A 12/13-6
Legislative Council
Agenda
Wednesday 7 November 2012 at 11:00 am
I. Tabling of Papers
| 1. | No. 16 | - | Secretary for Home Affairs Incorporated
Financial statements together with the Report of the Director of Audit for the year ended 31 March 2012 |
| (to be presented by Secretary for Home Affairs)
| |||
| 2. | No. 17 | - | Sir Edward Youde Memorial Fund
Report of the Board of Trustees for the Period 1 April 2011 to 31 March 2012 together with the financial statements and the Report of the Director of Audit for the year ended 31 March 2012 |
| (to be presented by Secretary for Home Affairs)
| |||
| 3. | No. 18 | - | Occupational Safety and Health Council
Annual Report 2011/2012 |
| (to be presented by Secretary for Labour and Welfare)
| |||
| 4. | Report No. 2/12-13 of the House Committee on Consideration of Subsidiary Legislation and Other Instruments | ||
| (to be presented by Hon Andrew LEUNG, Chairman of the House Committee) | |||
II. Questions
1. Hon Frederick FUNG to ask: (Translation)
Regarding the effective utilization of the television channels and future development of domestic free television programme services ("free TV"), as well as the vetting of applications for free TV licences, will the Government inform this Council:
(a) given that the audience ratings of the programmes of one of the two existing free TV broadcasters have all along been low, whether the authorities have recently assessed if there is poor utilization of television channels at present, the impact of such situation on the sustainable development of free TV, and if the two licensees have made efforts in promoting local creativity and programme diversity; if they have, of the assessment results, what measures they will take to enhance the utilization of the television channels, and if they will consider revoking the licence concerned or re-tendering some of the channels; if they will not re-tender the channels, of the reasons for that; (b) given the report that an applicant for the free TV licence has indicated that, despite the overwhelming public support for introducing new free TV, the Government has not yet completed the vetting of applications, and that the applicant has been waiting for more than 1 000 days for the result of the application, whether the authorities can list those previous projects the vetting of which has also taken such a long time; whether they have assessed the impact of such a long vetting time on the future development of free TV, and if the long vetting time will give investors an impression that the Government is exceedingly bureaucratic and inefficient, thus affecting investors' interests in investing in Hong Kong in future and undermining the competitiveness of Hong Kong; and (c) what mechanism is in place to ensure that the vetting of applications for television licences will not be subject to political considerations and political interference, and to avoid the authorities responsible for vetting the applications putting unreasonable demands on the applicants and existing licensees taking legal actions to delay the vetting process?
2. Hon Kenneth LEUNG to ask: (Translation)
It was uncovered earlier that there were unauthorized alterations in two properties owned by Harvest Charm Development Limited ("the Company") in which the wife of the Secretary for Development ("SDEV") had a stake and that the properties had been used to operate sub-division of flat units (commonly known as "sub-divided units"). Moreover, while SDEV has said that he and his wife do not hold any shares of the Company at present, it has been reported that SDEV might still have control over the Company through two overseas registered companies. Some members of the community have pointed out that SDEV has a duty to tackle the problems of sub-divided units and housing for members of the public, yet the Company in which his wife has a stake is suspected to have carried out unauthorized alterations and operate sub-divided units, they are therefore concerned about whether the integrity checking mechanism for politically appointed officials ("PAOs") and the existing measures can effectively prevent conflicts of interests. In this connection, will the Government inform this Council:
(a) whether it had conducted checking on the integrity and sources of assets of the candidates for nomination as SDEV and their family members; if it had, of the details of the checking mechanism, and whether checking was conducted under the mechanism on the candidates or their immediate family members to see if they were involved in unauthorized alterations and the operation of sub-divided units, and whether they could pass the integrity checking when they were so involved; whether the Government has reviewed and improved the mechanism in the light of the aforesaid incident; if it has, of the details; (b) as it has been reported that the relatives of SDEV were engaged in investment activities of trading old buildings, and SDEV needs to handle policies on urban renewal and land supply, whether the authorities have assessed if there are any loopholes in their measures to prevent conflicts of interests; and how they ensure that the private affairs of the various PAOs and their family members will not lead to conflicts of interests with the official duties concerned; and (c) whether the existing declaration system requires the various PAOs to declare the shares in overseas registered companies indirectly held by them and their spouses and to declare if they receive any bonuses from those companies; if so, of the details of the relevant declarations; and whether the Government will take the initiative to ascertain if the relevant declarations are true; if it will not, of the reasons for that?
