official record of proceedings thursday, 18 february 2016 ...€¦ · prof sophia chan siu-chee,...

LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 18 February 2016

5299

OFFICIAL RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS

Thursday, 18 February 2016

The Council continued to meet at Nine o'clock

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

LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 18 February 2016 5300

THE HONOURABLE ANDREW LEUNG KWAN-YUEN, G.B.S., J.P. THE HONOURABLE WONG TING-KWONG, S.B.S., J.P. THE HONOURABLE CYD HO SAU-LAN, J.P. DR THE HONOURABLE LAM TAI-FAI, S.B.S., J.P. THE HONOURABLE CHAN HAK-KAN, J.P. THE HONOURABLE CHAN KIN-POR, B.B.S., J.P. DR THE HONOURABLE PRISCILLA LEUNG MEI-FUN, S.B.S., J.P. THE HONOURABLE CHEUNG KWOK-CHE THE HONOURABLE WONG KWOK-KIN, S.B.S. THE HONOURABLE IP KWOK-HIM, G.B.S., J.P. THE HONOURABLE LEUNG KWOK-HUNG THE HONOURABLE ALBERT CHAN WAI-YIP THE HONOURABLE CLAUDIA MO THE HONOURABLE MICHAEL TIEN PUK-SUN, B.B.S., J.P. THE HONOURABLE JAMES TIEN PEI-CHUN, G.B.S., J.P. THE HONOURABLE NG LEUNG-SING, S.B.S., J.P. THE HONOURABLE STEVEN HO CHUN-YIN, B.B.S. THE HONOURABLE FRANKIE YICK CHI-MING, J.P. THE HONOURABLE WU CHI-WAI, M.H.


5301

THE HONOURABLE YIU SI-WING, B.B.S.

THE HONOURABLE GARY FAN KWOK-WAI THE HONOURABLE MA FUNG-KWOK, S.B.S., J.P. THE HONOURABLE CHARLES PETER MOK, J.P. THE HONOURABLE CHAN CHI-CHUEN THE HONOURABLE CHAN HAN-PAN, J.P. DR THE HONOURABLE KENNETH CHAN KA-LOK THE HONOURABLE CHAN YUEN-HAN, S.B.S., J.P. THE HONOURABLE LEUNG CHE-CHEUNG, B.B.S., M.H., J.P. THE HONOURABLE ALICE MAK MEI-KUEN, B.B.S., J.P. DR THE HONOURABLE KWOK KA-KI THE HONOURABLE KWOK WAI-KEUNG THE HONOURABLE DENNIS KWOK THE HONOURABLE CHRISTOPHER CHEUNG WAH-FUNG, S.B.S., J.P. DR THE HONOURABLE FERNANDO CHEUNG CHIU-HUNG THE HONOURABLE SIN CHUNG-KAI, S.B.S., J.P. DR THE HONOURABLE HELENA WONG PIK-WAN THE HONOURABLE IP KIN-YUEN THE HONOURABLE MARTIN LIAO CHEUNG-KONG, S.B.S., J.P. THE HONOURABLE POON SIU-PING, B.B.S., M.H.


THE HONOURABLE TANG KA-PIU, J.P. DR THE HONOURABLE CHIANG LAI-WAN, J.P. IR DR THE HONOURABLE LO WAI-KWOK, S.B.S., M.H., J.P. THE HONOURABLE CHUNG KWOK-PAN THE HONOURABLE CHRISTOPHER CHUNG SHU-KUN, B.B.S., M.H., J.P. THE HONOURABLE TONY TSE WAI-CHUEN, B.B.S. MEMBERS ABSENT: THE HONOURABLE ALBERT HO CHUN-YAN THE HONOURABLE JAMES TO KUN-SUN DR THE HONOURABLE LAU WONG-FAT, G.B.M., G.B.S., J.P. THE HONOURABLE EMILY LAU WAI-HING, J.P. THE HONOURABLE STARRY LEE WAI-KING, J.P. DR THE HONOURABLE LEUNG KA-LAU THE HONOURABLE MRS REGINA IP LAU SUK-YEE, G.B.S., J.P. THE HONOURABLE PAUL TSE WAI-CHUN, J.P. THE HONOURABLE ALAN LEONG KAH-KIT, S.C. THE HONOURABLE WONG YUK-MAN THE HONOURABLE KENNETH LEUNG DR THE HONOURABLE ELIZABETH QUAT, J.P.


5303

PUBLIC OFFICERS ATTENDING: THE HONOURABLE MRS CARRIE LAM CHENG YUET-NGOR, G.B.S., J.P. THE CHIEF SECRETARY FOR ADMINISTRATION PROF THE HONOURABLE ANTHONY CHEUNG BING-LEUNG, G.B.S., J.P. SECRETARY FOR TRANSPORT AND HOUSING THE HONOURABLE MATTHEW CHEUNG KIN-CHUNG, G.B.S., J.P. SECRETARY FOR LABOUR AND WELFARE THE HONOURABLE EDDIE NG HAK-KIM, S.B.S., J.P. SECRETARY FOR EDUCATION PROF SOPHIA CHAN SIU-CHEE, J.P. SECRETARY FOR FOOD AND HEALTH THE HONOURABLE WONG KAM-SING, J.P. SECRETARY FOR THE ENVIRONMENT THE HONOURABLE PAUL CHAN MO-PO, M.H., J.P. SECRETARY FOR DEVELOPMENT THE HONOURABLE LAU KONG-WAH, J.P. SECRETARY FOR HOME AFFAIRS MR YAU SHING-MU, J.P. UNDER SECRETARY FOR TRANSPORT AND HOUSING CLERKS IN ATTENDANCE: MR KENNETH CHEN WEI-ON, S.B.S., SECRETARY GENERAL MISS ODELIA LEUNG HING-YEE, DEPUTY SECRETARY GENERAL


MS ANITA SIT, ASSISTANT SECRETARY GENERAL MISS FLORA TAI YIN-PING, ASSISTANT SECRETARY GENERAL MS DORA WAI, ASSISTANT SECRETARY GENERAL MR MATTHEW LOO, ASSISTANT SECRETARY GENERAL


5305

MEMBER'S MOTION PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Good morning, everyone. This Council will continue with the second debate session of the Motion of Thanks. The debate themes are "Land, Housing, Transportation, Environment and Conservation". Does any Member wish to speak? (No Member indicated a wish to speak) PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): If no Member wishes to speak on these debate themes, I now call upon public officers to speak. Three public officers will speak in this session, and they may speak for up to a total of 45 minutes. MOTION OF THANKS Continuation of debate on motion which was moved on 17 February 2016 SECRETARY FOR THE ENVIRONMENT (in Cantonese): Good morning, President and Honourable Members. I thank Members for their views. I will respond to several aspects including climate change and energy, nature conservation, waste management and environmental quality as follows. Climate change and energy First of all, I would like to thank a number of Members for their concern. It is worthwhile for Hong Kong society to raise concern and step up action in this regard. The Paris Agreement lays down clear direction and objectives beyond 2020 for global co-operation in addressing climate change. Hong Kong will continue to take forward climate change mitigation measures proactively. The Chief Secretary for Administration will chair a newly established inter-departmental committee to steer and co-ordinate the climate change of various departments, promoting mitigation, adaptation and resilience initiatives which include setting a carbon reduction target after 2020. A multi-pronged approach will be taken to review and optimize carbon reduction policies and initiatives, such as the optimization of our fuel mix for electricity generation, maximization of energy efficiency, promotion of green road transport, and waste management. We will also keep pace with the times so as to address the latest development in climate change.


A key to meeting the challenges of climate change is to bring together the entire society in understanding the need for and adopting a less carbon intensive lifestyle, so as to tackle the urgent need. To this end, I am pleased and obliged to maintain communications with all stakeholders and various sectors of the community, so as to work hand in hand with one another. After reporting to the Legislative Council the outcome of the public consultation on the future development of the electricity market last year, we have started negotiating with the two power companies regarding the future arrangement of the Scheme of Control Agreements. In negotiating with these two companies on the new arrangement, the Government will adhere to the views collected during the public consultation and the overall well-being of the society, with due regard given to such considerations as combating climate change. Nature conservation Our work in nature conservation includes combating illegal trade in ivory and formulating the Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan (BSAP). Combating illegal ivory trade The global smuggling of ivory and the regulation of local ivory trade have received much concern. In view of this, the Agriculture, Fisheries and Conservation Department will step up its regulation measures. On top of initiating legislative procedures as soon as possible to ban the import and export of elephant hunting trophies, we will also actively explore other appropriate measures, including enacting legislation to further ban the import and export of ivory, to phase out local ivory trade, on top of imposing heavier penalties on smuggling and illegal trading of endangered species. Moreover, we will continue to strengthen enforcement and raise public awareness on elephant conservation and the relevant control. Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan Since 2013, the Government has been formulating the first city-level BSAP with stakeholders. We are now conducting, until 7 April this year, a three-month public consultation regarding the BSAP. After collecting views from the public and the stakeholders, the Government will complete the


5307

formulation of the BSAP as soon as possible, with reference to principles laid down in the Convention on Biological Diversity, the needs of Hong Kong, the priority given to social and economic affairs and so on, with a view to enhancing nature conservation measures and supporting sustainable growth in society. Waste management With reference to the Hong Kong Blueprint for Sustainable Use of Resources 2013-2022, the Government continues to introduce various measures in phases, making progress gradually. Reduction of waste at source We have set up an inter-departmental working group to steer and co-ordinate the preparatory work for the implementation of the quantity-based charging scheme for municipal solid waste. We will also strive to get ready the legislative proposals necessary for the charging plan within the 2016-2017 Legislative Session. Meanwhile, the Environment and Conservation Fund has earmarked a provision of $50 million for community involvement programmes to let relevant stakeholders try participating in the quantity-based charging scheme for waste, so as to accumulate relevant and useful experience and to learn the effectiveness of the scheme in reducing waste early on. Regarding Producer Responsibility Schemes, we hope the current term Legislative Council can speed up the scrutiny of the relevant bills and pass the legislative frameworks with regard to the schemes on waste electrical and electronic equipment as well as on glass beverage containers before the end of the current term, so as to implement these two important Producer Responsibility Schemes on schedule. I note that many Members have indicated their support to this and hoped that the Legislative Council can implement on schedule the work in this regard as far as possible. Meanwhile, we are preparing for the construction of relevant facilities and ancillary measures such as collection network, and so on. Furthermore, we have finished reviewing the Construction Waste Charging Scheme and started the relevant trade consultation. We are planning to put forward the legislative proposal as soon as possible within this Legislative Session, with a view to adjusting the charges for the disposal of construction


waste appropriately and responding to the concern over illegal disposal. I understand that various Members have indicated their support in this regard and hoped that we can strengthen the ancillary measures regarding illegal disposal. Waste-to-energy In terms of waste-to-energy, we are going to proactively take forward initiatives in three aspects:

(1) Preparing for the construction of phase 1 project of the Integrated Waste Management Facilities which will adopt advanced incineration technology for the treatment of municipal solid waste. The facilities will generate renewable energy sufficient to meet its own needs, and surplus electricity can be supplied to the power grid to help reduce greenhouse gas emission and combat climate change. We are now preparing for the tender exercise with a view to commissioning in 2023;

(2) Following-up on the construction of phase 1 project of the Organic

Waste Treatment Facilities, with a view to commencing operation next year; and

(3) Carrying out tender preparation work for phase 2 project of the

Organic Waste Treatment Facilities. Food waste The Government's A Food Waste and Yard Waste Plan for Hong Kong 2014-2022 highlights reduction at source, reuse and donation, recyclable collection, and turning food waste into energy as its four policy axes in meeting the challenge of local food waste. We will continue to encourage the public to adopt behavioural changes, foster the necessary mindset change, and promote the reduction of food waste at source. We launched in November 2015 the Food Wise Eateries Scheme to continue encouraging the catering industry to provide portion menu and let customers select according to their appetite, so as to let them join hands in reducing food waste. We will also continue to support non-governmental organizations in collecting from the industrial and commercial sectors surplus food and soon-to-expire but fit-to-eat food, and donating it to those in need, as a win-win measure of caring for the needy and reducing waste.


5309

Apart from the Organic Waste Treatment Facilities, we are now exploring the use of existing sewage treatment works facilities for food waste and sewage sludge anaerobic co-digestion to help raise the food waste treatment capability. We have prepared to carry out a pilot trial at Tai Po Sewage Treatment Works to confirm the technical feasibility and the installation requirements, in order to help formulate appropriate new action plan, with a view to expediting the combat of food waste challenge in Hong Kong. Recycling and community work The $1 billion Recycling Fund has been set up to help the recycling industry improve network, develop products, explore markets, and so on. We have also established a small-scale project with a lower funding limit and simpler procedures to facilitate applications from small and medium enterprises. In the forthcoming year, we will continue to promote the Community Green Stations scheme and are now conducting tender exercise for the operation contract of three projects. In addition, we will promote the clean recycling campaign, with a view to strengthening the promotion of at-source separation and cleaning of recyclables at the community level. Furthermore, with the launch of the Restored Landfill Revitalisation Funding Scheme, we will speed up the development of restored landfills for appropriate uses by non-profit-making organizations or national sports associations, so as to help actualize community development as soon as practicable. Application for Batch 1 of the scheme is now open till 29 April this year. Study of the planning of future waste management and transfer facilities Existing waste management facilities and those under planning are insufficient for the treatment of all the solid waste to be generated in Hong Kong in future. We launched in September 2015 a study of the planning of future waste management and transfer facilities. Based on the concepts of a circular economy and "smart city", we will determine the facilities, technologies, and so on needed up to 2041 for waste transfer and treatment, to support sustainable development of Hong Kong society. Air quality The Government has stepped up the improvement of air quality during recent years. Comparing with 2010, air quality in 2015 has improved remarkably. Major air pollutants, including nitrogen dioxide, sulphur dioxide


and respirable suspended particulates, saw drops ranging from 12% to 25%. However, the level of ozone was on the rise due to the regional smog problem and enhancing regional co-operation is thus a must. We are now conducting a review with the Guangdong Provincial Government to assess the achievements made in the reduction of air pollutant emission in the Pearl River Delta in 2015, and are finalizing the emission reduction targets for 2020. We will also strengthen our co-operation with the Mainland, to monitor ozone-related air quality issue and study the formation and control of ozone. Twelve Air Quality Objectives have been put in force since 2014. Half of them, that is, six objectives, have reached the ultimate targets as formulated by the World Health Organization. The remaining six objectives have also reached the mid-term targets. We will review the Air Quality Objectives at least once every five years and are going to conduct the first review within this year. The review will be rather complicated and challenging as it entails an examination of air pollution in Hong Kong and in the region, an evaluation of the risk posed to human health, as well as a consideration of practical and feasible air pollution control techniques, along with other social and economic factors, and so on. We are now drafting a work plan and are going to submit the relevant recommendations to the Legislative Council Panel on Environmental Affairs in March. Promoting the use of electric vehicles Electric vehicles aid the improvement of roadside air quality and help combat climate change. They enjoy higher energy efficiency when compared with conventional vehicles and help reduce greenhouse gas emissions. The Government has all along been taking the lead in using electric vehicles. It has also waived their first registration taxes, worked with the private sector to expand the electric vehicle charging network, and encouraged vehicle suppliers to introduce suitable electric vehicle models into Hong Kong. The use of electric vehicles in the public transport system improves roadside air quality better than that of private electric vehicles. The Government is now providing full subsidies for franchised bus companies to purchase 36 single-deck electric buses for trial runs to assess their operational performance under local conditions. If the trial results are satisfactory, the Government will encourage franchised bus companies to use electric buses on a larger scale, taking into account affordability of the bus companies and passengers. We will also encourage franchised bus companies to try out double-deck electric buses when technically suitable ones are available on the market.


5311

The number of electric vehicles has increased from less than 100 at the end of 2010 to nearly 4 200 at the end of 2015. The Government will also upgrade more public chargers to medium-speed, study the provision of information to electric vehicle owners on the use of Government installed chargers and support property management companies to install more charging facilities, so as to promote the wider use of electric vehicles under local conditions. Furthermore, Members are concerned with the Pilot Green Transport Fund which has been set up to support the testing of electric vehicles, hybrid vehicles, as well as green and innovative transport technologies applicable to the public transport sector and non-profit-making organizations. We will continue to promote these relevant measures. Water quality of Victoria Harbour Over the past two decades, we have progressively implemented the Harbour Area Treatment Scheme to collect and treat sewage generated around Victoria Harbour. With full commissioning of Stage 2A of the scheme in December 2015, all sewage around the harbour has been intercepted and diverted to the Stonecutters Island Sewage Treatment Works for centralized treatment. Compared with the monitoring data in the first quarter of 2015, the levels of E.coli and organic pollutants in terms of biochemical oxygen demand have significantly reduced by 74% and 20% respectively. However, there are still residual pollution discharges to some coastal waters of Victoria Harbour, even causing odour problems. Thus, the Government has commissioned a consultancy study to analyse and identify the specific causes of near shore pollution, so as to conduct pollution control and prevention at source. Meanwhile, we will take immediate measures to deal with any pollution problem identified, including actively preparing for the construction of dry weather flow interceptors and rehabilitation of trunk sewers in Kowloon and Tsuen Wan to help reduce residual pollution discharges and improve the quality of the coastal waters of Victoria Harbour. External lighting The Environment Bureau has launched the Charter on External Lighting (the Charter) and invited members of the business sector to switch off at a preset time lights for decorative, promotional or advertising purposes that affect the


outdoor environment. Under the Charter, external lighting switch-off period runs from 11 pm or 12 midnight to 7 am. With regard to the operational needs of the business sector, the Charter has put in place exemptions from compliance with the switch-off requirement. More than 1 000 properties and shops, including premises from different sectors, have committed to sign the Charter which will commence in April this year. We will continue to monitor its effectiveness. Conclusion We hope that Honourable Members will continue to support our work in improving the environment, with a view to meeting all the environmental challenges for the benefit of society and livelihood. Thank you, President. SECRETARY FOR TRANSPORT AND HOUSING (in Cantonese): President, many Honourable Members have spoken on the housing issue in this session. Housing is honestly the top livelihood issue in Hong Kong these days. It is also the most important item in the policy agenda of the current Government. The severity of the housing problem manifests itself in the supply-demand imbalance. As a result, property prices and rents have remained high and exceeded people's affordability. The housing problem is complex. If we are to tackle this problem at root, we must first be willing to face the reality: demand exceeding supply, the number of households increasing faster than population growth, the inelastic demand for housing, the increasing prevalence of "sub-divided units", young people's hope of improving their living environment, and the desire of middle-class people to acquire their own homes. The ultimate solution is the acceleration of housing construction to increase supply. This is the only way and there is no short-cut. In December 2014, the Government announced the Long Term Housing Strategy. Under this strategy, the Government will adopt the "supply-led" and "flexible" principles and make determined and continuous efforts to identify sites to increase housing supply, reconstruct the housing ladder, and re-launch the Home Ownership Scheme and other subsidized sale flats projects, including the Green Form Subsidized Home Ownership Pilot Scheme. As projected late last


5313

year on the basis of the latest demand, the target of total housing supply for the next 10 years will be 460 000 units, and the ratio of new public housing supply to new private housing supply will be maintained at 60:40. The target of public housing supply is 280 000 units, of which 200 000 will be public rental housing (PRH) units. The attainment of this ambitious target of housing supply is undoubtedly one formidable challenge to society as a whole. Policy determination aside, the Government must also overcome various problems, such as inadequate land supply, long planning time, tight labour supply, and also rising costs of housing construction. In respect of planning for public housing, we have faced more difficulties and resistance than expected. Since most of the available sites are not disposed sites and many of them need time for planning, and also since we need to deal with community opposition and the challenge of judicial review in some rezoning cases, individual housing projects have been affected. We understand that building more public housing by land rezoning or increasing development density will affect nearby communities to some extent. The Government will do its best in respect of planning and assessment, in a bid to strike a balance between various interests and demands. But I must ask all social sectors to give priority to the overall housing demand of society in the long run, and hold an open attitude towards housing planning. Most importantly, we must not underestimate the demand for PRH in society because to many grass-roots families, moving into PRH is an effective way to get rid of poverty and improve their living conditions. This can in turn alleviate social conflicts. When seeking to achieve the housing construction target, we should maximize the use of all lands and seek community support, so as not to miss any chance of building even just one more unit. To meet the financial needs arising from the massive construction of public housing, the Government has already set up the Housing Reserve, which has accumulated to an amount of $74 billion by now. Even though our efforts have achieved steady progress in public housing construction year after year, we must still admit that the present volume and speed of housing construction still lag behind actual demand. On the other hand, the number of PRH applications has kept increasing. The number of general applications (made by family and elderly one-person applicants) soared from around 106 100 in mid-2012 to around 147 000 at the end of December last year. The number of non-elderly one-person applications


under the Quota and Points System even increased drastically from around 93 500 to 143 700 at the end of last year. In other words, the number increased by 53.7% in three and a half years. At present, the latest average waiting time for the first housing offer to general applicants has already exceeded the work target of three years set by the Hong Kong Housing Authority (HA). At the end of December last year, the waiting time stood at 3.7 years. I understand that people are anxious to receive PRH allocation. But I think we should still adhere to an average waiting time of three years as the target, and make that the HA, the relevant government departments and society can join hands to identify more sites for developing public housing. In respect of the private residential property market, the sustained efforts of the Government have led to a steady increase in the supply of residential units. As estimated, supply in the first-hand private residential property market will reach 87 000 units in the next three to four years. The various rounds of demand-side management measures (commonly known as "harsh measures") launched by the Government have helped to suppress the over-heated property market. While private property prices and rents have shown obvious signs of downward adjustment in recent months, housing supply and demand are still imbalanced. Therefore, the Government has no intention to reduce the harshness of the measures or withdraw them at this moment. We will continue to keep a close watch on the development of the property market and the changes in external circumstances. While seeking to increase housing supply, we have not ignored public housing quality and the environments in public housing estates. All along, the HA has adhered to an approach of sustainable development in the construction of public housing, seeking to achieve water and energy conservation, maximize the provision of open space, raise the greening rate and increase natural ventilation and lighting. After the lead-in-drinking water incident, we have attached greater importance to the quality of drinking water in public housing estates and improved the monitoring regime for waterworks projects in public housing. President, in respect of transport, the policy of the Government is primarily based on public transport development with railways as the backbone. This policy also aims to reduce the reliance on private cars and make good use of road resources to reduce congestion; drive the development of green transport to improve pedestrian environments; and promote a bicycle-friendly environment in new towns and new development areas.


5315

In respect of transport infrastructure, two new rail lines are expected to complete and commence service this year. They are the Kwun Tong Line Extension and the South Island Line (East). While continuing to press fully ahead with the slightly delayed Central-Wan Chai Bypass and the Island Eastern Corridor Link project that will improve traffic along the northern shore of Hong Kong Island, we will make preparation for the construction of the Tseung Kwan O ― Lam Tin Tunnel this year to provide Tseung Kwan O with another external traffic link. We will also take forward the Central Kowloon Route project as a means of providing a new trunk road connecting East and West Kowloon. The Railway Development Strategy 2014 announced in September 2014 recommends that seven railway projects be completed in the planning horizon up to 2031. By that time, our railway network is expected to cover around 75% of the population and 85% of the employment opportunities in the territory. While railway is the backbone of the public transport system, we should not underestimate the functions of other modes of public transport. For this reason, even though the Government has no intention of conducting the Fourth Comprehensive Transport Study at this moment, we already commenced the comprehensive Public Transport Strategy Study after completing the railway development blueprint mentioned above, in a bid to improve the positioning and roles of various modes of public transport, and to foster the complementary roles of various public transport services. This can in turn provide people with convenient services and a diversified range of options while also enabling various service providers to develop sustainably in the long run. In our view, public transport fares (including MTR fares) should take account of operating costs, people's affordability and business sustainability. On the premise of maintaining a generally reasonable setting for public transport, we have stepped up our efforts of studying the possibility of introducing quality taxi services and increasing the seating capacity of Public Light Buses. The Transport Department will continue to assist the taxi industry in upgrading its service quality. The department will also explore improvements to the vetting, approval and monitoring regime for hire cars, including the introduction of measures which can facilitate the entry of new service providers into the industry. The Government is determined to tackle traffic congestion on roads with a multi-pronged approach. We have accepted in principle the 12 short-, medium- and long-term measures recommended by the Transport Advisory Committee,


and we will take forward the measures in phases. In December last year, a public consultation exercise was launched on the implementation of the Electronic Road Pricing Pilot Scheme. Besides, we will continue to promote bus route reorganization, and in the parking policy review due to commence later on, we will give priority consideration to meeting the parking needs of commercial vehicles. After the Eastern Harbour Crossing is returned to the Government in August this year, we will commence studies forthwith on formulating an overall strategy and feasible proposals to rationalize traffic distribution among the three cross-harbour tunnels. President, transport and transportation involve many stakeholders from various industries, including vehicle owners, drivers, passengers and pedestrians. There are even different demands in districts. Therefore, the Government will handle all related matters prudently, in a bid to strike a balance in the overall interest of the public. The current Government has put in place the "Universal Accessibility" Programme, with the aim of improving barrier-free access facilities at existing public walkways on a priority basis. So far, some 20 projects have been completed. Apart from proceeding with the remaining 180 projects or so in the 18 districts, we will start to invite each of the 18 District Councils again in the fourth quarter of this year to nominate not more than three existing walkways for inclusion in the programme. With a view to enabling the elderly and those in need to move along slopes more conveniently, we will seek funding approval in this Legislative Session for the purpose of taking forward three projects relating to hillside escalator links and elevator systems, all of which are at a relatively advanced planning stage. At the same time, we will install covers on certain walkways connecting to public transport facilities, and expedite the installation of seats and display panels showing real-time bus arrival information at sheltered bus stops. President, the development of transport infrastructure must be forward-looking. In the light of the visions to be laid down by the Development Bureau in its current planning study covering a period beyond 2030, we will commence strategic studies on railways and major roads accordingly, so as to dovetail with the overall long-term land development of Hong Kong, including the development of Lantau Island, the North West New Territories and the New Territories North.


5317

In recent years, many massive infrastructure projects have experienced serious cost overrun and delay. The Government is deeply concerned about this, and will conduct a review covering the monitoring systems of government departments. But we must point out that according to the global competitiveness ratings given by the World Economic Forum last year, Hong Kong ranked first in terms of infrastructural competitiveness. In recent years, whenever there are any massive infrastructure projects, some will as a rule dismiss them as "white elephant projects". Actually, if we look at many past projects, such as the cross-harbour tunnels, railways, the new international airport, the airport express, and even the West Rail Line, we will see that at the planning stages, some people also expressed concern about a possible wastage of public money. But after the completion of these infrastructure facilities, they all became saturated in no time, contrary to the previous worry. We believe our strategic infrastructure, including the Guangzhou-Shenzhen-Hong Kong Express Rail Link, the Hong Kong-Zhuhai-Macao Bridge and the third runway system of the airport, will show us that they can bring economic and social benefits to Hong Kong in its next phase of development and enhance Hong Kong's overall competitiveness as well as regional and international connection. President, I so submit. SECRETARY FOR DEVELOPMENT (in Cantonese): President, good morning, Members. I thank Members for their speeches on housing, land, transport, the environment and conservation, and so on. In this speech, I will give an account of the policies and measures on land planning and development. Land has been indispensable to Hong Kong's housing, economic and social development. The SAR Government always attaches high priority to the supply of adequate land for an increasing population in Hong Kong, so as to sustain our economic development and ensure the provision of adequate public facilities to meet the people's needs. In the Policy Address this year, the Chief Executive has updated the progress of a series of short-, medium- and long-term measures on increasing land supply, which can demonstrate the effects of the current Government's determined efforts to adopt multi-pronged strategies to correct the previous supply-demand imbalance for land in Hong Kong and realize the 10-year home building target for our long term development.


The pace of land development has slowed down considerably since 2000 following the economic slump and financial crisis, directly giving rise to today's serious shortage in land supply, exorbitant property prices and high rentals. As there is a long time span between planning and implementing land supply and development projects, land development initiatives must start as early as possible, and we must persevere without getting disrupted by any short term economic fluctuation. Besides endeavouring to make up for lost time in land supply to reverse the previous shortage, the Government must also carry on its tasks on land use planning and development to build up a land reserve for future use in due course, as a means of sustaining Hong Kong's development while avoiding the recurrence of the acute shortage of land in the past. However, as the Government has reiterated time and again, it really does not have the magic to boost up and speed up land supply within a short span. We must do it step by step. While increasing land supply, we must try our best not to create any unacceptable impact on local communities. The Government will go on actively implementing various short-, medium- and long-term land supply measures proposed under the blueprints in the 2013 and 2014 policy addresses, while society as a whole must also make trade-offs to solve the imminent demands for housing from the people, especially from those who are on the waiting list for public housing or whose living conditions are in dire need of improvement. In terms of short- and medium-term measures, the Government will keep on optimizing the use of existing developed sites in urban areas and new towns, as well as nearby locations in the vicinity of existing infrastructural facilities through land use reviews. And, subject to relevant planning terms, the development intensity of these sites will also be increased as appropriate. Besides the 42 sites proposed for rezoning in the 2013 Policy Address, we mentioned in the 2014 Policy Address that we had already identified another 150 sites or so with potential for housing development. Provided that statutory plan amendments can be completed on time, we target to make most of these lands available in the five years between 2014-2015 and 2018-2019 for building over 210 000 units, of which more than 70% will be public housing units. By the end of last year, 46 sites have completed statutory rezoning procedures for housing development. It is estimated that the sites can provide a total of around 41 000 units, of which around 20 600 will be public housing units, while 20 400 or so will be private units. Statutory rezoning procedures for


5319

another 17 sites have started already, and those sites are expected to provide around 33 400 residential units in total upon completion of the procedures, including around 21 900 public housing units and around 11 500 private units. As stated in the 2016 Policy Address, we will also consider slightly expanding the area of certain sites where planning terms permit and technically feasible. According to our preliminary estimate, such a move can additionally provide around 17 000 flats, with over 90% of these being public housing units. Apart from increasing housing land supply, we also have to maintain a continuous supply of lands for economic use to sustain Hong Kong's economic growth. Since 2010-2011, the Government has put up 19 commercial and industrial sites for sale, covering some 760 000 sq m of floor area. The Government has already made or will soon make available three commercial/business sites in 2015-2016, providing a gross floor area of around 67 800 sq m. Moreover, the Government Property Agency invited tender for the sale of government property located in the Trade and Industry Department Tower in Mong Kok last December, involving a gross floor area of around 26 400 sq m. The Government is also attempting to increase commercial space by various means, including the conversion of suitable government sites in Core Business Districts into commercial use, such as Murray Road Public Carpark and government sites in the Queensway Plaza and Caroline Hill Road. Other such measures include the implementation of Energizing Kowloon East to increase the development intensity of Kai Tak Development. In respect of long-term land supply, the Government is now proceeding in full steam numerous new development areas and new town extension projects. It is estimated that Kwu Tung North and Fanling North new development areas, Tung Chung New Town Extension, Hung Shui Kiu new development area and Yuen Long South Development can provide 197 000 units for occupation progressively from 2023 onwards. President, while taking forward new development areas in the New Territory, we also have to handle brownfield sites, which are areas currently used for low value-added economic activities which, nonetheless, are still important to Hong Kong's economy and local employment. For example, the Hung Shui Kiu new development area will involve around 190 hectares of brownfield land, and Yuen Long South Development covers another 100 hectares. Clearance of brownfield operations in Hung Shui Kiu and Yuen Long South represents a major challenge, which requires comprehensive re-planning and infrastructure


upgrading, as well as thorough discussions with stakeholders. Some brownfield sites have development potential, yet most of them are currently occupied for various operations, not being able to be released for development all at once. The Government is stepping up efforts to explore feasible and efficient measures for optimizing land use to manage those brownfield operations that are still necessary, and to earnestly study the possibility to relocate some operations into specially-designed multi-storey buildings. Furthermore, as part of the Government's ongoing efforts in identifying appropriate sites for Hong Kong's long-term development, we will conduct a planning and engineering study for the re-planning of Tseung Kwan O Area 137, the last plot of sizeable land in the urban areas with potential for large scale development. We will study the feasibility of making optimal use of some 80 hectares of formed land for residential, commercial and other development, after accommodating the desalination plant and taking into account relevant factors, such as potential environmental impact and traffic and infrastructure capacities, and so on. The study concerned will commence at the end of this year or the start of next year the earliest. President, in the meantime, the Government is updating the territorial development strategy, that is, Hong Kong's planning vision and strategy transcending 2030. While we set our sights on future vision, we will adopt a problem-solving, proactive, pragmatic and action-oriented approach in our study to draw up a blueprint for Hong Kong's future land planning and supply. At the moment, we have mostly completed the baseline reviews of various aspects, as well as examining the key planning direction and strategies. We are now devising a conceptual spatial framework and the proposal, and we plan to commence public engagement later this year to further fine-tune the territorial development strategy. Regarding Lantau where a few strategic infrastructure projects are under construction or under planning, it is undeniable that the area has huge development potential. Indeed, Lantau is critical to Hong Kong's long-term development. Having been established for two years by now, the Lantau Development Advisory Committee has completed many tasks, including submission of the proposal on strategic positioning and development directions for Lantau, which covers such aspects as spatial planning, land use, conservation, strategic transport infrastructure, social development, recreation and tourism. The Committee has submitted a work report to the Chief Executive earlier in January, giving recommendations from different sectors in detail.


5321

One can easily see that Lantau development does not mean construction everywhere, as we have put much emphasis on the balance between conservation and development, as well as carrying out a series of local improvement works. In the long term, we do need to study if the East Lantau Metropolis development is feasible. Related public consultation on major proposals under Lantau development is underway in a bid to widely gauge public views to further embellish the development projects in ways than better meet public expectation. In respect of the above, we will set up the Lantau Development Office as soon as possible for implementing the tasks on Lantau such as planning, conducting studies and construction. President, the Government has been maintaining investment in capital works projects to improve the people's quality of life and enhance Hong Kong's long-term competitiveness. As construction of mega infrastructure will reach a peak over the next few years, it is estimated that project expenses will exceed $70 billion each year, bringing consistent opportunities to the construction sector in terms of employment and development. While carrying out these capital works projects, we have taken note of the trends in the construction market. In fact, the persistent inflation in tendering prices in the last three years has caused grave concern in society. This is also a matter of concern to the Government. The Building Works Tender Price Index compiled by the Architectural Services Department has surged by around 22%, comparable to similar index in the private sector, while in the same period the Composite Price Index has risen by 14% only. According to certain studies, project cost is affected by factors such as economic conditions, global prices of construction materials and overall number of local projects, and so on. Our study also shows that price hikes in recent years can mainly be attributed to rises in underlying costs such as manpower, materials and machinery as a result of changes in local and external economic conditions. Apart from these factors, costs have also escalated due to design and contractual requirements and increased demands for manpower and material resources arising from tightened statutory requirements for environment and occupational safety and health. Furthermore, fluctuations in the construction market and filibusters in the Council in recent years have also delayed the approval for public works projects, and taking these situations into account, contractors have thus reflected the additional risks into tendering prices accordingly.


