 |
| (to be presented by Secretary for Development)
| |||
| 3. | No. 12 | - | Environment and Conservation Fund
Trustee Report 2011-2012 |
| (to be presented by Secretary for the Environment)
| |||
| 4. | No. 13 | - | Traffic Accident Victims Assistance Fund
Annual Report for the year from 1 April 2011 to 31 March 2012 |
| (to be presented by Secretary for Labour and Welfare)
| |||
| 5. | No. 14 | - | Office of the Telecommunications Authority
Trading Fund Report 2011/12 |
| (to be presented by Secretary for Commerce and Economic Development)
| |||
| 6. | No. 15 | - | Hongkong Post Annual Report 2011/12 |
| (to be presented by Secretary for Commerce and Economic Development) | |||
II. Questions
1. Hon Emily LAU to ask: (Translation)
At its meetings held on 18 and 19 September in Geneva, the United Nations Committee on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities ("the Committee") considered the report submitted by China (including Hong Kong and Macao) on China's fulfillment of her obligations under the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities ("the Convention"), and the Committee published its concluding observations and recommendations at the end of September. In this connection, will the Executive Authorities inform this Council:
(a) given that the Committee has pointed out in its concluding observations that the rank of Hong Kong's Commissioner for Rehabilitation is too low and that Hong Kong lacks an independent monitoring mechanism, whether the authorities will consider appointing a person of a higher rank to be the Commissioner for Rehabilitation and setting up an independent monitoring mechanism so as to ensure that Hong Kong will effectively fulfill her obligations under the Convention; (b) given that the Committee has expressed concern about the rather passive role adopted by the Equal Opportunities Commission, which is responsible for monitoring and executing the Disability Discrimination Ordinance, how the authorities will make improvements in this regard; and (c) whether they will set up an inter-departmental group led by the Chief Secretary for Administration, with dedicated responsibility for executing and coordinating matters in relation to fulfilling the obligations under the Convention and handling issues about the rights and interests of persons with disabilities?
2. Dr Hon Kenneth CHAN to ask: (Translation)
It has been reported that the Government plans to resume the site where the International Montessori School ("IMS") is situated for development of a youth hostel, and that the relocation of IMS may reduce the existing number of international school places. Regarding the relocation of IMS and the policy on international schools, will the Government inform this Council:
(a) of the Government's specific plan to resume the aforesaid site; whether the Government will provide assistance to IMS, its teachers and students as well as the parents; if it will, of the details; given that IMS had moved three times in the past decade or so, whether the Government will assist IMS in developing a permanent campus; if it will, of the details; if not, the reasons for that; (b) of the number of foreign students in the past three years who needed to study at international schools but went to local schools due to a shortage of international school places; whether the Government will adopt some short-term and transitional measures to assist students who cannot secure international school places in the near future in tackling their learning difficulties; if it will, of the details; if not, the reasons for that; and (c) given that some parents have pointed out that the shortage of international school places at present directly affects the desire of overseas talents and investors to develop their career and make investments in Hong Kong, whether the Government will honour the Chief Executive's pledge in his manifesto by formulating a specific policy on increasing international school places; if it will, of the specific details of the policy; if not, the reasons for that?
3. Hon CHAN Yuen-han to ask: (Translation)
In the 1997-1998 Policy Address, the Government pledged that it would, within 10 years, provide the opportunity for at least 250 000 families living in public rental housing to buy their flats, with a view to achieving 70% home ownership by the end of 2007. The Hong Kong Housing Authority ("HA") therefore launched the Tenants Purchase Scheme ("TPS") in early 1998, but the Scheme was halted in 2005. In this connection, will the Government inform this Council:
(a) of the respective numbers of housing estates and flats that had been included in TPS in the past, the number of flats sold each year, and the percentages of such numbers against the total number of tenants eligible for TPS, with a breakdown by housing estate; given that the households in TPS estates include both tenants and owners, of the number of complaints and requests for assistance relating to building management and maintenance received by the authorities so far, and the relevant details; (b) given the persistently high prices of private housing at present, whether the authorities will consider afresh re-launching TPS, so as to provide the opportunity for more families to buy their own flats; if they will, of the factors for consideration as well as the details; if not, the reasons for that; and (c) whether the authorities will request HA to conduct in-depth discussion on the current situation and future development of TPS; if they will, of the details and the relevant arrangements; if not, the reasons for that?