3. Hon CHUNG Kwok-pan to ask: (Translation)
At the Legislative Council meeting on 17 October this year, the Chief Executive undertook that the Government would assist the industrial, commercial and professional sectors in removing the obstacles in the course of development in Hong Kong and overseas, and will collaborate with the central or local authorities to resolve the difficulties encountered. Although Members from the industrial and commercial sectors in the past few years repeatedly requested the Government to consider and review afresh section 39E of the Inland Revenue Ordinance, the Government had all along rejected the requests for reasons based on such principles as "territorial source" and "tax symmetry", etc. On the other hand, some Hong Kong businessmen on the Mainland have told me that Hong Kong enterprises in the Pearl River Delta are suffering from the severe blow of various negative factors, such as contraction of markets in Europe and America, escalating wages on the Mainland and rising costs of currency exchange, as well as the urgency in restructuring of industries, etc. In this connection, will the Government inform this Council:
(a) in order to honour the principle of appropriately proactive governance, whether the Government will proactively discuss, based on the spirit of taking special measures for special problems and adopting the government-to-government approach, with the mainland authorities ways to remove the obstacles caused by adherence to principles such as "territorial source" and "fax symmetry", etc., so as to review afresh and amend section 39E of the Inland Revenue Ordinance and other relevant tax policies; if it will, of the details; if not, the reasons for that; (b) whether the Government has specific measures and plans to bring innovation and scientific researches conducted by Hong Kong enterprises on the Mainland into the remit of the tax support policy, and to provide depreciation allowances for the machinery and plants used on the Mainland by Hong Kong enterprises, so as to support the development of Hong Kong individuals and enterprises on the Mainland; if it has, of the details; if not, the reasons for that; and (c) given that some small and medium enterprises ("SMEs") have pointed out that as production costs on the Mainland have been rising continuously, they have to rack their brains in recent years to explore opportunities for overseas development, lower costs and enhance productivity, whether the authorities will consider offering more subsidies to SMEs, e.g. assisting them in investing in overseas regions such as Burma, etc. to develop industrial parks, so as to enable Hong Kong manufacturers to "go global" and maintain their competitiveness internationally?
4. Hon CHAN Han-pan to ask: (Translation)
Given that the general out-patient clinics under the Hospital Authority ("HA") provide evening out-patient services until 10:00 pm only, members of the public seeking medical consultation in late nights may seek consultation only at private clinics offering overnight out-patient services or the accident and emergency ("A&E") departments of public hospitals. However, since only 16 public hospitals across the territory have A&E departments, members of the public seeking medical consultation often have to wait for hours to receive treatment. In this connection, will the Government inform this Council:
(a) whether it will request HA to enhance the existing evening out-patient services, including extending the service hours to 12:00 midnight and increasing the number of consultation quotas; if it will, of the details; if not, the reasons for that; (b) whether it will request HA to implement overnight out-patient services in individual districts on a trial basis, with a view to alleviating the existing pressure on A&E departments; if it will, of the details of the plan; if not, the reasons for that; and (c) given that some members of the public have relayed to me that as the demand for evening out-patient services is greater in some densely populated districts or districts with relatively more elderly residents (e.g. Tin Shui Wai), and there is no A&E department of public hospitals in such districts, great inconvenience has been caused to members of the public, whether the authorities will require HA to extend the service hours of the evening out-patient services provided in such districts or set up overnight out-patient services there, so as to enable patients to receive timely treatment?