To address the issue of high construction cost in public works projects, we will establish a multi-disciplinary office to draw up, promote and co-ordinate cost control measures and initiatives related to cost reduction. These measures include reducing unnecessary design and contractual requirements, putting in place an indicative cost system for public works projects, adopting the guiding principle of "design for buildability" and refining procurement and tendering for projects, and so on. The above new measures will be progressively introduced as soon as possible. We hope the Legislative Council and society as a whole can support our works and join us in solving the problem of high project costs in Hong Kong. President, the short-, medium- and long-term land supply measures mentioned earlier are essential for fulfilling housing demands from the people and sustaining Hong Kong's social and economic development. We can only improve the living space and conditions in our city by making proper use of the developable land and exploring additional land for development. However, certain organizations or individuals are still keen on believing that demands for land in Hong Kong can simply met by enforcing one single measure, or a few specific projects. For instance, they think that as long as the brownfield sites are developed, it is no longer necessary to plan and implement any other projects to increase land supply in the long term; or that, after finalizing the construction of new development areas, it does not need to rezone any suitable greenbelt sites and government sites in the short and medium term. According to such "replacement theory", the problem of land supply in Hong Kong can readily be solved by one single proposal. This is unrealistic. With such an inadequate supply of land at present, we must adopt all possible means to plan and increase land supply, so that we can continue providing enough land for society to fulfil demands for housing and other socio-economic activities. The Government appreciates that society and members of local communities have alternative views on land development. We will keep on putting in efforts to maintain good communication and strike a right balance, while trying our best to address the aspirations of affected residents and stakeholders on the basis of fairness and reasonableness. That said, the Government truly does not have the magic, and we hope District Councils, members of local communities, residents and stakeholders concerned can understand and support our works, and to make trade-offs together.


5323

President, I have also noticed the proposals brought forward by Members in their speeches yesterday for establishing an independent authority to supervise building repair works against bid-rigging. The Government had already clearly stated its stance on this subject during the debate held in this Council on 2 and 3 December last year on a relevant motion moved by Mr Christopher CHUNG. Due to time constraint, I do not intend to reiterate our points here. Mr Abraham SHEK also voiced some opinions on recent land sales by tender. Owing to time constraint, I cannot detail my reply here. However, I must illustrate one point: the Government does not have a high land premium policy. The two tender invitations as remarked by Mr Abraham SHEK relate to a site in Tsing Yi and another site in Yuen Long. Despite having received nine and 10 tender documents for the two sites respectively, the tendering was still not successful in the end. Yet the tendering for another plot of land in Tai Po was successful. So, does the Government have double standard? Absolutely not. The Government adopts a land sale system verified by the Independent Commission Against Corruption. Before putting land up for sale, professional valuers from the Lands Department will conduct premium assessment to determine a reserve price, and the Government will not proceed with the land sale if quotations received from tendering do not meet the price. Regarding the sites in Tsing Yi and Yuen Long, although valuations made by tenderers varied, but I can tell that the quotations we received were far below the lower end of the sites' market values. Therefore, having known this, Members will understand that we do apply the same set of criteria while inspecting tender documents. Thank you, President. PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): The second debate session ends. PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): We now proceed to the third debate session. The debate themes are "Poverty Alleviation, Welfare and Medical Services, Elderly Care, Public Health and Population Policy". This session covers the following seven policy areas: Poverty Alleviation; Welfare Services; Support for Ethnic Minorities and the Disadvantaged; Elderly Care; Health Services; Food Safety and Environmental Hygiene; and Population Policy.


Members who wish to speak in this session will please press the "Request to speak" button. MR WONG KWOK-HING (in Cantonese): President, today is going to be the last time that I display this "amputated leg" when speaking in the Legislative Council Chamber. Mr Martin LIAO and some other Members once told me that this leg looked just horrible. I therefore promised them that if I could really succeed in making people with loss of one limb also eligible for the Disability Allowance (DA) one day, I would display this leg just for one last time in this Council. And, today is the one last time. I remember that since 2007, I have been standing beside Mr LEE Shing-leung in his attempts to fight for the eligibility of people with loss of one leg for the DA from Secretary Matthew CHEUNG. Our efforts have lasted almost a decade, spanning three Legislative Councils. The Inter-departmental Working Group on Review of the Disability Allowance (the Working Group) under the Labour and Welfare Bureau worked for four years and convened 13 meetings, and now its efforts finally come to fruition. The Working Group has submitted a report with nine improvement proposals covering five major areas. The Government has undertaken that subject to the passage of the Budget, people with loss of one limb would be eligible for the DA and transport fare concessions within roughly two months. I would like to take this opportunity to express my gratitude to Chief Executive Mr LEUNG Chun-ying for honouring his election undertaking, the Working Group for its hard work, and all those people who put down their signatures in support of our cause after seeing this leg in the streets in the years past. I am grateful to the volunteer who made this false leg, as it looks so real that it has touched many people and helped to persuade the Government to accept our recommendation in the end. Last but not least, I must of course thank Mr LEE Shing-leung for his steadfast efforts in the past 10 years. First in a wheelchair and later aided by a crutch, he brought along this false leg and visited many different government departments together with us. He also participated in various petitions, parades and protests. Now, his efforts have finally borne fruit. The DA Scheme drawn up in 1973 is not without unreasonable and unjust terms. After working on the issue for 10 years, we have finally made a breakthrough. However, as the Secretary told me in one meeting, this is just the


5325

beginning and must continue to following up our neighbouring places are implementing the World Health Organization-revised International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health. This is the second area and I hope the Government can keep up its efforts. With regard to improvements in the third area, two items stand out as relatively remarkable breakthroughs. First, the Community Care Fund is invited to introduce a pilot scheme to raise the maximum level of disregarded earnings for recipients with disabilities under the Comprehensive Social Security Assistance Scheme, from $4,200 to $6,800. Additionally, a monthly allowance of $5,000 for hiring a carer is provided for an eligible recipient with disabilities and in paid employment. I welcome the Government's further improvement of welfare benefits granted to persons with disabilities. Finally, I hope that the Secretary for Labour and Welfare will let us know in his reply when persons with disabilities can enjoy the DA under the revised terms and the two-dollar transport fare concession. Thank you, President. MR LEUNG YIU-CHUNG (in Cantonese): President, after the delivery of the Policy Address by the Chief Executive, Chief Secretary for Administration Carrie LAM held a press conference together with three Bureau Directors to explain the related policies in the Policy Address. She said that following the delivery of the Policy Address, she noticed some people's opinion that in regard to livelihood issues, the Government simply clung to an attitude of offering small favours, introducing piecemeal measures and disregarding the people. However, she emphasized that poverty alleviation, elderly care and helping the disadvantaged were the policy emphases of this Government, adding that the Low-income Working Family Allowance Scheme, which would involve an annual recurrent expenditure of $3.1 billion, would start to take applications in May 2016. So, she maintained that the welfare measures in this Policy Address were very thoughtful and considerate, as they could look after the old, the young and persons with disabilities. She even said that the Policy Address was written after listening to opinions. In addition, she remarked that the recurrent expenditure on social welfare rose from $42.8 billion in 2012 to $59.7 billion in 2015, accounting for 18.4% of the Government's recurrent expenditure and second only to education expenditure. Remarkable increase in social welfare expenditure is expected in 2016 when compared with the expenditure in this financial year.


President, after listening to these words of the Chief Secretary, many may think that the SAR Government has really devoted a lot of efforts to poverty alleviation and the problem should have been relieved greatly, thus giving a cause of self-satisfaction to the Chief Executive and the Government. President, the Chief Executive will always be self-satisfied regardless of how well or how poorly he has done his job. The former Chief Executive Donald TSANG regarded popularity ratings as mere vanity. LEUNG Chun-ying probably even thinks that popularity ratings mean nothing at all, otherwise the deep-rooted problems before us would not have turned even more so and the poverty problem would not have aggravated. President, the SAR Government set the first official poverty line for Hong Kong in September 2013. Families with a monthly income below 50% of the median household income are regarded as poor, and statistical updates will be done annually. Before increases in welfare rates, the poor population in Hong Kong stood at 1 336 000 in 2013, with the poverty rate at around 19.9%. After the adjustments of the policies on Comprehensive Social Security Assistance, Old Age Living Allowance and Disability Allowance, the poor population was recorded at 972 000, with the poverty rate at 14.5%. When compared with the situation in 2012, the poverty situation indeed saw some alleviation. Therefore, the Chief Executive himself hastened to announce that the poor population had dropped below 1 million, claiming that the effects of the measures had been encouraging. But he also stressed that he would not be self-satisfied. President, he vowed that he would not be self-satisfied. But how could that be true? If he was truly not self-satisfied, why should he choose to announce these so-called achievements personally, instead of asking the Chief Secretary for Administration or other officials to make the announcement? President, we do not intend to discuss whether the Chief Executive is truly not self-satisfied. In fact, he must not be self-satisfied because the Commission on Poverty at present measures poverty only on the basis of income without considering other factors including household expenditure, power, culture, mental wellness, and so on. President, I can give a very simple example. There are two households, one of which is a one-member household earning a monthly income of around $7,000 and living in a public rental housing (PRH) unit at a rent of less than $1,000. The other one is a three-member household earning a monthly income


5327

of around $12,000 and living in an illegal "sub-divided unit" in an industrial building at a monthly rent of over $4,000. There is a big income difference between the two households, but we will probably agree that when expenditure and quality of life are also considered, the household living in the "sub-divided unit" is definitely poorer than the one living in the PRH unit because the rent the former household pays takes up at least one third of its income and it has three members. The environment and fire-fighting facilities in "sub-divided units" are very poor, and the growth of children will be greatly affected. All these are real problems arising from poverty. President, I have not done any calculation, but I suppose the income of the three-member household may not be under the poverty line, and the household whose income is under the poverty line may instead be the one-member household. Actually, figures cannot possibly reflect the real situation as the poverty line only takes income into account and neglects expenditure. Therefore, statistically, there appears to be improvement but this is not the case in reality. The Government's handling of the problem is just a game of juggling statistics. So, I think neither LEUNG Chun-ying nor the SAR Government should be complacent, and the poverty line should be revised. President, in recent years, many organizations in the community and academics have been advocating that expenditure should also be used as a basis of measuring poverty. Moreover, WONG Hung, Associate Professor in the Department of Social Work of The Chinese University of Hong Kong, has been doing years of research on subsistence living expenses, social ostracism and relative deprivation in conjunction with The Hong Kong Council of Social Service. He has proposed that apart from the poverty line, we should also formulate a "subsistence living protection line" which sets the standards of subsistence living expenses through public engagement, so as to gauge the number of Hong Kong people whose living cannot meet the relevant standards and make up for the inadequacy of measuring poverty on the mere basis of income. If poverty can be measured from different perspectives, its various facets will be brought to light. More importantly, we can then check whether the Government has introduced any corresponding poverty alleviation policies and whether the existing policies are effective and appropriate. In recent years, the welfare policies introduced by the Government, such as transport subsidy, the Old Age Living Allowance or the Low-income Working Family Allowance to be introduced this year, have no doubt reduced the population of income poverty ― I must emphasize the word "population" ― but as stated above, as welfare payments rise, expenses also increase and the


increases may even exceed the rises in welfare payments. Therefore, the Government should not rely merely on income as a basis of computing the effectiveness of welfare policies on poverty alleviation. It should take expenses into consideration as well. So, I think poverty should be tackled from various fronts and a "subsistence living protection line" should be set. President, a few days ago, I attended a meeting of the Subcommittee on Poverty of the Legislative Council at which elderly care services were discussed. I asked the government officials why meal delivery service for the elderly was available only on weekdays and not on holidays. The Government replied that the service was also available on holidays but elderly people must make prior requests. President, I am very puzzled. Elderly people ask the Government to provide meal delivery service because they have mobility difficulty. Why does the Government adopt a policy that provides the service on weekdays only? Isn't a concern about the mobility difficulty of elderly people the Government's precise intent of offering this service? Are elderly people supposed to be suddenly capable of getting around easily and buying their own meals on holidays? This policy is really very odd. Members can probably remember that the last day of the last Lunar Year was a Sunday, so together with the first, second and third day of the new Lunar Year, there were four holidays in a row. What happened to the elderly people requiring meal delivery service? How did they buy their food? President, the neighbours of such elderly people told me that they bought dry food, such as biscuits, for them. President, I really cannot understand. The SAR Government and the Chief Executive both claim that they respect and care for the elderly. But why do they look after them on weekdays only? Do they actually think that such elderly people can look after themselves all of a sudden on holidays? Is that what they think? I simply cannot understand. Thus, I hereby strongly demand that the Government change its policy and provide meal delivery service from Monday to Sunday. If the relatives and friends of an elderly person ask him to eat out on a certain holiday, he can then notify the department concerned that meal delivery to him on that day is not required. This is very easy. Why can't it be done? The Government will definitely say money is a reason. Is the SAR Government really so poor that it cannot even bear the costs of delivering meals to elderly people on holidays? I hope the Chief Secretary and the Secretary can tell me the answer later. Thank you.


5329

MR POON SIU-PING (in Cantonese): President, this is the last time that the current Legislative Council receives and debates a policy address of Chief Executive LEUNG Chun-ying. In the first policy address he delivered to the Legislative Council after his assumption of office in 2013, there is the pledge of establishing a Social Security and Retirement Protection Task Force. It is said, "The Task Force will study retirement protection in depth in an open, pragmatic and prudent manner. It will consider all views objectively and work towards a consensus in the community on how we should take forward retirement protection in Hong Kong." In his 2014 Policy Address, it is stated once again, "The Government will adopt an open and pragmatic attitude in considering the way forward for retirement protection." But this year, he is still saying, "I call on all of you to actively express your views and engage in an in-depth, informed, objective and rational discussion." It has been almost four years since this Legislative Council took office and its term of office is already drawing to a close, but the Government still keeps talking about conducting consultation on retirement protection. How long has the Government delayed the implementation of universal retirement protection, the necessity of which has long since been acknowledged? How many old people have passed away after hoping against hope for years for retirement protection? The way forward for retirement protection ultimately hinges on whether the community can agree to support an arrangement regarding universal retirement protection and on how to make this arrangement financially viable if there is agreement. But much to our disappointment, from the recent consultation paper on retirement protection, all of us can see clearly how the Government looks at this issue. The Government has changed the theme of consultation, from whether people support universal retirement protection to a choice between "regardless of rich or poor" and "those with financial needs". This approach looks objective. But it will actually stigmatize retirement protection, provoke negative public sentiments, cause confrontation between the rich and the poor, and reduce retirement protection from a basic right to a mere economic issue. Following the same logic, in case we need to review the Old Age Allowance in the future, the Chief Secretary for Administration may again offer a choice between "regardless of rich or poor" and "those with financial needs" in her proposal. Should the Government adopt such a tactic? When we are asked in the Chief Executive's Policy Address to actively express our views and engage in an objective and rational discussion, I can only say, "I don't know where to start with".


In the consultation document on retirement protection, the Government has also included, as a related discussion topic, the abolition of the arrangement for offsetting long-service and severance payments against employers' Mandatory Provident Fund (MPF) contributions. This similarly shows that the Government has no intention to abolish the offsetting arrangement. In LEUNG Chun-ying's election manifesto, his undertaking to "adopt measures to progressively reduce the proportion of accrued benefits attributed to employer's contribution in the MPF account that can be applied by the employer to offset long-service or severance payments" is placed in the section of Employee Benefits. His political platform on retirement protection, on the other hand, covers various improvements to the MPF System, such as choices of annuities, management fee reduction, investment products with steady returns, and so on. All these proposals do not involve abolishing the offsetting arrangement. It is evident that at that time the Chief Executive was also of the view that the offsetting arrangement and retirement protection should be handled separately and should not be taken as one issue. Now, the Government has made a secret change and gainsaid what was promised in the past. Adding the abolition of the offsetting arrangement to the consultation document on retirement protection is an attempt to blur the focus of society, add more variables to the discussion and delay the Government's response to people's demand for abolishing the offsetting arrangement. The Government's action is regrettable. Retirement protection aside, elderly care services are also a great concern of the public. Especially at this very time when our population is ageing fast, the provision of satisfactory medical and elderly care services is indeed a formidable challenge faced by the Government. At present, there are worries about both the quantity and quality of community and residential care services for the elderly. On quantity, increases in service quotas are invariably announced in the Chief Executive's annual policy addresses, but there is usually no mentioning of any targets to shorten the waiting list or the waiting time. Elderly people on the waiting list can only quench their thirst for residential care with the statistical increases announced. I am glad to learn from the Government that the "first-hire-then-train" pilot scheme, which encourages young people to take up care work in residential care homes for the elderly, has received positive response. I hope that the Government will increase the training quota, so as to expeditiously add new blood to the care service industry. On quality, it is stated in the Policy Address that the authorities plan to merge the Licensing Office of Residential Care Homes for the Elderly and the Licensing Office of Residential Care Homes for Persons with Disabilities in 2016-2017. The Government said


5331

at a meeting of the relevant Panel that after the merging of the two offices, inspections of residential care homes would be stepped up to curb irregularities and the licensing system would also be reviewed. I hope that by reforming the regulatory system, the service quality of the industry can be enhanced and people can use private residential care services without any worries. Regarding healthcare, the time spent by society on discussing health insurance schemes is definitely no shorter than the time spent on discussing universal retirement protection. But so far, it is still impossible to set up a "high risk pool", which is at the core of the voluntary health insurance scheme. As a result, the voluntary health insurance scheme has been reduced to a proposal consisting of piecemeal changes: setting the minimum requirements for insurance products, drafting standardized policy terms and conditions and planning for the migration of existing policies, as stated in the Policy Address. These are far from being able to meet the expectation of society. With these remarks, President, I will leave my views on labour issues of the Policy Address to the next session. MR SIN CHUNG-KAI (in Cantonese): President, has LEUNG Chun-ying honoured his election undertakings of legislating for standard working hours and abolishing the offsetting arrangement under the Mandatory Provident Fund (MPF) System? In LEUNG Chun-ying's election manifesto in 2012, it is emphasized, "A special committee comprising of government officials, representatives of labour unions and employers' associations, academics and community leaders will be set up to follow up on the study on standard working hours conducted by the current administration. This committee will examine issues relating to employees' overtime work conditions and arrangements …" The undertaking is very clear. However, the only action that the authorities have taken so far is just the setting up of a committee and after that, they simply think that they have already responded to people's aspiration regarding standard working hours. What is more, they have also kept holding consultation in an attempt to delay the enactment of legislation. Recently, a proposal on replacing standard working hours by contractual working hours has even been put forward. This shows the intention of deceiving the public. As we all know, the formulation of standard working hours should actually mean the enactment of legislation to regulate the number of working hours. But the authorities' recent proposal on contractual working hours will only enable employers to set the


number of working hours. This is obviously the exact opposite of enacting legislation on standard working hours or even an attempt to substitute the right concept by the wrong one. The number of working hours will be set by employers, rather than any legislation as originally demanded. In this way, employers will even have a "legitimate" excuse to lengthen working hours for as much as they want, or make the working hours of employees longer than they now are. The MPF offsetting arrangement is another undertaking he made during his election campaign. But no arrangements for abolishing the offsetting mechanism have ever been proposed in his policy addresses over the past few years. Recently, the authorities have even said that since the offsetting arrangement also involves retirement protection, views on it will be sought as part of the public consultation on the latter. We observe that the authorities have always been evasive on labour issues. In respect of abolishing the offsetting arrangement, the authorities have refrained from establishing a committee, and there is even no separate consultation on this issue. It is thus only natural for society to think that the authorities do not really want to fulfil this undertaking. As shown by statistics, in the period between 2010 and 2014, the sum used for offsetting accounted for 26% to 36% of the total amount of withdrawn MPF benefits. In 2010-2011, the sum used for offsetting was even greater than the combined amount of benefits withdrawn by retirees and early-retirees. In 2014, the sum used for offsetting was $3 billion, up 42% from $2.1 billion in 2010. The arrangement has been in place for 15 years, and the amount of employers' MPF contributions that has been used for offsetting long-service payment or severance payment is as high as $26.6 billion in total, which is sufficient to meet a whole year of government expenditure on providing social security for the elderly. Last year alone, the accrued MPF benefits of 43 400 employees were offset under the arrangement. The objective of the MPF System is to protect the livelihood of retirees and give them some savings for use in their post-retirement life. In this connection, the MPF offsetting arrangement runs totally counter to the original legislative intent of the MPF System years ago. Some people say that LEUNG Chun-ying is reluctant to implement labour-related policies and wants to leave them to the next government because he wants to use them as slogans to garner support for his re-election from organizations supporting labour welfare policies. If this is true, employees are being used by LEUNG Chun-ying as his own chips.


5333

The authorities frequently emphasize that since labour shortage has caused the delay of construction projects, it is necessary to import workers. However, labour importation can only tackle the symptom but cannot cure the disease itself. It will even exert negative impact on Hong Kong and those young people who wish to join the industry. Information from the Construction Industry Council indicates that the number of registered workers has increased by 100 000 when compared with the figure five years ago. While the average age of construction workers is 46, the average ages of new workers who joined the industry in 2012 and 2013 were respectively 40 and 38. This can show that many young people have entered the industry. Moreover, the construction peak at present may just be a cyclical phenomenon. Can the authorities guarantee that the volume of construction works will remain at the same peak level a few years later? Labour importation will definitely affect the employment prospects and wage levels of local workers, and after the majority of the existing projects are completed, it may even lead to an excessive labour supply and deprive local workers of job security. Therefore, the authorities must first take care of local workers and prudently handle the issue of increasing labour importation. In respect of poverty alleviation, this Council is antipathetic to the policies of poverty alleviation, elderly care and healthcare set out in the Policy Address. The Government's repetitions of the tasks undertaken by bureaux and departments are just a cosmetic effort devoid of any substance. Its strategy of developing social welfare is ambiguous, and the related services are fragmentary. There are no long-term planning and service indicators either. There have been many cases in which elderly people passed away while they were waiting for admission to residential care homes. In the face of population ageing, the Government has sought to evade its responsibility by hook and by crook without offering any solution. President, finally, I would like to talk about healthcare. These days, a family member of mine need to stay in hospital quite often, so I am able to experience the very poor situation in public hospitals. I observe that the standard of public healthcare services in Hong Kong have not shown any improvement. I am not saying that there is no improvement on the part of healthcare personnel. Staff of the Hospital Authority are very concerned about their patients and they have all been doing their utmost. The only thing is that there is a severe shortage of hospital beds, especially during these winter months.


The number of beds in wards may have to be increased from three to four, or even five, and corridors or entrance/exit areas are now filled with hospital beds. As the staff establishment remains unchanged, healthcare personnel are inevitably exhausted when they have to cope with the extra workload arising from the added beds. President, healthcare is probably the kind of welfare benefit that is least likely to be abused. No healthy person will abuse hospital services. The Government or the Policy Address brags about the $200 billion earmarked for healthcare in the coming decade, as though this was a very generous spending. If we are talking about five years, $200 billion may well be quite a big sum. However, the funding is supposed to cover 10 years. Frankly speaking, when many people or even middle-class people retire (I will retire at the end of this year), they will still be in good health, so they will be able to take care of themselves and will not need any support from the Hong Kong Government. But they are in their twilight years and need hospital services, they too must rely on the public healthcare system of Hong Kong. People aged over 65 will soon account for one fourth of the total population. At this very time when Hong Kong can still have huge annual surpluses, we must build up a sound healthcare infrastructure of enough hospitals and beds. Most importantly, we must beef up elderly services combining medical and nursing care, as many elderly people may need to stay for several months after hospitalization. Can the authorities establish more care and attention homes that provide such elderly services, so as to alleviate the burden on the medical care system? I hope that on top of the $200 billion earmarked for the coming decade, the Secretary can allocate additional resources for elderly healthcare. MR LEUNG CHE-CHEUNG (in Cantonese): President, the elderly population in Hong Kong has now increased to 1.02 million and it will grow further from one elderly person in every six persons at present to one elderly person in every three persons by 2035. With the rapid development of medical technology and marked improvements in facilities meeting the needs of elderly people, there are now more than 3 000 centenarians, according to the statistics compiled by the Elderly Commission. It is also expected that the number will increase by more than 10 times to 40 000 about 20 years later.


5335

In the face of rapid population ageing, the Government has been emphasizing "ageing in place as the core, institutional care as back-up". In the Chief Executive's Policy Address this year, it is said that an age-friendly environment will be provided. Apart from the continuation of the Universal Accessibility Programme, other measures will also be put in place to provide public toilets for priority use by elderly people, enhance public transport systems and provide a subsidy to franchised bus companies to install seats at bus stops. We will give full support to these measures since they will bring convenience to elderly people. However, the current institutionalization rate of elderly people in Hong Kong is 6.8%, which is higher than the respective rates of 4.2%, 2.9% and 1.9% in the United Kingdom, Japan and Taiwan. In other words, our elderly people are too dependent on residential care services. If the Government is really determined to promote "ageing in place", then apart from providing the age-friendly community facilities mentioned above, it must also draw up long-term and integrated plans in areas such as medical care and housing, so that the institutionalization of elderly people with no great need of care can be deferred or even completely done away with, thus achieving ageing in the community. In the case of housing, for example, a policy should be drawn up to require the design and planning of all housing estates in the future, public and private housing estates alike, to designate one housing block or individual floors as elderly housing. Housing estates with basic medical and recreational facilities should also be built for the purpose of accommodating elderly people in their local districts. The number of elderly people with dementia in recent years has been on the increase. If elderly people can live in the communities they know well and thus need not adapt to new environments, the incidence of elderly persons going astray will certainly be reduced greatly. Most importantly, their children living nearby may visit them more frequently and this will help to promote mutual care among family members, so that elderly people will not be made to spend their twilight years alone in unfamiliar residential care homes or in new towns far away from the urban areas. The risk of their turning into hidden elders will also be reduced, thereby relieving the burden of society.


Besides, population ageing has also led to an increasing demand for medical services. It is noted that the Hospital Authority incurs an expenditure of nearly $50 billion a year and 46% of the money is spent on meeting the medical needs of elderly persons aged 65 or above. Under the impact of an ageing population, there has been an ever-increasing demand for public medical services. Elderly people are often required to attend regular follow-up consultation in hospitals for common geriatric conditions. In most cases, they only need to receive routine checking of blood pressure, undergo a blood test and collect medicine when attending follow-up consultation but it would take them almost one whole day every time. This reflects the tight manpower conditions in the public medical sector and the heavy burden of our healthcare system. As it is anticipated that elderly people's demand for medical services will only rise, the Government really needs to consider whether certain forms of co-operation like public-private partnership should be adopted for the development of community medical services for the elderly so that medical practitioners may focus on serving elderly people in one single community. It will be possible for medical practitioners to follow up the health conditions of their patients in a more attentive and caring manner if they know each other well. As for elderly persons with poorer health conditions, the cases may be referred to hospitals for follow up. President, this is only our vision for the future. We hope that the Government will accept our suggestions and embark on planning in this regard as soon as possible so that elderly people's mind can be put at ease and ageing in the community can genuinely be achieved. Let us come back to the reality now. Many elderly people are still waiting for residential care places because many singleton elders have no one to rely on. Some of them have mobility difficulties, while others live in cramped conditions and their family members are unable to take care of them. Against this background, the number of elderly people waiting for subsidized residential care places has reached 30 000 in recent years, and the waiting time for admission to residential care homes for the elderly (RCHEs) is as long as 21 months. Given the imbalance in supply and demand, no wonder it has always been sarcastically remarked that even when elderly people die, they are still waiting. The Government has sought to increase the supply of subsidized residential care places in recent years with the introduction of various schemes. But like the supply of housing, the provision of such places also faces difficulty in finding


5337

sites. Very often, even with strenuous efforts, the Government can only increase the supply by just several hundred places a year. This approach is just like "squeezing toothpaste out of a tube". It simply cannot meet the increasing demand of elderly people, nor can it meet the urgent need of the moment. Hence, we should really make the best use of the 10 000 vacant places currently available in private RCHEs, instead of lamenting over the situation here. Frankly, the service quality of private residential care varies greatly and many of them actually provide very poor services. In particular, the ill-treatment of elderly people in a private RCHE last year has made many elderly people fearful of private RCHEs. Nevertheless, I think that with the provision of financial assistance to private RCHEs to relieve their pressure of operating costs, coupled with effective government supervision, the service quality of RCHEs can be greatly enhanced. This will help to restore elderly people's confidence and make them willing to live in private RCHEs again, thus directly resolving the present difficulty experienced by elders in finding residential care places. The Democratic Alliance for the Betterment and Progress of Hong Kong (DAB) has put forward the idea of setting up a development fund for RCHEs. The idea is to provide subsidy to eligible private RCHEs on a one-off or continuing basis for upgrading their facilities and services, such as making changes to their indoor facilities and indoor space. In this way, they will be able to meet the EA1 standards under the Enhanced Bought Place Scheme of the Social Welfare Department and in turn become subsidized RCHEs. Financial assistance may also be provided under the development fund to draw on the folk wisdom to develop innovative healthcare technology and equipment to meet the special needs of RCHEs. Examples include toilet seat equipped with an automatic cleaning system for the convenience of elderly people, shower chair with electric lifting device, ramp with an automatic system, wheelchair lift, drug management system, and so on. With the assistance of such technology and equipment, elderly residents with mobility difficulty in RCHEs will become less dependent on care workers in their daily lives. Furthermore, with regard to the long-standing difficulty faced by RCHEs in recruiting front-line care workers and the poor quality of service personnel, I suggest that financial assistance be provided to such institutions under the development fund for subsidizing the continuing training or professional training


of their employees with a view to promoting the standard of professional services in RCHEs. Apart from the mode of "hire and then train" adopted to attract young people to join the industry, subsidy may also be provided to RCHEs for training housewives who are interested in taking up employment in the field on a job sharing basis, thereby relieving the problem of manpower shortage in RCHEs. Speaking of population ageing, I have to say something about the issue of retirement protection. I wish to reiterate that the DAB is in support of the implementation of universal retirement protection. But we also think that it will involve a lot of problems, including the commitment of huge resources. For example, it is highly likely that new tax types will have to be introduced to our tax regime, tax increases may be necessary or other sources of financing will have to be explored. Universal retirement protection can be implemented only when society has reached a consensus on these issues and agreed on the financial commitment. Meanwhile, when a consensus is yet to be reached, I think the Government may, as a first step, deploy the resources currently available to provide livelihood security for elderly people with financial needs under the established mechanism. Under this guiding principle, the DAB has long proposed the establishment of a three-tier pension system of retirement protection, which is similar to the "those with financial needs" option put forward in the consultation document on retirement protection published by the Government recently. It is my belief that before a consensus is reached in society, our proposal can serve as a transitional arrangement for retirement protection under which timely financial assistance may be provided to poor elderly people with limited assets. Mention has also been made in the consultation document of a public annuity scheme proposed by Dr LAW Chi-kwong of the Commission on Poverty. Under the scheme, participation is on a voluntary basis and in return for their contributions paid, participants will receive after their retirement a fixed monthly payment based on average life expectancy and pre-determined interest rates for the rest of their life. In my opinion, the idea is similar to the CPF Lifelong Income For the Elderly Scheme (CPF LIFE) implemented in Singapore, which is targeted mainly at the middle class. Another option is to convert part of a retiree's assets under the Mandatory Provident Fund Scheme into annuity payments, which I believe will help to formulate a retirement protection scheme with a more comprehensive coverage. However, the annuity scheme proposed is merely an outline and the authorities concerned have to seriously study the


5339

issues involved, including the need or otherwise of the Government to set up an administrative body to operate the scheme, the provision of subsidy by the Government to low income groups, and so on. I so submit. MR FRANKIE YICK (in Cantonese): President, when compared with its counterparts in the past, the Policy Address this year devotes less treatment to poverty alleviation, elderly care and support for the disadvantaged, and the paragraphs on such issues are mostly an account of the implementation of existing measures. It is mentioned in the Policy Address that the Social Welfare Department is planning to roll out the second phase of the Pilot Scheme on Community Care Service Voucher for the Elderly this year, which extends the scope of the vouchers to residential respite service and permits qualified private service providers to operate as Recognised Service Providers under the Scheme. Throughout the years, the Liberal Party has been advocating the issuance of elderly care vouchers to elderly persons waiting for places in subsidized residential care homes, so that they can select suitable private services while they are waiting. This will enable them to receive proper care during their waiting time, thus alleviating the physical and mental stress of elderly persons and their families. The second phase of the Pilot Scheme on Community Care Service Voucher for the Elderly is precisely the answer to the aspiration of the Liberal Party, as it can help alleviate the imbalance between public and private services and thus enable waiting elderly persons to receive appropriate assistance more quickly. The Liberal Party is supportive of the measure. Yet, the scheme is still a pilot scheme, and the maximum number service vouchers to be issued is just 3 000. We hope that the authorities can implement the pilot scheme as early as possible and seek to improve and fully implement the Scheme on Community Care Service Voucher for the Elderly based on the experience drawn from the pilot scheme. In this way, more elderly persons can be benefited. Actually, long-term planning is essential for the provision of all social welfare services. There should be a projection of future demand based on existing data. The projection should then be used as the basis of assessing the capacity of service provision and making long-term arrangements such as manpower training and land use planning. However, it is a pity that in the formulation of social welfare policies, the authorities have all along sought to


treat only the symptom instead of curing the disease. In the case of elderly care, for example, it was only when the shortage of elderly homes finally surfaced that the authorities hastened to identify sites for their construction. And, the industry had long since faced the situation of "the elderly taking care of the elderly", but it was not until 2015 that the authorities eventually implemented the Navigation Scheme for Young Persons in Care Services to train young care workers. In the absence of long-term planning, the welfare policies of the Government are often unable to address urgent issues, thus giving rise to many social problems. I hope that the authorities can properly utilize the various demographic and social statistics for the purpose of projecting the demand for various welfare services and planning the way forward. Furthermore, the various social sectors are very concerned about the public consultation on enhancing retirement protection that the Commission on Poverty is currently conducting. The Liberal Party has always thought that the Government should properly utilize resources to support those in real need. The statistics set out in detail by the authorities can already show that given the realities of rapid population ageing and an ever-increasing dependency ratio, the "regardless of rich or poor" option, which proposes distributing money to virtually everyone, is not financially viable. Implementing this option despite all the practical difficulties will inevitably lead the Government to introduce different forms of tax increases. In the midst of the present economic downturn, most industries are now caught in a grim struggle for survival. Any drastic tax increases will certainly rub salt in the wound, producing the chain effect of people's unemployment in the end. In particular, the sales tax mentioned in the consultation document will raise the cost of living in almost all aspects, adding to the livelihood burden on people. The Liberal Party urges the Chief Executive to honour the promises he made last year and seriously consider the factors of adequacy, sustainability, affordability and stability in the course of planning and formulating relevant policies, so as to focus on allocating resources to provide stronger support to those elderly people in genuine need. Before society comes any consensus on universal retirement protection, the Government should first improve the existing social security system and pillars of retirement protection, such as the Mandatory Provident Fund System. President, I so submit.