4. Hon Alice MAK to ask: (Translation)
The former Secretary for Food and Health had stated that there were two main aspects in the government policy on markets: first, to pay close attention to whether or not the provision of public markets was adequate and make every effort to meet public demand in general; and second, to strive to improve market facilities and create a desirable, clean and hygienic business environment for market stall operators on the premise of putting public resources to rational use. In this connection, will the Government inform this Council:
(a) whether the authorities had set up any new public markets in the past three years; if so, of the number of new markets set up each year and their locations; if not, the reasons for that; whether the authorities have any plans at present to set up new markets; if so, of the details; if not, the reasons for that; (b) whether the authorities will review the existing planning guidelines for new development areas to incorporate the principle of ensuring the public to have appropriate and diversified consumer choices, so as to facilitate consideration of the need to set up public markets in new development areas; if so, of the details; if not, the reasons for that; and (c) how the authorities assessed the public's demand for public markets in the past; whether the authorities have conducted any survey on the operating environment and commodity prices in various types of markets, so as to ensure that small business operators have room for survival and the public have abundant choices in consumption, thereby reducing the situation of consumers being exploited because of monopoly?
5. Hon Tommy CHEUNG to ask: (Translation)
The English Schools Foundation ("ESF") has introduced a Nomination Rights Scheme ("NRS") for nine primary schools, five secondary schools and one special school, which are operated directly by ESF and subsidized by the Government, at a price of $500,000 per student and with a quota of 150 for the first year. It is learnt that since parents buying NRS will be accorded priority in securing a place in ESF schools for their children, some parents are concerned that NRS might turn education into pecuniary transactions, thus violating the basic principle of fairness in provision of education. In this connection, will the Government inform this Council:
(a) when the authorities became aware of ESF's introduction of NRS for its subsidized schools; whether ESF has reached a consensus with the Education Bureau and obtained its approval well before implementing NRS; if so, of the Education Bureau's basis for granting the approval, and whether other government-subsidized schools may also adopt this approach in admitting students in future; if not, what follow-up actions the Education Bureau will take; (b) given ESF's claim that the purpose of NRS is to raise funds for maintenance of facilities in ESF schools and school redevelopment, if NRS has been approved by the Government, how the authorities will in future urge ESF to make public the financial position of the income and expenditure of ESF schools, to ensure that the funds raised will be used for the specified purposes; and (c) following ESF's introduction of NRS, whether the authorities will speed up the reduction of subsidies for ESF schools, so as to facilitate the gradual transition of ESF schools to operate under a self-financing mode; if they will, of the details; if not, the reasons for that?
6. Hon NG Leung-sing to ask: (Translation)
Hong Kong has developed into a major international financial centre in recent years, and the financial services industry has become the second largest pillar of the economy of Hong Kong. In this connection, will the Government inform this Council of:
(a) the value added of the banking industry, including licensed banks, restricted licence banks and deposit-taking companies, and its percentage in the Gross Domestic Product in each of the past three years; (b) the respective percentages of employment in the banking industry in the working population and the total employment of Hong Kong in the past three years; and (c) its concrete plans on the development of the banking industry for the consideration of the to-be-established Financial Services Development Council?