5. Dr Hon Helena WONG to ask: (Translation)
Long queues are often seen in female toilets in public places. In a paper submitted to the Legislative Council ("LegCo") in February 2012, the authorities proposed to amend the relevant building regulations. The proposed amendments include enhancing the standard of provision of sanitary fitments, taking into account the assessed numbers of male and female users in different types of venues, and adopting a ratio of 1:1.5 (replacing the current ratio of 1:1) for assessing the numbers of male to female in the premises. On the other hand, it has been learnt that legislation was proposed in the United States Congress in 2010 demanding that the male-to-female ("M/F") toilet compartment ratio be increased to 1:2, and Taiwan introduced in 2010 legislation requiring the M/F toilet compartment ratio in cinemas and bus stations not lower than 1:5. In addition, some members of the public have pointed out to me that toilets in public places also lack facilities which allow family members of different genders to take care of infants, the elderly and children in using toilets. Regarding toilets in public places, will the Government inform this Council:
(a) of the latest work progress of the aforesaid legislative amendments, and the expected time for submission of the amendment regulations to LegCo; (b) given that, as mentioned above, the current M/F toilet compartment (including urinals) ratio in Hong Kong is lower than the ratios in other regions, coupled with the facts that women outnumber men in Hong Kong's population and that females usually use toilets for a longer time than males do, whether the authorities will consider further increasing the M/F toilet compartment ratio to not lower than 1:2; and (c) whether the authorities will consider introducing legislation to improve the facilities in male and female toilets in public places, for example, installing handrails, coat hooks, skid-proof flooring, as well as facilities which will allow family members of different genders to take care of infants, the elderly and children in using toilets, so as to implement family-friendly policies; whether they will consider making reference to overseas examples and studying the provision of stand-alone unisex sanitary facilities, so as to facilitate those users who need to take care of family members of the opposite gender; if they will, of the details; if not, the reasons for that?
6. Hon WONG Yuk-man to ask: (Translation)
Some members of the public have reflected to me that a Member of the Executive Council ("ExCo") frequently publishes articles in newspaper columns criticizing the democratic camp and the opposition camp, and he has even made remarks targeting at members of Scholarism at a public forum earlier on; moreover, while the Chief Executive ("CE") was the Convenor of ExCo in the Government of the last term, he made remarks from time to time which were in contradiction to the stance of the Government. In this regard, will the Government inform this Council:
(a) whether the ExCo Member's aforesaid articles and remarks reflect the Government's stance and attitude towards individual community groups; if not, why CE and the Chief Secretary for Administration have not made clarification promptly to address public concerns; (b) apart from the rule of confidentiality, whether ExCo has formulated any guidelines or rules to regulate the public remarks made by ExCo Members, and whether CE or the Convenor of ExCo will openly admonish ExCo Members who have breached such guidelines or rules; if such guidelines or rules have not been formulated, of the reasons for that, and (c) given that the media have pointed out that the status of ExCo has been undermined and weakened, whether the Government will consider abolishing or restructuring ExCo, with a view to economizing on administrative resources and enhancing efficiency in policy implementation?
*7. Hon Ronny TONG to ask: (Translation)
Recently, quite a number of owners of village houses in the New Territories have sought my assistance, and expressed grave concern about the existing policy on village houses (in particular the policy on unauthorized building works). In this connection, will the Government inform this Council:
(a) given that some owners of village houses have told me that when owners submit the reporting form under the "Reporting Scheme for Unauthorized Building Works in New Territories Exempted Houses" introduced by the Buildings Department in April 2012, they are required to submit at the same time a safety certification issued by a competent person to prove that the building was safe, and since some owners cannot afford the high fees charged by such competent persons, they will not take the initiative to make the reports, whether the Government will exempt owners of village houses from submitting the safety certification, offer financial assistance to owners who have financial difficulties, or revise the requirement to have such certification provided by government experts instead; if it will not, of the reasons for that; (b) given that some owners of village houses have indicated that the existing legislation stipulating that small houses "may not exceed three storeys or be of a height of more than 8.23 metres (i.e. 27 feet) and their roofed-over area generally should not exceed 65.03 square metres (i.e. 700 square feet)" has restricted owners from adding fixed green features of a larger scale (e.g. ground floor canopies with pillars or canopies projecting from the external walls of village houses which can insulate against heat and thus reduce the use of air-conditioners), whether the authorities will consider relaxing the restrictions to allow owners to add such green features; if they will not, of the reasons for that; and (c) given that the Buildings Ordinance (Application to the New Territories) Ordinance (Cap. 121), which regulates small houses, has been in operation for a long time, whether the Government will consider making any amendments to it; if it will, of the specific time to do so and the particulars; if not, the reasons for that?