5341

MR LEUNG KWOK-HUNG (in Cantonese): President, I will not limit my speech to poverty alleviation and welfare services, as the work of a government should be an integrated whole. The debate is divided into five parts mainly for the sake of saving the time of public officers: Members speak on a certain policy area and the public officers concerned will listen and reply. This is a mere ritual and used to work well during the time of colonial Governors. However, the situation has changed today. What is a policy address? Well, we may put it that way: the Policy Address should draw the conclusion that the work of the Government has brought about a riot. LEUNG Chun-ying bragged on and on here, saying that he would form a steering committee for doing the work related to the Belt and Road Initiative. However, soon after this, there broke out in Mong Kok what he calls a riot. He should regard the riot as an assessment of his administration. To please XI Jinping, he used more than 4 000 words to talk about issues related to the Belt and Road Initiative and called himself its "super-connector" when delivering the Policy Address in this Council. Nonetheless, the conclusion the Policy Address should draw is that his administration has led to a riot. This should be how he should assess his own administration. Therefore, it is in fact a waste of time for Members to still spend any more time on this debate in this Council today. Of all the problems faced by this political regime, which can possibly be more important than that very incident which LEUNG Chun-ying calls a riot? I frankly find his perception of a riot somewhat very strange. In the words of the Government, those people threw stones and this is an act of violence, so the incident was definitely a riot and must not be whitewashed. He can of course say so. But President, frankly speaking, all those who were not blind could see what happened that day. Who still needs any such explanation from him? However, "riot" is not just a legal term but also a word with a political overtone, right? Is a riot necessarily bad? No, of course. One example is the 1967 Riots. Chief Secretary for Administration, many of the "nobility", top officials and celebrities with whom you clink glasses these days all used to be "riot convicts". I am not talking about people like TSANG Tak-sing. They were just "thought convicts", as they only distributed leaflets at that time. Chief Secretary for Administration, you too should have read this in Quotations from Chairman MAO Zedong: "A revolution is an insurrection, an act of violence by which one class overthrows another." These words were chanted most frequently back then in the 1967 Riots. "A revolution


is an insurrection, an act of violence by which one class overthrows another." These words were chanted like this. President, you too should have chanted these words before, right? How can we possibly believe that you never did so? LEUNG Chun-ying should make this the conclusion of his Policy Address this year: "I have caused a riot in Hong Kong." But even if I do not challenge his reference to the stone throwers as rioters, I must still ask him, "Why did they do so during LEUNG Chun-ying's term of office?" Besides, government officials themselves also think that this is actually a general trend and not a sporadic incident. We also think so, by the way, but we have different reasons for thinking so of course. He says that the efforts to implement universal suffrage have failed; people resent the work of the Government; and they have thus turned increasingly defiant of the law. These are his own words. This means that he has tacitly admitted that since March 2012 when he was Chief Executive-elect and since July 2012 when he assumed office, all in society have come to realize more and more that he just should not be trusted, that conventional protests will no longer work, and that a new form of protests, that is violent resistance, must be adopted as the norm. Whether the stone-throwing clash in Hong Kong will become the norm will all depend on LEUNG Chung-ying. Sadly, apart from calling the incident a riot, he has done nothing at all. He should actually conduct a review. President, let me quote a very simple example. There were a series riots in 1989. Do not think that I want to talk about the Tiananmen Square incident. I am referring to the riots in London and all over Britain, the poll tax riots. Chief Secretary for Administration, you should know of these riots, right? The poll tax riots were caused by the draconian rule of Mrs Margaret THATCHER. Back then, Members of Parliament (MPs) kept urging her to introduce reform, so she decided to bring in a big reform. She hit on the idea shifting the responsibility to all the representative assemblies in Britain, local councils and whatnot, asking them to levy poll tax in their respective jurisdictions. This was how she answered the request of MPs for reform. She thought that this dirty political ruse could work and could plunge MPs, especially those asking for reform, into the dilemma of having to contradict their own advocacy. Nevertheless, riots broke out all over Britain. Chief Secretary for Administration, you may look at the poll tax riots in Wikipedia later. What happened in the end? In the end, Mrs Margaret THATCHER had to step down and poll tax was abolished. Mr LEUNG Che-cheung, do you know that


5343

Mrs Margaret THATCHER was also in a similar situation that day? When she got up in the morning, she said, "It was all chaos in London till 3 am." It should be about 9 am in Hong Kong. Like LEUNG Chun-ying, she walked out in sleepy eyes, saying that large-scale riots had occurred in London, that there had been nationwide riots, and that burning and looting by rioters were reported. She severely condemned the rioters and said that strict punitive actions under the law would be taken against them. Some people were arrested and sentenced to imprisonment. However, the problem is that LEUNG Chun-ying should actually look at the political nature of the recent riot, and for this reason, he must not downgrade himself to the level of the Commissioner of Police and then consider the issues related to the riot purely from the angle of the police chief. How can he possibly do so? He should do some self-examination, shouldn't he? Chief Secretary for Administration, in case a riot breaks out during the time of a government, can it possibly put all the blame on others, irrespective of whether it is returned by elections? Mr LEUNG Che-cheung, do you find it very convenient today? My friends, even if I do not ask LEUNG Chun-ying to do self-examination, XI Jinping will ask him to do so. XI Jinping already asked him to work for harmony long ago. Nevertheless, LEUNG Chun-ying never talked about "promoting harmony" after all his meetings with XI Jinping. He never did so. He only said that XI Jinping asked him to govern according to the law and would support him in this regard. We never heard him talk about "promoting harmony". Subsequently, when XI Jinping met the media after meeting with LEUNG Chun-ying, he eventually spelled out his request. It was not until then that ZHANG Xiaoming and LEUNG Chun-ying were forced to mention this request because XI Jinping had already spoken openly about it. To put it simply, if LEUNG Chun-ying does not launch any studies on why the riot broke out … I will return to poverty alleviation. Chief Secretary for Administration, he wants you to work on poverty alleviation. But what about himself? President, what has he done concerning poverty alleviation? He has broken the work of poverty alleviation into small fragments, all the time establishing funds, one after another, and launching pilot schemes lasting three years after three years. His term of office is only five years, and three years plus three years will be six years. This actually implies that that if he can continue to lead the Government, the pilot schemes can then continue, so everybody must vote for him in the next Chief Executive election. This explains why a decision on universal retirement protection must be delayed until 2016. The reason is to give himself some sort of support in the election. Frankly speaking, he will keep on delaying … Mr Steven HO, you do not need to look at me like this. He will


keep on delaying. Together with the Chief Secretary for Administration, he will say, "Opinions are divided but I, LEUNG Chun-ying, am neutral." My friends, this is nonsense. How can there be any neutrality when it comes to policy issues? Why doesn't he remain neutral on the riot? Whenever he sees any opportunity, he will come out and say something. Regarding universal retirement protection, President, I want to talk about your recommendation in 1992, and I hope you can listen up. You may perhaps question whether you really made the recommendation back then. You said that the provision of universal retirement protection had been long overdue, and that before its implementation, the British Hong Kong administration should distribute $2,300 to each retiree every month (There were talks about a three-tier scheme subsequently). If the effect of inflation is counted, what will be the present value of $2,300 back in 1992, Chief Secretary for Administration? Do you people have any sense of shame anyway? How come the situation after the reunification is even worse than the situation in the days of your previous boss? But I would think that this is actually inevitable, because LEUNG Chun-ying is always so very brazen when talking about welfare benefits, poverty alleviation and the like. Oh, by the way, do you know what is "brazen cream"? In childhood, we often described an unabashed person as having dabbed some "brazen cream" on his face. This kind of cream must be put back on the selling racks again. Well, LEUNG Chun-ying must use it every day because he keeps saying that his efforts to curb property prices are beginning to work, and since he will provide more lands for private housing construction, the supply of private residential units will increase and prices will fall. He keeps saying that prices are beginning to drop, so the results can already be seen. But has he ever said anything about the rate of property price increases since July 2012? Is he going to say anything about this? How can he say that such a slight drop is an achievement after property prices have soared to such outrageous levels? Just ask him to go to hell! This is also the case with elderly care. Ever since I first joined this Council, I have been raising this problem: the number of elderly people who passed away while waiting for residential care places will only go up. The number has increased from 3 000 to 5 000, and is going to be 6 000 very soon. What has he done? He always gives the excuse that there is no land. What has he actually done anyway?


5345

Poverty alleviation, welfare and medical care all face the same situation. Chief Secretary for Administration, can you look toward my side? You have chided me for filibustering in this Council, and you have actually been chiding me for that year after year. But as you can see, the proposal of universal mandatory health contributions account (also known as "mandatory medical insurance") cannot work out because the insurance industry blackmails you ― no wonder Mr CHAN Kin-por has been such a "star" recently ― but you dare not introduce any government products to make up for the deficiency of the market. Actually, for both the Mandatory Provident Fund Scheme and mandatory medical insurance, as long as the Government can provide a kind of products as the mainstay, other people will have nothing more to say. Alternatively, the Government can follow Germany's example of signing a master contract with an enterprise to bars other people from getting any dividends. However, the Government refuses to adopt this approach. The $50 billion invested by the Government in the mandatory medical insurance scheme has been frozen. This sum has now been put back into the Treasury. And now $50 billion is earmarked to set up a retirement fund ― it is stated in the political platform of the Chief Executive that we have to save for retirement. After listening to my suggestion, the Government has earmarked $50 billion, but this is frozen again. Chief Secretary for Administration, when can the money be defrosted? The Chief Secretary for Administration asserted commandingly on the rostrum the other day that I as a legislator paid over $90,000 a month must do my work. But I must say in return that she is paid over $300,000 a month. I believe that if her official residence, drivers, cooks and other services are also counted, the cost of hiring her will be even higher. Anyway, let me now say that I approve of her idea, her idea of increasing tax by 4.2%. This is the first time that I am on her side. I do not care how she is going to do it ― through a progressive profits tax or a luxury goods duty, or whatever. The only important thing is that the rate of 4.2% must be achieved. In this way, it will be possible to implement universal retirement protection, and there will be no riots any more. President, her proposal is mere empty talks. By the way, the library under your charge is not bad at all. There is a book called "Kowloon Disturbances 1966: Report of Commission of Inquiry". I have the English version here and the Chinese version has been taken away by my personal assistant. This book records that after the Ching Ming Festival holiday on 5 April, disturbances (not riots) occurred in Kowloon on 6 April and 7 April at night, resulting in one death, several thousand arrests, hundreds of prosecutions and the imprisonment of many.


The disturbances happened in April, yet they already published a report in October. I do not like colonialism and I also know that the report was just a show. But they at least tried to do something and the conclusion of the report even set out the factors leading to the disturbances. In fact, these factors are still valid in the context of today because the backdrops now and then are very similar ― undersized homes, poor sanitary conditions and a young population with no sense of belonging. At the time, the future of Hong Kong was uncertain. There was no hope of reconquering the Mainland. And, there were talks about liberating Hong Kong, but that was proven not true in 1967. Well, the report talked about many factors, and the unsatisfactory education system and poor housing conditions were all mentioned. The Governor was just a colonial official, so he could actually treat those Hong Kong people mercilessly as trash. Yet, he still conducted a review, right? In contrast, those in our government claim that there is nothing to review. Are they in their right minds? Even the 4 June Incident in 1989 was followed by a report which contained several ten thousand words, setting out ZHAO Ziyang's suspected collusion with foreign forces, right? The more he overstates the incidents as a riot, the more he will be held responsible and the greater will be the need for him to explain why he could not foresee the outbreak of the riot and refuses to explore the causes of the riot. This is the essence of governance. The Chief Secretary for Administration should advise LEUNG Chun-ying to follow the protocol instead of speaking indiscreetly. In paragraph 10 of the Policy Address last year, he criticized the editor of Undergrad for advocating independence. When asked to give evidence, he could not give any. He then talked about a colour revolution. My friend, all his accusations cannot be substantiated and are downright falsehood. What are we going to do? Does he know why people do not trust the Government? He should have learnt the ancient saying that a regime cannot establish itself without the trust of the people. This means that the lack of soldiers and food does not matter so much, but the lack of integrity will be fatal. President, when we debate this ritualistic Policy Address today, most Members still think that nothing have changed in Hong Kong. They simply read out the scripted speeches written yesterday, the day before yesterday or last month, advising the Government to implement various kinds of measures. The main problem at present is that we do not have the right to choose. We must put up with the "rotten oranges" presented to us. President, he criticizes me for engaging solely in filibuster without doing anything else. If there were five


5347

Secretaries of Departments and 14 Directors of Bureaux, what would be the situation in Hong Kong today? In regard to the setting up of the Financial Services Development Council, Hong Kong (FSDC), LEUNG Chun-ying has already said clearly that the Hong Kong Monetary Authority (HKMA) is outside his system of control. He thus cannot interfere with it. Hence, he must take back some power from the HKMA, so that he can get some money. But now John TSANG has taken the money back and set up some development funds. The purpose is to prevent him from taking the money. If he can get the money, he will probably set up an investment company similar to Temasek. A man of his mentality, he will spend a few hundred billion dollars on building infrastructure facilities of benefit to the Mainland, facilities similar to the Hong Kong-Zhuhai-Macau Bridge, Guangzhou-Shenzhen-Hong Kong Express Rail Link (XRL) and Liantang Boundary Control Point. Speaking of these projects, I reckon that if the $145.1 billion spent on the Airport Authority is also counted, then even if we exclude the project for developing West Kowloon … If the construction costs the projects for developing West Kowloon and East Kowloon are also counted, the total will be $500 billion. These projects are all "white elephants" facing uncertain prospects of completion. If we allow him to set up the FSDC as a corporation, become the "super-connector" and engage in Temasek-like projects, what will be the consequence? Singapore has failed completely. Can Hong Kong do any better even with the support of the Mainland's stock market and foreign exchange market? This is what I want to say. The clever people of Hong Kong, it was fortunate that I stood in his way, right? He is a man who will stop at nothing to get what he wants, so do you think he will ever ask for your opinions? President, you also know that the attempt to set up the FSDC as a corporation ended up in a fiasco because the HKMA was tough enough. The HKMA said that if a corporation was to be set up, the members must register their interests. It said that it was okay to set up the FSDC as a corporation, but the members must register their interests. But no one was willing to so, because all the children of business tycoons and top officials around LEUNG Chun-ying cannot possibly register their interests. Hence, the attempt to set up the FSDC as a corporation failed and it was instead set up as a private company limited by guarantee. Hong Kong people just do not understand why we boycott LEUNG Chun-ying or oppose him here. This is not because we hate him, but because there are problems with his policies. President, the Hong Kong Government has


been spending huge sums of public money to boost our GDP and achieve results, in a furtive attempt to echo the optimism of the Mainland. Our Government is not prepared to spare even a dollar to help the elderly. Look at this brick here. It is from LEUNG Chun-ying. I do not mean that he has literally thrown a brick at us. I am just saying that all the boundary facilities and the XRL he is building all need a lot of bricks and cost enormous sums of money. We are unable to help the elderly, improve our education policies, expand our university education and work out a satisfactory scheme of providing free early childhood education even after three years of efforts. The Government ascribes all these to the lack of money. But then, what about the $500 billion mentioned above? President, I still have 10 minutes left. I will use the remaining time for continuing to scold him later. Therefore, my fellow Members, let me say at the end that if you are so keen on condemning the riot, I cannot but give you a rebuke here. President, I hereby declare my view that the oppressive regime of LEUNG Chun-ying is synonymous to violence and the source of all violence. As long as this oppressive regime exists, there can be no harmony in this society. The aim of the 31 August Decision is to prevent Hong Kong people from selecting a Chief Executive of their own choice. Candidates are to be screened before the people can cast their votes. Anyone who describes such an electoral system as normal, proper, unique and splendid must be perpetrators and breeders of violence. They are no different from Mrs Margaret THATCHER who announced the introduction of poll tax in 1989. However, what Mrs Margaret THATCHER wanted to take from the British at that time was just their money, not their dignity and their basic rights. Why don't they feel any shame when they condemn us? All is only because they are not accountable to anyone. They must look at what happened in 1989. I mean what happened in Britain, not the 4 June Incident. The British hated poll tax so much … If the British are now told that in the future, candidates running in the election of the British Prime Minister will be screened before people can cast their votes, they will certainly stage a riot. President, that is the end of my speech. An oppressive regime breeds violence. The deprivation of universal suffrage is violence, and the election of a person like LEUNG Chun-ying in the absence of universal suffrage is even greater violence. Thank you, President.


5349

DR FERNANDO CHEUNG (in Cantonese): President, I have been agonizing over what I should do in this policy debate since it started yesterday. Should I just focus on the many policies set out in the Policy Address or the policy details therein and explore whether they can meet the needs of society? Alternatively, should I focus on a major incident that has just occurred, that is the disturbance and people's serious clash with the Police in Mong Kok, as a basis of evaluating the overall governance of Hong Kong? I am thankful to Mr LEUNG Kwok-hung. He has given a very clear portrayal of the realities before us. If LEUNG Chun-ying, as the Chief Executive, defines this incident as a riot, he should realize that this is in fact a political term, and this term actually denotes the presence of strong anti-government sentiments and grievances in society, all of which must be vented in the way which LEUNG Chung-ying describes as a riot. In that case, what they saw were of course all a gang of extremely discontented rioters resorting to violence. (THE PRESIDENT'S DEPUTY, MR MA FUNG-KWOK, took the Chair) Yesterday I had a chat with my students in class after covering the course materials because I must also apply the theories to the present social situation. So, I asked my students to give their views on the recent disturbance in Mong Kok and explain how they looked at this incident and what they thought the problems were. Deputy President, in the end, in just less than half an hour, all these students, who were only in their second or third year of university, already managed to give three broad categories of reasons. First, the SAR Government no longer pays any heed to the interests of Hong Kong people. Instead, it simply looks towards the north, always succumbing to Beijing and the Central Authorities and selling Hong Kong people down the river. Such is the strong perception of the students. I asked them to provide evidence and give some examples that induced them to have such a low opinion of the SAR Government. They said that there was no need to delve deeply into the past because the Policy Address this year, for example, repeated the Belt and Road Initiative over and over again almost without mentioning anything else. Where will this road lead us to? To hell? What has that got to do with Hong Kong anyway?


The one proposal in the Policy Address which is most directly related to the Belt and Road Initiative is the earmarking of $1 billion for assisting students from the Belt and Road region in pursuing studies in Hong Kong. Our students are very angry about this, because in the past two years, about 10 000 Hong Kong students who obtained university entrance qualifications were not offered any undergraduate places in publicly-funded institutions. Why aren't these young people in Hong Kong given any assistance by the Government? There is already a shortage of university places in Hong Kong, but the Government still plans to allocate $1 billion for sponsoring the studies of students from other regions in Hong Kong. How come the Government is so fawning? Don't tell us that it does so for the sake of Hong Kong people. Some may argue that $1 billion is only a very small sum of money, or just a drop in the ocean compared to the hundreds of billions of public expenditure every year. But the problem is that Hong Kong young people are even denied this mere drop in the ocean. We may look at the "white elephant projects" that cost us hundreds of billions. The funding of the Hong Kong-Zhuhai-Macao Bridge, for example, has already been approved, and the cumulative expenditure is over $100 billion. However, this is not all the expenditure as there are still other works relating to the boundary control point and its topside development and shopping malls. They talk about the development of "bridgehead economy". But can this help Hong Kong people? In what ways can this help Hong Kong people? How much of this $100 billion will go into the pockets of Hong Kong people? And, how much of it will go into the pockets of financial predators and large syndicates? All of us should know the answers. How about livelihood issues, such as the poverty alleviation policy much discussed these days? Some people say that very good results have been achieved in respect of poverty alleviation, as evidenced by the drop of the poor population to less than 1 million at long last. How can they have the face to say so? As a matter of fact, even after policy intervention, the poverty rate of old people is still as high as 30%. This is also the case with persons with disabilities. What is meant by "after policy intervention? This means that even with all the welfare benefits provided by the Government, including the Old Age Living Allowance, the "fruit grant" (the Old Age Allowance), Comprehensive Social Security Assistance (CSSA) and Disability Allowance, 30% of our old people and persons with disabilities are still living in poverty. Is this really a satisfactory result, something to be proud of? It is surprising as to why they


5351

should still have the face to say that poverty alleviation and helping the disadvantaged are the primary concern and most important policy of the present Government. And, we must not forget that it has actually been working for several years but the situation is still essentially the same. I am not saying that the Government has not done anything. What I mean is that its slogans are loud and appealing, but when it comes to the actual allocation of resources, it often invests capitals amounting to hundreds of billions in infrastructure construction, spending money like water. But how about the common masses? These days, any time we look at the charity page of Apple Daily, we can always see that every day, there are many appeals to donors for financial assistance in drug purchases, because the targeted therapy drugs needed by miserable cancer patients are not included in the Drug Formulary. As for the wheelchairs required by patients, even though subsidy is granted under the CSSA system, the rate is never enough for purchasing the types specified by therapists. As there is a shortfall of several ten thousand dollars, help from donors must be sought. There are cases like this every day. I myself have come across many such cases. What kind of world has ours become? Why are there still people who have no money for drugs? Why are there still people whose living areas are constantly getting worse and smaller, people who cannot even afford ordinary residential housing and must live in industrial buildings? The Government has announced it will take enforcement actions. But what will become of these people afterwards? Are they supposed to sleep in the streets? Well, even if they really do so, the authorities will not stop either and will spray cold water all around their dwellings in cold winter and confiscate all their belongings. Is this our policy to deal with street sleepers? Seeing all this, students have come to conclude that various inadequacies are found in present government policies, including those on poverty alleviation and care for the elderly and other disadvantaged groups. In respect of education, it has been said suddenly and without any cogent reasons that "Putonghua as the medium of instruction for teaching the Chinese Language subject" should be implemented. Earlier on, there was even a forcible attempt to implement national education, and when the attempt failed, such education was implemented in various disguised forms. The authorities have invested huge resources in organizing student visits and exchanges in the Mainland. The aim is just to answer the dictate of Beijing. The aim is very clear, and this is also the greatest


problem. Why have there been so many conflicts between China and Hong Kong recently? Why are the young people nowadays so negative towards government administration? The precise reason is that the direction of governance simply runs totally counter to the interests of Hong Kong people. This is the first major problem. Second, peaceful and rational means can no longer work. This is another major problem because even this Council, or this legislature, is unable to solve any problems now. The Legislative Council represents public opinions. With the separation of powers, we can at least play the role of check and balance here despite the executive-led feature of our system. When any serious problems arise in society, such problems can be brought before this legislature, where we can negotiate with those in power, make them see their blind spots, point out their policy errors and prevent them from making mistakes in the enactment of legislation and use of public money. We are supposed to discharge the duty of gate-keeping here. However, can we still play this role? The Government has been such a bully in everything it does, attempting to bulldoze all its proposals through. Having done so, it now criticizes all the diligent gate-keepers here, accusing us of filibustering and jeopardizing livelihood issues. In fact, the Government is the very one who uses livelihood issues to blackmail us into approving the different "white elephant projects". Such projects have long since run into cost overrun and delay. But then, the Government puts the blame on us, saying that the cost overrun and delay of these projects are entirely attributable to our filibuster. This is nothing but stating the result as the cause. Huge money has been spent, but the money has not been spent on addressing Hong Kong people's greatest needs. Universal retirement protection has been delayed for many years, but the Government is still beating around the bush. Nelson CHOW has written his report and has even done a thorough financial estimation for his proposal. But the Government wants to start all over again, putting forward the options of "based on financial needs" and "regardless of rich or poor" and forcibly twisting the course of the matter. These students are only in their second or third year of university, but in a matter minutes, they could already sketch the underlying causes of this major clash: the Government no longer pays any heed to the interests of Hong Kong people and peaceful and rational means can no longer work, can no longer solve


5353

any problems. Just as YUEN Kwok-yung has said, Hong Kong has failed to work out any means to solve its problems or has lost its ability of problem-solving. In my opinion, this is attributable to the dictatorship of one single man called the Chief Executive, who can make all decisions and have all the say in any matters. He can simply ignore and suppress all other opinions like a tank running over its obstacles. As long as enough voting support can be secured in the Council, the views of the opposition camp can be totally ignored. Such is the attitude of the Government in its governance today. Anything the public do not want him to do, he will surely and deliberately do, and in this way, he deliberately defied public opinions and did the least desiring thing of appointing Arthur LI. He is forever belligerent, just to prove who is more powerful. They want to have all the say and ignore everything. Such is the attitude of the Government in its governance today. The third major problem is the extremely poor relationship between the Police and members of the public. This has been very obvious since the Umbrella Movement. The Police now adopt double standards in law enforcement, and they are no longer under any checks. They resorted to violence during the Umbrella Movement. But after that, they have not even bothered to conduct any review, and they do not need to face any consequences either. In the series of prosecutions, we could observe how the integrity of the Police came under severe challenge in court. They were suspected of giving false evidence, and not only this, the evidence they gave even disapproved their own accusations. We could see this happen again and again. Do not take our young people for idiots. Even though the media are under control, even though TVB and other mainstream information channels for the older generations are under control, it is impossible to control the Internet. The young people nowadays belong to the Internet generation. Their world and that of non-Internet users are two entirely different worlds. This reminds me of one article written by Allan AU. In this article, AU narrated a story he had heard: a person liked going up hills in his childhood, and one day on a certain hill, he saw two ant colonies ― one colony of red ants and one colony of black ants. One ant in each colony had a bigger head, and both of them were apparently the leaders. The person then put the leader of the red ants into the black ant colony and the leader of the black ants into the red ant colony, just to see what would happen.


The two ants with a bigger head soon sensed something wrong, so they hurried off but no clashes with the other ants occurred. The person then removed the antennae of the ant leaders and put each of them back into the wrong colony again. The ants of the two colonies started to fight soon afterwards, and both sides sustained heavy casualties in the end. The person watching all this fight was very happy. According to Allan AU, the person who told this story was ZUO Fang, the founder of Southern Weekly. Through this story, he disclosed his personal experiences during the Cultural Revolution of how those in power abused their powers, took away people's perceptiveness, controlled the media and information flow, and then put people against each other in fights and quarrels. One example is the clash between "blue-ribboners" and "yellow-ribboners" and the emergence of some "love Hong Kong" sects and militant protesters in the Umbrella Movement. In the fight I am discussing now, front-line police officers used police batons, pepper spray and even a revolver. This recent clash in Mong Kok was so bitter that it almost caused fatalities. What will happen next time? I asked my students whether they thought that this clash was just a sporadic incident. I also asked them whether they would agree that suppose the authorities really took stern enforcement actions to arrest several dozen people as asserted by LEUNG Chung-ying, no similar incidents would occur and we would thus move on to the next stage. None of the students agreed to this. They all said that there would certainly be another clash. Why? Because the discontent has not disappeared and the grievances are still present. There is now a common view that the Government no long pays any heed to the interests of Hong Kong people in its work; peaceful and rational means can no longer work; and assured by its absolute power and the absence of any checks, the Police have enforced the law arbitrarily, thus causing animosity between the Police and the public. In the aftermath of the recent incident, policemen will turn even more outraged and their hatred will increase. They have public power and weapons. If their gear is further upgraded, fatalities may really occur next time. In case there occurs in Hong Kong a serious clash in which some members of the public and even policemen die, what will happen next? Should we plunge Hong Kong into such an abyss? Has it ever occurred to the Government that it must do some self-examination? Has it ever occurred to the Government as to why so


5355

many academics and professionals have called on the SAR Government to conduct a review and establish an independent commission of inquiry on the causes and consequences of this incident? There are serious problems with the administration of the Government. Since it calls this incident a riot, why is it reluctant to face the underlying causes of this riot? The incident was a culmination of many years of development. Since the reunification, Hong Kong people have witnessed that the SAR Government is essentially the same as the colonial administration in the past, meaning that nothing has changed except that its sovereign power is now China instead of the United Kingdom. A colonial government simply will not pay any heed to the interests of the local people, and the will of the sovereign power prevails at all times. To put it simply, our present political system is appointed and selected in its entirety by the sovereign power, which means that power does not come from the people. So far, the Central Government has adamantly refused to accept and trust Hong Kong people, turning down our request for choosing our own political leader. They talk about "one country, two systems"; but in reality, the clutch is tightening and they want to see "one country, one system" as early as possible. Immediately after this disturbance, some people hastened to talk about the need for enacting legislation to implement Article 23 of the Basic Law, claiming that it was necessary to ensure national security as the disturbance was a separatist movement. They apparently believe that national security reigns supreme, so it can override everything and pave the way for iron-fisted suppression. However, iron-fisted suppression will only provoke resistance. How come they still fail to realize this after so many years? Why are they still out of sync with the reality, thinking that the young people today have just turned inane all of a sudden and resorted nonsensically to violence? They should talk to students in any of the universities, or talk to members of the public in the streets ― but they may not dare to do so because they fear they may run into protesters at close quarters. Why are all these rulers so fearful of the people? Why do powers that be distance themselves so greatly from the people, only having to courage to get close to their apologists and all those sycophants? This Council has been ruined by these very people. Are they willing to sit beside Members as true equals and listen humbly to the public opinions they represent? The present way of governance has failed to work, to the extent that our next generation (or at least a good part of the next generation) have lost their


confidence in the political regime and Hong Kong and found it necessary to resort to violence as means of getting what they want. However, we know that violence is not the way out. Violence only breeds more violence. In the end, the biggest losers will just be Hong Kong people. Those Hong Kong people who are already disadvantaged will only face an even greater lack of care and attention amidst the chaos. But even now, frankly speaking, can this legislature and the community still have any more energy, time and attention to address those livelihood issues that need urgent improvements? The topics of discussions in this debate session are poverty alleviation, elderly care, support for the disadvantaged, public healthcare and medical services. However, can we still have the time and mood to discuss these topics in detail? Clashes now prevail, and there is no room for anything else. I am afraid the story of red ants and black ants told by Allan AU is already coming true in Hong Kong today. Someone is laughing to himself. Someone is happy to see the recent clash because only a clash like this can accentuate LEUNG Chun-ying's importance ― only a clash like this can enable him to have greater power and more excuses to control and oppress Hong Kong for the Central Authorities in ways which can ensure that Hong Kong will continue to suit China's needs and lay golden eggs. And, it does not matter even if Hong Kong is unable to lay any more golden eggs under his control because the most important thing is that he can suppress Hong Kong. Is this the future direction of governance? Is this LEUNG Chun-ying's strategy of winning re-election? Is this the future of Hong Kong? Deputy President, I fear that more and more Hong Kong people have already lost their confidence after the three years or so of LEUNG Chun-ying's administration. Some professionals and people who have the means already hold foreign passports, and not only this, I believe they must now be contemplating whether their children should continue to live in Hong Kong, or even whether they themselves should continue to do so. This kind of governance will soon see the change towards "one country, one system" for Hong Kong, turning it into another Mainland city and obliterating all its core values. Is this supposed to be the duty of the SAR Government? Is this the direction we can proudly follow? Should we thus sacrifice our young people, or even sacrifice their lives, and continue to suppress them and call them rioters? Is this the conclusion drawn in this Policy Address?


5357

Deputy President, I hope that the SAR Government can ask itself a serious question. Even though it has a political mission to accomplish, it must still be true to its conscience and ask whether the continuation of such governance is fair to our next generation. The Chief Secretary for Administration now sitting before us started her career in the colonial administration. With all her education, knowledge and wisdom, plus the advanced dissemination of information in Hong Kong and her overseas visits, she should know what the standards of modern civilization are; she should know what actions should be taken if we are to enhance the life quality of Hong Kong people and their society. We do not want any downward spiral, nor the incessant degradation of Hong Kong. Who are in power? You people. Who have the say? You people again. Right now, there is a serious conflict in Hong Kong, one which is so serious that even young people can readily point out that peaceful and rational means can no longer bring forth any solutions. Who have plunged Hong Kong into such a miserable situation? Who have made Hong Kong people think that the Government is simply not for the people, not for us? Why do the people have this perception? Should those in power ask themselves this very question? I know you are definitely unwilling to set up a select committee. Any request in the Legislative Council for the establishment of a select committee will definitely be vetoed by the pro-establishment camp. The sole duty of the pro-establishment camp is to "defend the emperor". And, they are now so obsessed with this duty that they will support whatever the Government says. Once an order is made by the Liaison Office of the Central People's Government (LOCPG), they will render their support. It is so simple. This has long since been the case: the Chief Executive is one thing and the LOCPG is another, meaning that there are two power centres. But of course, both of them are loyal to Beijing. Why should we let Hong Kong plunge into to such a state? What will happen if there is another clash? Deputy President, I hope that the ruling team in the present Government, from LEUNG Chun-ying down to Chief Secretary for Administration Carrie LAM and all Bureaux Directors, will ask themselves one serious question. If they think that the young people today are unruly rioters, and the clash in Mong Kok was a riot, they must ask themselves, "Who caused this riot in the very first place?"