*7. Hon LEUNG Kwok-hung to ask: (Translation)
Quite a number of members of the public and overseas Chinese have complained to me that while the Government puts in great efforts to promote digital audio broadcasting on the one hand, it has earlier looked on with folded arms the disagreement among the shareholders of Digital Broadcasting Corporation Hong Kong Limited ("DBC") on the other hand, resulting in DBC once discontinuing its broadcasting services which affected quite a number of members of the public. In this connection, will the Government honestly inform this Council:
(a) given that the Government informed this Council on 17 October this year that it was aware of the disagreement among the shareholders of DBC and it had followed up closely on the developments, of the contents of the disagreement; and whether it has examined if DBC and its shareholders had breached the licensing conditions or legislation in the aforesaid incident; if it has, of the results; (b) as the Government has indicated that the Commerce and Economic Development Bureau ("CEDB") had twice written to DBC for clarification on media reports on the aforesaid incident, whether it can provide copies or contents of these letters; (c) given that the Government has indicated that CEDB had met with DBC management for more than once, of the number of meetings held between CEDB and DBC management on the aforesaid incident and the details (set out in the table below); Date Time Meeting venue Name of management staff Officials in charge Discussion contents Results
(d) whether the shareholders of DBC have given any undertaking to the Government in applying for the licence and whether they are required to comply with any licensing conditions; if so, whether the Government has required each shareholder that they must fulfill their undertakings and comply with the licensing conditions, as well as explained to them the legal consequences they have to bear personally of their failure to fulfill their undertakings and comply with the licensing conditions; if so, when it has done so; if not, of the shareholders whom the Government has not yet been successful in contacting and the number of those who have refused to cooperate; (e) whether the Government has critically examined DBC's financial capability before granting a licence to it; if so, whether it has assessed the reasons why DBC still defaulted on employees' wages or service fees; if not, why the Government had then refused to grant a radio licence to Citizens' Radio on the ground of its financial capability; (f) whether, by making reference to the practices of handling the closing down of the Commercial Television and the telecast of the London 2012 Olympic Games, the Government will immediately intervene in DBC's discontinuation of broadcasting services, so as to enable members of the public in Hong Kong and overseas Chinese to continue to listen to DBC's programmes; if so, when and how it will do so; if not, of the reasons for that; (g) as it was reported on 17 October this year that a DBC shareholder had successfully applied to the High Court for appointing an accounting firm as the interim receiver of DBC, whether the Government has reflected to the accounting firm immediately that DBC must comply with the licensing conditions and continue to provide broadcasting services; if so, when it has done so; if not, of the reasons for that; (h) whether the Secretary for Commerce and Economic Development ("SCED") has taken any actions to effectively make DBC continue broadcasting; if so, of the contents and effects of such actions; if not, the reasons for that; (i) whether the Chief Executive ("CE") or the Chief Secretary for Administration has requested SCED to intervene in DBC's discontinuation of broadcasting services or stopped him from doing so; if so, when he or she has done so; if not, of the reasons for that; (j) whether the Government will provide, on the ground of DBC's discontinuation of broadcasting services, pecuniary compensation to those members of the public who have bought digital radio sets in response to the Government's publicity on the promotion of digital audio broadcasting and out of their preference to listen to DBC's programmes; (k) whether the Government has assessed the impact of DBC's discontinuation of broadcasting services on those members of the public and overseas Chinese who listen to its programmes every day; (l) given that quite a number of members of the public have indicated that they have requested, through Facebook, fax, telephone and email, SCED to intervene in the aforesaid discontinuation of broadcasting services and ensure that DBC will continue to broadcast, but SCED has made no response so far, whether the Government will arrange for SCED to meet with and respond to all the complaining members of the public in person, so as to respond to CE's advocacy of politically appointed officials visiting various districts more to listen to the views of the public; if it will, when it will make the arrangement; if not, of the reasons for that; and (m) whether it has assessed if the discontinuation of broadcasting services was the result of SCED's failure to monitor DBC properly; if the assessment result is in the affirmative, whether it will hold SCED politically accountable and require him to step down; if it will, when SCED will step down; if not, of the reasons for that?