*8. Hon Cyd HO to ask: (Translation)
It has been learnt that the Government is preparing to conduct an interim review of the Scheme of Control Agreements ("SCAs") with the two power companies in early 2013. In this connection, will the Government inform this Council:
(a) of the specific timetable for the interim review; (b) whether it has drawn up any objectives for the interim review (such as to reform the electricity tariff structure, to discuss the model and regulatory framework for liberalization of the electricity supply market, to strengthen interconnection between the power grids, etc.); if it has, of the objectives and details of the interim review; if not, the reasons for that; (c) whether it has set up a dedicated task force responsible for the interim review; if it has, whether the members of the task force include professionals and academics who are not from the civil service, of the membership list of the task force and the professional background of each member; (d) whether it will consult the public on the interim review; if it will, of the arrangements for the consultation, including details such as the timetable, approach and scope; if not, the reasons for that; (e) whether it will make public the relevant documents and detailed minutes of meetings on the process of Government’s previous negotiations with the two power companies on SCAs, as well as the details of the interim review such as all relevant documents and minutes of meetings; if it will, when such information will be made public; if not, the reasons for that; (f) whether it has conducted any study on the existing SCAs to evaluate their pros and cons; if it has, of the findings of the study; if not, the reasons for that; and (g) whether it has studied regulatory frameworks and monitoring models applicable to power companies, other than those under SCAs; if it has, of the details of the findings of the study; if not, the reasons for that?
*9. Hon Mrs Regina IP to ask: (Translation)
In its letter dated 5 June 2012 to the Panel on Education of this Council, the Education Bureau pointed out that the existing textbook vetting criteria had been optimized to facilitate the reuse of textbooks among students and encourage them to use other means to finish assignments and assessment tasks. The relevant sub-committee of the Curriculum Development Council also endorsed a revised set of textbook vetting criteria, which has been in force since July 2012. In this connection, will the Government inform this Council:
(a) of the details of the revisions made to textbook vetting criteria; (b) of the specific measures to put into practice the reuse of textbooks; and (c) whether it has assessed the effectiveness of revising textbook vetting criteria in lowering textbook prices?
*10. Hon LEUNG Che-cheung to ask: (Translation)
Recently, quite a number of property owners sought my assistance, saying that they had received promotional mails from private works companies which claimed that the Mandatory Window Inspection Scheme ("MWIS") was applicable to buildings over 10 years old and that such companies could offer free services for inspection of aluminum windows. Upon inspection, the personnel from such companies advised them that, in order to comply with the law, the aluminum windows concerned needed to be repaired and they recommended maintenance and repair plans costing over $10,000. After making enquiries with the Buildings Department ("BD"), staff of my office have found that the personnel who conducted the window inspections were not Qualified Persons ("QPs"). Under MWIS, BD will issue pre-notification letters to the Owners' Corporations ("OCs") of target buildings and then one to two months later issue statutory notices to the owners requiring them to carry out window inspection. The aforesaid owners suspect that someone have tried to reap money by misleading members of the public. In this connection, will the Government inform this Council:
(a) of the targets of BD's publicity on MWIS; whether it has assessed if there is adequate publicity targeting at the elderly and those who do not have the habit of Internet browsing; (b) given that the second phase of MWIS's publicity programme has been launched in May 2012, whether it has assessed the effectiveness of the programme, and whether it will further step up publicity; (c) apart from providing the registers of QPs and registered contractors under MWIS on BD's web site and in its office at Mongkok, whether the Government will increase the number of locations where such registers are placed for inspection by the elderly and those who do not have the habit of Internet browsing; (d) whether the Government will consider formulating guidelines on charges for window inspection and repair items for the reference of owners and OCs; and (e) whether the Government will follow up and investigate the aforesaid cases, including monitoring the situation where window inspections are not conducted by QPs; whether it will penalize persons who contravene the regulations concerned, and of the penalty provisions?