MR WU CHI-WAI (in Cantonese): Deputy President, the title of the Policy Address is "Innovate for the Economy; Improve Livelihood; Foster Harmony; Share Prosperity", but it is actually an assortment report. Each Bureau Director is requested to give a work report on their policy portfolio, and their contributions thus make up the Policy Address of Chief Executive LEUNG Chun-ying. However, can this Policy Address meet the expectations of the people? Apart from the policies put forward by Secretaries of Departments and Directors of Bureaux, the Policy Address contains nothing else except the Belt and Road Initiative put forth by the Chief Executive. The public thus think that the Policy Address of the Chief Executive fails to face squarely the problems in the Hong Kong society now. What path does Chief Executive LEUNG Chun-ying, the head of the Hong Kong SAR, want Hong Kong to follow? Is the direction of the Belt and Road where our future lies? In fact, the appeal the Central Government made to Hong Kong to participate in the development of Northwestern China is very similar to the appeal now. Both appeals give us an impression that there are numerous opportunities. But what was the result of the first proposal? What has happened to the Northwestern China proposal now? Has it become the graveyard of heroes or the burial grounds of investors? Will the Belt and Road Initiative end up in the same way? We do not have a crystal ball, and we do not know the answer indeed. Will the Belt and Road Initiative be the key to the well-being of Hong Kong in the future? It certainly is not. It may represent an opportunity. But as Mr Kenneth LEUNG said yesterday, we have also established connection with Southeast Asia, Eastern Asia, or even countries further away such as the United Arab Emirates and countries in the Middle East. We have already established connection with them since long ago, and if we strengthen our connection with them, no one will have any strong views about that. But if the Government focuses all its attention on the Belt and Road Initiative, we cannot but wonder what has gone wrong with the governance in Hong Kong. Is the Belt and Road Initiative the only way out for Hong Kong people? The public can tell from the Policy Address that the answer is obviously in the negative. In fact, the biggest issue for the Chief Executive is governance. All Members who spoke in these two days ― left wing, right wing or moderate Members alike ― do not deny that there are deep-rooted problems in the society of Hong Kong. Has the Government dealt with these deep-rooted problems? We fail to see any efforts of the Government to deal with our present plight. We


5359

can only see minor patchwork remedies. In regard to the "white elephant projects", the Government asks us not to make any trouble, saying that their delay will produce various economic impacts on society. Deputy President, should the SAR Government behave so stubbornly when handling highly controversial issues in society? I wish to cite an example. We have spent a long time on discussing the Hong Kong-Zhuhai-Macao Bridge (HZMB). Members asked the Government what overall economic benefits the HZMB could bring, but the Government did not have any answer. We asked the Government whether the proposed increase in the approved project estimate it now sought would affect the completion and commissioning of the HZMB, and it clearly answered no. Then, what is the money used for? Surprisingly, the money is used for landscape works and enhancement of the boundary crossing facilities. However, such landscape works and enhanced functions are required only if the designed capacity of 9 000 to 12 000 vehicle trips is exceeded. Society is now beset by conflicts and dissension. If we look at the issue from this perspective, what is the big deal if the Government puts the project on hold? Why must the Government press ahead? Another example is the Guangzhou-Shenzhen-Hong Kong Express Rail Link (XRL). We have been chasing after the Government since 2010, asking how it will handle the issue of co-location of boundary control facilities, and whether, like what Secretary for Justice Rimsky YUEN has said, the co-location arrangements will involve a new interpretation of Article 18 of the Basic Law and Annex III to this Law, such that a different interpretation of the matters outside the limits of the autonomy of Hong Kong will be generated, and that national laws can be introduced to Hong Kong due to the new interpretation of Article 18 and Annex III to the Basic Law. Again, the Government has not provided any answer to these questions. But it still sought funding from the Legislative Council for completing this works project. In fact, throughout the discussion process, Members have put forth different proposals, including conducting immigration clearance in XRL train compartments. We have even suggested a separate-location model. We would rather treat the additional immigration clearance as paying protection fees. This option will definitely not undermine "one country, two systems". But as soon as we proposed the separate-location model as a mid-way solution, the Government immediately turned it down, saying that the separate-location modal could not be


an option because it could not unleash the full economic potential of the XRL. Certainly, we are all aware of this. If the XRL does not adopt the co-location arrangements, it certainly will not unleash its full economic potential. But if we compare or consider the blow that the co-location arrangements will deal to "one country, two systems", we will come to a different conclusion. The Government has not provided any response to this point. We attempted to buy time for the Government, so that despite the limited time, it could still provide more information for informed discussions in society on related issues, but the Government did not provide any information, only saying that Members should do their duty and conduct detailed study or put questions on the issues. We hoped that the Government would give us an answer before we endorsed the funding, but we did not get any positive response from the Government. All in all, the Government has not given any meaningful considerations to our social conflicts or sought to resolve such conflicts. The Government is of the view that its policies are the right course of action, and all criticisms and contrary views are attempts to stir up trouble or attack the Government. Honestly, if government actions have won the support of the people, why would they ever think about attacking the Government? People have put forward different ideas and solutions only because they see many problems the Government's policies. But the Government does not accept these ideas and solutions. This explains why people are filled with utter despair and hopelessness when they look at the Government, this Council or the future of society. This is what ignited the riot on the first day of the Lunar New Year. Worse still, in response to the riot, the Government holds that it is not possible and necessary to conduct any investigation into the deep-rooted conflicts behind this incident and seek to understand what has gone wrong with our society. Has the Government done its part to find a remedy to the problem? If the Government refuses to do so, any views or proposals it puts forth will not be able to target on the deep-rooted conflicts in society. In other words, conflicts will persist and governance will become more difficult. Deputy President, this debate session is about, among others, poverty alleviation, elderly care and welfare services. In fact, society has long since forged a consensus on these issues. The Government often says that resources are limited and thus these issues should be considered in greater detail. It also


5361

explains that these issues involve substantial increases in recurrent social expenditure and that once increased, the expenditure will only increase further. It thus concludes that great prudence should be exercised in taking each step forward. Deputy President, this viewpoint can be used as a justification when we try to find out what approach we should adopt to alleviate poverty and care for the elderly. But it should not be the only yardstick in a policy discussion. I wish to use universal retirement protection scheme as a simple illustration. I believe the majority of people in society want to find a way forward for the problem of our ageing population. The Government perhaps will say that it has put in place the Comprehensive Social Security Assistance and the Old Age Living Allowance to help the needy elderly and thus it has already looked after and made necessary arrangement for them. But objectively speaking, retirement protection is a matter of elderly people living with dignity in their retirement years. Regarding this issue, in the old days, elderly people aged 65 to 69 who wished to apply for the "fruit grant" had to undergo a means test, while those aged 70 or above did not need to be means-tested. What does this mean? It means that the line is set at the age of 70, before which elderly people need to undergo a means test. At or after the age of 70, it becomes a right of elderly people to receive the "fruit grant". It is a way in which society repays elderly people, so that they can live with dignity and peace in their retirement years. However, the Government's approach to this issue ever-changing. Prof Nelson CHOW has published a report on this issue with actuarial projections. After the report was submitted to the Commission on Poverty, however, consultations and discussions started all over again. Has the Government faced social conflicts squarely? No, again, it has not. Even if we go way back in time and if the Government finds that it is difficult to shoulder the long-term expenditure in this regard, can it adopt a mixed model to take forward universal retirement protection? Can a mixed-model approach be a way forward? A mixed model means that elderly people within a certain age range will be means-tested. For example, Old Age Living Allowance applicants below the age of 70 have to undergo a means test and those above the age of 70 need not do so. By so doing, society can strike a more reasonable balance on the retirement protection arrangements, and the Government or society can shoulder a lighter economic burden. This approach can also show that the Government has made a


meaningful effort to solve this problem or find a way forward. Regrettably, instead of adopting this approach, the Government has divided society into two opposing groups, namely "regardless of rich or poor" and "those with financial needs". What does it mean? It means that the Government wants to create social conflicts. Is this a direction or an action the Government should take in the course of governance? The answer is obviously in the negative. Let us turn to some simpler matters. On population ageing, the Government says that it wants to provide the elderly with safe and easy access. But what does the Government propose? It proposes to expand the scope of walkways maintained by the Highways Department. The Government holds that elderly people can then have safe and easy access in the community. However, in the past six or seven years, among the 18 assessed project proposals on hillside escalator links and elevator systems, the Government only completed three project proposals. However, regarding these three project proposals, the Government has spent several years on their consultation exercises and has just kick-started their construction. As for the other project proposals, there is not even a commencement or completion date. Does this match the goal the Government sets in the Policy Address that it wants to provide the elderly with safe and easy access? We talked about universal retirement protection just now. The Government is concerned that this issue will incur recurrent expenditure. But the proposals on hillside escalator links and elevator systems do not involve any recurrent expenditure, so why doesn't the Government press ahead with them? Does it think that some districts do not have such a need? If the Government thinks that it has to re-define "needs", then it should work in this direction. But it has not done so either, except stalling on the projects. Housing estates built along hill slopes are mostly found in Kwun Tong and Wong Tai Sin of East Kowloon, where the majority of our elderly people reside. They surely need to use these hillside escalator links and elevator systems. But the Government has not pressed ahead with these projects. Why can't the Government increase the quota of these projects, and why does it stall on the projects? (THE PRESIDENT resumed the Chair)


5363

Besides, the projects under the "Universal Accessibility" Programme often fall within the areas of private housing estates. Why doesn't the Government try to apply the "providing the elderly with safe and easy access" arrangement to the whole territory of Hong Kong? For example, the Government can use a matching fund to encourage private housing estates to enhance or install elevator systems to link up with Government land. Are we only allowed to use public money or public resources on Government land? But the point is that the Government now does not even carry out project proposals on its land, not to mention encouraging private housing estates to install elevator systems linking up Government land. Then, the Government's idea of "providing the elderly with safe and easy access" is nothing but a useless idea because the Government does not really intend to pursue this idea. Let us return to the elderly people living in East Kowloon. Actually, the problem involves the ageing populations not only in East Kowloon but also in the whole of Hong Kong. The Government has laid out in great detail in the Policy Address a 10-year blueprint for hospital development, saying that apart from projects that have commenced, namely the redevelopment of Kwong Wah Hospital, Queen Mary Hospital and stage one construction of an acute general hospital in the Kai Tak Development Area, the hospital development plan for the coming decade also includes stage two construction of the acute general hospital in the Kai Tak Development Area, and the redevelopment or expansion projects of several other hospitals. However, I wish to clarify one point, and that is, there is not yet any date for the funding application and construction timetable for the stage one construction of the acute general hospital in the Kai Tak Development Area. The so-called "have commenced" actually refers to the work of preliminary service planning of the hospital project. We, the Democratic Party, have been lobbying for the construction of the acute general hospital in the Kai Tak Development Area in one go, rather than in stages, so as to speed up the construction of the hospital. But the Government has yet to give an official response to our request, not to mention a timetable. As for the redevelopment projects of Our Lady of Maryknoll Hospital and some other hospitals, they are only a big plan in the coming decade. Can the Government tell the public the specific timetables of these projects? Can it tell the public that these projects are not blank cheques? But we notice that the Government issued many blank cheques in the policy addresses delivered in recent years. The proposals put forth in the policy addresses did not have any


specific details and timetables, without which Members cannot follow up on and monitor whether the Government has made good use of public money to improve people's livelihood. Apart from hospital services, I am also concerned about matters on which people already have a consensus and do not have any disagreement. The Democratic Party and the social welfare sector have been very concerned about dental services for the elderly. We have been urging the Government to strengthen the dental services for the elderly, asking it to draw reference from the General Out-patient Clinic Public-Private Partnership Programme and subsidize eligible elderly people in annual dental check-ups. However, in the entire Policy Address, the only place where "dental service" is mentioned is that "the Government will proceed with the planning for a new Families Clinic and enhance the specialist dental service for civil service eligible persons". We are certainly not against the Government in its attempt to provide fringe benefits for its employees. We support it. However, from the planning perspective, are civil servants the only people the Government needs to look after? Doesn't it need to look after the dental problems of the elderly? Do elderly people also need to have dental check-ups? Actually, the Government only needs to make good use of existing policies and adopt public-private partnership for the provision of dental care. By so doing, the Government can substantially improve the dental care services many elderly people need at their old age. But the Government does not even bother to do these simple things, things that we already have a consensus. Is this a problem with policy implementation, governance or policy direction, or rather, a problem with the apathy and incapability of the Government? I believe the answer is more than obvious from the examples above. This debate session is on poverty alleviation and elderly care. I hope the Government can seriously consider and listen to the views of different Members and political factions in this Council. If the Government's apathy is due to our divided views, we can understand that, because the Government needs to deal with the divided views first. However, if the Government does not pursue the proposals that we have reached a consensus, then the Government must be unreasonable, incapable and disrespectful of the consensus reached in this Council.


5365

If so, as Dr Fernando CHEUNG has said, people will think that the Legislative Council is no longer a platform for resolving social conflicts and that the Government no longer respects the function served and the role played by this Council in resolving social conflicts. People will then become more agitated. That is why democratic Members or Member of the professional sectors have time and again urged the Government to expeditiously establish a select committee led by Chief Justice to look into the deep-rooted conflicts in the society of Hong Kong, so as to find a remedy for society. If the Government is not even willing to find a remedy, is the Government going to delay curing these problems in society until they become incurable and lead Hong Kong to its doomsday? Thank you, President. MR CHEUNG KWOK-CHE (in Cantonese): President, the past Lunar New Year's Day was unexpectedly so unforgettable. Whether it was "a riot in Mong Kok" as described by the Government, and whether it was a "fishball revolution" as perceived by netizens and the media, people on all sides are clearly aware that the deep-rooted conflicts in society have reached the boiling point and any incident can serve as the fuse setting off the bomb of public grievances. Yet, the root cause of the incident is certainly attributable to the Government's failure, over the past three years or so, to unite Hong Kong as it initially promised. Instead, the Government has put in place various policies that worsen the split of society, harbouring wrong-doers, abusing its power, and exerting its authority to the fullest. In this way, it has handed down the "death sentence" to young people, who once believed that they could change society and the Government, thus making them angry, heart-broken and desperate, and driving them onto the one-way path of militant acts. To quote a group of scholars who are now initiating a petition, "If the regime sheds the constraints imposed upon it by the norms of civilization, society will be forced back into a more primitive state, and some of the oppressed will risk rebellion in an attempt to check the excesses of the regime. If the sources of the problems are not addressed, then society as a whole will have to pay a high price." I do hope that following this incident, the power that be are wise enough to do a pragmatic examination of the flaws in their previous governance, so as to


give Hong Kong a fresh start, instead of suppressing public opinions in a way similar to the building of embankment by Dayu's father. This will only lead to a deluge of public outrage. When I talk about a deluge of public outrage, I must refer to an essay posted on a social networking platform, entitled "Great Grievances". This essay, which has attracted close to 9 600 likes and has been shared for more than 5 000 times, is basically a compilation of scandals and controversies surrounding the current Government and governing team since they took the helm. Some of these include the unauthorized building works found in the Chief Executive's residence, a Secretary who allegedly engaged in operating "sub-divided units", drove under the effect of alcohol and hoarded agricultural land, an Executive Council Member who sold his property just before the launch of property cooling measures, the outburst of anti-national education movement, the North East New Territories Development project, the building of a third runway, the denial of an operating licence to HKTV, the delay and cost overruns in the Guangzhou-Shenzhen-Hong Kong Express Rail Link Project, the 87 canisters of tear gas fired in the year before last, and the recent incident involving LEE Po and four of his partners, and so on. The essay sets out a total of 110 items of wrongful deeds, showing that people's discontent with the Government runs long, like a lengthy piece of sarong. Of course, I am not going to elaborate this owing to the time constraint we have. But I must point to an item on the list: the controversy arising from the Government's distortion of the "Demo-grant" proposal advocated by Prof Nelson CHOW of the University of Hong Kong (HKU) as a "regardless of rich or poor" option, in a fake consultation loaded with pre-determined views. I believe that this is among the sources of social unrest and deep-rooted social conflicts. President, different groups, units and academic institutions have conducted a considerable number of studies on universal retirement schemes over the last 10 years, indicating that the implementation of universal retirement protection scheme is a common demand across social classes. In 2007, the Public Opinion Programme of the HKU conducted the "Opinion Survey on Retirement Protection for All Hong Kong People". In this survey, 80% of the respondents supported the provision of a universal retirement scheme. In 2009, the research centre of the Democratic Party conducted a telephone interview with more than 1 000 people, and about 80% of them held that a universal retirement scheme should be implemented immediately. In 2010, the Centre for Social Policy Studies under the Department of Applied Social Sciences of The Hong Kong Polytechnic


5367

University (PolyU) conducted a telephone interview, in which close to 80% of the respondents supported the setting up of a universal retirement system. Two years later in June 2012, the Centre for Social Policy Studies of PolyU again conducted a telephone interview and successfully surveyed 1 032 people. Of all the respondents, 88% agreed that a universal retirement scheme should be put in place during LEUNG Chun-ying's tenure and 92% opined that a feasible proposal for a universal retirement scheme should be put forward for consultation during LEUNG's tenure. In the same year, even the pro-government Hong Kong Research Association likewise conducted a survey on "People's opinions on retirement protection". In this telephone interview covering more than 1 000 people, 65% of the respondents supported the Government's establishment of a universal retirement protection system. A grass-root group, the Neighbourhood and Worker's Service Centre, surveyed elderly persons living in various districts across the territory in 2012, and 82% of them supported the Government's establishment of a non-means-tested universal retirement protection scheme. By the end of 2012, the Hong Kong Catholic Commission for Labour Affairs interviewed about 300 grass-root women, and more than 90% of them hoped to see the Government implement universal retirement protection. With regard to political parties which are representative of public opinion, apart from the Democratic Party mentioned just now, the Civic Party also conducted a telephone survey in late 2013, interviewing 1 416 people successfully. Close to 80% of the interviewees supported the establishment of a universal retirement protection scheme with tripartite contributions from employees, employers and the Government. Pan-democrats aside, the pro-establishment Democratic Alliance for the Betterment and Progress of Hong Kong (DAB) also conducted during the same year the "People's opinion survey on universal retirement protection". Among the 866 people interviewed, 73.4% agreed that all people aged 65 or above should be provided with a monthly pension. In May 2014, Wen Wei Po reported that the DAB had conducted another interview which covered more than 2 300 people. About 70% of the interviewees agreed that a monthly pension should be provided to people aged 65 or above. Both interviews targeted on the entire population. The public opinion in this regard is very clear. If some still choose to listen selectively, believe that public opinion is fickle, or hold that the 10 opinion surveys on universal retirement protection conducted over the years are inaccurate as they may not be administered by academic institutions or are biased with pre-determined political views, I would like to ask our colleagues, the Secretary for Labour and Welfare and the Chief Secretary for Administration to look at the latest opinion surveys done by The


Hong Kong Institute of Education, the Hong Kong Council of Social Service and PolyU . Prof CHOU Kee-lee of The Hong Kong Institute of Education wrote an article on the press in January, reporting that the Department of Asian and Policy Studies under the Institute and the Public Opinion Program of HKU did a telephone interview in mid-2014. Out of the 1 000 surveyed who aged 25 or above and were in paid employment, 82% supported the implementation of universal retirement protection scheme with tripartite contributions from employees, employers and the Government, while only 8% strongly opposed universal retirement protection scheme. In March 2015, the Hong Kong Council of Social Service interviewed 553 people, 61% of them supported universal retirement protection and only 5% opposed it. After the Government launched the relevant public consultation late last year, the Centre of Social Policy Studies of PolyU conducted the first opinion survey in the public consultation period. As at January this year, the Centre successfully interviewed more than 1 000 people, with close to 70% of them supporting non-means-tested universal retirement protection and close to 90% maintaining that the Government should inject $100 billion as start-up funds. The 13 opinion surveys cited just now are not merely about a handful of figures but also about the actual responses of people. These people often belonged to the lower strata society and wanted to cry out for help to the Government through the interviews. These are the young, the middle-aged and the old who are living in distress. Their common wish, in other words, the public opinion, is to have the Government put in place some form of universal retirement protection as soon as practicable. The public opinion is now placed before us, and the only question is whether it gets the due respect from our SAR Government. Nonetheless, the SAR Government distorts the proposal put forward by Prof Nelson CHOW of the HKU during the consultation and uses the phrases "regardless of rich or poor" and "those with financial needs" to set the parameters of consultation and define the difference between the two proposals, in a bid to mislead the public. On top of this, the Government takes also a pre-determined stance and states its opposition to the setting up of a universal retirement protection system. It tries to scare the public off with unreasonable population projection and massive projected expenditure, and refuses to include in the consultation paper the financially safe scholar-backed universal old age pension option, in a bid to swing the conclusion of the public consultation towards the introduction of a means test and thereby misrepresenting universal retirement


5369

protection as a kind of poverty alleviation measure for the elderly. President, all these have brought about disappointment and anger among the people who are eager to see the early implementation of universal retirement protection, thus further fuelling the already seething sentiments of the public. Our previous generation contributed to Hong Kong with their youth and sweats, laid the foundation of prosperity in society and accumulated for us a huge amount of wealth. However, when they become old and can no longer maintain the productivity wanted by society, they are regarded as burdens and mere consumers of social resources who are only eligible for retirement protection after passing a means test. This is heartlessness, showing a complete disregard of social justice. This heartless Government even tries to preach, talking about social justice on behalf of the young. What it is actually doing is provoking generational conflicts and tearing the society apart. But people have in fact seen through the tricks played by the Government. Last week, a young mother whose name is CHAN gave an account online of how an elderly woman passed as an employee of the McDonald's. She wrote, "I was astonished. Indeed that was not the first time I saw someone pick up and eat other people's leftovers, but the first time I saw [someone passing as an employee to pick up and eat leftovers]. I could not help but shed tears at that time. On the one hand, the Government spares no efforts in demeaning the elderly and denies them of retirement protection until they are close to penniless. On the other hand, some elderly persons disguise themselves as employees in the hunt for second-hand, leftover meal, in order to save face." I do not know how our officials, who are supposed to act like parents to the citizens, feel upon hearing this account. President, I am completely stricken with grief as such an inhuman standard of living could have been prevented with a no-label universal retirement protection. Prof Peter DIAMOND, a scholar committed to researching pension and social security systems all over the world in recent years and a 2010 Nobel Laureate in Economics, visited Hong Kong lately to share with us his views on retirement protection. He was doubtful of the SAR Government's current consultation on retirement protection and refuted the claim that it was unfair to ask the young to feed the old, saying that the Government had led the discussion towards a wrongful direction. He bluntly called the phrasing of the term "regardless of rich or poor" in the consultation document very weird. And he went on to criticize the Government's treatment for being unjust, as it seemed to be intentionally leading the public to choose between the two proposals, both


being extreme options, presented in juxtaposition in the consultation document. He was disappointed over the Government's failure to offer a middle-of-the-road option other than the two polarized ones. Even a foreign scholar is able to see this with such clear insight. We, who are directly involved in the issue, are so furious to see the Government, in the interest of a handful of people, send the project to the grave when it is completing the last mile, and push Hong Kong further down into an abyss instead of kindling a ray of hope for the next generation. This Government indeed does not deserve thanks from this Council. And I am going to propose instead a motion of regret, like what I did last year, as the Policy Address fails to undertake the implementation of universal retirement protection scheme. Besides urging the Government to formulate a universal retirement protection scheme under the principles of sustainability, robustness, replacement ratio and affordability, I also request it to earmark $100 billion as seed grants for the scheme. President, just now I speak for the powerless in Hong Kong and I speak also for the social welfare functional constituency to which I belong. On 25 January this year, the Scholar Platform for Universal Old Age Pension organized at the City University of Hong Kong a conference on retirement protection which was attended by nearly 500 people, including colleagues and students in the social welfare field, as well as representatives of relevant social organizations. Social workers stand on the frontline of society to safeguard human rights and social justice, on top of providing services to citizens with a view to enhancing social well-being. Over the years, we have witnessed Hong Kong people working hard, contributing to the gradual accumulation of wealth in society without enjoying substantial improvement in their own standard of living. We have always been working for different communities, yet, owing to structural problems in politics, in society, and in the economy, the underprivileged are still living in fear and trepidation. The elderly are still living without dignity, as they are forced to totter down the street in search of junk; young people, women and middle-aged people are in constant agitation because of their own retirement needs and those of the older generation. We social workers are thus made to stand up and speak out for the dignity and rights of the elderly. The eight elected members of the Social Workers Registration Board recently conducted, in January this year, a survey on "The views of the social welfare sector on retirement protection system". A total of 1 089 questionnaires were returned and most of the respondents were young social workers. And,


5371

67% of them aged under 40, and 28.3% between 41 and 60. About 90% of the respondents supported the universal old age pension scheme proposed by 180 scholars, and 86% opposed the "those with financial needs" proposal put forward by the Government, indicating the full support the social welfare sector throws behind the universal retirement protection system. The social welfare sector understands that the elderly need far more than basic protection against starvation and cold. More importantly, the elders want to live with dignity: having not only adequate pension for survival but also support in various aspects of life, including that from the community and from residential care homes. They also need good and friendly living environment fostered by the Government and by society in terms of service and policy. The Elderly Service Programme Plan currently implemented by the Government, however, shies away from elderly policies in housing, medical and health, and pension ― like what Mr WU Chi-wai has said just now, the elderly's demand for dental care, and crowning or tooth-filling services is huge. And I have no clue how sincere the Government is in planning ahead for the manpower, resources and premises needs of elderly services. Even if the Government is able to come up with new resources, I am not sure if they will be used for the planning, modification or expansion of existing services, including community support, community care and residential care services. Or, is the Government only going to launch service voucher schemes, to relinquish its responsibility for elderly service provision to the market? According to a most conservative prediction made by the elderly community care concern group under my office, given the extremely low service level at present, the Government must at least set aside $6 billion to $18 billion for the provision of community care and residential care for eligible elderly persons in 2030. In 2020, in view of the increase in elderly population in various districts, the Government has to add at least 37 Neighbourhood Elderly Centres throughout the territory and earmark $96 million and 11 000 sq m of land for the operational needs of these Centres. Meanwhile, the Government should build at least seven more District Elderly Community Centres and earmark for their operation $51 million and 3 000 sq m of land. What I have cited a moment ago are just some simple examples. The provision of quality care to the elderly is not just the responsibility of the Social Work Department nor the exclusive dominion of the Labour and Welfare Bureau. Facing the growth of elderly population in the future, on top of


providing public toilets for priority use by elderly people, extending pedestrian green time by two more seconds, encouraging the elderly to grasp the young old golden years to serve the community or to return to education, is there any inter-departmental structure in place to follow up and supervise these policy measures? The Policy Address says the Government will continue to reserve sites for elderly care facilities. So where exactly are these sites? Can we take a look at them? How many sites will be reserved? Is the Government able to provide the public with an accurate and concrete projection of the above? If the Government is just talking about matters in principle, how can the public rest assured that it is determined and able to honour these undertakings? How can members of the local community and the sectors give timely and viable recommendations to the Government? President, I have made a suggestion to the Government earlier this year on the inclusion of an elderly impact assessment in policy formulation. Under the proposal, government departments and bureaux should make an elderly impact assessment of the relevant policy during its formulation and spell out the results of such assessment in policy papers and Legislative Council Briefs. When conducting public consultation, government departments must consult the Elderly Commission for possible impacts that the policy might have on the elderly. The introduction of elderly impact assessment aims to aid the Government to study and evaluate policies in formulation with an elderly-friendly consciousness, including making evaluations on the potential advantages and disadvantages to the elderly, providing tax regime analysis and economic policy analysis with reference to the needs of the elderly and incorporating a performance indicators for the elderly in policy making. If the Government sincerely cares about the elderly, and actually set aside the necessary manpower, resources and sites in view of the ageing population, they need not cheat under cover of a diversion and set up something so-called the Future Fund. With the introduction of elderly impact assessment, all government departments must give society a clear account how they have taken up the responsibility of fostering an elderly-friendly society, and hence the effectiveness and continuity of the policies will not be affected by personnel changes. President, there are many issues which are not given treatment in the Policy Address this year. Social welfare is one example: not even a drop in the ocean is spared to alleviate the prolonged service waiting time, no new subsidized places in residential care homes for the elderly are provided in view of the


5373

massive number of service-waiting elderly persons, no additional resources are given to community care services for the elderly, and hostels for the disabled persons are just empty talks. Services for the mentally ill are strengthened but just to a very limited extent. The number of subsidized places for whole-day pre-school education has remained the same for more than a decade. Sitting pretty with hundreds of billion dollars, the Government turns a blind eye to distressed livelihoods but is eager to build white elephantine infrastructure, and seek funding approvals incessantly for cost overruns. People in the industry are therefore highly disappointed. If we comment on the section on social welfare in detail, and going through it item by item, the 30 minutes we now have is inadequate. But I will make use of this short duration of 30 minutes to move amendments and to speak out repeatedly for universal retirement protection, just like what I did last year. I insist on asking the Government for universal retirement protection (without any intention to safeguard my own benefit in the future, as I am now close to 65 year old). As a representative of the social welfare sector, a long-serving social worker, I am driven to seek justice for the next generation, to make final preparation for them and for Hong Kong's future, to honour the promises I have made to citizens and to realize social work ideals. On the last mile before the implementation of universal social retirement protection, it will definitely work against the well-being of society if we simply allow dissension and hatred to drive away rational communication, empathy and tolerance, such that no change can be made within the present system and people are forced to stage recurrent protests in the streets. I hope that colleagues in this Council can make a thorough consideration, and support my motion in good conscience. Lastly, President, public opinions work like water: it floats and topples a boat. This theory is simple enough. If public grievances are not properly allayed but are met with perversity instead, the outrage of Hong Kong people will surge. While the leader will be held responsible in history, those who aid dictators or stop short of keeping power abusers in check are in fact equally filthy. I hope we do have a good grasp of the scene, act sensibly and turn ourselves back from transgression. I so submit.


MR FREDERICK FUNG (in Cantonese): President, if a government is to command the support or trust of the people it governs, apart from formulating good policies … A government should seek to win the trust of the people. If the attitude adopted by a government is neither open nor transparent, the people will not be convinced and satisfied even though its policies are desirable. If the people ask their government to formulate a certain policy but it ignores their demand, they will be even more discontented. President, I fully agree to the views on universal retirement protection which Mr CHEUNG Kwok-che discussed earlier in his speech. He talked about public opinions and values, and I will not repeat them now. I am not a social worker but I have served Sham Shui Po for 40 years. In this district, which is recognized as the poorest area in Hong Kong even by the Government, there live the greatest number of elderly people. I see eye to eye with Mr CHEUNG Kwok-che. Let me stress once again that I am not a social worker and have not received any training in social work. But having lived with the kaifongs for 40 years, I fully understand their needs, especially the needs of the elderly. No one is satisfied with the universal retirement protection proposal put forward by the Government. Why? Chief Secretary for Administration, you are the Chairperson of the Commission on Poverty (CoP). Last month, some organizations in the community held a consultation session on universal retirement protection. That day, they screened a video clip of LEUNG Chun-ying addressing the Hong Kong Council of Social Service during his election campaign. Some civil servants on the CoP were also there. At that time, he said clearly that he supported the implementation of universal retirement protection. Yet, since the re-establishment of the CoP, the Government has been maintaining that LEUNG Chun-ying's election manifesto only mentions his intention of considering the implementation of universal retirement protection. President, how can the people be convinced if what is written down can differ from what is said? Chief Secretary for Administration, President, I was likewise very dissatisfied after watching the clip last month, so the social workers and elderly people who attended the session that day must be even more so. In this consultation document on universal retirement protection, I can find at least five things which are not acceptable. Back then, I strongly opposed the idea of the CoP to invite Prof CHOW to carry out a study. This is because one month before the invitation, Prof CHOW published a long article in the Hong Kong Economic Journal expressing his disapproval of implementing universal


5375

retirement protection. Since the stance of Prof CHOW was so clear, would there be any conflicts if he was invited to do the study? Nonetheless, the CoP extended the invitation eventually. I respect Prof CHOW very much. The findings of Prof CHOW surprise both the officials on the CoP who invited him to do the study and myself because he turns out to be in favour of introducing universal retirement protection. This is contrary to the conclusion of his article published one month before the invitation. I have no clue as to what happened in the process but obviously, Prof CHOW's views and values have changed. This is very important. Here, I would like to openly apologize to Prof CHOW, and hope that the CoP will accept the findings of Prof CHOW. Nonetheless, it is very clear that the CoP does not accept his findings. Prof CHOW already spent 18 months on his study, but the Government has still asked civil servants to study the issue for another six months. How are we going to tackle the issue of retirement protection for the elderly in the future? The Government has put forward two proposals: provision of protection regardless of personal wealth; and protection for those in financial need only. Members of the public, who may have to foot the bill, are asked to compare the two options and make a decision. As far as I understand, the CoP has been discussing whether universal retirement protection should be implemented. Actually, the subject itself can already be a theme for consultation. After calculation, the Government considers that the implementation of universal retirement protection will involve colossal expenditure. The Government can object to its implementation, but our argument is on whether this should be a right of all ― all Hong Kong people, in particular retirees. Hong Kong students can enjoy free education as they are Hong Kong's future; Hong Kong people, be they rich or poor, pay the same fees when they seek consultation at or are admitted to public hospitals. Likewise, since the elderly have served Hong Kong all their life, should they not enjoy the same rights? Regardless of whether it is financially viable, we should support the implementation of universal retirement protection because the elderly all made great contributions in the past. However, the two options put forward are about whether universal retirement protection should be implemented, whether it is worth implementing, and whether protection is to be restricted to elderly people in need. Obviously, the Government only intends to offer protection to elderly people who are poor and in financial need. The entire discussion has thus changed from having one single focus to having two.