| Public Officer to reply | : | Secretary for Financial Services and the Treasury
(in the absence of Secretary for Commerce and Economic Development) |
*8. Hon Alan LEONG to ask: (Translation)
The Development Bureau had submitted to this Council consultation documents on the North East New Territories New Development Areas ("NDAs") (including the three NDAs of Kwu Tung North, Fanling North and Ping Che/Ta Kwu Ling) Planning and Engineering Study at each of the three consultation stages. The total areas and the developable areas of the NDAs set out in those documents were different: (i) in the document submitted on 25 November 2008, the aforesaid land areas were 1 000 and 775 hectares respectively; (ii) such areas were reduced to 805 and 620 hectares respectively in the document submitted on 24 November 2009; and (iii) in the document submitted on 28 June 2012, such areas were further reduced to 787 and 533 hectares respectively. In this connection, will the Government inform this Council:
(a) of the reasons for making each amendment to the total areas and the developable areas; and the land areas taken out from the developable areas by each amendment owing to a change in land use to "Village Type Development"; (b) of a breakdown, by the new land uses, of the areas of land taken out from the total areas and the developable areas by each amendment; (c) as the Government has indicated in the Stage Three Public Engagement Digest that 167 hectares of land (accounting for 21.2% of the total areas) will be used for "Residential and Village Type Development", of the areas and percentages of land for various uses in the NDAs (set out in the table below);
Kwu Tung North Fanling North Ping Che/ Ta Kwu Ling Village Type Development
Public housing
Residential (Group A)
Residential (Group B)
Residential (Group C)
Residential (Group D)
Residential (Group E)
Others
Total
(d) among the lands mentioned in (c), of the areas of land in respect of which the Government will incorporate the terms of "Hong Kong property for Hong Kong residents" in the Conditions of Sale (set out in the table above); (e) of the respective areas of "Village Type Development" sites reserved for the construction of New Territories small houses in the three NDAs, and the estimated numbers of small houses which can be provided respectively in the three NDAs; and (f) as the Government has reserved a total of 24 hectares of land for "Commercial, Research and Development" uses and another 36 hectares of land have been planned for developing special industries in the three NDAs, of the industries that the Government will develop in making use of such land?
*9. Hon CHUNG Kwok-pan to ask: (Translation)
When the Chief Executive ("CE") talked about the relationship between the Government and the market in his address to the Legislative Council on the 17th of this month, he pointed out that Hong Kong needed to develop new strengths to keep its leading position; otherwise, it would fall behind. With regard to the promotion of the development of industries in Hong Kong, will the Government inform this Council:
(a) whether the Government of the current term will continue to promote the six industries where Hong Kong enjoys clear advantages; if it will, of the specific plans in place, and the details of the policies concerned; if not, the reasons for that; of the measures put in place by the authorities to support the development of such industries in order to improve the Hong Kong economy; (b) whether the authorities have any specific ideas regarding the new strengths that Hong Kong needs to develop as mentioned by CE; if they have, of the details; whether the authorities will review afresh the policies regarding the exploration of emerging industries and the nurturing of related talents so as to promote diversified development of the industrial structure and enhance Hong Kong's competitiveness; and (c) whether the Government will strengthen support for the traditional pillar industries which are relevant to the emerging industries, in particular those faced with continuous soaring operational costs and, as a result, are in dire need of reforming for development; if it will, of the details?
| Public Officer to reply | : | Secretary for Financial Services and the Treasury
(in the absence of Secretary for Commerce and Economic Development) |
*10. Hon TANG Ka-piu to ask: (Translation)
The Fare Adjustment Mechanism of the MTR Corporation Limited ("MTRCL") has been in operation for four years since 2009. Except for the first year with freezing of fares, MTRCL increased its fares for the other three years despite making profits of more than $10 billion. The fare increase for this year was as high as 5.4%, the highest among all these years. Some members of the public have pointed out that MTRCL has tried to "make every possible gain" in making fare adjustment. Quite a number of members of the public have also reflected to me that the fare concessions and promotional schemes introduced by MTRCL (such as the monthly pass for the Tung Chung Line, the "Ride 10 Get 1 Free" scheme, etc. launched this year) have not brought real benefits to the public, and that the Government, being the major shareholder of MTRCL, should have "the final say" and "monitoring power" over MTRCL's annual application for fare increase. In this connection, will the Government inform this Council:
(a) whether it knows as of date the respective numbers of people who have benefited as well as the total savings from the various concession schemes introduced by MTRCL in the past three years; (b) whether it knows the weekly average numbers of Octopus cards, since the introduction of the "Ride 10 Get 1 Free" scheme by MTRCL this year, the holders of which took nine and eight MTR journeys respectively in a week (from Monday to Friday), and the respective percentages of such numbers in the total number of the Octopus cards sold; if such statistics are not available, of the reasons for that; (c) of the annual dividends received by the Government from MTRCL in the past four years; how the Government disposed of the dividend income and details thereof; (d) whether the government officials who are currently non-executive directors on MTRCL's Board of Directors have the power to veto fare adjustment proposals at the board meetings; if yes, whether they have exercised such power; if not, the reasons for that; and (e) given that it has been reported that MTRCL undertook in May 2012 to introduce concessionary measures to give back to MTR passengers within one year the additional income of $670 million generated by fare increases, of the specific measures taken by the Government, as MTRCL's major shareholder, to ensure that MTRCL will honour this undertaking; how the Government will follow up the situation of MTRCL not honouring this undertaking?