*11. Hon Christopher CHUNG to ask: (Translation)
Regarding the aspiration of the residents of Hong Kong Island East for the MTR Corporation Limited ("MTRCL") to construct an extension to Siu Sai Wan, will the Government inform this Council:
(a) whether the Government or MTRCL has conducted a feasibility study on construction of the Siu Sai Wan extension; if yes, of the details and findings, and if the findings of the study show that the feasibility is not high, whether the Government will consider constructing a smaller-scale railway system in Siu Sai Wan (e.g. the Light Rail system in Tuen Mun and Yuen Long, or the monorail system poised to be built in the Kai Tak Development Area) and linking the system to the existing stations on the MTR Island Line; if no study has been conducted, whether it will consider doing so; (b) of the current population of Siu Sai Wan, as well as the respective figures of the projected population growth in the next five and 10 years; and (c) given that the Government published in April this year the first-stage public consultation document for the Review and Update of the Railway Development Strategy 2000, proposing to conduct a study on three regional railway corridors (namely the Hong Kong-Shenzhen Western Express Line, the Northern Link and the Coastal Railway between Tuen Mun and Tsuen Wan), when the Government will carry out the second-stage public consultation, and whether it will consider including the Siu Sai Wan extension as one of the items for study and discussion in that stage of public consultation?
*12. Dr Hon Kenneth CHAN to ask: (Translation)
In recent years, many students have enrolled in various self-financing post-secondary ("SFPS") programmes and the number of SFPS institutions operated by different bodies and universities is also on the rise. It has been reported that the Community College and the Lingnan Institute of Further Education operated by the Lingnan University as well as the HKU SPACE Community College are alleged to have over-enrolled students, which has aroused public concern about the operations and regulation of SFPS institutions. In this connection, will the Government inform this Council:
(a) whether the authorities will follow up the incidents of over-enrolment of students by the aforesaid institutions and conduct an independent investigation into the matter; if they will, of the details; if not, the reasons for that; (b) whether it knows the total number of places offered by, and the total actual intake of, the SFPS programmes of each SFPS institution in each of the past three years; (c) whether it knows, in the past five years, the amounts of application fee, enrolment deposit and other admission fees for SFPS programmes charged by each of the SFPS institutions operated by publicly funded tertiary institutions; given that those applicants who end up not studying in the post-secondary institutions concerned may not be able to get a full refund of the aforesaid fees, whether the authorities have regulated the charging of such fees; if they have, of the details; if not, the reasons for that; (d) of the number and nature of complaints received by the authorities and the University Grants Committee in the past five years about SFPS institutions and programmes, with a breakdown by institutions and nature of complaints; and how they have specifically followed up these complaints; (e) whether the authorities will conduct a comprehensive review of the existing mechanism for regulating SFPS institutions and programmes in the light of the above mentioned incidents of over-enrolment of students; if they will, of the details of the review; if not, the reasons for that; and (f) whether the authorities will consider reviewing the existing academic accreditation mechanism for such programmes, so as to ensure the programme quality and that the institutions can provide a suitable learning environment for their students; if they will, of the details; if not, the reasons for that?
*13. Hon WONG Yuk-man to ask: (Translation)
In appointing non-official members of statutory or advisory bodies, the Government generally needs to follow the "6-6 Rules", i.e. each person appointed should not hold more than six such public offices at any one time and should not serve on a body in the same capacity for more than six years. In this connection, will the Government inform this Council:
(a) of the current number of statutory and advisory bodies the chairpersons or members of which are appointed by the Government; (b) of the current number of persons serving concurrently on four or more statutory or advisory bodies as non-official members; and (c) given that it has been reported that the Government has appointed persons from the same political parties or chambers of commerce to which the outgoing members are affiliated to fill the vacated offices, has re-appointed persons to the same public offices which they have left one to two years ago, and there are even incidents where some people have been appointed to the same public offices for over six years thus violating the "6-6 Rules", of the reasons why the authorities have adopted such practices?
*14. Hon Gary FAN to ask: (Translation)
I have received a request for assistance from a member of the public, who said that he had been granted loans by the Student Financial Assistance Agency ("SFAA") when he attended a publicly funded undergraduate programme from 2001 to 2004; and he was subsequently issued a permanent Registration Card for People with Disabilities by the Labour and Welfare Bureau because of brain disease. In the past few years, SFAA had all along rejected his application for waiver of repayment of loans on grounds of permanent disability and incapacity. In this connection, will the Government inform this Council:
(a) whether SFAA has formulated any criteria for waiving repayment of loans; if it has, of the details, and whether applicants holding Registration Cards for Persons with Disabilities is one of the criteria; if not, the reasons for that; (b) of the number of applications received by SFAA from loan borrowers in the past five years for waiver of repayment of loans on grounds of incapacity or permanently disabilities; and (c) whether SFAA will review its existing mechanism and consider waiving repayment of loans by those people mentioned in (b); if it will, when it will complete the review; if not, of the reasons for that?