Moreover, the consultation document makes it clear that the Government does not agree to the implementation of universal retirement protection. This gives the people very great disappointment. Since the Government has already indicated that it does not intend to implement such protection, is there still any point to hold further discussions? In case the consultation finds that there is massive public support, will the Government comply? The Government makes no commitments in the consultation document. Finally, the people are also dissatisfied with the consultation period. President, the Government does not accept the findings of the study done by Prof CHOW and it is conducting its own. The consultation period will end in June 2016. I expect it will take another two or three months before the final report can be released. By then, the Chief Secretary for Administration or the Government will say that implementation is impossible because the term of LEUNG Chun-ying's administration is drawing to an end and there is no time for the Legislative Council to hold any debate. Therefore, the entire consultation is fake, not meant for allowing the public to reach a conclusion for implementation. Even if the outcome shows that it is feasible, the whole thing will be left to the next Chief Executive. Yet, the next Chief Executive may not hold the same stance and another consultation will have to be conducted; or the next Chief Executive may simply refuse to hold any consultation at all. As regards the entire process, I for one am very dissatisfied. I believe the Chief Secretary for Administration also heard my speech at the meetings of the CoP. I said the entire consultation process gave me the impression that the Government was just staging a big show, and the consultation was fake and unacceptable to all. I, Frederick FUNG, am not alone. Various organizations in the community also think so. No matter how well the Government performs its screenplay, the people will not be satisfied if it tells them in the end that it will not implement the protection. Thank you, President. MR ALBERT CHAN (in Cantonese): President, I learnt from the news this morning that a 16-year-old youngster plunged to his death from a building right after the start of the new school term. As reported, his suicide might be related to the problems he faced in school. Youth suicide … Also, on Lunar New


5377

Year's Day last week, a group of young people staged a protest in Mong Kok, and the protest was determined to be a "riot" by the Police and the SAR Government. President, the whole series of problems actually show a major governance problem: the policies of the Government, especially the Policy Address just announced by the Chief Executive, have all failed to address the existing problems in society. People Power submitted an 80-page proposal to the Government as early as several months ago, recommending this objective of governance: "bolster our foundation, remove the causes of problems, rectify the social situation, discard all ills and introduce reform, with a view to aiding the masses." People Power also put forward to the Government a series of principles, policies and recommendations on resolving and alleviating the various deep-rooted problems. President, we did not send the proposal to "689" because we did not recognize the status of "689", nor did we think that he would listen to us. Therefore, we sent the proposal to the Chief Secretary for Administration and the Financial Secretary, hoping that they would accept some of the recommendations from us, people in the opposition camp who are labelled as anti-Chinese and bent on messing up Hong Kong. However, there was no response in the entire Policy Address, and it looked as though they never studied our proposal. Afterwards, the clash broke out in Mong Kok. President, speaking of the clash in Mong Kok, I must talk about the repeated warnings I have given to the Government over the past one year in this Chamber. I have been warning it that as long as the problems of oppressive rule and deep-rooted conflicts remain unresolved, the protest movement in Hong Kong is bound to escalate. Protests will inevitably increase in degrees of ferocity and violence, even to the extent of using petrol bombs. We have also forewarned the Government that rather than dispelling protests and clashes, the repression on Lunar New Year's Day will actually lead to more protests and clashes, and their degrees of ferocity and violence with escalate with police violence. In fact, when the Government battered young people in many different violent ways during and after the Umbrella Movement, I already warned the Government that such violence would only lead to fiercer protests. But the Police did not listen to me and the Secretary for Security simply turned a deaf ear to my warning. In fact, this is just common sense. President, when you were young, many of your views and observations were very correct. But now that you are more advanced in age and in a different role, your stances may have


changed. By the way, let me first thank you for your red apples. But President, I frankly cannot guess why you should have given Members red apples to eat at this time in history. President, in regard to the objectives of governance relevant to this debate session, People Power has made many recommendations, including a population policy that puts Hong Kong people first ― the formulation of a long-term population policy putting Hong Kong people first, the drawing up of an immigration policy in line with local interests and the recovery of the authority to vet and approval entry applications from Mainlanders. These involve the population policy. There are very detailed suggestions on all these proposals, and they are not just headings. With regard to welfare, we recommend: increasing welfare benefits; strengthening livelihood protection; abolishing the Lump Sum Grant Mode; returning wealth to the people through the distribution of $10,000 to each citizen; perfecting the Community Care Fund for the benefit of more people; improving the dental care scheme for the elderly; implementing an income guarantee scheme for grass-roots families; establishing an unemployment assistance fund; raising CSSA rates to reasonable levels; increasing the Old Age Living Allowance and abolishing its means test; implementing universal retirement protection; providing financial assistance to more elderly homes; improving the quality of elderly home services; setting five-year plans for elderly homes; providing more elderly home places; and reviewing the approval criteria for the Disability Allowance and increasing the rates of the allowance. As to healthcare, we should formulate a people-based healthcare policy that sees the abolition of the Drug Formulary, full subsidy to public hospital patients, and improved healthcare services in New Territories West. There is a whole series of recommendations. President, I have only 10 pages here, but our policy proposal runs on for 80-odd pages in total. President, when talking about the Mong Kok incident, many people will describe the youngsters involved as extremely violent, and the Government even refers to it as a "riot". But it has formally turned down our request for setting up an independent commission of enquiry. My conclusion is that the Government is afraid to know the truth. The Government is afraid to see an inquiry report ― I mean in case an inquiry is really held ― with a conclusion pointing at the policy blunders of the Government. The report will disclose one by one the causes of


5379

young people's anger and the clash, together with the developments and problems leading to the outbreak. The Government does not dare to face the truth. I can actually sense a drastic change in the mentality of many top government officials, including our Chief Secretary for Administration, dubbed the "Able Warrior", whom I once looked upon with great expectations. When she was Secretary for Development, she formulated many policies capable of changing certain undesirable policy directions from the past. I am of the view that some policy decisions she made as Secretary for Development should deserve our commendation. However, since taking up her present post, especially since LEUNG Chun-ying became the Chief Executive, the Wonder Woman we once regarded with high hopes has somehow become the Evil Queen who owned the Magic Mirror ― I do not know whether this is due to the constraints imposed by her position or to her own change in mentality. President, if you look at the development of our society over all these years, you will see that disturbances or vandalism involving young people did actually happen in the past few decades. President, on 25 December 1981, the Christmas Day, there occurred in Central a disturbance involving some 3 000 people, a number larger than that involved in the Mong Kok incident. These people overturned and threw stones and bottles at vehicles, causing the injury of 11 and the damage of seven vehicles. More than 10 young people aged between 15 and 27 were arrested that evening. In the aftermath of this youth incident, the Government embarked on a massive development programme of youth services. The British Hong Kong administration formulated many different policies in response to youth problems. However, I cannot observe any similar mentality in the present Government after the recent incident in Mong Kok. There has only been condemnation, followed by suppression, smearing and indiscriminate arrests. Various measures have been put in place to divert attention, and some people have even proposed the enactment of legislation against the wearing of masks. The Secretary for Security is also present now, so I must warn the Government once again that the stepping up of suppression and control will only drive the protest movement underground. In fact, when Andy TSANG stepped up police violence immediately after taking the helm in 2011, I already warned that violence would only be met by stronger resistance. My prediction has been proven true again and again. Any prohibition of mask-wearing will only drive protests underground. People will set fire on warehouses and offices, burn vehicles and make bombs. They will go underground. Unable to vent their


dissatisfaction, people will only resort to protests that are more conspiratorial, more covert and more militant. The history of all places tells us this will be the case. Such incidents are similarly found in advanced democracies, the United States, Italy and Japan alike, so Hong Kong is no exception especially because of its tyrannical and totalitarian rule. President, you also participated in and even led some protest movements as a young man. You should also know this mentality. In fact, over the past few years, I have also been considering how far the protest movement should go. Should I turn to an extreme protest movement? Should I resign from the Legislative Council and take the protest movement underground? In fact, I have also been thinking along these lines. I have been asking myself whether the continuation of peaceful protests can achieve the desired results. Fortunately, I still firmly believe that the road walked by Martin Luther KING, Jr and GANDHI is the only way out for Hong Kong. Yet, sometimes, when I was beaten up by the Police, when I saw the shamelessness of LEUNG Chun-ying, when I noticed how certain government officials called a stag a horse and confounded right and wrong, President, some kind of indignation would still well up in me. If such indignation gets out of control, or in case such indignation changes one's thinking, a change of behaviour will result. A person's political behaviour is the synthesis of his rational cognition and sense of identification. When one's sense of identification changes, one's rational cognition and analysis will change accordingly, and so will one's behaviour in the end. In many cases, one's behaviour may change in a flash, and the Government must not try to test what the trigger of such behavioral changes is. The trigger may change from one thing to another at any time. Hawking … The Jasmine Revolution in the Middle East was also triggered by the hawking problem, and lots of social protests, revolutions and uprisings were triggered by the discontent of the grassroots as well. Thus, how can the people help feeling angry with this Government, which seeks to escalate existing conflicts and problems incessantly? It is a fact that social conflicts have been increasing over the past three years, and there are problems with housing, social welfare and education. And, the issue of education has even escalated into the subject of a protest movement. All of us should remember the Government's frequent talks about the need for harmony. What actually is the basis of the harmony it talks about? Under the present system, how can there be any harmony? With "689", with police


5381

suppression, with poverty, with more and more "sub-divided units", and with people's failure to receive any public housing allocation even after a long wait of 10 years on the General Waiting List, how can there be any harmony? With patients waiting three years in vain for specialist out-patient services in hospitals, how can there be any harmony? When people see that their parents are still unable to get any specialist treatment services even when they pass away, how can there be any harmony? Elderly people in people's families … Every year, more than 5 000 elderly people pass away while they are still waiting for a place at residential care homes, so how can there be any harmony? The many problems with social welfare, healthcare and education will only add fuel to social conflicts. I am not going to discuss the economy with you because I already talked about it yesterday. The economy is certainly one of the root causes of the whole problem, but many other policy issues are equally so. A few days ago, I told Prof Sophia CHAN, Under Secretary for Food and Health, that the authorities have even driven smokers to the point of revolution. A few days ago I had another meeting with smokers. They were extremely angry, saying that they would set up a smokers' uprising group. They said that the Government had been so crazy as to designate no-smoking zones in eight bus interchanges all at the same time. According to them, smoking is even totally banned in one of these interchanges. In the case of another interchange, smokers must walk up a nearby footbridge before they can smoke. So, smokers must walk up the footbridge after a bus journey of 45 minutes in order to smoke, and just five minutes later, they must then walk back to the interchange to catch another bus. At present, there are 700 000 smokers in Hong Kong. They are all very angry. The tobacco duty they pay amounts to $4 billion to $5 billion each year, but the Government simply oppresses and smears them like lepers. In contrast, drinkers are spoken of very favourably, and the drinking of wine is depicted as a very high-class hobby. I have been saying for many years that the poor must now pay dearly for tobacco but the rich can enjoy good wine at low prices. This policy of the Government has intensified our social conflicts. Let us imagine how the Government is going to disperse the 700 000 smokers if all of them take to the streets together. Let us organize a "Light a Cigarette Campaign" for all smokers in Hong Kong. Let all the 700 000 smokers "set fire" and light a cigarette all at the same time. Are you going to charge them for arson? Therefore, the point I am driving at is that the Government simply must not oppress any minority group


in society on the pretext of any subjective policy goal. But the policy of the Government is exactly like this now. It always thinks that it is infallible, and whenever it thinks something is incorrect, it will say "kill, kill, kill!". There is no mercy. When young people see these problems, how can they hold their temper? If "689" were here and I were 30 years younger, I would certainly rush forward to beat him up. Even now, I still have such an urge, but I am getting old now. I am already 61 years old this year. President, as we can see, there are so many problems. For example, we have been fighting for universal retirement protection for many years. The Government is not without any money, but it just keeps saying it has no money for this. On the other hand, however, the cost overrun of just any "white elephant project" may easily amount to more than $4 billion ― this is just the cost overrun, not the original cost ― and, there is another project which needs an additional funding of $19.6 billion. It simply looks like there is never ever any shortage of money for all these projects, and cost overrun just keeps occurring. The Chief Secretary for Administration must be held responsible for this because the launching and funding of several projects were decided by her as Secretary for Development. I must, in particular, also mention the Director of Highways under the Transport and Housing Bureau handpicked by her as Chief Secretary for Administration. He has definitely failed to perform his duties satisfactorily in his five years of service in that capacity so far. He is responsible for the construction of the Express Rail Link and the Hong Kong-Zhuhai-Macau Bridge. But the projects under his charge are the ones with the largest number of fatal accidents, the longest delays and the biggest cost overrun. Yet, the Chief Secretary has still commended him. What kind of government is this one? It is a government which allows its officials to protect and harbour one another. Government officials and Bureaux Directors do not have to resign even though they have problems. But Rafael HUI was sentenced to imprisonment for many years due to minor corruption. Worse still, "689" does not need to bear any responsibility for his involvement in a $50 million incident. What the Court of Appeal said about Rafael HUI in its judgment of the case can actually be applied totally to "689". How can this convince the public? "689" could receive $50 million, but why was a civil servant dismissed for borrowing just a few hundred dollars from a tennis coach? How can this convince the 180 000 civil servants? Anyway, well, even if I continue to speak, the Government will


5383

not listen to me because they are already numb and they all live in their own small world. In this small world of theirs, they will only commend, flatter and support one another. They will no longer pay any heed to dissenting views. They like to look at themselves in the Magic Mirror of their own and see if they are the fairest in the land. As long as the Magic Mirror is not removed, the governance problems in Hong Kong will be here to stay forever and ever. DR PRISCILLA LEUNG (in Cantonese): President, in his policy address last year, the Chief Executive criticized Undergrad, the official publication of the Hong Kong University Students' Union. At the time, many people in the pan-democratic camp criticized the Chief Executive for intentionally aggravating social conflicts, saying that he should not seek to foment disputes in his policy address. Just now, Mr LEUNG Kwok-hung dismissed the allegation that Undergrad propagated "Hong Kong independence", saying that the allegation was simply not true. Honestly, I for one very much hope that he is right. Since I noticed last year that Undergrad might really be propagating "Hong Kong independence", I have been closely following the publications of university students and even the movies young people like to see. My worry has been growing because I can observe that "Hong Kong independence" is really a topic of discussion in the social circles of some young people ― and also some adults, of course. I think we must not ignore this phenomenon because "Hong Kong independence" is not a way out for Hong Kong, not an option for Hong Kong. The Policy Address this year covers a wider range of issues, and this matter is no longer mentioned. I suppose there is an apparent attempt to avoid this most controversial political issue. The Policy Address this year focuses on economic and livelihood issues. People may thus find it dull and banal. Maybe, since the constitutional reform proposals were already voted down last year, the Chief Executive and the Government do not wish to see any more disputes and just want us to recuperate. But things have not turned out the way they wish. One major theme of this debate session is health. Talks on the health of Hong Kong people must of course cover their physical health. Later on, I will talk about hospitals and other related aspects. But at this juncture, I think I must point out that Hong Kong is now suffering from very acute problems of emotional health. Mr Albert CHAN is good at choosing words and expressions.


He says that we must "give priority to Hong Kong people". Mr Gary FAN, on the other hand, talks about the "moderate localist camp". But Hong Kong is part of China, so their expressions are nothing but incitement of hostility to the country and even "Hong Kong independence". This is just like the case of a youngster with a father and a mother. The mother keeps telling him the wrongs of his father. Nobody is perfect, of course. But if the mother keeps talking about the wrongs of the father only, he will somehow be perceived by others as a bad guy even if he is in fact a good man. This is likewise the case when we look at the Police. Doctors also make mistakes. We should let the Medical Council of Hong Kong inquire into medical incidents. But we should not lose faith in our medical sector due to medical incidents, nor should we lose faith in our legal sector. Similarly, we should not turn our police officers into the adversaries and enemies of young people. Is this the reality in Hong Kong? The pan-democratic camp has dismissed our police officers as brutal cops. All of us should observe how the police officers in other countries deal with similar incidents and then judge the truth of their words. I also have similar experiences on the Internet. I won in the last District Council election, but the opposite story was circulated online. Even the mass media asked me the next day whether I had managed to turn my defeat into victory only after doing a re-count of votes. The truth is that there was never any re-count of votes. There is another example. We support the suspension of the Territory-wide System Assessment. But there are online rumours that we oppose its suspension. I now realize that many youngsters, or other people for that matter, will only receive one type of information, so they can only see the negative side of Hong Kong. Dr Fernando CHEUNG is himself a social worker. If he notices the prevalence of despair among young people, should he still make things worse and tell them that Hong Kong is desperate and hopeless? Should he still say that Hong Kong has already sunk to the bottom and is entirely hopeless? Is this the reality, by the way? Even though he dislikes Chief Executive LEUNG Chun-ying, should he gainsay every effort made by the Government? I have also seen that movie. I know some organizations have even booked the whole house for their members, thus fanning the flame. There is one dialogue in the movie which delivers a most unequivocal message. An adult


5385

character in the movie, not a youngster, says, "There is no democracy in Hong Kong because no Hong Kong people have died for the cause." I am extremely worried by these words. I have the premonition that should the incident lasting from the night of Lunar New Year's Day to the early hours of the next day repeat itself, death could really be possible. Some people have even said that suicide is very nice for all its romanticism. Members can look at this magazine I bring along with me. Here on its cover we can see this caption: Hurl my first brick ― Sacrifice is the mother of rebirth. What is the underlying message? These words are meant to tell young people that such acts are justified. I think this is cruel. What is the good of making a son hate his father? We actually belong to the same family. Some people have portrayed policemen as their archenemy. Do they want the Police to lose their morale and degenerate into a ragtag force like the Filipino policemen who handled the hostage incident? As Members may remember, many people all wondered why those Filipino policemen could be so poor in standard. We should treasure our police officers because they are our last important bulwark, instead of … Young people may already be very despondent having been exposed to so much negative information. But some people still want to propagate ideas that give them even greater despair. Should a social worker present only one side of the story and withhold the rest when dealing with the family problems of his clients? He should say, "Your father is also good in some ways, only that he is not good at expressing himself, or his way of handling things is not satisfactory. Your father also has some good qualities." Has the social worker put forth any objective views? I honestly think that many Hong Kong people are suffering from emotional problems these days. They think that Hong Kong is an utter failure, politically, socially and economically, and that it is now caught in a totally hopeless situation. I think this is a problem we must tackle. But Secretary Dr KO Wing-man is not present now. The Policy Address only talks about hospitals, and apart from this, it says absolutely nothing on how to deal with emotional problems in the community. In my view, emotional problems are more harmful than physical health problems. Inter-bureau efforts are required to deal with such problems.


We have no choice because we belong to one family. Some people rightly say that the disagreement between two generations is a matter of generation gap and we have no choice but to face it. We must therefore try to understand the new generation, seek solutions despite any difficulties and tell them that the world and Hong Kong are not so hopeless. But some people simply keep telling young people day and night that Hong Kong is totally hopeless. They even go so far as to glorify self-harm behaviour. I am afraid that over time, young people may really harm themselves or even others. In that case, society will never see any peace and tranquillity. In regard to dealing with emotional problems in the community, I hope we can use some terms that are more agreeable to Hong Kong people because they loathe names such as "psychiatric hospital", and they do not want to receive care from other people. But they can accept the term "relief of emotional tension". At present, many young people are depressed. And actually, many other people are likewise unhappy due to various problems. I think we must squarely address and relieve their emotional tension. I earnestly hope that the pan-democratic camp, the opposition camp and also those who still believe in the peaceful resolution of our problems can all stop justifying or romanticizing any emotional acts or acts incited by one-sided perceptions of the social realities. They must stop inciting young people to radicalism, stop inducing them to make mistakes punishable by 10 years' imprisonment and stop telling them that all is the Government's fault. They must stop pushing young people to the edge of the cliff. This is very cruel to young people. Actually, many people never lose their heads. They always make sure that their wrongdoings can never be proved by an evidence whatsoever, and the law cannot do anything about them. But many young people will simply charge forward, and they are the very ones who will be penalized in the end. I hope people can stop before things go too far. Even though they are dissatisfied with the existing regime … Actually, is Hong Kong really such a flop? I hope people can stop propagating such negative sentiments. Just now, some Members said that the problems today all stem from the 31 August Decision last year. I want to point out here that actually, this is just a matter of cause and result. I already advised them long ago to drop the tactic of Occupy Central. But they paid no heed to me. In fact, the opposition camp should bear a big share of responsibility because they presented their ideas only to those who were not familiar with the democratic system in Hong Kong or those


5387

who had no faith … Now, there is really an outbreak of violence, and the worst aspect of democracy has been exposed. I think they should reflect on why they decided to take an adversarial approach in the very first place. Now, after the recent outbreak of violence, the situation is really very precarious. My worry is that it will be even more difficult to take forward our constitutional reform. No society or individual is perfect. I have always believed in the theory of "incrementalism" advocated by Charles LINDBLOM, convinced that peaceful and progressive social improvement is always in the better interest of people. In contrast, violence or revolution with bloodshed will only cause prolonged suffering to people. Some say that the Policy Address is far from perfect. Well, I must say that no policy address can possibly be perfect. But even if the policy address is really without any merits, we should still say a word of thanks for all the efforts made. Let me now talk about this. Over the past few years, apart from putting forward improvement proposals on people's livelihood, politics, the economy and social problems, I have also been urging the Government that at the time when we have a fiscal surplus in the Treasury, it should draw up some long-term plans. I have put forth a proposal covering the three areas of education, healthcare and water quality. The idea is to allocate $10 billion bit by bit to each of these areas like making savings. These areas require long-term planning, and the results may only be seen five or even 10 years later. Sadly, I have heard only mere discussions over all these years. But I think there is a breakthrough this year at long last. As for water quality and health, I think they are related to each other. In respect of public healthcare, I have never imagined that this year, the Government will propose to allocate $200 billion in the next 10 years. If we divide this sum by 10 years, the amount for each year is $20 billion. We welcome this proposal because the Government's introduction of a 10-year plan is something good. Our public healthcare is facing the problem of population ageing. And, middle-class people know very well that their insurance schemes will not cover any dental or other medical protection after retirement. For this reason, I hope the Government can make long-term planning in this respect. I certainly welcome this proposed direction. Recently, the Hospital Authority put forth the "0-1-1" cost reduction plan. But I think the direction suggested by the Government is basically the first step forward. So, it has my approval.


As for hospitals, I have pointed out many times that since Kowloon West is served by only one hospital, elderly people living in Sham Shui Po must travel all the way to Yau Ma Tei in order to seek accident and emergency services. In my view, the Government should give serious thoughts to the idea of building more hospitals, because Kowloon West is honestly an area with many ageing communities. For this reason, the Government should formulate convenient arrangements for them. Just now, I talked about dental services. In fact, dental services are expensive. Many middle-class people have told me that they can no longer enjoy any dental coverage after retirement. Dental services may even be unaffordable to retired professors. Therefore, I have been requesting the Government to seriously consider the introduction of mobile dental care coaches. The reason is simple. It is because mobile dental care coaches can provide "point to point" services in remote districts. That way, people with such needs will not need to go to public hospitals. I do not think many resources will be required for this purpose. So, can Secretary Matthew CHEUNG and Secretary Dr KO Wing-man hold inter-bureau discussion? The introduction of mobile dental care coaches is a good idea. Many people will give their "likes". In addition, the Policy Address proposes to build a children's hospital. Even though the proposal has yet to be materialized, I still welcome this initiative. Actually, we have raised this request for many years, and we hope that this proposal can be materialized as soon as possible. Speaking of Chinese medicine, the Government's proposals likewise have my approval. The previous Government gave mere lip-service to the development of Chinese medicine. In 2011, it even dissolved the Hong Kong Jockey Club Institute of Chinese Medicine set up with $500 million funding during the time of Mr TUNG. I think the Government has shown a genuine intention to foster the development of Chinese medicine, and I hope the authorities can seek to bring forth this matter. Particularly, I hope that a Chinese medicine hospital can really be built, because many Hong Kong people like to seek treatment from Chinese medicine practitioners and think that Chinese medicine and Western medicine can be complementary to each other. Therefore, I hope the authorities can do the job well in this aspect. Just now, I also talked about another issue which I have been raising year after year in my proposals on policy addresses and Budgets ― a water quality improvement fund of $10 billion. Sadly, the Government still has not done any


5389

work in this regard this year. Why do I choose to raise the issue of water quality now, rather than during the debate session on environmental issues? The reason is that water quality affects not only the beauty of the physical environmental but also public health. The West Kowloon Cultural District will draw many visitors in the future, and jogging and qigong practice are popular among many residents in Tai Kok Tsui, Hung Hom and Tsuen Wan. As some qigong masters have pointed out, poor air quality is not good to people practising qigong. We can see that many children like running around in Tai Kok Tsui. Water quality affects not only the beauty of the physical environment because sea breezes blowing onshore may carry pollutants. We have indeed wasted the waterfront in Hong Kong. I hope that everybody can enjoy good health. If the authorities can improve the water quality of the harbour, all people ― rich or poor, men or women and young or old ― will be grateful 10 years later. I hope the relevant departments can give serious thoughts to this idea and strive for funding approval. The Environment Bureau is not the only Policy Bureau involved, because it has told us that inter-bureau efforts are required to take forward this matter. The Chief Secretary for Administration is now present. I now put forth this request once again, in the hope that the Government can achieve something five or 10 years later, so that the water quality in the cross-harbour swimming race will no longer arouse any concern or criticism from environmental groups. The Green Harbor Actions which I set up jointly with HO Kin-chung has questioned the suitability of the water quality for holding any cross-harbour swimming race. Our concern is actually the health impact. If the current Government can do a good job, the fruit obtained five or 10 years later will be ascribed to it. Besides, the Chief Executive has still done some work because he announced the installation of dry weather flow interceptors in Hung Hom and Tai Kok Tsui, along with the full-scale commencement of the flow-turning process in November last year. I hope the Government can implement the relevant proposal on a full scale. Instead of confining the installation of such devices to districts with more complaints such as Hung Hom and Tai Kok Tsui, the Government should implement the measure on a full scale. This is a very good policy achievement which is no less admirable than the setting up of the MacLehose Trail. People will remember it. In the case of the elderly care policy, Members should not focus solely on hospitals. Some elderly people aged between 60 and 64 have asked me to relay a demand for them, one which I also put forth every year: do not forget the "blank


areas" in their welfare. Secretary Matthew CHEUNG, please give them something, will you? People in this age range are most hard-working, and most of them were born in the 50s and 60s. As Members know, people born around this time are very hard-working, and they do not want to retire. At present, I also employ some people born in the 50s and the 60s. They are very dutiful. I hope the community will not let such resources go to waste. As Members can see, at present, many people in the Legislative Council, the political circle, the business sector and even the professional sector are over 60 years old but still very energetic. I hope that instead of wasting their wisdom, our society can design some positions that can let them manifest their strengths. Sometimes, their job devotion and sense of discipline are better than young people's. Our society should not waste their strengths, and should conceive ways to enable them to join the community again and manifest their abilities. That way, they will feel happy both psychologically and emotionally, as they can have an opportunity to utilize their wisdom instead of letting it go to waste. The political circle is a particular case in point. How can young people possibly compare with our present … The President is a good example. Our society honestly needs to give them an opportunity to manifest their strengths. (THE PRESIDENT'S DEPUTY, MR ANDREW LEUNG, took the Chair) Speaking of abilities, these people can no doubt serve as advisors but they can also be coaches. In my view, we should not forget their business start-up needs. At present, we only emphasize young people's needs for starting a business. In fact, the Government may set up a business start-up fund for socially enthusiastic people who have retired from their first working life at the age of 60 (Police officers retire at 55), so that they can start a business alone or jointly with several other people. This involves long-term arrangements. Besides, we may even experiment the idea of the "grey hair" serving the "grey hair". Members should realize that the "grey hair" may actually do some money-generating business as well. We must not think that elderly people are just our financial burden. They actually do not want to be so. People of that generation are reluctant to apply for Comprehensive Social Security Assistance (CSSA), in contrast to the young people or new arrivals these days. Even if we ask them to apply for CSSA after they have retired, they will not be willing to do


5391

so. They want to have a job. In my view, my proposals of enabling elderly people to participate in starting up a business require inter-bureau consideration. For this reason, the "loan fund for occupation switching" I have proposed over these years should be renamed as the "loan fund for retirement or occupation switching" this year, so as to include various types of people. If they can join our society again, social expenditure can actually be reduced. At this point of my speech, I wish to reiterate that Hong Kong actually still possesses many merits, including our social and economic institutions, a high degree of economic freedom, the rule of law, and a fine police force. Hong Kong is honestly one of the best places in the world. Rather than focusing on our shortcomings, we should spread positive sentiments in society. I do not want to see pan-democrats suffer the ill consequences of their own deeds in the end. This honestly will not bring any good to them. They keep saying that Hong Kong is so a failure. As a result, young people have developed a liking for violence. This will not bring any good to anybody. I hope you can join us in putting out the fire, rather than instigating any animosity or fanning the fire. Deputy President, I so submit. MR STEVEN HO (in Cantonese): Deputy President, I just heard Mr CHEUNG Kwok-che and Mr Albert CHAN say that the Chief Executive, Mr LEUNG Chun-ying, could only see other people's mistakes but not his own. They also said that he always thought that he must be right. This was roughly what they meant. However, with the same logic, can I ask Members from the pan-democratic camp if they have seen their own problems? In regard to the riot in Mong Kok on Lunar New Year's Day and even the unlawful occupation activities which lasted for 79 days more than one year ago, was your encouragement and support to them also one of the factors leading to the incidents? After the recent riot, a political party provided free legal consultation service to the people involved. Were they, in another form, supporting such acts of violence? There is nothing wrong to fight for democracy, and we also fight for it. But we are taking different routes. And, I think the route you people choose has given rise to very serious problems.


Today, we have come to the third debate session. I actually expected that certain Members would mention the hawker policy, and that while talking about the riot in Mong Kok, they would put all the blame on the Government of the Special Administrative Region (SAR). However, they have done more than what I expected, as they have gone so far as to hold the Government responsible for all problems in Hong Kong. In the future, the hawker issue will no longer be their only focus. The housing problem, the healthcare problem mentioned by Dr Priscilla LEUNG and any other problems will be used by them as excuses for a riot. I understand that we all have the freedom of speech. On the second and third days of the Lunar New Year, the press said that they had to take to the street as there were problems with the hawker policy. Nonetheless, I have to tell Hong Kong people that their objective was neither democracy nor the benefits of hawkers. I am sure that their objective was to overthrow the SAR Government and their acts of vandalism were meant solely to get some political bargaining chips. I am not saying that all people who came out or even the people who threw bricks had the same objective. But I believe that those who initiated the incident all had this objective. After inciting the public, they simply left the scene. They even put on masks in order to evade responsibility. Is my criticism unfounded? Not at all. One of the video clips on the Internet shows a man inciting the masses and slowly walking to the railings afterwards to smoke and "watch the show" (This is only one scene in the incident that day, not a complete account). Since he was so valiant, why didn't he charge forward together with the rest? From the clip, we can see that their purpose was just to stir up chaos. Hence, in the future, they may use any social issues as excuses for rioting, and the SAR Government must be prepared for this. What was the cause of the so-called "fishball revolution"? As an old saying goes, "If names be not correct, language is not in accordance with the truth of things." If they come out to overthrow the SAR Government without a cause, they will not get any support, of course. However, if they occupy the moral high ground, their road will be easier to walk through. Hence, the public must be very careful. Even though the principle or the issue that they mention is recognized by us ― in the example of the hawker policy, we also recognize that there are problems ― I think we should still think seriously how we should fight for the cause.


5393

Besides, one thing is very strange. When we talked about hawker problems last year, people would immediately think of Kweilin Street in Sham Shui Po. But why did it happen in Mong Kok instead of Kweilin Street this year? In fact over the past one year, some Legislative Council Members and the Government have already done some work. We have set up a subcommittee on hawker policy to discuss how the hawker trade can sustain. Since there is too much information, I will not go into detail. But generally speaking, we adopt the bottom-up approach. Is there any example? Yes, it is in Sham Shui Po. We are of the view that in any district, as long as residents' rest is not disturbed and there are no noise nuisance, sanitary and food safety problems, we can actually identify a place for hawking activities. However, how is the result? It is a mixed result. The situation is still not satisfactory, as it is impossible to allow certain types of stalls to operate inside the area. The hawker stalls which cannot operate inside the area are those of higher risk from the view of the Government, such as the stalls selling deep-fried intestines, which require a whole pot of hot oil, flame cooking, charcoal burning, and so on. It is hence not satisfactory enough. In this regard, we will continue to communicate with the SAR Government and explore various means to enhance the attractiveness of such areas ― they are, in fact, already very attractive, as they can attract a lot of visitors. In the future, when we follow this right path, we must inevitably make decisions on how such hawker stalls they can be transformed and restructured, and how local conflicts can be minimized. I believe that the problems with public markets and markets will become ready excuses for riots in the future, as we can also see that there are problems. The Government also recognizes that there are problems. To prepare for the dinner on Lunar New Year Eve, many housewives ― my mother is also one of them ― will do grocery shopping in markets. Nevertheless, around the period of the Lunar New Year, the Tin Shui Wai market under the Link was redeveloped into a shopping mall. Residents must now take a longer walk to buy groceries and they are forced to change their shopping patterns. They must walk farther. However, some people do not know where to buy groceries after leaving their housing estates. Secondly, prices are also a problem, of course. The shopping patterns of residents are changed and shop owners are also forced to move. Their way of living has to change. Therefore, the community is filled with restless and unstable sentiments. This problem must be tackled by the Government. The Government must not allow the Link to lightly increase the rents substantially on the pretext of renovation, or let it appoint any outsourced


management companies which have a notorious reputation. In fact, the stall owners there had no choice but to stage the protest this time. But this was just a highly localized and mild form opinion expression. It is recently reported that some notorious outsourced service providers or market management companies in the markets operated by the Link are suspected of opening a number of meat stalls in the markets under different names. Although this stall is called "Chan Kee" while that stall is called "Wong Kee", they are actually owned by the same person. Will this lead to bid rigging or monopoly? Is it the duty of the Government to investigate these cases more actively? Can the competition law, which came into force recently, help these residents? If the Government is not active enough and needs the public to report cases before it can take action, we will co-ordinate with the Government. We can even make it a big operation. We can do so. The authorities want to follow the procedures, but their ultimate objective is to help people resolve difficulties in their daily lives. After all, it must realize that changes in market supply and demand and the need for people to change their patterns in daily life have already led to grievances in society. Therefore, I hope that the Government can do more work for the public interest. I have also heard recently that in the planning of some districts ― this may belong to the second debate session ― cinemas are provided according to a certain ratio of cinemas to population. Hence, if the Link is not doing well in the planning of markets, can the Government study whether public markets can be planned in certain places according to a certain ratio of markets to population, so as to make sure that certain sites are designated to satisfy local needs for markets? This approach is also used in planning of libraries. I think the Government can seriously study it. In fact, there are also other social issues. However, I only want to remind the Government to watch whether these issues will be used by some people with ulterior motives to provoke another riot. The issue of columbaria is an example but I am not going into detail as it is being considered by a committee. However, there are three key figures. At present, 80 000 cinerary urns now being placed in unauthorized columbaria need to move. The Government can only provide 50 000 niches in the columbaria, while niches for the remaining 30 000 urns still need to be found. Even if only 15 000 families are affected, the number of people involved is not small. The Government also has to find ways to relieve the grievances of these people. The details concerned will be left for deliberation of the committee.