*11. Hon WONG Ting-kwong to ask: (Translation)
Regarding the governance of public organizations, will the Government inform this Council:
(a) given that the Audit Commission published in 2009 reports on issues of governance of the Equal Opportunities Commission and the Office of the Privacy Commissioner for Personal Data, how the controlling officers concerned have followed up and implemented the improvement measures recommended in the reports, so as to prevent these organizations from merely "taking the advice without changing the attitude"; of the specific tasks carried out and the work progress; (b) whether the authorities will revise the arrangements for monitoring public organizations to ensure that the Government has appropriate monitoring authority and is able to help reform the governance structures and management of public organizations; if they will, of the details; if not, the reasons for that; and (c) whether the authorities will review the long-term positioning and development of public organizations with a view to enhancing their accountability; if they will, of the details; if not, the reasons for that?
*12. Hon Kenneth LEUNG to ask:
Although Hong Kong tightened its anti-money laundering legislation with the enactment of the Anti-Money Laundering and Counter-Terrorist Financing (Financial Institution) Ordinance (Cap. 615) in April 2012, it was ranked 86th among 144 countries and territories in terms of money laundering risk and assessed to be of medium risk level in money laundering by the Basel Institute on Governance earlier this year. Besides, it is noted that only three circulars on anti-money laundering have been issued to estate agents since 2000 to prevent money laundering activities via the real property sector. According to the Financial Action Task Force Mutual Evaluation Report published in July 2008, only one single suspicious transaction report ("STR") was filed by estate agents between 2003 and 2007. In this connection, will the Government inform this Council:
(a) how many STRs were received by the Joint Financial Intelligence Unit each year from 2008 onwards, and how many of such STRs were made by estate agents; (b) how many estate agents were disciplined, since 2000, by the Disciplinary Committee of the Estate Agents Authority due to failure in observing the anti-money laundering principles contained in the aforesaid circulars; (c) what measures the Government is going to take to enhance the client identification process, transaction monitoring and the reporting regime for combating money laundering activities via the real property sector; and (d) whether the Government will examine if it is appropriate to require offshore vehicles holding residential properties in Hong Kong to disclose the names of their shareholders in land records in order to increase the transparency of real property transactions?
*13. Hon Charles Peter MOK to ask: (Translation)
Regarding unsolicited commercial marketing messages, will the Government inform this Council:
(a) given that nowadays smart phones and instant mobile messaging applications (such as WhatsApp) are very popular and a number of organizations or individuals use them as marketing tools, whether the authorities have received any complaints about unsolicited electronic messages sent through instant mobile messaging applications; if they have, of the number of such complaints received each year; whether the authorities will bring this kind of messages within the ambit of the Unsolicited Electronic Messages Ordinance ("UEMO") (Cap. 593); (b) given that UEMO has been fully implemented for nearly five years, whether the authorities have plans to review it to ensure that it is able to keep pace with the current technological development and to enhance its regulatory effectiveness; if they have, of the details and the work schedule; if not, the reasons for that; and (c) given that the authorities had informed the Panel on Information Technology and Broadcasting of this Council in November 2009 that they had no plan to introduce legislation to regulate person-to-person telemarketing calls, whether the authorities at present have plans to review afresh the impact of this kind of telemarketing calls on the public and consider introducing legislation to regulate such calls; if they have, of the details and the work timetable; if not, the reasons for that?
| Public Officer to reply | : | Secretary for Financial Services and the Treasury
(in the absence of Secretary for Commerce and Economic Development) |
*14. Hon LEUNG Yiu-chung to ask: (Translation)
It has been reported that during his election campaign in January this year, the Chief Executive proposed to separately provide shopping malls or shopping areas in the vicinity of the shopping malls under The Link Management Limited to offer low-priced goods for sale, so as to meet the needs of tenants of public housing estates. In this connection, will the Government inform this Council if it has any plan at this stage to implement such proposal; if so, of the details; if not, the reasons for that?
