Bills Committee on Adaptation of Laws (No. 9) Bill 1999
List of concerns raised by members at the meeting on 7 July 1999

I Section 3 of Schedule 5 -- Section 4(4) of the Motor Vehicle Insurance (Third Party Risks) Ordinance

Members consider that upon adaptation, the Administration should not be simply technically replacing the term "Her Majesty" by "State", but should take into account Article 22 of the Basic Law under which any offices set up in Hong Kong by departments of the Central Government, or by provinces, autonomous regions, or municipalities directly under the Central Government, and the personnel of these offices should not be granted any privileges. Members are concerned about the scope of the State organs, the vehicles of which could be exempted from third party insurance after the proposed adaptation. They are of the view that the scope is too broad which includes Xinhua News Agency (Hong Kong Branch). The scope could even be further widened in the future with the possible increase in the number of subordinate organs of the Central people's Government in Hong Kong. In the absence of channels to sue against the driver of a vehicle of the state organ at fault by a victim of a traffic accident, members are worried that the right of the Hong Kong residents cannot be protected.

The Administration is requested to re-consider if the term "Her Majesty" carries only the meaning of the Queen personally, or of the Queen and the British Forces only.

Members also requested the Administration to provide information on vehicles exempted from third party insurance before reunification, in particular on whether vehicles of offices of British Government set up in Hong Kong were required to undertake third party insurance, and whether vehicles of British Government transported to Hong Kong were entitled to the exemption or were required to get international circulation permits.

II Section 13 of Schedule 1 (By-law 4(1), Cross-Harbour Tunnel By-laws (Cap. 203 sub. leg.))
Section 14 of Schedule 2 (By-law 4(1), Eastern Harbour Crossing Road Tunnel By-laws (Cap. 215 sub. leg.))
Section 12 of Schedule 10 (By-law 4(1), Tate's Cairn Tunnel By-laws (Cap. 393 sub. leg.))

The Administration is requested to consider if the "Crown" in these provisions means "in the right of the Hong Kong Government", "in the right of her Majesty's Government" or both, and to re-consider the reference to "Crown" be adapted to "Government" on the following grounds:

  1. all tunnel legislation can be kept consistent;

  2. the reason for requiring persons to carry out public duties in the tunnel area is mainly to cater for circumstances when the tunnel companies fail to provide adequate and safe facilities to the public. The provisions in the legislation are aiming at facilitating the monitoring of the Government on the service provision of the tunnel companies. As persons in the public service of the "State" should not have any duties in the tunnel area, it could only be those vehicles carrying persons in the public service of the Government entering the tunnel area for operational reasons which should be exempted from paying tolls; and

  3. while members agree that vehicles which carry persons to discharge duties on behalf of the Hong Kong Government should be exempted from the payment of tolls, the reference to "Crown" in these provisions if directly adapted to "State" could give to the effect that vehicles which carry persons to discharge duties of the State will be exempted, and yet whether these vehicles are discharging duties of the State could be outside the control and knowledge of the Hong Kong Government.
The Chairman has suggested that the reference to "Crown" in these provisions be adapted to "Government" at the moment and the Administration should proceed to amend the relevant by-laws to the effect that any vehicles which carry persons in assisting the Hong Kong Government to discharge public duties in the tunnel area will be exempted from toll payments.

The Administration is requested to explain if there is any negative impact if the reference to "Crown" in these provisions is adapted to "Government".

III Section 62 of Schedule 8 (Regulation 2(1), Road Traffic (Traffic Control) Regulations (Cap. 374 sub. leg.)
Section 64 of Schedule 8 (Regulation 41(2)(a), Road Traffic (Traffic Control) Regulations (Cap. 374 sub. leg.)
Section 65 of Schedule 8 (Regulation 62, Road Traffic (Traffic Control) Regulations (Cap. 374 sub. leg.)

Basing on similar concerns that the scope of persons in the public service should not be too broad and should be limited to mean only those who are in the public service of the Government, the Administration should re-consider adapting the term "Crown" to "Government" in the Regulations.

In the definition of "person in the public service of the Crown" in Regulation 2(1) of the Road Traffic (Traffic Control) Regulations (Cap. 374 sub. leg.), the Administration could consider replacing the word "means" by "includes" to facilitate the term "Crown" be adapted to the "Government".

IV Section 2 of Schedule 9 (Section 17, Road Traffic (Driving-offence Points) Ordinance (Cap. 375)

As regards driving licences, the Administration is requested to explain whether there is any problem if references to "persons in the public service of the Crown" be adapted to "persons in the public service of the Government".

V Section 2(3) of Cap. 215, Cap. 393, Cap. 436 and Cap. 474

The Administration is requested to provide explanation on the proposed adaptation of these provisions in respect of the deletion of the words "of the opinion that" from the respective sections, and the effect of the provisions after the proposed adaptation.

Legislative Council Secretariat
12 July 1999