5395

As regards the problems of the agriculture and fisheries sector, I pointed out to the Secretary for Development and the Secretary for Transport and Housing in the second debate session yesterday that the co-ordination between the two Bureaux was insufficient. As a result, when conducting district planning, the Government will refer the issues of the agriculture and fisheries sector to the Food and Health Bureau. And we are told that the ex-gratia allowance is none of their business and we must talk to Dr KO. The public officers are not so rude, but after hearing the answer, I feel that the authorities have not considered our opinions during the planning stage. They think that since the old and original system is already operating, it should go on, regardless of whether it is fair. I thus think that the Government should reconsider the situation. In the future, we must still tackle different types of social planning, including the third runway, and even the development of Lantau Island and East Lantau, and so on. We must tackle the problems concerned. If they are not resolved as soon as possible, the same situation will continue. Talking about removal and clearance, farmers will be the first ones to voice discontent. Once any group of people have come forward and said that no removal or clearance is accepted, it will be difficult for the Government to resolve the problem. Therefore, these problems must be addressed earlier. Has the Government introduced any desirable policies? In the previous two policy addresses, it is mentioned that $500 million will be used to set up the Sustainable Fisheries Development Fund. In this Policy Address, the Sustainable Agricultural Development Fund, Agricultural Park and even agricultural priority areas are mentioned. For the time being, I shall not comment on whether these are beneficial to us. But even if they are, the benefits will still be offset if the opinions of the agriculture and fisheries sector and the stakeholders of other sectors were not considered during the co-ordination, communication and even planning among the above-mentioned Bureaux or their departments. An even worse situation may arise and the losses cannot be compensated. Therefore, the Government has to give due consideration. Concerning the three measures mentioned in the Policy Address, namely the Agricultural Park, agricultural priority areas and Sustainable Agricultural Development Fund, farmers must of course face the problem of land resumption. Once the authorities say that a certain area may undergo planning ― just a possibility, I must say, and only simple questions are asked ― the farmers concerned are already faced with the problem of expulsion. If there is just a


short time left before land resumption by the Government, the landlord will think it may be better to sign short-term leases with farmers so as to save him the trouble of driving the farmers away in the future. I have seen a lease with a duration of only two months. I just wonder whether we will soon see one-day leases. Anyway, the existing system of the Government is unable to safeguard the rights and interests of farmers. Land resumption will go ahead after the funding application is endorsed by the Legislative Council, but then only the landlords and not the farmers can have their names registered at this stage. Therefore, once the Government launches consultation on the planning of a certain area, many genuine farmers will be expelled right away. The arrangements introduced by the Government to assist in the restructuring of the agricultural industry are often unable to benefit existing farmers or those who have been farming for several decades. How can this situation be improved? Can the Government start registration earlier so that the people affected can really exercise their rights? Farmers simply cannot talk about no removal or clearance because they have lost even their rights. When at the end the Government really compensates the landlords, they will gain double benefit. I do not rule out the possibility that some landlords are also farmers. However, the situation that I mentioned just now is very common. If the landlord does not increase the rental substantially so as to force the farmers to leave, he will sign short-term leases with them instead, as this will be more convenient to drive the farmers away. Conflicts thus arise. Even if farmers can enjoy their rights, can the problem be resolved once they are included in the Agricultural Park? However, the Agricultural Park is only 80 hectares in size. Joining the Agricultural Park will definitely be useful to farmers. And, I also want to assist farmers in joining the park through the Sustainable Agricultural Development Fund. Nevertheless, the area there is absolutely insufficient. Hence, after listening to our views during the consultation period, the Government introduces agricultural priority areas, and this initiative has our support. Nonetheless, there is a problem. The authorities are now conducting a study. When can there be a tentative plan? Farmers are now facing the problem of expulsion, and the problem of short-term leases is still unresolved. Hence, I may as well raise one point here. The authorities must explore and implement some measures as soon as possible. However, in the interim, do the authorities have any measures to protect the agricultural land concerned?


5397

The measures that the authorities may consider include the following. First, the authorities must seriously combat any acts which will destroy agricultural land, such as fly-tipping and unauthorized conversion of agricultural land uses. Some people like dumping waste or construction waste materials onto agricultural land. The landlord may allow dumping of waste onto his agricultural land. For a truck of waste materials, he will charge $500, and he says that this is already rather cheap. As a result, these people continue to dump waste materials onto the agricultural land, and the landlord continues to reap profits. The rental payment of a farmer for using the agricultural land may be about a few thousand dollars per year. But by allowing these people to dump a truck of waste materials, the landlord can already earn several hundred dollars to $1,000. The landlord may do this for his own interest, and the agricultural land will be turned into an area for dumping waste materials. Law executors may be unable to take prosecution against the landlord, as the latter can pretend to be innocent, saying that fly-tipping onto his agricultural land by others is against his will. The landlord can also say that it is difficult to restore the agricultural land to the original condition due to lack of money. Even if the landlord has money, he is probably unwilling to restore the agricultural land to the original condition with his own money. How should the Government resolve these problems? In fact, there is a large room for improvement on the part of the Government. Second, I have just talked about unlawful acts. Let me now discuss how the Government can tackle lawful acts. At present, it is too easy for agricultural land owners to change the uses their agricultural land under the law. What is their approach? First of all, the landlord causes damage to the agricultural land. He then applies for conversion of land use, as it is no longer a piece of quality agricultural land. This will make it reasonable for the landlord to change the use, right? If the landlord causes damage to his own agricultural land to make it unsuitable for farming, he will of course fill and level up the agricultural land for warehouse use, for example. The Government, however, has no means to curb such acts. Therefore, damage of agricultural land can be caused by both unlawful acts and lawful acts (Under the law, it is too easy for landlords to change the use of their agricultural lands). How is the Government going to deal with the problems concerned and lessen the impact?


In fact, as we now discuss agricultural land, we should know that we are not just talking about fertile soil and ploughing by farmers. Even though a piece of land is planned for agricultural purpose, still, many forms of farming can be possible. For instance, we can use it for stereo planting. By making some ditches and filling them with soil, the land level will be elevated. The ditches can be as high as our waist level so that farmers do not even need to bend down when farming. We can even develop hydroponics, and so on. However, have the Government provided these channels and given due consideration to them? I think the Government should seriously deal with these issues. In fact, there are also some problems with developing hydroponics in factory areas, including difficulties in applying for and taking out insurance, as well as the problem with deeds of mutual covenant. I am not going into detail here, as I am now preparing a paper which may be submitted to the Government in due course. I hope that the Government can pay more attention to the parallel development of various agricultural trades, instead of putting emphasis on one single aspect. Besides, it should not inculcate the public with the idea that agriculture is only about ploughs, soil and people bending down to farm. This is a rather negative image of farmers and also belittles their roles. Next, I will talk about the issue of protection. In fact, the issue of protection concerns not only farmers; it is common farmers and fishermen. We are now engaging in agriculture and fisheries, and are not fighting a war. If we die when fighting war, our country will issue death benefits to our families. Nevertheless, our fishermen and farmers do not have such protection. There are not many types of insurance provided to them. They have to shoulder all the economic losses incurred in any natural disasters like typhoons, earthquakes, and even excessive hot water temperature, red tides, and so on. I have to criticize the Government for one thing. Sometimes when there is a natural disaster … For instance, there was an incident at the end of last year when a large amount of fish died. In the incident, there were about 50 million to 60 million dead fishes. According to the Government, it immediately arranged registration with the affected fishermen for the Emergency Relief Fund. If the Government has really done its work, the public will recognize its efforts. But the problem is that the assistance was only superficial. Can this fund really help the fishermen resume fishing operation? Under the Emergency Relief Fund, a term on Rehabilitation grants is clearly stated.


5399

However, I can tell Members one case. A large number of fish died in my friend's fish farm. He invested over $1 million in it. For the fish fry, fish food and the like, he spent more than $1 million. Just for cleaning up the mess, including clearing and transporting the dead fish, he employed six boats, six workers and used 60 tanks of fuel. He spent more than $20,000 just on cleaning up the dead fish. How much is the rehabilitation grant under the Emergency Relief Fund provided by the Government? It is $6,780. This amount cannot even pay for the cost of cleaning up. How can fishermen resume their fishing operation? When recounting this incident, I still feel the urge to cry. What about agriculture? In regard to the agricultural land for farming purpose, the shortest growth period of crops needs 21 days, which is already very quick. If the crops are damaged by frost or heavy rain, the land restoration period will be about more than a month. At least more than two months will be needed for replanting the vegetables. How much is the rehabilitation grant provided by the Government? It is about $11,160. Is it enough for farmers to purchase seeds, fertilizers for replanting? What can they make ends meet in these two months? Hence, I advise the Government not to call it a rehabilitation grant, as it is only an emergency grant. For instance, if someone sets fire on your flat … if a fire broke out in your flat, this grant can only be used for buying some bread to fill your stomach. This is not a rehabilitation grant as such. During my district visits when I see fishermen looking at their dead fish, I do not know how to face them. Therefore, the Government has to implement two measures. First, it should improve the Emergency Relief Fund so as to provide them with contingency grants. Second, it should improve the protection system for the agriculture and fisheries industries, so that they can really be protected and have the confidence to continue their development in the industries. Deputy President, I can hardly say any further. I so submit. Thank you, Deputy President. MR TOMMY CHEUNG (in Cantonese): Although a great deal of assistance has been offered by the Government over these two years to the agriculture and fisheries industries, their representative still has so many grievances. I honestly cannot imagine how the sector I represent should react.


Let me return to the Policy Address this year, which I think very highly of. This is mainly because the Chief Executive has so rarely accepted the suggestions of the Liberal Party and responded to the public demand for reforming the Medical Council of Hong Kong (MCHK) and relaxing restrictions on the importation of overseas medical practitioners. I have stated many times recently that the Government should refrain from intensifying dissension within society and focus on tackling less controversial issues concerning people's livelihood. Hence, when I met with the Chief Executive together with some fellow Members of the Liberal Party at the end of last year to reflect our views on the Policy Address to be delivered, we pointed out to him that if the Government could do something on the problems with the MCHK and the shortage of doctors, it would definitely win the applause and support of a lot of people. My thanks also go to the Chief Secretary for Administration, who has actively worked in co-operation with us, fought for us and supported us in this regard. As a matter of fact, since the public announcement made by the Government on its plan to take on board my Member's Bill and introduce a bill into this Council in the first quarter of this year for amending the Medical Registration Ordinance, I have come across a lot of people in this Council, in radio stations, on the street and they have all indicated agreement to the relevant policy initiatives. All of them, including Members of this Council, members of the public, doctors serving in public hospitals and even private doctors, have expressed no objection to my suggestions. Therefore, I am confident that the legislative amendments introduced this time will have the support from various political parties and different social classes. The only purpose of my proposed amendments is to put in place a requirement with a very low threshold, so that a message can be conveyed to the MCHK, making it very clear that there is growing public discontent about the shortage of doctors and the mechanism for handling medical complaints. In fact, a judicial review case concerning the MCHK in October last year has once again sounded the alarm for the substandard performance of the MCHK in handling public complaints against medical practitioners and the lack of appropriate guidelines, discipline and structure for handling complaints. Mr Kevin ZERVOS, the Judge who heard the judicial review case, has even


5401

pointed out that if the framework and mechanisms in place are not working adequately, serious consideration should then be given to making changes or introducing reforms necessary. Queries have recently been raised by some doctors' organizations. They are concerned that with the introduction of the proposed amendments, the ratio of appointed members to elected members in the MCHK, which now stands at 1:1, will be affected and the principle of professional autonomy will be undermined. I consider this a furtive swap of concepts, a transposition of ideas and an attempt to confuse the facts. This is a tactic employed to delay the process of introducing reforms to the MCHK and I hope the Government will not step back. Deputy President, although it is stated in the Policy Address that some 5 000 additional public hospital beds would be provided, the number of degree places in medicine, dentistry and other healthcare disciplines will only be increased by 50, 20 and 60 respectively in the next three years. The increase is in fact far too inadequate to meet the demand arising from the future development of healthcare services. Besides, a slow remedy can hardly meet our urgent needs. Hong Kong's population is ageing, the demand for healthcare services is very keen and there is a very acute shortage of doctors. It is useless to have hospital beds with inadequate doctors but what we are now facing is a pressing problem of inadequacy in both hospital beds and doctors, which requires the immediate attention of the Government. Although the Chief Executive has pointed out in the Policy Address that non-locally trained healthcare professionals will be admitted to meet local demand, I am very doubtful as to how this promise can be honoured with the measures currently in place. First of all, the MCHK on the one hand does not encourage non-locally trained doctors who do not know Chinese to practise in Hong Kong, and on the other hand it is concerned that doctors trained in the Mainland are not up to the required professional standard. Hence, Hong Kong permanent residents or Hong Kong residents who have graduated from overseas medical programmes and have obtained qualifications to practise as a medical practitioner are required to sit and pass the very demanding Licensing Examination of the MCHK if they wish to register as medical practitioners in


Hong Kong. From 2009 to 2012, the average passing rate for the Licensing Examination of the MCHK is only 25% and due to public pressure, the passing rate in recent years has slightly risen to 30% but is still below 40%. I agree that the threshold for allowing non-locally trained doctors to practise in Hong Kong should be relaxed on the premise of not compromising our healthcare service standard. For instance, should reference be made to overseas examples to abolish the Licensing Examination of the MCHK and substitute it with the graduation examination arranged by local medical schools for their students? Would it be fairer to do so? With regard to the system under which non-locally trained doctors are allowed to practise in Hong Kong with limited registration, can the one-year validity period of a limited registration be extended to three years or even longer so as to encourage such medical professionals to come to settle down in Hong Kong with their entire families? Besides, since there is a short supply of specialist doctors in Hong Kong, why not follow the example of overseas places such as Singapore to allow specialist doctors who graduated from medical programmes in recognized places and universities to practise in Hong Kong with a view to addressing our pressing needs? Deputy President, I would like to reiterate that my Member's Bill is just a starting point. The Government should expeditiously draw up a clear-cut blueprint for healthcare reform in Hong Kong and put forward bold and decisive reform proposals for the regulatory framework of healthcare professionals, the admission of non-locally trained healthcare professionals to tackle the problem of manpower shortage, the speeding up of the enquiry procedures of the MCHK, the inclusion of more lay members in the MCHK to avoid investigation by its own people, and so on. The relevant work should be completed before the expiry of the term of office of the Chief Executive in 2017. Deputy President, the Chief Secretary for Administration has stated publicly that she could not understand why Mr Tommy CHEUNG would step out of line and involve himself in such healthcare issues. Hence, let me now switch to talk about some issues concerning the catering sector which I represent. As indicated by a lot of statistical data, the catering and retail industries are experiencing a dark period. The value of total retail sales has dropped to a record low since the SARS period and the catering industry has also shown no sign of recovery. Based on the seasonally adjusted series, total restaurant


5403

receipts have decreased by 1.2% in value and 1.8% in volume in the fourth quarter of last year, implying that both the actual receipts and the number of customers have decreased. Due to the further weakening of local consumer spending and the decline in number of visitors to Hong Kong, business in both industries has taken a nose dive. However, the Chief Executive has failed to sense the urgency of the people and set out in the Policy Address the Government's response measures for the worsening market situation. This is a bit disappointing to me. I can only place my hope on the Budget to be delivered and look forward to hearing some good news then. The Government should at least make reference to the measures adopted during the SARS period in 2003 to provide temporary loans to operators of small and medium restaurants and shops and waive their license fees. Deputy President, given the present difficult times, I hope more business facilitation measures would be implemented. The Government has done a good job last year to accept the views expressed by trade members and extend the maximum validity period of a liquor licence to two years. Is it also possible for the Government to consider allowing food premises with good operation records to renew their license biennially instead of annually? This can relieve the burden of trade operators and also help to reduce the workload of the administration departments concerned so that manpower may be deployed to expedite the processing of other license applications, such as applications for a liquor license or outside seating accommodation of food premises. I particularly hope that a review of the meeting arrangements of the Liquor Licensing Board can be conducted to explore the feasibility of holding additional meetings to speed up the vetting and approval process, especially during the summer vacation. As far as I know, a leave of one month for the Liquor Licensing Board every year during summer but I came across a complex case last summer. I understand that the officers in charge of the case in the Food and Environmental Hygiene Department had already done their best to help but regrettably, as members of the Liquor Licensing Board were on leave, the case had to be put on hold for one whole month even though the applicant had already gone through all other necessary procedures. In the interim, the bar in question was forced to suspend operation and its owner was made mentally and physically exhausted in dealing with all sorts of problems arising, such as the livelihood of his employees


who live from hand to mouth. In the beginning of this year, I heard that he had already passed away. Although his death may not have any direct relationship with the case, I still feel bad about it. Deputy President, in addition to the problems concerning liquor licence applications, trade members have also informed me lately that due to the incident of excessive lead content in drinking water, the Government has vigorously stepped up its regulation of fresh water supply systems, thus causing a serious delay in processing applications for the installation of such systems in restaurants. The undersupply of skilled plumbers has already made it difficult for trade operators to engage registered plumbers to carry out the necessary inspection work and worse still, due to the recent upsurge of workload in the Water Supplies Department, it takes them more time than before to get the Department's replies to their enquiries concerning inspection work and exchange documents with the Department. Things should not be allowed to go on like this. Trade members are willing to follow the Government's practice of stepping up regulation in this regard but the authorities concerned should have adequate ability to perform their roles. The Government should endeavour to increase manpower and expedite the vetting and approval process as soon as possible, lest the business environment of trade operators may be undermined and we may face a situation in which a number of parties will suffer a loss. Deputy President, I have reservation about the Government's plan to formulate exit plans for public markets and Cooked Food Hawker Bazaars (CFHBs) with high vacancy rates. According to the Audit Commission, Yu Chau West Street CFHB in Sham Shui Po has the highest vacancy rate but as revealed by press reports published earlier, a site visit to the CFHB has confirmed that an empty seat can hardly be found during lunch hours. It can thus be seen that stall vacancy rates should not be the only factor of consideration in drawing up a relocation plan. As I was a member of the Provisional Urban Council nearly 20 years ago and have for many times handled issues relating to wet markets and CFHBs, I know very well that the issue of high vacancy rates of public markets and CFHBs is actually a problem left over by history. There was no planning at all when public markets were set up by the Government at the outset and the only objective was to relocate all illegal hawkers on the streets to these markets. Hence, there may be several tens of stalls selling chicken or vegetable in a single market, while each stall has very limited space with no air-conditioning system. With these


5405

inherent deficiencies in their hardware, the planning and design of public markets have already become outdated. It would be very difficult for these markets to attract customer flow and facilitate business expansion, thus resulting in a scene of desolation in some markets today. Deputy President, times have changed and in order to attract more customer flow, tenants should be provided with a comfortable and bright environment which allows natural convection of fresh air. The place should be complemented with a good planning in trade mix in order to facilitate the provision of diversified services and a wide range of goods. It is only under such circumstances that healthy competition instead of vicious competition can be promoted among tenants and good business management can be achieved. As witnessed by all of us in recent years, problems do arise from the operation of the Link Asset Management Limited (the Link). This is the reason why stall traders operating in the market of Cheung Fat Estate went on strike yesterday. Markets selling wet goods are now getting fewer and fewer and as quite a number of them have been sold to the Link, members of the public are forced to patronize supermarkets. In times of downturn of the market environment, it is particularly necessary for the Government to actively deploy and allocate resources to complete the refurbishment of markets at a faster pace, so that the operation space of small shop tenants will be improved with a view to revitalizing the local economy and creating more local job opportunities. Lastly, I would like to add that the Government should never use this as an excuse for introducing rental increases. It is never too late to increase rent when the business environment of these markets have improved and the customer flow has increased. Deputy President, I pin high hope on the Food Truck Pilot Scheme (the Pilot Scheme) to be launched by the Government and expect that it would promote a more diversified development of the catering industry of Hong Kong. Although some have criticized that the cost of setting up a food truck is $600,000 and it could thus hardly be described as a business run on a small capital, it must still be noted that the start-up cost is indeed lower as compared with that required for the setting up of a restaurant under a tenancy agreement of at least one year. Moreover, as the Government is prepared to provide financial support under a loan scheme and participants of the Pilot Scheme will be selected through a competition, it is believed that the creativity and quality of food offered can be ensured to consolidate Hong Kong's status as a gourmet city.


However, the Government should understand that a consensus has already been reached in this Council over the creation of more room for the trading of cheap goods in Hong Kong. I certainly realize that the Government also has its difficulties because there are always voices of opposition in the local community on the other side. I therefore have always said that the Government should proactively strike a balance between the needs of both sides and identify solutions to problems, such as introducing advanced equipment and innovative business models for stall traders, striving to minimize environmental nuisance, or allowing the offer of concessions to residents by stall traders, so as to reduce resistance in the local community as much as possible. Deputy President, finally, I would like to say a few words on the Food and Health Bureau's plan to redevelop the food safety laboratory under the Government Laboratory, which I believe will help to enhance the efficiency of food testing work. I welcome this but would like to point out that apart from stepping up the testing of food available in the local market, testing of the sulphur content in cooking oil as well as genetic testing of cooking oil should also be conducted. For example, testing must be conducted to find out if edible lard contains any genes of cow or chicken, thereby ascertaining if "gutter oil" has been provided for public consumption. With the assistance of such test results, though it may not be adequate to prove a case and institute a prosecution, the Government will be able to grasp the actual situation and take investigative actions. Compare to the formulation of additional food license conditions and imposition of all gate-keeping responsibilities on trade members, this should be a fairer and more effective way to deal with the matter. Deputy President, I so submit. MR MICHAEL TIEN (in Cantonese): Deputy President, I deliberately wait until this session to speak because Chief Secretary for Administration Carrie LAM, whom I most respect, is present. The two issues which I am going to talk about also have something to do with the Chief Secretary for Administration. First of all, I would like to talk about the issue of commodity price, in particular prices of goods sold in markets. A number of colleagues have spoken on the management of markets just now but I would express my views on the subject from a different angle. Chief Secretary, you would never believe that after being elected as a Member of this Council, the strongest public resentment I


5407

come across in local community is neither about political dissension nor on government administration, but about the ever-increasing prices of food items sold in markets, that is, the issue of commodity prices. Members of the general public are convinced that after an investment has been made by the Link Asset Management Limited (the Link) to carry out refurbishment works for markets under its management, shop tenants are bound to pay higher rents because after an investment of hundreds of million dollars has been made by the Link for refurbishment, a rent increase becomes necessary. As shop tenants are made to pay higher rents, a price increase is inevitable. Chief Secretary for Administration, you do not hold a Master of Business Administration (MBA) degree but I do, and therefore you have to listen to my views in this regard. This has affected the daily meals of grass-roots people since they are convinced that a rent increase is inevitable after an investment has been made. I agree to this point of view but a blind spot lies in the question of whether, consequent to a rent increase, it is strictly necessary to impose a price increase. The concept is widely accepted but is it backed up by any objective economic principle? Chief Secretary for Administration, I think you also realize that the answer is in the negative. To put it simply, in the face of surging property prices, there is only one way available for the Government to tackle the problem, that is, to increase supply. We all know that in a market-oriented economy, it will not be possible to regulate prices with the introduction of government policies since this is not a planned economy. In order to have ensure effective market regulation, we must return to the basic principle of supply and demand, a concept which we got to know when we were taking the course of Economics 101 in school. The selling price is always determined by supply and demand and has nothing to do with the rate of rent increase. Hence, if it is suggested that the root of soaring prices lies in the rent increase imposed after the Link's investment for refurbishment, as a MBA degree holder, I have to say that this is totally wrong since the most important thing is after all an increase in supply. An increase in supply will bring about greater competition and by then, a price increase will never be imposed because shop tenants will only go for a higher sales volume and customer flow. This is an eternal truth under a market mechanism and a capitalist system. If anyone wants to challenge me, please feel free to share your views with me later.


The Legislative Council election, which is held once every four years, will again be held this year and Chief Secretary for Administration, I think you can also foresee that it will once again be a designated performance for candidates running in the election to hold some Members, though I was not among them, accountable for supporting the listing of the Link back in those years. In this connection, I would like to share two photos with grass-roots people who are watching television broadcast of this Council meeting. The condition of a market after refurbishment by the Link is shown in one of them. It can be seen that fish tanks are fitted with drainage channels so that public passageways can always be kept clean. Trolleys are available to save stall operators the trouble of conveying food items with plastic bags. The market is also equipped with air-conditioning systems, which are seldom found in markets under the management of the Food and Environmental Hygiene Department (FEHD). Chief Secretary for Administration, the best part lies in the presentation and display of goods. Rules have been drawn up by the Link on how vegetable should be displayed and how it should be complemented with lighting design, and the aim is to enhance the attractiveness of the goods sold. With the instructions given by the Link on how stall operators should display and present their goods to potential customers, people passing by will find the goods attractive even though they have no intention to purchase them. Chief Secretary for Administration, how about markets under the management of the FEHD? Let us take a look at the second photo here. Not only is the place more than untidy, a multi-level approach is also adopted for the display of food items, with the lowest level of them on the ground. We can see effluent near the plastic tray here and sometimes we may find rats around here. The stall here has not open for business for two weeks and stall operators of the neighbouring stalls have occupied the stall space for placing miscellaneous articles. Stalls and shops which are closed for business can be described as kisses of death for any shopping centres and markets because customers will be left with fewer choices with the presence of a number of inactive stalls and shops. The problem of sparse visitor flow may then arise and all other stalls and shops which are open for business will ultimately suffer. However, this is an uncontrollable situation because on account of certain political reasons, the Government can find no way to penalize these stall operators. Although warning letters may be issued, these stall operators may still choose to close their stalls for business since the Government does not dare to drive them away. It seems that the Government can do nothing about a lot of problems.


5409

As we all know, it is a long-standing problem that no air-conditioning system is provided in many markets. As for dry and clean passageways, it would be fair to say that what we see in this photo is comparatively desirable. I wish to tell all of you that the clean and tidy market we see here is managed by the Link and is located in Tin Shui Estate of Tin Shui Wai, while the market shown in this photo is Tai Kiu Market under the FEHD in Yuen Long, which is in the vicinity of Tin Shui Wai. Can you guess how great the difference in commodity prices of the two markets is? 100% or 200%? You are all wrong and there is only a 20% difference in commodity prices of the two markets. Let me put a further question to the Chief Secretary for Administration: If the monopoly of the Link does not exist in Tin Shui Wai and the Government is willing to provide a public market in the district, the latter market, despite its conditions, will still enjoy certain inherent advantages since there will be no need for local residents to travel to Yuen Long for grocery shopping, right? In the face of competition, there will certainly be downward adjustments in the sale prices of goods in the market of Tin Shui Estate and according to my estimation, in districts where both a private market and a public market are available, there will only be a difference of up to 10% in commodity prices of the two markets. I would like to ask grass-roots people who are watching the television broadcast of this Council meeting: Do you want to have this choice? If both a clean and tidy market under the Link and a public market hopefully not in such a condition are available in their communities, grass-roots people will be given a choice since goods are at least sold at cheaper prices in the latter and there will be a 10% difference in commodity prices of the two markets. Why should I raise the matter today? No one ever considers that I would be interested in talking about the management of markets and people always think that I seldom go grocery shopping at markets. I raise the matter today because it is heard that the Chief Secretary for Administration has reservation about the resumption of construction of public markets. In her opinion, it may not be a good idea for the FEHD to bear a greater responsibility and engage in such commercial activities because with a deficit of over $200 million recorded each year in this regard at present, it is possible that the annual deficit incurred will fall into a bottomless pit if several more public markets are provided and increase to $300 million or even $400 million. Chief Secretary, I know very well that you have your own reasons for arriving at such a decision. As a matter of fact, there are many constraints associated with the management of such affairs by civil servants and you have been put in a very difficult position by the strike staged by


victims and their many sob stories. Therefore, I have been trying hard to convince the Secretary and I hope he has reflected to you an issue which you have to consider sooner or later. Since we already have quite a number of public markets, it will make the people of Hong Kong even happier if they are given a choice in each district with the provision of both public and private markets. Under such circumstances, you are indeed correct in deciding that the FEHD should not be made to shoulder a greater responsibility. This is the reason why I have suggested that it is time for the Government to consider setting up a statutory body for the purpose. There are many people with good reputation and professional knowledge in our society who are willing to devote their time to raising the standard of public markets in Hong Kong. As mentioned by a number of fellow Members just now, it would be necessary to deal with the related hygiene issues, environmental problems and the compulsory requirement that market stalls should be open for business. Regulation and control should be exercised by the proposed statutory body if market stalls are not open for business, stall operators have placed miscellaneous articles beyond their stall areas, or stall operators have run a number of stalls engaging in the same industry. I have asked the Link why the prices of goods sold in the markets under its management could, instead of 30% or even 40% more expensive, be regulated to levels comparable with the prices of goods sold in public markets. In reply, the Link has explained to me that according to its latest practice, there are express provisions which require that bidders for pork stalls in a market should work for different employers. The same requirement also applies to bidders for vegetable stalls or fish stalls, meaning that a single operator will not be allowed to bid for two stalls engaging in the same industry in a market. This is something which a statutory body can achieve. But can the Government do so? I am not sure. I only know that there are always complaints from the public and victims are many. In other words, if markets are under good regulation, visitor flow will naturally be promoted. Yet, the increase in visitor flow does not necessarily lead to the charging of market rent because it is not a statutory body's aim to make a profit. Hence, as long as it is not running in deficit, express provisions may be drawn up on the payment of 90% of the market rent by stall tenants of public markets. Revenue from rent will be invested in the further development of public markets so that reasonable regulation will be imposed to boost visitor flow, which in turn will provide business opportunities and keep the sale prices of


5411

goods at low levels. Therefore, I say these words with earnestness since this is such a good opportunity for me to share the idea of setting up a statutory body with you when you are present in this debate session, and I understand that you will also be present in another debate session. It is time for the Government to let go, Chief Secretary for Administration, and I think you really have to let go now. Why take the trouble to manage public markets by civil servants? The provision of community care services for the elderly is another issue which the Chief Secretary for Administration is most familiar with. As we all know, in the face of an ageing population, there is an ever-increasing demand for elderly care services in society. I agree with the views of the Government that our long-term care for elders is over dependent on the services provided by residential care homes for the elderly (RCHEs). Due to the undersupply of subsidized RCHE places, as at the end of November 2015, applicants have to wait more than three years for the allocation of RCHE places. In my opinion, only elderly people with genuine need for 24-hour care should be admitted to RCHEs. When I pay visits to RCHEs with gifts for elders during festive seasons every year, it has always come to my attention that many elderly people in these RCHEs are actually in very good health and have no particular need for special care. The problem is that they do not know what to do at home and thus, arrangements for admitting them to RCHEs are made by their family with the mere hope of having some friends to chat with them. Hence, effective community care services may reduce or delay elderly people's need for admission to RCHEs. We can in fact focus on improving the bodily functions of users of elderly care services and most important of all, slowing down the pace of degeneration in their cognitive ability. A person's senility is not solely determined by the deterioration of his bodily functions but very often, it may be a result of his leading a very lonely, boring and dull life day after day. Therefore, it is necessary for the Government to strengthen community care services. According to overseas experience, under the funding mode of "money-follows-the-user", services of a high quality may be provided at a reasonable price by promoting the development of a private market in community care services. Therefore, we believe that by inviting participation of some private organizations with relevant experience in the second phase of the scheme, great help will definitely be rendered to promote the diversified and balanced


development of the sector. As we all know, requirements are often set for awarding a government contract, and these private organizations have also indicated their wish to spread their wings and fly high in the industry with the setting up of more day care centres for the elderly. However, in order to do so, apart from meeting the requirements set by the Social Welfare Department and providing the required services, it is also their wish to be granted seed money for the purchase of the necessary equipment to develop an entire set of procedures. As I now understand, only subsidized RCHEs are eligible for application for seed money and I hope the Government will consider conducting vetting and approval of genuinely eligible private RCHEs so that they will be allowed to apply. In my opinion, it is a good thing in the long run to provide day care services since elderly people using such services may spend time at home with their family at nights, while get together with other elderly people in day care centres during the daytime so that they will not be left alone at home. I think this will make their lives more meaningful. I have spent two nights in a caged home a few years ago and have repeatedly shared with others that among the 30 caged bedspace dwellers there, there was an elder who spent 24 hours a day watching television. He never talked to others and just kept staring at the television. He could remember vividly each and every word uttered by a particular government official on a particular day in a particular month but he had never chatted with his neighbours. I always feel that there is not much meaning in living a life like this. He never left home, never chatted with anyone because he said he had no friend. Besides, Chief Secretary for Administration, I would also like to talk about the long-term shortage of manpower faced by the elderly services sector, particularly care workers and enrolled nurses which has a vacancy rate of 20%. Owing to an ageing population, there will definitely be sustainable development of residential care services for the elderly in the long run. The elderly population is 1 million at present but it will increase to 2.5 million about 30 years later. Therefore, it is obvious to all that the elderly services sector may become the single sector with the greatest number of employees in Hong Kong a few decades later, but how can there be sufficient manpower to meet the manpower needs of the industry? It will not be possible to rely on imported workers but it also appears that young people are not interested in joining the industry.