Public Officer to reply : Secretary for Transport and Housing
*15. Dr Hon LAM Tai-fai to ask: (Translation)
The Chief Executive ("CE") has indicated in his election manifesto that "[w]e will support Hong Kong manufacturers in restructuring their business model to tap the domestic market on the Mainland", and "will actively consult with Mainland authorities to help Hong Kong enterprises on the Mainland to resolve the problem of increased taxation costs arising from business restructuring". In the Inauguration Ceremony of the Government held on 1 July 2012, CE also said that "[w]e fully recognize the contribution to our economy by Hong Kong businesses operating on the Mainland and will continue to support their restructuring and upgrading". In this connection, will the Government inform this Council:
(a) of the specific measures or plans to honour CE's aforesaid pledges; (b) whether the problems of increased taxation costs arising from the restructuring of Hong Kong businesses on the Mainland include the problem of Hong Kong enterprises engaged in import processing trade not being able to obtain depreciation allowance in Hong Kong for machinery and plants made available for use by mainland enterprises because of section 39E of the Inland Revenue Ordinance (Cap. 112) ("section 39E"); if so, how this problem can be solved; if not, of the reasons for that; (c) as the authorities have said that there are practical difficulties in relaxing the restriction imposed by section 39E, which include whether the machinery or plant used on the Mainland was producing profits chargeable to tax in Hong Kong, whether it is used for the manufacturing of goods sold solely to the Hong Kong enterprise, whether the machinery or plant has been sold, and whether depreciation allowances of the same machinery or plant have been claimed by other enterprises, etc., whether the Government will discuss with the relevant mainland authorities to resolve such practical difficulties; if it will, of the details; if not, the reasons for that; (d) as both the Secretary for Financial Services and the Treasury and the Secretary for Commerce and Economic Development of the Government of the last term indicated that there were no justifiable grounds to relax section 39E, whether the Government of the current term will review afresh section 39E; if it will, of the details; if not, the reasons for that; (e) given that the Government of the last term refused to accept the recommendation put forward by the Joint Liaison Committee on Taxation on section 39E, whether the Government of the current term will consider accepting the recommendation; if it will, of the details; if not, the reasons for that; (f) whether CE has made enquiries to or followed up with any government department on issues involving section 39E; if he has, of the details; if not, the reasons for that; (g) whether the government departments concerned have relayed truthfully and objectively to CE the views on section 39E of the local industrial and commercial sectors, the accounting trade and tax experts; if they have, of CE's response; if not, the reasons for that; (h) whether the government departments concerned have truthfully explained to CE why the authorities have all along not consulted the Department of Justice or other members of the legal profession on the interpretation of section 39E; if they have, of CE's response; if not, the reasons for that; (i) as the authorities have indicated that relaxation of section 39E might lead to tax avoidance loopholes, whether the Government of the current term has carefully assessed the possibility of the emergence of the so-called tax avoidance loopholes and their impact; if it has, of the details; if not, why the authorities have said so; and (j) as the authorities have indicated that they have to take into account the overall interests of Hong Kong and all the taxpayers in making each and every policy decision, whether the Government has assessed the contribution to be brought to the overall interests of Hong Kong by amending section 39E; if it has, of the details; if not, the reasons for that?
*16. Hon CHEUNG Kwok-che to ask: (Translation)
Some social workers who are engaged in the provision of elderly services have relayed to me the aging trend among patients with mental illness, as well as the rising number of ex-mentally ill persons staying in residential care homes for the elderly ("RCHEs"). In this connection, will the Government inform this Council:
(a) of the current number of patients with mental illness in Hong Kong, together with a breakdown by disease groups in the diagnosis profile adopted by the Hospital Authority; the current number of patients with mental illness who are over 65 years old in Hong Kong; (b) among the discharged patients with mental illness who are over 65 years old, of the respective current numbers of those staying in RCHEs (e.g. care and attention homes and nursing homes) and hostels for ex-mentally ill persons (e.g. halfway houses and long stay care homes) which are subvented by the Social Welfare Department; and (c) under the current policy and with the existing services, how the authorities cater for the needs of the elderly with mental illness for rehabilitation and residential services; whether the authorities will consider providing specialized services to patients with mental illness who are over 65 years old; if so, of the details; if not, the reasons for that?