*15. Hon CHAN Hak-kan to ask: (Translation)
Recently, a branch of a Chinese Banyan tree at Lam Tsuen San Tsuen in Tai Po snapped, fell and hit a passing lorry, killing one person and injuring another. Earlier on, a hundred-year-old Chinese Banyan tree at Park Lane Shoppers' Boulevard in Tsim Sha Tsui collapsed, injuring five persons. A tree nearby was subsequently found to have diseases and thus removed. Moreover, during the time when Hong Kong was hit by Typhoon Vicente and the Hurricane Signal No. 10 issued by the Hong Kong Observatory was in force, a multitude of trees fell in various districts. These incidents of tree collapse have once again aroused public concern about the health of trees and safety issues. In this connection, will the Government inform this Council:
(a) as the Development Bureau had stated, in its Progress Report on the Work of the Tree Management Office submitted to this Council in July 2011, that "Focusing on areas with high pedestrian or vehicular flow, tree management departments first carry out a tree group inspection for locations under their purview", of the number of trees in such areas which had been inspected by the authorities to date since the inception of the Tree Management Office; among those inspected trees, of the number which were found to have problems and required detailed inspections, as well as the total number of trees in need of risk mitigation measures (such as pruning, removal of wilted branches, treatment of pest and disease, and cabling and propping to support the trees, etc.); (b) of the number of staff members in each of the relevant government departments who are responsible for tree management work, as well as the frequency of tree inspections and the time taken for each inspection by each department; whether the authorities will require the departments to complete the inspections within a specified time limit; if they will, of the details; if not, the reasons for that; (c) given that the public can now report problem trees by phone, through the Internet or using mobile phone applications, of the average time taken by departments to deploy their staff to inspect the trees concerned upon receipt of reports, and whether the authorities will draw up any performance pledge in this regard; and (d) in addition to publishing the list of problem trees on the web sites of the government departments concerned, whether the authorities will consider making such information available to the public through other channels (such as putting up warning notices or signage next to the problem trees); if they will, of the details; if not, the reasons for that?
*16. Hon Charles Peter MOK to ask: (Translation)
The Hong Kong Science Park ("Science Park") provides purpose-built research and development office spaces, advanced laboratories and technical support services to more than 300 science and technology companies. However, it has been reported recently in the media that in the park, "half of the offices of the companies are in darkness during office hours, and quite a number of offices are occupied by 'empty chairs' only." In this connection, will the Government inform this Council:
(a) whether it has conducted any investigation into the aforesaid report; if so, of the outcome, and the actual utilization rate of the Science Park excluding those offices with "empty chairs" only; whether it knows the current occupancy rate of the Science Park and the number of enterprises waiting to be admitted into the Science Park; and (b) whether it knows the criteria based on which the Hong Kong Science and Technology Parks Corporation vets and approves applications for admission to the Science Park at present; how the Corporation ensures that the tenants are really engaged in research and development in science and technology; whether the tenants are required to make full use of their rented office spaces, and of the mechanism to deal with cases in which such requirement is violated?