5413

However, I have chatted with some young people and they have indicated otherwise. Some of them are not interested in their studies and have thus failed to achieve good academic results. Hence, although they wish to enrol in professional courses such as enrolled nurse training programme, they are not admitted by higher education institutions. Such being the case, the mode of "hire and then train" under the Navigation Scheme for Young Persons in Care Services (the Navigation Scheme) currently implemented by the Government is, in my opinion, very suitable for developing such services. Operators in elderly services sector may consider hiring young people who have no other qualification apart from completing a one-year or two-year training course of the Youth Pre-employment Training Programme after graduation from secondary school so that they may learn on the job. They will surely keep up with their efforts if they are determined to pursue a career in the sector. Why? It is because no one would be willing to keep on working as a care worker and perform such obnoxious tasks as cleaning the body of elderly people in RCHEs after 10 or 20 years. It is only natural that young people will look forward to the opportunity to move upward and thus, as long as they are willing to keep up with their efforts, a clear career path will be mapped out for them to enrol in enrolled nurse training programme in open universities. Employment in the elderly services sector may provide them with a chance to practice as care workers, which will bring forth the determination to pursue career development in the sector and support their enrolment in enrolled nurse training programme, thereby obtaining a recognized professional qualification. It is another matter as to whether they will continue to serve the sector after they have acquired a professional qualification, or whether they will change job to work in hospitals or somewhere else. No matter what, they have contributed to the manpower supply and the expansion in labour force of Hong Kong, which is not a bad thing indeed. Therefore, I very much hope that consideration would be given by the Government in this regard. Secretary CHEUNG is now present at the meeting and I would like to ask him to consider how the Navigation Scheme can be extended. I have met with some young people who are quite interested in pursuing a career in the elderly services sector and they really have a mind to serve elderly people, treating them in a way as if they are their own grandparents. If some incentive can be given to them by the Government for enrolling in diploma or higher diploma programmes, they may be promoted to the rank of


assistant supervisor or supervisor in the future. This is the only way to lay a foundation for the long-term development of the sector. Deputy President, I shall stop here for the time being. MR CHAN HAN-PAN (in Cantonese): Deputy President, quite a number of initiatives in regard to healthcare are proposed in the Policy Address this year. The ones that we like more and find commendable are the offering of vaccinations against cervical cancer to young girls and the increase in hospital beds. Moreover, we have been concerned about the shortage of operating theatres in the Tuen Mun Hospital. Today, I see that the Government has released a document saying that a funding application will be made to the Public Works Subcommittee, then the Finance Committee. Yet, we all know that filibuster is now a serious problem. I hope that Members can stop filibustering and pass the funding request relating to increasing the number of operating theatres in the Tuen Mun Hospital. In regard to public markets, Members say that the markets under the Link are beautifully furnished and their environments are comfortable. However, we should not appraise the operation of a market simply by looking at its furnishings. I hope Members can talk with stall operators to get an idea of the room for business survival in such markets. Public markets are very important to hawkers and the public in terms of livelihood and living. All along, there have been suggestions on adopting other management systems for public markets, such as out-sourcing. The Audit Commission points out that over the past few years, public markets have been operated with deficits. This indicates that the modus operandi is far from satisfactory and must be criticized. However, I hope that the Food and Health Bureau can hold on as markets are very important to people's livelihood. We must not focus only on an annual loss of $100 million or $200 million. We must also consider whether markets can help commodity prices to remain stable. Rents in public markets are low, and this is definitely of help to the public in their living. When we say that low rent can help, we certainly do not mean that the Government is managing the markets well. Rather, I think the Government should do better in this regard. It should take a look at the business


5415

environment of the markets and consider if their competitiveness can be enhanced. I believe that if the markets become more competitive and the business environment is improved, stall operators will surely say yes when they are asked to pay higher rents. Yet, if the environment remains unchanged, with a high temperature during the summer and wetness everywhere, the people will grumble if rents go up. So, it is my strong hope that the Government can devote more resources to public markets, including the installation of air-conditioners and the re-introduction of markets under the Food and Environmental Hygiene Department in some newly developed regions. Ordinary people are sensitive to livelihood issues and it is very easy to provoke their emotions. They are concerned about whether foods sold in the markets are good and whether the streets are clean. Therefore, we can see from the Mong Kok riot that rioters would always target on people's greatest concerns in a bid to stir up social unrest and achieve their political motives. I of course condemn violence and hope that rioters will not be spared. But at the same time, I also hope that the Government can pay more attention to small livelihood issues, so as not to give rioters any excuses. I hope that the Government can consider the idea of delegating the management of certain livelihood-related matters to the districts, including the cleaning of public places and the management of markets, so that the districts can take immediate contingent measures to tackle problems. As the District Council members can look at things from people's perspectives, they can urge the Government to do better. Therefore, I hope that the Chief Secretary for Administration can consider delegating the management of municipal services to the districts so that adjustments can be made. In respect of medicine and health, the Democratic Alliance for the Betterment and Progress of Hong Kong (DAB) has over the years devoted a lot of manpower and resources to the issue of Chinese medicine. In respect of medicine, the Government has done two things: the compilation of the Hong Kong Chinese Materia Medica Standards (the Standards) and the establishment of a registration system. For a decade or so, government resources devoted to Chinese medicine have been spent on these two aspects. The Government says that in order to compile the Standards, there must be good testing. Thus, it has put in massive resources. In the past, whenever we talked about Chinese medicine, the Government would say that it was committed to supporting the development of Chinese medicine as the Standards were being compiled. The


Government however is reversing the order of things. Let us think about it. Is it sort of kidding to say that having a testing regime is helping the development of Chinese medicine? Moreover, when it comes to the development of the Chinese medicine industry, can we say that we have helped them if no resources have been used to help the industry develop and enhance its productivity and quality? If the registration system is good, it can guarantee the quality Chinese medicine in Hong Kong. Unfortunately, we have a poor system. If no changes are made, I firmly believe that even Chinese medicine manufacturers with a long tradition in Hong Kong will also be unable to meet the requirements of the registration system. The possible outcome is that no manufacturer can survive and no new medicines can be successfully registered. My worry is not pure imagination. You only need to look at the data to get the picture. Over the past few years, have any new medicines ever been offered in the market under this registration system? Have any traditional Chinese medicines been successfully registered in Hong Kong? I do not think I have to go into detail in this regard. Therefore, the DAB has come up with a set of policies for the Government to consider, including an early review of the existing ordinance on registration since it is stifling the survival of the Chinese medicine industry. In addition, we hope that the Government can set up a $2-billion Chinese medicine development fund. Unfortunately, the Government has not accepted our proposal this time. Yet, we firmly believe that if the Government implements this plan, the $2-billion development fund can really help the industry to develop. Meanwhile, we have made reference to many countries and found that separate institutions are responsible for the monitoring and development of the pharmaceutical industry. Let us look at the Mainland government as an example. The China Food and Drug Administration is responsible for the monitoring of Chinese medicine, and there is also an administration for the development of the Chinese medicine to assist in the consideration of market development and addressing of problems encountered by the industry. At present, Hong Kong has only placed the Chinese medicine industry under the Department of Health, which only plays a monitoring role and there is no one to take care of the industry's development. Under such circumstances, how can the industry develop well? In the Mainland, the GDP share of the Chinese medicine market has almost caught up with that of Western medicine. But how big is the market of Chinese medicine in Hong Kong? Our market is shrinking all the time.


5417

Thus, I hope that the Government can carefully consider the set of policies put forward by the DAB regarding the development for Chinese medicine. We are revising the second edition of our proposals and will submit it to the Government for consideration once we have finished. Talking about pension, livelihood protection for the elderly is very important. I am also aware that the Government is conducting a consultation on the issue but there are a lot of controversies. I believe more time for consideration is required before a consensus can be reached. However, I hope that policies which are not controversial can be implemented first, including our earlier proposal to lower the age for the non-means tested "fruit grant" to 65, that is, elderly people reaching 65 can get the "fruit grant" without undergoing a means test. Some elderly people have told us that they have to spend as much as they can until they are left with a certain amount to collect the "fruit grant". I do not think this is satisfactory. So, I hope that the Government can consider lowering the age to 65 so that elderly people reaching 65 can register at the first instance for the "fruit grant". In my opinion, if the Government can do this before retirement protection for the elderly is introduced, elderly people will feel the Government's commitment towards the implementation of retirement protection. Deputy President, I so submit. PROF JOSEPH LEE (in Cantonese): Deputy President, I would like to focus on healthcare and elderly services. It seems that more treatment is devoted to these two subjects in the Policy Address this year, but there is nothing new, as most of the measures simply put old wine in a new bottle. First, I will discuss a measure regarded as new by both the Government and I, that is, a measure to deal with the situation that allied health practitioners in Hong Kong are still left unregulated after 10 years of discussion on healthcare manpower planning. As a matter of fact, practitioners like dieticians, speech therapists or psychologists have never been subject to regulation before. Indeed, discussions on this topic have been going on for more than 10 years. In 2013, we recommended to the Government an administrative regulation scheme under which allied health professions would voluntarily maintain centralized registers with the Government for record. Each profession would have its own register, which would be open to public inspection so that members


of the public could search for qualified dieticians, speech therapists and psychologists. The suggestion was really a good one. In the discussions, the Government also mentioned conducting a study in collaboration with The Chinese University of Hong Kong on the criteria of regulation. This is what I have referred to as an administrative scheme. We certainly welcome the launch of a voluntary accredited registers scheme for supplementary healthcare professions announced in the Policy Address this year. In fact, we have been discussing the issue over the past three years, and the inclusion of this measure in the Policy Address has clearly demonstrated the Government's endorsement and recognition of this arrangement. We surely welcome this move. Now that the scheme has been incorporated in the Policy Address, it still requires resources before it can be implemented. Similar remarks were made by the sector and many other people during discussions about voluntary regulation conducted in the past three years. As the Policy Address has now confirmed the launch of the registration scheme, we of course need to discuss with the Food and Health Bureau or the Department of Health before the proposal can materialize. Since the Government has already raised this issue in the Policy Address, then apart from dealing with the ensuing technical arrangements, we also hope that resources can really be allocated in the upcoming Budget, so that ideas and discussions can turn into a concrete scheme. By then, the Department of Health will keep centralized registers, under which some formerly unregulated healthcare professions will be subject to regulation via administrative means. Resources are needed to achieve this. We hope the Government can affirm this through the Budget to push through the scheme. Considering the importance of funding support, we urge that the Government must provide resources in this regard. We wish that the Budget will cover relevant complementary measures and distribute resources for implementing and optimizing this accreditation system which is recognized by the sector and is beneficial to the public. This is what I have referred to as a new measure. Apart from the new measure above, there are some other measures which have barely achieved any progress, such as the measures related to manpower. The Government has mentioned the $200 billion to be devoted in the coming decade ― no, the word "devote" should not be used. Adhering to the Government's wording, we should say $200 billion has been "earmarked" for rebuilding hospitals and providing additional beds, and so on. In fact, we do not need to bother the Government to put these issues into the Policy Address this year, as the Hospital Authority (HA) already has all such projects in the pipeline.


5419

But the Policy Address has announced that funds will be earmarked. That said, we have in fact learnt a lesson from the previous Government who earmarked $50 billion for healthcare reform. At present, it seems that only $4 billion has been drawn from the sum, yet the Government indicates that $40 billion has already been spent in total, with only $10 billion left. So, what are we going to do with this? Besides feeling worried, we realize that the healthcare reform is yet to be implemented. But this is another issue, and the Policy Address has been silent in this regard. In fact, we surely welcome the move to inject resources to improve public healthcare services. The $200 billion earmarked can contribute to enhancing services offered by various hospitals over the next 10 years. But this is nothing new, as this has been proposed before. I hope the Government can truly draw the $200 billion out this time, so that relevant stakeholders, whether they are the HA or someone else, can really formulate some concrete action plans, so that the public can be notified of the priority of these projects in the coming 10 years. During a meeting I attended yesterday, the management of a hospital mentioned their wish to improve certain areas of their services. So, can this hospital bring forth any proposals? Despite having earmarked the fund, is the Government really going to distribute the money? These are the issues of concern among stakeholders of the public healthcare sector. Moreover, we do not want to see that this turns out to be a fantasy in the end. The Government has to put words into practice. It must not just give an empty talk of earmarking the amount, but claims that no more fund is available when stakeholders really queue up for funding. We do hope that the $200 billion can offer some help. Despite earmarking the sum, the services provided in this regard are not new at all. Nonetheless, one thing that the Government has not touched upon is manpower. If it is earmarking $200 billion to improve the services provided by so many hospitals within 10 years, how come manpower is not needed in this respect? The Policy Address announces a measure to increase the number of degree places in medicine, dentistry and other healthcare disciplines by 50, 20 and 68 respectively, yet this is indeed an existing measure which has nothing to do with the tasks over the next 10 years. If we are adding some 5 000 beds over the next decade, why on earth do we not need anybody to meet the additional workloads? We need more doctors, nurses, allied health practitioners and other


supporting staff. Why don't the authorities mention this at all? This is worrying. Is the Government just giving hollow words? This is truly an important issue, especially after such a marathon discussion over a period of at least 20 years. An essential issue regarding healthcare manpower planning is ratio. What is the nurse to patient ratio? What is the ratio of head nurses for clinical supervision to frontline nurses? These are highly important questions. As we have put in great detail just now, the result of our survey conducted last year was undesirable. Let me repeat this one more time: in Hong Kong, a nurse has to take care of around 12 patients under our public healthcare system. Regarding the international standard, other countries have enacted legislation to define a nurse to patient ratio of only one to six. Does the Government need to do some long-term planning? Of course, the Secretary will say, "Don't worry. We will publish a report soon." We have long been waiting for such a report, yet we are also wondering about its content. We look forward to any new idea from the Government. To our disappointment, the Policy Address has given no indication in this respect. On the other hand, the Government of the last term pledged in the course of deliberation on public healthcare services that chiropractic treatment would be added to the public healthcare system. The chiropractic sector is nothing new. They are regulated in Hong Kong under the law by the Chiropractors Council, the statutory body of the discipline. Apart from not being granted the authority to issue medical certificates by now, the chiropractic sector is absolutely lawful. Adding chiropractors to the public healthcare system can certainly reduce the number of cases on the orthopaedics waiting list, such as cases related to pains in the back, neck or arm. They can also ease the workloads of physiotherapy and reduce the queue for such treatment. After the issue was mentioned by the previous Government, it was mentioned again by the current Government in the beginning of its term, but without a reason, it is not mentioned anymore now, nor is this mentioned in the Policy Address. Why doesn't the Government offer such a good service? I do not know if there is any internal struggle. Perhaps there are some sort of politics going on between orthopaedists and chiropractors. But these are not the problems of my concern, I am simply puzzled as to why the people are not offered such a good service under the public healthcare system. This is also a kind of service that will help alleviate the pressure on the waiting list.


5421

The third argument that I would like to present is the treatment of rare diseases. I did also mention some cases of rare diseases at the Council meeting last year. We urge the Government to take notice of some rare diseases in Hong Kong, such as mucopolysaccharidosis, myelofibrosis or Pompe disease, and so on. However, that they are patients with rare diseases does not mean they do not need help. At the moment, there is no effective government policy to systematically support these patients and inform them about the complementary facilities to be provided by the Government in the future. I am not going to illustrate the importance of policy formulation, as the cabinet comprising so many Secretaries of Departments and Directors of Bureaux sitting here all know this very well. In respect of such a policy, many other countries like the United States, Australia, Taiwan and Singapore have already enacted legislation on preventing and treating rare diseases, so that patients with these diseases can clearly know of any help that they can receive from the public healthcare system or the government, as well as the resources deployed on them. However, in Hong Kong, these are exactly the group of people who are given no help. They have to shoulder the burden of these rare diseases by themselves, either economically or mentally. I want to remind the Government that no one likes to have disease, especially rare diseases. They suffer from these diseases probably for different reasons, but the Government cannot simply assert that there is no precise definition or international standard. In fact, the World Health Organization (WHO) has offered relevant definitions. Why don't we refer to these definitions then? If we intend to learn from foreign countries, we should study whether it is feasible to do so. If not, we simply need to develop a policy that can help those patients. We must not forget that they are also people of Hong Kong, though they do not form the majority. When formulating its healthcare policy, the Government is duty bound to identify more effective means to take care of them. To our disappointment, the Policy Address has made no mention of this. On primary healthcare, the Government has proposed a new measure to implement a pilot scheme through the Community Care Fund for providing teenage girls from low-income families with a free cervical cancer vaccination. Actually, HPV vaccine is not new after all, as it has been on the market for a few years. Of course, we have no problem with the introduction of the scheme, and we welcome this indeed. We certainly welcome the measure to offer protection to the social class which is relatively less well off. That said, I want to ask if the Government intends to change its policy right away, and whether it will only subsidize those who cannot bear the cost with preventive care for free? Cervical


cancer vaccination is by no means cheap. Does the Government mean that those who can afford the cost should receive vaccination at their own expenses? Is this what the Government implies? Has the Government considered if the policy will send such a message to the people? Of course, we welcome this measure announced in the Policy Address, but we also look forward to a clarification from the Government, as the last thing we want is to see the Government being criticized after introducing this policy for splitting up different strata in society, in which those who have the means will need to pay for the vaccination by themselves, while the Government will "finish off" the vaccination for those who cannot afford on their own. Though I have put it rather coarsely, but I am afraid the Government will be challenged and queried if it has changed its policy. Is this the way how our dual-track system encompassing the public and private sectors are administered? I do not know, yet I hope the Government can clarify my view on this scheme. On top of the cervical cancer vaccination above, I also brought up the subject of primary prevention when I spoke in other sessions. For example, will the Government consider providing mammography service to women over 40 years old for breast cancer prevention? While men are often neglected, we have our own health issues even though we look alright. For example, men at my age may encounter prostate-related problems. Will the Government impose any preventive measures as a means of support? With regard to these questions, the Government has given no response so far. To my disappointment again, the Policy Address has totally ignored this issue as well. After discussing public healthcare services, I will talk about the support given to pre-school children. The Policy Address has also mentioned such service, child assessment services to children with developmental disorders in particular. This is of course a good step to take, as more resources will be deployed to set up an additional assessment centre with a view to commencing operation and benefiting these children within six months. We certainly welcome this measure, it is not difficult to establish one more Child Assessment Centre, but we must bear in mind that software will also be required, by this I mean human resources. In order to really help these children with developmental disorders, the Centre also needs a team of qualified experts and professionals, as well as adequate manpower. Deputy President, I very much hope the Government, upon heeding my advice, will arrange enough manpower to operate the Centre when it commences service. This is a relatively important point of my argument.


5423

Regarding the Pilot Scheme on On-site Pre-school Rehabilitation Services, this is nothing new. Under the Scheme, the Government will join hands with 16 non-governmental organizations in the provision of outreaching service to children with special needs from kindergarten-cum-child care centres. This is a desirable step to take. The Government indeed utilized the Lotteries Fund last year, or 2015-2016, to offer assistance in this area. Certainly this is a good measure. I believe Secretary Matthew CHEUNG knows very well that, with only 2 900 places available under the Pilot Scheme, together with another 6 800 places offered by the Social Welfare Department on a permanent basis, only less than 10 000 people can benefit from these measures, while at least 12 000 people are on the waiting list. I hope the Government can shorten the waiting time after deploying more resources in this area. Also, it should divert adequate resources to pre-school rehabilitation services for children with developmental disorders. This is the right policy we want, a Scheme to provide additional resources. Yet, the Government still has to deal with one problem. Only children aged six or below are eligible for the Scheme. So, when they reach the age of six or go to primary schools, they can no longer access such service. The Government probably needs to take note of this transition period and make corresponding considerations. Although additional resources are deployed to provide service to 12 000 children, after entering primary school when they reach seven or eight years old, they will suddenly become ineligible for this service. According to psychologists, children with developmental disorders need a transitional period during their growth. What are parents going to do with this service disruption? Should they turn to services in the private sector by themselves? Should they join the queue for public services again? The service interruption may also jeopardize children's development during the disrupted period, cancelling out all previous efforts. The Government must pay attention to this and consider if it is feasible to extend the service to enable voluntary participation, so that these children can still take part in a voluntary scheme after they enter primary school, or reach seven or eight years old. This can effectively address parents' concerns by offering them an alternative option, while children will not become helpless and refuse to attend lessons because of developmental problems after getting promoted to primary school. Next, I will discuss mental health services. It is of course desirable that the Government does formulate an overall policy on mental health services, while the issue is under review by a committee. However, the Policy Address this


year has only focused on elderly people suffering from dementia. As I have already reminded the Government, let us not forget that mental health is not only about this group of elderly people. True, the Government says that a working group is now reviewing the policy, while the Government has implemented new measures for elderly people suffering from dementia, such as adopting the medical-social collaboration mode, or even conducting a three-year territory-wide education programme and inviting celebrities to participate in publicity events. We welcome these measures. In terms of overall mental health policy, however, I hope the Policy Address will not only focus on these elderly people. They are the needy people whose symptoms have appeared, yet there are other groups in society who are in need of help as well. As to medical-social collaboration, I hope the two Secretaries present can provide sufficient manpower to carry out such a campaign to offer appropriate services to needy elderly persons with dementia and their families. Deputy President, I am a bit verbose. I repeat: Do not forget that the subject of mental health does not cover elderly people with dementia only, but also some other groups. We feel somewhat disappointed that the Policy Address has not touched on any one of them. With regard to people with mental illness, it seems that the Policy Address has not spoken of anything about drug treatment. Policy addresses delivered in the past did touch on this topic. Does it mean that the issue has already been solved now? I know that the HA has undertaken such a responsibility with meagre resources. However, can the Government put forward a clearer vision on its future projects or policies in supporting these people with mental health issues, so that they can take better drugs and live a stable life in the community? As we have pointed out before, how can they get employed if their hands keep trembling while drooling after taking drugs? Under such a situation, they cannot make any job, not even washing a car. Can we possibly give them better drugs to alleviate these problems? This has to be borne by the Government, yet nothing is mentioned in the Policy Address. I want to remind the Government that mental health is also a major aspect of healthcare which needs public support. Surely, we welcome the Government's efforts to take care of the elderly, yet other social groups need support too, especially persons with mental illness. Actually, some other people who look fine in their mental health status also require attention, but this is another issue about primary healthcare which I do not intend to go into detail in this occasion. I would like to talk about elderly healthcare again. This is the right time to do so, as both Secretary Matthew CHEUNG and Secretary Paul CHAN are present. Please listen to my speech. In terms of elderly services, Secretary


5425

Matthew CHEUNG is an expert. We do welcome the Government's arrangement to increase the number of residential care places for the elderly. However, after adding more supply of residential care homes and relevant places, the Government still need to resolve problems related to service quality. In fact, existing legislation related to residential care homes for the elderly is extremely obsolete, particularly those applicable to the private sector. At present, only one nurse is required for every 60 residents, and the nurse can be an enrolled nurse or a registered nurse. Should a nurse cannot be hired, they can hire two care workers instead. This is what I call an out-dated practice. Why do I say so? It is because elderly people become more dependent when they grow old, while their self-care ability decreases, making it necessary for them to live in residential care homes. Secretary Matthew CHEUNG knows this too. However, the existing legislation in this area was enacted almost 20 or 30 years ago. Should we conduct a review then? This is the first point. Secondly, should the Government introduce by administrative means a quality assurance mechanism to more effectively regulate and assess the services offered by residential care homes, in order to prevent a recurrence of the incident which took place in a residential care home in Tai Po? Why did the incident happen? It was exactly a result of the defects in our regulation and quality assurance system. If Secretary Matthew CHEUNG can adopt a two-pronged approach and strengthen administrative regulation, I believe families of elderly people will have more confidence in taking their senior family members to these premises, making use of many vacant places available in the private sector. Families probably do not have the trust in a particular residential care home in the absence of such a quality assurance mechanism, not knowing what will be done on the elderly residents there, as well as the services they will receive after payments are settled. Shall we ask them to go and visit the elderly members of their families every day? For this they cannot be at peace. Therefore, I hope the Secretary can speed up the progress of establishing a trustworthy quality assurance system. Another issue regarding elderly healthcare was the elderly dental services supported by the Community Care Fund to eligible elderly people last year. This was a service that we fought for years, and finally we received a positive response then. However, it seems like nothing is offered this year. Does it mean that the elderly have no dental problem anymore? I think many Members would have heard of dental complaints from elderly people when meeting elderly groups before, and even I myself have heard so. Why is the Government still


talking about a shortage of dentists today, asking me to think twice before pushing it for progress. Indeed, the service is exactly the gesture and action that are required from the Government, in order to let the elderly know that they will be given a hand when they do not have the means to handle the dental problems they face after growing old. The Government should reconsider this issue. Why is the Policy Address silent on elderly dental healthcare? This is a big problem that cannot simply be solved by pulling out a tooth. Do the elderly people need to pull out all their teeth and only consume porridge from now on? Of course I am joking, and the Government should not think so neither. So, this is precisely the issue that the Government should reconsider. Furthermore, I want to raise another point. In my memory, I have been in this Council for 12 years, and this is the twelfth time that I speak on policy addresses. There is an issue that I have never mentioned before, that is, hearing problem among the elderly. I do not know which one of you present in this Chamber now is older than 65 years, yet a report from the WHO points out that a third of the elderly aged over 65 will start to develop issues related to hearing. They will not notice themselves, and will likely attribute this to ageing, believing that it is normal for their eyes or ears to decline with age. It turns out that blurred eyes indicate some sort of health problem. Presently, this can be cured by cataract surgeries under a very good programme by the Government which enables patients to get their lens replaced within a short waiting time. We are very happy with this. Yet, problems found in the ears do not only impair the ability to hear but will also contribute to a series of hearing issues as well, leading to many other difficulties in communication and social life. This is an area that has never caught the Government's attention before. The WHO points out that at least a third of elderly people above the age of 65 have hearing impairment. As a matter of fact, patients usually do not have to spend too much time on the waiting list before he can access to consultations in ear, nose and throat departments under the current public healthcare system in Hong Kong. Normally it takes around six months to a year. But what if the patient is diagnosed with hearing problems? He has to join another waiting list for adjusting a hearing aid and meeting an audiologist, yet this will take another two years at least. Many elderly persons tell me that they have no option after encountering hearing problems but give up hearing any sounds for the time being. Do we intend to solve the problem like this?


5427

Therefore, I hope the Government can deploy resources in this area. This is a topic not mentioned before, so I intend to take this opportunity of Policy Address debate to point this out and remind the Government that we have to seriously handle the issue of hearing impairment among the elderly. Moreover, the Government always says that we are now faced with population ageing, which is exactly the reason behind the increasing cases of hearing impairment among the elderly. Under such a situation, will the Government step up any efforts in this connection? Can the coverage of existing healthcare vouchers be expanded to subsidize the adjustment of hearing aids? The adjustment of hearing aids is subject to regulation, and the elderly people are not advised to acquire these devices casually by themselves lest they will be cheated without knowledge. In some cases, the devices are not used properly and the elderly may simply give up using them after hearing noises in the sound. Does the Government realize this? I hope the Government will introduce measures in this regard with a view to helping the elderly dealing with issues with their hearing beyond the age of 65. This is another subject worthy of attention, and the Government can even offer assistance through healthcare vouchers. In the end, in the remaining one minute of my speaking time, I want to make a clichéd remark. Like it or not, all of us here will one day come to the end of our life journey. The Secretary and we always talk about "ageing in place". This has been a topic of discussion for a long time, and we have time and again emphasized the importance of taking "dying in place" seriously. This is in fact essential and it will be highly desirable if elderly people can choose on their own to stay at home accompanied by their families until the very end. But at the moment, only one or two projects are available under the relevant Home End-of-Life Care Programme. Lacking resources, the projects are implemented with much difficulty. If we really wish to achieve "ageing in place" and "dying in place", I hope the Government and the two Secretaries can examine if they should integrate and expand the programmes, regardless of whether this is done in the context of healthcare or social support, so that the elderly can truly have a choice of spending their final moments at home. Also, deploying the right resources can be helpful to the elderly, no matter whether these resources are provided in terms of healthcare resources, legislative amendments or other complementary measures in social welfare. No mention has been given in the Policy Address this time. I wish the Government can look at these issues when it has the opportunity in the future. Thank you, Deputy President.


MS CLAUDIA MO: Ever since Beijing's publication of its White Paper on Hong Kong back in June 2014, Hong Kong's ethnic minority communities seem to have become official outcasts. Do you remember what is in that report? It keeps talking about the fact that we are citizens of the great mother country, and it keeps talking about the descendants of the great Chinese race. So, if you are not Chinese, forget it, you are not one of us, you are not part of Hong Kong. That is the message. So, it is hardly surprising that this so-called policy paper of C Y LEUNG would give ethnic minorities no mention, or hardly one mention, let alone their welfare and their rights. Never mind. They are simply not part of Hong Kong and C Y LEUNG would go as far as to suggest that, perhaps Hong Kong should consider quitting this United Nations convention on asylum seekers against torture, clearly implying that we have got far too many bogus applications and it is not good for Hong Kong. But no wonder, human right campaigners and specialists would tell C Y LEUNG that he is doing something very dangerous and irresponsible. I need to tell you a story. I have a young professional ethnic minority friend who is of South Asian descent. He is a qualified professional. Once when he was in the street, he got stopped by the Police who asked him for his "行街紙 ", what is more commonly known as a "going-out pass" or a "temporary permit" to come out to the town centre of Hong Kong. Really, he naturally found that very hurtful and insulting, of course. He was born and brought up in Hong Kong. He got discriminated against all round already. And what C Y LEUNG has said about quitting this United Nations convention against Torture and whatnot simply has made things worse for people like him. Can I ask again how C Y LEUNG is going to quit that United Nations agreement? Just how? And this Chief Executive of Hong Kong knows no bounds when it comes to pleasing, sucking up to Beijing. He would offer this $1 billion scholarship to foreign students along this "One Belt One Road" business. Talking about what countries? Kazakhstan, India. We may not have Kazakh-Hongkongers yet in Hong Kong, but we surely have many Indian-, Pakistani-, Pilipino-Hongkongers. And C Y LEUNG has the cheek to suggest that by getting all these foreign students into Hong Kong, we can have them mingle with our own students and that can help upgrade our English level in town. What about our own Indian,


5429

Pakistani students who are actually Hongkongers and whose mother tongue, many of them, is actually English? We cannot mingle them up together? Instead you have to pay so much to invite outsiders in? Just how more ludicrous can this Government go? It is completely cheeky, completely shameless! And I need to tell you another story. I have got young Indian and Pakistani friends. They are both English teachers and one of them gets more private English tuition jobs because he looks whiter. That tells you the standard of racial harmony in Hong Kong. Meantime, discrimination, I would not call it rampant, but racial discrimination is all over the place in Hong Kong still, on every front, ranging from education, employment, housing, you name it. And you would say, "It is really not too bad. Please do not exaggerate it." I urge you to talk to actual members of our ethnic community to get some real understanding what is happening. If I were not of Chinese descent, or I did not look Chinese, or if I had darker skin, and I go and sit on a bus that is almost full, there is one seat next to me that is still available, people would avoid me like plague, they say, just because I am not Chinese, just in case I smell or something. It is really very, very hurtful. A scene in this supposedly cosmopolitan, modern city called Hong Kong is still happening. Please stop just paying lip-service and do bits and pieces here and there. Let us say a Carnival for ethnic minority in Kowloon West, ha ha ha! Clap, clap! All fine and well, go home. This is not good enough. It is because this Government's mentality or attitude is one of promoting only Chineseness and its education attempts are all half-hearted. Two years ago, you were saying, "You should be all very happy now. We are doing a lot for the ethnic minority students trying to learn Chinese properly." Go talk to them again, go talk to Unison as well. You are not doing it properly. You are not teaching Chinese as a second language. You are merely offering basic Chinese teaching curriculum in a simplified way. It is easier. So, you are of lower standard, learn it and it is good. They do not even bother to teach the composition of Chinese characters, to teach them that if they need to do something with "hand", that Chinese character would start with a "hand" radical. No, no such thing, just learn it. Chinese poetry from the Tang Dynasty? Just recite it. And what is even more


ridiculous is that young students of Primary Six to Secondary One would need to learn Mandarin at the same time when they have not even mastered Cantonese and they must learn Chinese in Mandarin text books. Just what on earth is this Government talking about? I know, you people sitting there are not in charge of education, but it has got a lot to do with our ethnic minority policy as well. So, please help look into all that. In a very recent feature story in the South China Morning Post, the headline says, "Falling through the cracks". It is about ethnic minorities' plight in Hong Kong. And the lead reads like this, "Race has become a basis for poverty in Hong Kong". The welfare chief please note: "Race has become a basis for poverty in Hong Kong". As long as you are not Chinese by blood, and in particular if you are of South or Southeast Asian descent, you are dead meat, you are bound to be poor almost. The per capita income in Hong Kong puts this city as one of the wealthiest, one of the most well done in the region, but we are one of the most unequal society in the developed world. This is not fair. There is something fantastically, fundamentally wrong in this regard. And when we talk about fairness, we say "fair play", and we do not say "equal play" because there is a difference. In life, we need to prioritize things. You and I cannot be equal. No two people can be exactly equal. You can never be equal, say, to your mother. So, let us just be fair. And one way to play things fairly is the yardstick of "first come, first served". But then in Hong Kong, our minorities in particular ― or all Hongkongers, as a matter of fact ― but our minorities in particular would need to compete with newcomers from the Mainland. Every day we have about 150 Mainland arrivals coming to Hong Kong on grounds of family reunion. Family reunion is fine; it is a noble ground and no one would dispute that. But the major problem is Hong Kong has no say on who could come to Hong Kong, who is actually, really, honestly, legally qualified to come. Fake documents? Bogus marriages? It is a matter for later examination. As long as they have a One-way Permit, they can just come in. Ok, they come in. Once they come in, I personally would consider them as Hongkongers. But then legally, they really should need to stay for at least seven years to get fully qualified as a Hongkonger. But now, they compete for welfare as well.


5431

Going back to that line "Race has become a basis for poverty in Hong Kong", where does that leave our ethnic minority community? Many of them were born, brought up and educated in Hong Kong. They are the perfect Hongkongers like you and I are. Newcomers? They are so late but they somehow get priority. That just sounds not right, right? It is not fair. We do say Hongkongers first. This is Hong Kong. All Hongkongers first regardless of our ethnic descent, please. I regret this is called a "Vote of Thanks" and we cannot change the word "thanks" somehow. This is a "Vote of No Thanks". MR CHAN CHI-CHUEN (in Cantonese): Deputy President, this is the Policy Address delivered by Chief Executive LEUNG Chun-ying. The writing of policy addresses is LEUNG Chun-ying's assignment, and he must turn in one policy address to Hong Kong people every year. After completing one's assignment, one will of course want to see the grading. In recent years, all the motions of thanks have invariably been voted down by the Legislative Council. In my view, LEUNG Chun-ying and the officials of the SAR Government simply do not care about the grading given to him by Members of the Legislative Council. However, Chief Executive LEUNG Chun-ying must not turn a blind eye to the grading given to him in the form of a disturbance lasting from the late hours of Lunar New Year's Day to the early hours of the next day in the streets of Mong Kok ― or a "riot" in the words of SAR Government officials. This is a most lucid appraisal report given by Hong Kong people about the administration of the SAR Government in recent years. I do not intend to put the blame on others. But these days, a remark made by President Jasper TSANG during a television programme in 1993 has gone viral on the Internet. Roughly, what he said is that if there is no social conflict, and all people can live and work in great gratitude and contentment, any attempts to stir up trouble will be in vain. I hope government officials can always bear in mind this remark made by President Jasper TSANG 23 years ago. Today, after 23 years, this remark still sounds as forceful, reverberating and insightful as before.