*17. Hon Albert CHAN to ask: (Translation)
Over the past few months, quite a number of members of public relayed to me that they had been deregistered from the register of electors without their knowledge, and that during the past few months, they had not received any letter from the Registration and Electoral Office requesting them to verify electors' information. In this connection, will the Government inform this Council:
(a) of the number of complaints received by the authorities from electors in the past 12 months about deregistration from the register of electors without their knowledge; (b) of the reasons for the electors being deregistered in the cases in (a); whether it has conducted any investigation to ascertain if the deregistration process involves any negligence or administrative errors on the part of government departments; if it has, of the details; if not, the reasons for that; and (c) whether the authorities will improve the existing policies and arrangements in order to avoid deregistration of electors without their knowledge; if they will, of the details; if not, the reasons for that?
*18. Hon Paul TSE to ask: (Translation)
Recently, the Consumer Council ("CC") published the performance of 341 fund schemes under the Mandatory Provident Fund ("MPF") Schemes for the past five years. With a membership size of 2.35 million and accrued benefits accumulated so far standing at $384.3 billion, such fund schemes yielded an overall rate of return of only 2.7% per annum but their annual average charging rate was as high as 1.74%, which was substantially higher than the relevant charging rates of some countries (1.19% for the United Kingdom ("UK") and 0.56% for Chile). A newspaper report entitled "MPF contributions have no prospect of recovery of losses" has pointed out that "half of the funds have 'incurred' losses on the part of wage earners", but there are numerous investment methods yielding much higher investment returns than MPF. A number of members of the public have also telephoned radio programmes, expressing their discontent with MPF and requesting the Government to completely abolish the MPF Schemes. Regarding the policies and measures for protecting the overall retirement fund contributions made by employees, will the Government inform this Council:
(a) whether, in view of the situation that nearly half of the fund schemes (46.6%) have incurred losses and the charging rates of fund schemes are higher than those of other countries, it will immediately review the actual effectiveness of the MPF Schemes and examine the feasibility of abolishing the MPF Schemes or replacing the MPF Schemes with other retirement protection schemes; whether the Government will set any deadlines and bottom lines (e.g. the charging rates of fund schemes have to be lowered to a level that is close to those of countries such as UK and Chile, etc. prior to a certain deadline, and the number of loss-incurring funds has to be capped at a certain percentage of the total number of funds) and listen to and assess the views of members of the public in order to objectively examine whether the MPF Schemes should be abolished completely; if it will, how and what bottom lines will be set by the Government and how the views of members of the public will be listened to and assessed; if not, of the reasons for that; (b) given that quite a number of members of the public have pointed out to me that the effectiveness of the MPF Schemes has been far from satisfactory for a long time and that they have to pay high fund fees irrespective of whether or not they make profits which always result in gains on the part of the trustees, and as such, the MPF Schemes not only cannot offer effective protection for their retirement life but instead gradually undermine their ability to cope with it, which have led to widespread discontent against the MPF Schemes in society and growing public sentiments calling for the abolition of the MPF Schemes, whether the Government has conducted any studies or reviews on this situation; if it has, of the results of the reviews; if not, whether it will immediately conduct such reviews; what methods are in place to convince members of the public that the Government requiring them to make mandatory contributions to the MPF Schemes can effectively protect their retirement life; (c) whether it has conducted any study on amending the Mandatory Provident Fund Schemes Ordinance (Cap. 485) to require that fees charged for fund schemes should be linked with investment performance, and that for fund schemes which have incurred investment losses, clients should be exempted from management fees or subsidized with management fees for the year after the loss-incurring year, so that part of the investment risks will be shared by fund trustees and competition will be promoted among them, and at last, only quality trustees will survive; and (d) given that the Mandatory Provident Fund Schemes Authority ("MPFA") incurs an expenditure of around $400 million each year but it has never implemented any effective policies resulting in fund schemes lowering the management fees charged to clients, nor has it conducted any one-stop assessments on the performance of funds, and it has only taken follow-up actions upon CC's announcement of its study results, whether the Government has assessed if MPFA is competent in discharging its duties and whether the annual expenditure of $400 million is used in a value-for-money manner and put to proper uses; also, whether the Audit Commission will conduct a value-for-money audit on MPFA?