*17. Dr Hon LAM Tai-fai to ask: (Translation)
Regarding the Government's reply to my written question raised on 24 October 2012 concerning sub-division of flat units ("commonly known as "sub-divided units"), bedspace apartments ("commonly known as "caged homes") and cubicle apartments, will the Government inform this Council:
(a) given that the Government instituted prosecutions in respect of 41 removal orders between 2007 and 30 September 2012, of the respective numbers of sub-divided units, caged homes and cubicle apartments involved in those cases, as well as the number of those in which the persons involved were convicted and the penalties imposed on them; (b) why the government departments concerned have not kept records on the numbers of unauthorized sub-divided units, caged homes and cubicle apartments in Hong Kong, as well as the numbers of households living therein; whether they have any plans to compile the relevant statistics; if so, when they will do so and complete the task; if not, of the reasons for that; (c) as it has been reported by the media that in its paper submitted to the Long Term Housing Strategy Steering Committee ("SC"), the Government indicated that as at mid 2011, a total of 65 000 people were living in cubicle apartments, bedspace apartments and cocklofts and around 6 200 people were living in commercial and industrial buildings, making the total number of those living in sub-divided units and cubicle apartments to around 71 000, why the Government said in its reply to my question that the government departments concerned had not kept records on the numbers of unauthorized sub-divided units, caged homes and cubicle apartments in Hong Kong as well as the numbers of households living therein; whether the Government will provide the paper to this Council; if not, of the reasons for that; (d) as the Government has said that cubicle apartments and sub-divided units are not defined in the Buildings Ordinance (Cap. 123), how the law enforcement authorities take effective enforcement actions against unauthorized cubicle apartments and sub-divided units, and whether it has any plan to amend the Ordinance to add the definitions; if not, of the reasons for that; (e) as the Government has said that the Buildings Department ("BD") has been issuing removal orders against unauthorized building works in sub-division of flat units, but it has not categorized such units into sub-divided units, caged homes and cubicle apartments, why it has not made such categorization, and whether it has any plans to do so; (f) of the total number of licensed bedspace apartments and the estimated number of unlicensed bedspace apartments throughout the territory at present; (g) as the Government has said that in the past five years, the Office of the Licensing Authority under the Home Affairs Department instituted prosecutions against two cases of suspected operation of unlicensed bedspace apartments, and those involved in the cases were convicted by the court and fined $3,000 and $9,740 respectively, whether the Government has assessed if the number of prosecutions instituted was on the low side, and whether the penalties were too light; if it has, of the details; if not, the reasons for that; (h) as the Government has said that normally BD does not register at the Land Registry warning letters issued during enforcement actions in respect of unauthorized sub-divided units, caged homes and cubicle apartments (commonly known as "imposing an encumbrance"), of the reasons for that; (i) as the Government has said that if the owners do not comply with the removal orders within a specified period of time, BD may carry out the works concerned through government contractors and the costs of the works, together with supervision and additional charges, shall be recoverable fully from the owners, of the annual number of cases in which BD carried out such works through government contractors in the past five years, the costs involved and whether they had been fully recovered from the owners concerned; (j) as BD issued a total of 527 removal orders during the period from 2007 to September 2012, of which 166 orders have been complied with while 361 orders have not and are being followed up, of the problems involved in those 361 cases and the reasons for not instituting prosecutions so far, and how BD will follow up such cases; (k) given that a member of SC has suggested converting industrial buildings to hostels, thereby turning them into "legalized sub-divided units", whether the Government will assess the feasibility of the suggestion; if it will not, of the reasons for that; if it will, the details, and whether the Government will consider relaxing the plot ratios for industrial buildings being converted to such purpose; if it will, of the specific recommendations; if not, the reasons for that; (l) why the government departments concerned do not have statistics of accidents and incidents related to sub-divided units, caged homes and cubicle apartments, and whether they have any plans to compile the relevant statistics; if not, of the reasons for that; (m) as the Government has not given answers in respect of the details of the appropriate safety and hygiene standards which the Chief Executive has pledged to set, whether it can provide a direct response to this question; if not, of the reasons for that; (n) as the Government has not given answers in respect of the time to start and finish drawing up the appropriate safety and hygiene standards, as well as setting long-term policies to solve the problem comprehensively, whether it can provide a direct response to these questions; if not, of the reasons for that; and (o) as the Government has not answered whether any work indicators, objectives and timeframe have been drawn up for tackling the problem of unauthorized sub-divided units, caged homes and cubicle apartments, whether it can provide a direct response to this question; if not, of the reasons for that?