*19. Hon Frederick FUNG to ask: (Translation)
As revealed by statistics from the Rating and Valuation Department, the price and rental indices of private domestic properties have been rising continuously for seven months. The latest price index (for August) has reached a record high of 210.6, which is higher than that of 172.9 during the peak of the bloom in the property market in 1997 by over 20%, and that of 179.8 in January this year by 17%, as well as that of 206.1 upon the inauguration of the Government of the new term in July by more than 2%. The price surge of small flats (i.e. Type A flats with a usable area of less than 40 sq m or 430.5 sq ft) is most remarkable, as shown by a rise of the price index from 185.6 in January to 222.9 in August this year, or a rate of increase as high as 19%. The latest rental index reached 146.5 in August, representing a rise of 10% when compared to 133.2 in January. Moreover, the Centa-City Leading Index, which reflects price movements in the second-hand property market, has also hit record high time and again over the past couples of weeks. In this connection, will the Government inform this Council:
(a) whether it has analysed and assessed the reasons for the continuous price spiral of private domestic properties, and the impact of the third round of quantitative easing monetary measures launched in the United States on the price and rental of private domestic properties in Hong Kong; whether it has assessed if the current price and rental of domestic properties have gone beyond the affordability of members of the public; if there is such a situation, whether it has assessed its impact on society and people's livelihood, and whether any concrete short-term, medium-term and long-term measures will be put in place to improve the situation; (b) given that property prices have hit record high time and again despite the series of measures launched by the Government of the new term to stabilize the property market since its inauguration, whether the authorities have evaluated the effectiveness of these measures; given that some members of the public have pointed out that the arrangement to allow white form applicants to purchase flats under the Home Ownership Scheme ("HOS") with premium not yet paid in the HOS secondary market has obviously pushed up the prices of such kind of flats, whether the authorities have assessed if the above measures have been implemented for the sake of expediency without careful consideration, resulting in an effect going contrary to their expectation; and (c) whether, in formulating measures to stabilize the property market, the authorities have considered factors such as the level of property prices and the affordability of members of the public, etc.?
*20. Hon Alice MAK to ask: (Translation)
The Government of the last term conducted several rounds of consultation on healthcare reform and proposed to take forward a Health Protection Scheme ("HPS") based on voluntary participation, with a view to providing supplementary financing for the healthcare system. The Government of the last term also pointed out that the provision of tax incentives for private health insurance premiums and private healthcare expenses would create the following problems: (i) providing tax deduction to health insurance premiums under HPS but not premiums for other health insurance products would violate the neutral and fair principle of the tax regime of Hong Kong; (ii) providing tax deduction to all policy-holders of other private health insurance schemes or to all private healthcare expenses would further narrow the tax base of Hong Kong; (iii) tax incentive was by nature regressive and relevant only to a relatively small proportion of the higher-income population where penetration of private health insurance was already high; and (iv) tax deduction for health insurance premiums in general or HPS premium in particular provided financial incentive for the working population only during their working age, but did not incentivize premium payment after their retirement when they might no longer have an income while their premium was much higher. It has been reported that the Secretary for Food and Health has indicated earlier that he would not rule out the possibility of providing working persons with tax concessions for a fixed number of years to attract members of the public to take out health insurance. In this connection, will the Government inform this Council:
(a) of the details of the aforesaid tax concession scheme, including the level and number of years of concessions need to be provided in order to achieve the objective of attracting more members of the public to take out health insurance, and whether the concessions are applicable to health insurance plans under HPS only or to other health insurance plans as well; (b) how the four problems highlighted by the Government of the last term could be resolved so that the aforesaid tax concession scheme may be taken forward; of the anticipated impact of the provision of tax concessions on the Government's tax revenue; and whether the authorities will make corresponding revisions to the tax regime; and (c) as it has been reported that the authorities have already commissioned an independent consultant to conduct a study on the implementation details of HPS, when the report is expected to be published; whether the authorities will consult the public on the proposals made by the consultant; if they will, of the details; if not, the reasons for that?
* For written reply