*18. Hon Paul TSE to ask: (Translation)
Some parents of school children have pointed out to me the serious overloading problem of school private light buses (commonly known as "nanny vans"), and they have expressed discontent with the requirement under the existing legislation that for the purpose of establishing the number of persons that may be carried in a vehicle, three school children aged 3 years or above but each not exceeding 1.3 metre in height shall be counted as two passengers ("the requirement"). In this connection, will the Government inform this Council:
(a) of the number of complaints received in each of the past three years about overloading of nanny vans; how the Government handled such complaints, and whether it has stepped up law enforcement and amended the relevant legislation, so as to improve the situation; in addition, the number of accidents in which school children were injured while travelling on nanny vans; (b) whether it has assessed if the current number of nanny vans is insufficient to meet the market demand, resulting in a shortfall in nanny van services; if the assessment result shows such a situation, of the reasons for that, and whether it has reviewed if the shortfall in nanny van services, coupled with the aforesaid requirement, has resulted in the prevalent overloading of nanny vans; if it has, of the review result; if not, whether it will immediately conduct such a review; (c) given that some educational institutions require parents of school children to sign a "letter of consent for referral of nanny van services", which stipulates that in order to comply with the "guidelines" of the Transport Department, school bus companies may arrange a student to share a seat with his companion (i.e. two students taking one seat), whether the authorities have assessed if such practice contravenes the requirement; if they have, of the assessment result, and how they will follow up the matter; if not, whether they can follow it up immediately; and (d) whether it has conducted any study on the exclusion of nanny vans from the vehicle classes to which the aforesaid requirement is applicable, in order to require that nanny vans must operate in the mode of "one school child taking one seat"; if it has, of the study results; if not, the policies and measures to be introduced to ensure that nanny vans, carrying school children under the mode of three school children being counted as two passengers, shall comply with the requirements under section 73(1AA) of the Road Traffic (Construction and Maintenance of Vehicles) Regulations (Cap. 374 sub. leg. A) by installing seats which have high back rests, better fit children's body shape and are more effective in absorbing impact, so as to provide school children travelling on nanny vans with appropriate protection?
*19. Hon Albert CHAN to ask: (Translation)
The Chief Executive has indicated in his election manifesto that he plans to restart, eight years later, the reclamation plans for which feasibility studies have been completed, including the reclamation plan in Sham Tseng/Tsuen Wan which the Government decided to shelve in 2003. On the other hand, I have learnt that Tsuen Wan Bay is located within the Victoria Harbour, and that according to the Protection of the Harbour Ordinance (Cap. 531) and the relevant judgment handed down by the Court of Final Appeal, the authorities must establish that there is an overriding public need for reclamation before it may implement reclamation plans within the Victoria Harbour. In this connection, will the Government inform this Council:
(a) whether it has decided to restart the reclamation plan in Sham Tseng/Tsuen Wan eight years later; if so, of the reasons and justifications for that; (b) whether it has studied, in making the decision mentioned in (a), if there is an overriding public need for the reclamation plan in Tsuen Wan; if the result of the study is in the affirmative, of the details; if the result of the study is in the negative, why the Government can restart the plan eight years later; and (c) whether it will undertake to uphold the policy adopted by the Government of the previous terms to permanently shelve the reclamation plan in Sham Tseng/Tsuen Wan, in order to ensure that the living environment of the residents in the district will not deteriorate; if it will, of the details; if not, the reasons for that?
*20. Hon CHEUNG Kwok-che to ask: (Translation)
As at 30 September this year, there were respectively 913 and 1 072 children aged between two and six waiting for the services provided by "Special Child Care Centres" and "Integrated Programme in Kindergarten-cum-Child Care Centre". Some parents have relayed to me that their children with disabilities have been waiting for these two services for over one year. Some experts have pointed out that symptoms such as obstinate behaviour, impairments in social interaction and slow language development will manifest in autistic children and will impede their learning and psychological development; if early intervention can be provided, their chances of rehabilitation may be greatly increased. In this connection, will the Government inform this Council:
(a) of the respective numbers of places provided for the aforesaid two services, the respective numbers of children waiting for such services and the respective average waiting time, in each of the past five years; (b) of the respective numbers of children who stopped waiting for the aforesaid two services in each of the past five years because they were admitted to primary schools; (c) whether it has assessed the effect of early intervention on the rehabilitation progress of autistic children; if it has, of the details; if not, the reasons for that; of the number of autistic children aged between two and six in Hong Kong in the past five years; under the existing policy and services, how the authorities cater for the rehabilitation and training needs of autistic children and children with other disabilities who are waiting for the aforesaid services; whether the authorities will provide District Support Centres for Persons with Disabilities with additional resources to increase the support and assistance for children with these disabilities, and whether the authorities will provide cash allowance for them to purchase rehabilitation services provided in the private sector; and (d) whether the authorities will increase the places for the aforesaid services in the coming five years; if they will, of the details; if not, the reasons for that?
* For written reply