In 1993, Chief Secretary for Administration Carrie LAM already joined the Government. Back then, it was the Hong Kong-British Government. Today, it is the SAR Government. Today, after all these years, I wonder if the Chief Secretary for Administration will have any fresh insights after hearing these words again from me. In this session, I want to focus on the words "live and work in great gratitude and contentment". This debate session is about poverty alleviation, elderly care and welfare policies. Are Hong Kong people really ungrateful? What has the SAR Government done over the past years to make it think that Hong Kong people should be grateful? When it comes to welfare benefits, poverty alleviation and elderly care, has the SAR Government made enough efforts? And, has it done a good job? The mentality of government officials is very interesting. Our public money does not belong to them, but they think that if too much assistance is provided by the public coffers, wastage of public money will result. To them, the best philosophy of managing public finances should be the provision of subsistence-level assistance that can just keep recipients alive without making them too comfortable and happy. Chief Secretary for Administration Carrie LAM is dubbed an "Able Warrior". Even in the case of constitutional reform, which ended up in a complete fiasco with only eight votes of support, she still managed to remain intact without sustaining any heavy damage. But on universal retirement protection, I think the Chief Secretary for Administration has failed to remain so able. She criticized Prof Nelson CHOW in his absence through the media, thus forcing this academic heavyweight to hold the first ever press conference in life to clarify how his opinions differed from those of the SAR Government (He expressed the hope that this would be the last). But then, the Chief Secretary for Administration criticized Prof CHOW in return, saying that he knew nothing about public financial management. It was the Chief Secretary for Administration who invited Prof CHOW to conduct the study. Was she saying that she was unaware of this at the beginning? But what is the real cause of such criticism? The real cause is that Prof Nelson CHOW changed his stance on universal retirement protection. And, how does the SAR Government conduct consultation or studies? The SAR Government already holds a predetermined stance or conclusion. Then, it will ask those people who hold similar stances or conclusions to express views or conduct studies, in the hope that the findings of their studies will not differ too greatly from its predetermined conclusion.


5433

The truth is that at the very beginning, Prof Nelson CHOW was likewise worried that the financial commitment would be too great, so he thought that an assets test was necessary and was not very supportive of universal retirement protection. But academic people are different in one way, in the sense that they do not have any predetermined stance as such. After his research and communications with elderly people, his understanding of the matter increased, and he began to speak on the basis of facts. Therefore, his stance changed. This is not "moving the goalposts". Rather, he just stated the truth discovered by his study. This explains why his stance and views have moved farther and farther away from those of the Government. For these reasons, the Government finds it necessary to challenge Prof CHOW's study and even undermine his credibility by hook or by crook. The Government has not shown even just the slightest bit of commitment. If the Government wants people to be grateful, it only needs to do a few good things. In the case of universal retirement protection, for example, I believe many elderly people will feel grateful if the Government is really sincere in its consultation. Even if they themselves cannot receive the relevant benefits, they will be grateful all the same. Every time I attend an assembly organized by the Alliance for Universal Pension, I can invariably see some elderly people in their seventies or eighties come forward to give their views. In fact, even if the Government commences consultation and studies now, they will not be able to get the relevant benefits or share the fruit as they will have passed away by the time of actual implementation. I think they will be grateful even at the moment of their final departure, because they can see that the Government is willing to do something really good to the elderly people of the future, meaning those in their forties or fifties now who will retire very soon. But the reality is different. What is the reality? The Government has rolled out the "regardless of wealth" option and the "those in financial need" option, and asked us to choose between them. The initial intention of the Government was to "kill with a borrowed knife", using Prof Nelson CHOW's study as a ground for rejecting universal retirement protection. But this has only created conflicts. As said by President Jasper TSANG years ago, if there is no social conflict, and all people can live and work in great gratitude and contentment, any attempts to stir up trouble will be in vain. Sometimes, conflicts are themselves already in existence, but sometimes, they are stirred up by the Government. The Government tries to stir up conflicts between two generations by asking our young people, "Do you think it is fair if you are required to pay tax in order to


meet the expenditure of supporting others' parents?" When it seeks to foment conflicts among Hong Kong people in this way, it is actually the very one who creates social conflicts. I hope that government officials, whether they are "courageous as they have no expectation", can do some good deeds. Today, Under Secretary Prof Sophia CHAN is present ― she has just left, and she was here just now ― Secretary Dr KO is not present. I want to have a brief discussion on the hawker policy as I have been following this issue all along. Some have said that the main trigger of the disturbance in Mong Kok on Lunar New Year's Day was hawking. I understand that the Government must enforce the law. But as the saying goes, "the law is also about compassionate understanding." During Lunar New Year time every year, hawkers will gather in streets and alleys to sell goods. All sorts of hawking activities can be found in Mong Kok, Sham Shui Po and even Causeway Bay, drawing large numbers of local people and even tourists. We can all notice people's tolerance, acceptance and fondness of street hawking activities during major festivals and holidays. We all hope that the Government can deal with such activities with discretion rather than seeking to eliminate them. Secretary Dr KO Wing-man attended the special meeting held by the Legislative Council Panel on Security concerning the hawker management policy. To what extent was the disturbance related to hawker management? Secretary Dr KO said that the Food and Environmental Hygiene Department (FEHD) had always handled illegal hawking activities with an attitude of tolerance, and under normal circumstances, they would only give verbal warnings to hawkers and disperse them. He added that on that particular night, FEHD personnel were merely doing routine patrol duties, without issuing any warnings to the hawkers selling cooked food unlawfully at the scene or arresting anyone, to speak less of taking any raiding operations. Is this the truth? What happened at the time? According to the Secretary, no warning was issued and it was just a routine patrol. However, as reported, the FEHD deployed several dozen hawker management personnel to the scene that night, thus giving rise to a tense atmosphere. What is the truth? This is one reason why we demand the setting up of an independent commission of inquiry to look into the incident. Whose version is the truth ― the Secretary's version or the assertion in media reports? On this matter, we wish to do justice to all sides.


5435

I am a member of the Legislative Council Subcommittee on Hawker Policy. I am aware that the Government wants to find some room for hawkers to make a living, because hawking activities can bring benefits to the local economy and people. One proposal is the setting up of open-air hawker markets and night markets under the district-led principle. Of course, this proposal is still at a preliminary stage. The Government will adopt a "bottom-up" approach. But there will be difficulties when it comes to actual implementation. People merely want to enjoy the fun of eating street food on festivals. If law-enforcement personnel take a rigid approach, serious clashes are bound to ensue. I will not simplistically ascribe the disturbance to the hawker issue. But I want to point out that the present-day Hong Kong is honestly like a powder keg, and any such clashes will turn into the fuse. I think of two incidents after this disturbance: the Kaohsiung Incident in Taiwan, and also the 28 February Incident of 1947 in Taiwan. Actually, the 28 February Incident years ago similarly stemmed from a minor clash between a woman selling cigarettes in the streets and soldiers tasked to confiscate contraband cigarettes. In the chaos, the woman was battered and her head injured, and onlookers started a commotion. Then, a soldier fired his pistol. The clash eventually ended up in the 28 February Incident, which almost changed the course of the history of Taiwan. Certainly, we cannot possibly say that hawking activities was the only cause of the incident. But similar clashes will actually serve as the fuse. Very often, clashes between the Police and the public and also between officials and the public are caused by similar street activities. I hope that the Secretary for Food and Health can continue to work hard on the hawker issue, instead of trying to shift the blame to others when a clash occurs after submitting a report. I so submit. MR JEFFREY LAM (in Cantonese): Deputy President, before the delivery of the Policy Address, there were a lot of arguments in society concerning the abolition of the offsetting arrangement under Mandatory Provident Fund (MPF) Schemes, drawing the great concern of the industrial and commercial sector. The Business and Professionals Alliance for Hong Kong therefore organized the Forum on the MPF Offsetting Mechanism in conjunction with 14 trade


federations. Together, we explored the impact of abolishing the offsetting arrangement on the economy and society of Hong Kong, and we expressed unanimous opposition to its abolition, stating that in case of any forcible abolition, society as a whole will have to pay the price ultimately. At the end, in the Policy Address, the Government says that through the existing public consultation on the improvement of retirement protection launched by the Commission on Poverty, it hopes to foster a consensus in society. In regard to the issues of retirement protection and elderly care, the industrial and commercial sector has never evaded its responsibility, never flinched, and is never unwilling to shoulder commitment. The industrial and commercial sector has been working quietly. We support the Government of the Special Administrative Region and contribute to the Hong Kong economy. In regard to welfare services and poverty alleviation, our stance is to keep the expenditure within the limit of revenue. We maintain that money should always be spent whenever necessary, and tax revenue should be used for helping those who are most in need in society. The work of poverty alleviation, elderly care and retirement protection still needs more planning, guidance and undertaking from the Government. The MPF system is one of the pillars of retirement protection. Mind you, I say it is "one of the pillars", and I did not say it is all about employees' retirement protection. Although the main parties are employers and employees, the Government is not without any role. It should not shift all the responsibility for employees' retirement protection to employers, nor should it leave employers and employees to hold negotiations on their own under the pretext that the Government adopts an open attitude. Also, the labour sectors should not ask the Government and employers to shoulder all the responsibility for employees' retirement protection. In recent years, the industrial and commercial sectors have been faced with various problems, such a business environment whose prospects are not quite so bright, unstable external economic circumstances and incessant increases in operating costs. Added to all these is the increase of the minimum wage level year after year. And now, standard working hours and the abolition of the MPF offsetting arrangement are also put forward. Every time, the industrial and commercial sector is the target. Every time, the industrial and commercial sector is shocked and scared. They will then unite and express their strong


5437

reaction. However, the public and employees will feel that the business sector is not willing to show any commitment. As for the Government, it will simply watch with folded arms, saying that it is none of its business and employers and employees must negotiate among themselves, and that if necessary, the Government will sit between the two sides and watch them negotiate. To a certain extent, the tense relationship between employers and employees is not totally unrelated to the many labour and welfare policies introduced by the Government in recent years. Deputy President, some owners of small and medium enterprises tell me that while it is not difficult to do business in Hong Kong now, it is even more difficult close down their business. It is because once the MPF offsetting arrangement is abolished, the operating costs of enterprises will increase and they will have no money to pay severance payment to employees. Even if they want to close down, it is not that easy. Hence, if the MPF offsetting arrangement is abolished, we cannot rule out the possibility that some enterprises will take the move first by closing down. Once spates of layoffs and business closures occur, will employees stand to gain? When the Government persuaded the industrial and commercial sector to support the MPF system, it clearly stated that like provident funds, the MPF system would be provided with an offsetting arrangement. It was said that employers had already fulfilled their responsibility of providing retirement benefit to employees with their contributions. Deputy President, we are facing the imminent problem of population ageing. In regard to retirement protection, the Government needs to conduct holistic examination and planning, instead of targeting on the industrial and commercial sector every time. I am very confident that as long as the market remains free, government policies are consistent, business conditions are favourable and the economy can thus develop, the industrial and commercial sector is always willing to contribute to society and help those in need. However, if a welfarist approach is adopted and rash actions are taken without wide consultation and thorough study, it will be difficult to resolve problems and may even trigger more social confrontation and conflicts. I thus hope that the Government can listen to the opinions of various sides on this issue. Deputy President, I so submit.


DEPUTY PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Does any other Member wish to speak in this session? DR HELENA WONG (in Cantonese): Deputy President, the Chief Secretary for Administration is here today. I would like to express my views on two areas in the Policy Address. I will first talk about the lead-in-fresh water incident and then I will move onto the population policy and child care services. Deputy President, since the lead-in-fresh water incident took place last July, the Government has been trying to tone down the incident. Government officials, including those from the Department of Health and the Water Supplies Department (WSD), have repeatedly emphasized that people will not die from drinking lead-tainted water. They say that for an average case, a person who drinks lead-tainted water for his entire life will have to reach the age of 70 to experience health problems, if any. The experts and lawyers of the Commission of Inquiry into Excess Lead Found in Drinking Water (the Commission of Inquiry) have ruled out the validity of such mean and insensible remarks. If government officials are correct in saying that an average case of lifetime consumption of lead-tainted water will only lead to health problems at the age of 70, then why are children who have only drunk lead-tainted water for two years, three years, four years or seven years tested positive for excess lead in their blood, and why is excess lead in blood found to cause childhood developmental delay? Hence, when government officials repeatedly said that lead-tainted water would not cause any problems, they were actually trying to tone down the incident. Deputy President, I have followed the evidence given at the hearings conducted by the Commission of Inquiry, in which the work done by the WSD, Housing Department (HD) and several government officials have been repeatedly called into question. A major concern of the public is that based on the results of its water sampling tests, the Government has found 11 public rental housing (PRH) estates the drinking water of which contains excess lead, and that the Government says PRH estates constructed after 2005 do not have this problem. However, in the past week, two of the three experts entrusted by the Commission of Inquiry submitted their reports. One of the expert reports is prepared by Prof Joseph LEE Hun-wei of The Hong Kong University of Science and Technology who personally led a group of experts in the University to conduct water sampling tests in the PRH estates. They sampled drinking water in the 11


5439

PRH estates affected by lead-tainted water, as previously confirmed by the Government, and also sampled drinking water in six PRH estates unaffected by lead-tainted water also previously confirmed by the Government. The expert report finds that more PRH estates previously confirmed by the Government as unaffected are now tested positive for excess lead in their drinking water. These PRH estates include Kwai Chung Estate, Yee Ming Estate in Tseung Kwan O, as well as other WSD-claimed unaffected PRH estates, including Shui Chuen O Estate. In fact, the drinking water in all these PRH estates are tested and confirmed for their high lead content, but no announcement has been made. The water sampling methods may have played a part in the difference in the test results. (THE PRESIDENT resumed the Chair) The water sampling method adopted by The Hong Kong University of Science and Technology is the same as the method adopted by the Democratic Party. We both sampled water from the night before, or what we call the "first drop" running from a tap at the start of the day. However, the WSD insists on sampling water after a tap has been running for two to five minutes. This method has been repeatedly called into question. I queried the validity of this method as early as last July, but the so-called experts of the WSD and government officials insisted that this was the correct method. In fact, considerable expert opinions of the Commission of Inquiry say that if water is sampled from a running tap turned on for two to five minutes, water containing high lead content may have already run away. That is why the inquiry results obtained by The Hong Kong University of Science and Technology experts and those obtained by the Democratic Party are different from those obtained by the WSD and the Government because the latter two refuse to sample the "first drop". Even now they still refuse to adopt this water sampling method. So, having seen the Government's approach, I am really very disappointed. This is obviously a political decision, rather than a scientific and sensible decision because considerable related documents and repeated experiments have already proven otherwise. The method of sampling the "first drop" adopted by the Professor of The Hong Kong University of Science and Technology is in line with what the Democratic Party proposed earlier. What makes me feel sorry is that the Chief Secretary for Administration has not instructed her subordinates,


namely the Development Bureau, the Food and Health Bureau and the Transport and Housing Bureau to properly look into the matter. And she was so eager to brush aside criticisms. Her "nanny" mentality has prompted her to defend the civil servants and the officials under her. But has it ever occurred to her that her acts have actually condoned her subordinates' negligence and indolence and reinforced the loopholes of the system? In fact, is the guideline value of not more than 10 microgrammes per litre for lead applicable to Hong Kong? Prof John FAWELL, a British expert entrusted by the Government-appointed Commission of Inquiry recently said that the WSD should not have so casually adopted the 10-microgram guideline value as the guideline value for Hong Kong. He is of the opinion that the guideline value for Hong Kong can be set at 5 micrograms. Why is the guideline value for lead set at 10 micrograms then? He pinned down the cause on the indolence of the WSD officials. Then, should 10 micrograms or less be regard as a completely safe lead content which will not cause any health hazard? Prof FAWELL thinks otherwise and says that 10 micrograms may also be potentially hazardous. Hence, the whole incident makes me feel sorry. Certainly, we are glad that the Commission of Inquiry is still working very hard to find out the true cause of the incident. But I notice while taking part in the inquiry and following its progress that when the WSD or HD officials testified, their legal representatives attempted to save them from taking responsibilities and doing follow-up actions. So, have they made sincere and honest testimonies to beg for leniency? I am very doubtful of that. President, people are now most worried that unaffected PRH estates previously announced by the Government may not be truly unaffected. It is because the experts have confirmed Yee Ming Estate as an affected estate after taking its water samples again with the "first drop" method. Besides, the Government has found other affected PRH estates, only that it has not made any announcement on its finding so as to tone down the matter. The Hong Kong University of Science and Technology experts tested the drinking water of one of the PRH estates, which is the Shui Chuen O Estate. The Democratic Party also tested the water samples of the estate. It is found that if its water samples are tested using the "first drop" method, the results confirm excess lead in the drinking water; but if its water samples are tested using the method adopted by the Government, that is, by first letting the taps run for a few minutes before taking water samples, the results do not exceed the guideline value. The Hong


5441

Kong University of Science and Technology experts only took "first drop" samples from three housing units in one of the blocks in Shui Chuen O Estate, and the water samples was not found containing excess lead. But how many housing units are there in Shui Chuen O Estate? Is it because the Commission of Inquiry does not have sufficient resources or time to conduct more water sampling tests? Actually, The University of Science and Technology experts also admit that if more resources and time are available, they can do better on the sampling tests. And now they can only take three water samples from one of the blocks in Shui Chuen O Estate. President, I have spoken at great length to urge the Government to seriously address people's worries. It should conduct water sampling tests again on the "unaffected" PRH estates using the "first drop" method adopted by the Professor of The Hong Kong University of Science and Technology, and then tell the public whether these estates are truly unaffected and publish all the data unreservedly. President, I believe the most important upcoming task is to legislate on water safety. But the Policy Address this year does not mention this at all. The Government says that there is a need to review the ordinance, but it does not provide any timetable, nor does it say when and how it will take forward this task. None at all. The Policy Address does not provide any details. Not one paragraph in the Policy Address has mentioned the lead-in-fresh water incident, except only one paragraph in the Policy Agenda. President, the Chief Secretary for Administration is here today. I wish to especially point this out for her and I hope that she will urge government departments to expeditiously tackle the lead-in-fresh water incident properly. Indeed, the Professor of The Hong Kong University of Science and Technology has already confirmed that Yee Ming Estate has excess lead in its drinking water. It was announced two days before the Lunar New Year. Because of the Lunar New Year, the Government did not send water wagons to the estate or distribute mineral water to its residents. We are unaware of any announcement saying that the developer concerned will take responsibility for the incident or any re-checking of the water quality will be done. How could the Government be so mean? If we are living in Yee Ming Estate or our children and grandchildren are living there, will we not come out and question the Government? This is why society has accumulated so much grievance and distrust against the Government. I hold that this is the reason.


President, due to limited time, I wish to move onto the population policy. Chief Secretary for Administration Carrie LAM has completed several reports on population, which show an ageing trend in our population and the gradual weakening of our labour force. The Chief Secretary also says that we need to strengthen our labour force and one of the directions is to work towards unleashing the working potential of women. But after all, why do women have to withdraw from the work force? After graduation from university, women, like their male counterparts, are supposed to go out to work, as very few women will get married immediately after university graduation. Hence, the employment rate of the working population has remained high, reaching over 90%. Then, when does the rate start to drop? The rate starts to drop when women are in their thirties and are almost at the end of their child-bearing age. If they still not bear a child, they will become an aged mother. In fact, Chief Secretary Carrie LAM herself understands that if a woman bears a child, she will have to figure out who is going to take care of the child. Then, who can help? If we truly want women to re-join the work force, we must address the infant care issue. Regrettably, we find in the Policy Address that the Government is not unaware of the importance of the issue, but it places the emphasis on the quota of extended hours service in day child care centres, saying that it will provide an additional 5 000 places. But parents actually want more aided long full-day child care places. The Government has not provided any additional places, and will only slightly increase the quota in Sha Tin. The subject of women employment was recently discussed at the Panel on Manpower where I have also voiced my opinion. The Government says that the quota will not be increased in 2016-2018, not until 2018-2019, which is a few more years later, when 100 additional aided long full-day child care places for children aged below three will be provided in Sha Tin. The Government's direction is correct, but the problem is that it all along has not properly taken care of its people, including elderly care, care for people with disabilities, child care and infant care. As for overall planning, the Government has not properly met the demand in each district as well. Does the Government think that having 100 more women come out to work can reverse the present trend of insufficient working population? The answer is obviously in the negative. How many babies are born every year in Hong Kong? The supply simply cannot meet the demand. The Government, however, still says that it has to conduct a study on this matter, saying that it has


5443

to hand over this matter to a certain advisory board to conduct a study, but it does not know how long the study will take. The Government should speed up its work in many aspects because it cannot only provide aided long full-day child care services in Sha Tin and does not provide this service in other districts or the new districts. When I handed out New Year scroll of Chinese blessings and chocolate gold coins to people at Kai Tak, Kai Ching Estate, Tak Long Estate, I was surrounded by a flock of children from these estates. There are many children in this district, but there is no nursery for children or infants. Their mothers have no choice but to remain in the estates to look after their children. Why is there no nursery in these estates? This is a planning error and I hope the Chief Secretary for Administration and the Government will follow up the matter. In fact, many other districts such as Sham Shui Po and Cheung Sha Wan are still rather poor. Many grass-roots women want to go out to work but they have no one to look after their children. I made a visit to the centre of the Hong Kong Society for the Protection of Children (HKSPC) in Prince Edward to exchange views on child care issues and take a look at their nursery schools where they take care of infants. They told me that women pregnant for just two months would already queue up at the HKSPC to apply for infant care services; and if they did so after childbirth, they would have to stay home for an unknown number of years before they could go out to work again. I learn from them that if women want to have someone to take care of their child after their maternity leave, they will have to start making application at the HKSPC after they are two or three month pregnant. Why do they have to queue up for infant care services before their child is born? We indeed have problems in this regard. I hope the Secretary for Labour and Welfare and the Chief Secretary for Administration can seriously follow up this matter. The Government has proposed to train grandparents as carers of their grandchildren. I really need to ask whether there is something wrong with the Government. Are we moving back in time to decades ago? We used to take care of everything. If we had grandparents, we would let them take care of the children and we would not count on the Government to help us. Is the Chief Secretary for Administration actually aware that many families nowadays do not have enough room to accommodate their parents (in other words, the grandparents)? How are they going to take care of the grandchildren? In allocating PRH flats, the Government will not arrange the grandparent generation to live near their family. The Government has never put into practice its so-called family-friendly policy.


After all the discussion on paternity leave, it ended up only having three days of leave. Secretary, you lobbied for our support in the Legislative Council last year. You said that the Government would conduct a review one year later. One year has already passed. When will you conduct the review? You have not even submitted a document on the review to the Legislative Council. Hence, the Government does not have any measures to support its policy. The Democratic Party lobbied for seven-day full-paid paternity leave, but the Government said only three days with a rate of four-fifths of employee's average daily wage. The maternity leave pay has remained at a daily rate of four-fifths of employee's average wage since its inception over 20 years ago. How are we going to encourage women to bear child and to return to the work force? Hence, President, I hope the Government can substantially step up its effect in doing what it should. I do not have too much time to speak today, but I also wish to say that the Government must follow up the food safety issue. At present, more and more imported vegetables are found exceeded the safety limits. These vegetables may contain too much pesticides, or have been applied with prohibited pesticides, or may contain heavy metals. Our Food Safety Ordinance lags far behind the times. I have repeatedly pointed out that we are worried about drinking water with excess lead, but we cannot imagine that the vegetables we eat may also contain lead. The Government says that the vegetables have not exceeded the safety limits. But if we adopt the standards used by other countries, all the vegetables are way over the safety limits. Why? It is because the standards we use are inadequate. Our standards have not been updated for decades. How are we going to safeguard the health of Hong Kong people with these standards? In 2014, I conducted a test on vegetables and found that some vegetables contained excess heavy metals. Although the vegetables did not exceed the limits adopted by Hong Kong, but they exceeded the limits adopted by the World Health Organization. Why can Hong Kong not do better in this regard? Taiwan and the Mainland are doing better than Hong Kong. We always lag behind. We must expeditiously introduce legislative amendment to the ordinance on food adulterated with metallic contamination. I believe no political parties or Members will thwart this bill. If the Government tells us that it gives high priority to food safety, then will it please expeditiously amend the Food Safety Ordinance to tighten the limit of lead content in food? The existing limit lags far behind times and is too lax. It fails to meet international standard and is even more lax than the standard adopted in the Mainland. This is totally unacceptable.


5445

Of course, smuggling of vegetable is another issue I wish to say. Why are vegetables still frequently tested positive for excess harmful substances? Is it a problem with control at source? The Government says that the vegetable comes from registered vegetable farms, but does the Government have sufficient manpower to make surveillance checks? If the SAR Government only conducts surveillance checks in Mainland vegetable farms arranged by the General Administration of Quality Supervision, Inspection and Quarantine, it will not find anything irregular. The SAR Government should fight for conducting random checks and random sampling of the produce in Mainland vegetable farms by the SAR Government officers themselves, so as to test the water and soil of these farms and see if any pesticides is found in their produce. As Legislative Council Members, we cannot go to the Mainland every day on behalf of the Government to do these checks. We also wish to have a chance to go to the Mainland to have a better understanding of how the Government operates in the Mainland. We have been making this request for two years, but the Government has yet to arrange for such a visit. We have repeatedly made this request in the Panel on Food Safety and Environmental Hygiene. Perhaps the Chief Secretary can help us to arrange a visit? President, I so submit. MISS CHAN YUEN-HAN (in Cantonese): President, in this debate session, I will focus on poverty alleviation, welfare services and elderly care. But this does not mean that we will not discuss public health and healthcare. I know that although my colleague has a hoarse voice today, he will still talk about these. Let me first say a few words on how I feel after sitting here for such a long time. Mr Jeffrey LAM just said that he spoke mainly on one thing. I do not know whether he has actually heard some talks that the Government has made a last-minute decision to abolish the offsetting arrangement. Maybe, my views on the business sector are all the results of a conspiracy theory. Whenever the Government responds a bit more positively to the labour sector and the grassroots, he will come out immediately to press the Government not to introduce any measures to benefit the public. I am dissatisfied with this. Although I do not have any strong personal grudges against Mr LAM, I must say that the attitude of the entire business sector is the cause of the present problems with the Government's administration. The business sector has been impeding


the implementation of government measures. In this connection, I think the business sector needs to do some self-examination. The business sector is totally unreasonable and simply holds a tough stance of refusal on all issues. When Chief Secretary for Administration Carrie LAM announced the conduct of consultation on retirement protection, she also mentioned the offsetting arrangement. If I can remember correctly, she said she felt sorry. If a person is dismissed once every 10 years in his entire working life of 30 years and every time his accrued MPF benefits are offset, what is he going to do when he retires? What will become of those people earning less than $10,000 a month? At the end, they must live on different forms social assistance, such as Comprehensive Social Security Assistance (CSSA) and Old Age Living Allowance (OALA), in their twilight years. This is the taxpayers' money. I think the stance of the business sector is much too rigid, and they simply do not consider how society as a whole can develop steadily. There can be discussions between employers and employees. However, if the business sector is diametrically opposed to the labour sector, I would think that it is downright unreasonable. Hence, I have spent several on responding to the remarks made by Mr LAM earlier. If the Government had really changed its mind at the last minute and talked about the room for negotiation in the Policy Address, it would be another story. Nevertheless, I really hope that the business sector can stop being so unreasonable. When discussing the Policy Address of this Government, we have discussed and expressed our different views. In regard to the Commission on Poverty under the charge of the Chief Secretary for Administration, or Mr Matthew CHEUNG's portfolio of welfare services, we already talked about the OALA at the very beginning. We also proposed to suspend the debate at that time, but that was only because the Government did not give us enough time and we were unable to gauge public opinions in good time. This does not mean that we do not support the measure. We think that the OALA is a good measure. Even the Low-income Working Family Allowance (LIFA), which will be implemented in May, is also a good measure. For all these years, community groups have been asking for measures for low-income working families. They think that this is a good measure. Of course, it is another thing when it comes to application procedures. We see that the Government has also done some work on elderly services. But frankly speaking, this is unable to meet the demand of an ageing population in society. But then, it cannot be denied that the Government has also made


5447

some slight progress. Some measures are not minor changes as in the past, and they are quite progressive. For example, the OALA and the LIFA are quite a big step forward, and we approve of them. But I think I also need to mention certain other issues. For instance, I can actually sense that the Government wants to abolish the offsetting arrangement, but it has been held up by the business sector. Besides, after a few decades of discussions, academics ― conservative, progressive, or whatever ― all find it necessary to introduce retirement protection due to population ageing. At this crucial moment, the Government introduces a consultation paper. People like us who have been following this issue for a few decades earnestly hope that this can materialize the integrated retirement protection plan which has been putting forward by The Hong Kong Federation of Trade Unions (FTU). This is made up two parts: mandatory private retirement protection plans for working people on the one hand and social insurance on the other. All in society are to make contributions to social insurance and money will be distributed to the elderly. This is the integrated retirement protection plan. Now, people call it universal retirement protection. We thought that the Government was moving in this direction this time. I also hope that public officers can appreciate our discontent. It is because after the proposals are introduced, we find that the Government has its own stance. This makes the whole generation of people like me and Prof Nelson CHOW very angry. We thought that after discussion, there would be a rational and feasible proposal, particularly because Prof Nelson CHOW was invited by the Government to conduct the study. We thought that this was a move of progress by the Government. However, the Government already had its stance, and it was with this stance that it set out the content. In this way, even though Dr LAW Chi-kwong put forward another proposal later, society as a whole simply ignored his idea and did not hold any discussion. If the Government is standing at the right position just as it does in dealing with the offsetting arrangement, it should not have a pre-determined position. Discussions should be held only after the consultation exercise. Nevertheless, before the consultation is complete, there is already a very clear attitude in society. Whether from the study conducted by Prof Nelson CHOW or conducted by some rather conservative intellectuals, including other schools of thought like Chicago School, they all think that it has to be carried out at this stage and there are no alternatives. I think the Chief Secretary for


Administration or the Secretary has also seen that on the following day after the announcement of the consultation paper by the Government, more than 80% or 90% of the editorials from the Hong Kong media all asked the Government why it did not implement universal retirement protection or the integrated retirement protection plan proposed by FTU. This is beyond people's comprehension and understanding. I do not know why the Government does so. Is the business sector imposing pressure on the Government again? I have no idea. Or is it the opinion of those public officers who believe in free economy, as other people say? I have no idea either. However, I hope the Government can clearly see that on this point, many people in the whole society, whether more than 60% of the people or even more than 70% of the people as in the result of the survey, hope to see a figure … we do not need too much, just something like $3,000. This can let retirees have a steady income without having to go through a means test, and they can live their twilight years comfortably. I hope that the Government can reconsider the proposal before talking about other matters. Our generation has been fighting for retirement protection for more than 30 years. Some people have been fighting for 20 years, some fighting for 10 years, while some have just joined recently and many of them are young people. President, I am the Chairman of the Subcommittee on Retirement Protection of the Legislative Council. Whenever a public hearing was held, many people, more and more young people indeed, would air their views. As they were so concerned, we asked them whether their intention, as some people had said, was just to provide for their parents. They answered in the negative. Many people said that they were willing to make contributions and help the elderly in spending their twilight years happily. The elderly persons in attendance would also cry. Their body language could tell us how they wanted to have this welfare benefit. Perhaps I should not say that this is a welfare benefit. I should instead say it is a measure to give people a happy life in old age. Nevertheless, my speaking time is very limited, and I do not want to say too much. I only hope that the public officer responsible can understand that in this regard, a majority in society do not agree to the present decision of the Government, in particular its approach of consultation. I hope that the Government can really be fair in this respect. Thank you, President. I so submit.


5449

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Does any other Member wish to speak in this session? MR TAM YIU-CHUNG (in Cantonese): President, Members are not very keen on speaking in this session. I initially wanted to wait a bit longer but I am afraid that I cannot wait any more. Let me focus on healthcare issues. In this regard, I note that the Policy Address this year proposes the spending of $200 billion on building new hospitals and providing additional hospital beds. Numerically, $200 billion is a very huge sum. But the funding will in fact be cover a period of 10 years. This means that there will be roughly $20 billion a year, and in that sense the amount is not very large. I will give an elaboration on this point later. The Government plans to build more hospitals and provide additional hospital beds, but how are we going to solve the problem of manpower supply? According to the Government, it may be necessary to provide more courses and places in medical schools, so as to expand professional training and provide additional manpower. But this will take time. It takes at least five to seven years to train up a medical practitioner, not to speak of the fact that new medical practitioners must need time to accumulate useful experience. As for overseas doctors, the Hospital Authority (HA) has already been recruiting doctors from overseas for practice in Hong Kong. But it is noted that since the service contracts offered to overseas doctors are relative short in duration, the offers are not very appealing to them. Can adjustment be made in this regard as soon as possible? They are here to serve the HA and if their services are considered useful, why not offer them service contracts for a longer duration so that they can come to work in Hong Kong without any worries? I think this is a more efficient way of achieving the desired effect. Besides, the services provided by the HA are quite comprehensive. For example, a patient who has undergone an operation and opened a patient file with the HA may regularly attend follow-up consultation and undergo medical check. If necessary, drugs and medical injections will also be prescribed to them on a long-term basis by the HA. Hence, we should not compare public healthcare services with private medical services because the public healthcare system will definitely provide long-term medical care and there will thus be an ever-increasing demand for public healthcare services. Besides, since old


people necessarily have more health problems, the problem of population ageing which we often mention has led to an ever-increasing demand for healthcare services. Furthermore, I also observe that some patients may be unable to return to their homes after their discharge from hospital because their families cannot give them the nursing care they require. It would be necessary to admit them to residential care homes but the current demand for residential care services is so keen that applicants are often made to wait for many years before a place can be offered. However, these patients will not be allowed to stay in hospital since hospital beds should not be used for this purpose and they will definitely be asked to leave. There is thus a huge gap between hospital services and care and rehabilitation services. Since patients do have a genuine demand for these services, how should the problem be resolved? It is suggested that the demand should be met through the provision of private services. But due to the unavailability of the necessary professional expertise, manpower and equipment, this is not considered feasible. Hence, this is a very practical problem for us to tackle when in any study on the problem of population ageing. I would also like to talk about the relationship between the Department of Health (DH) and the HA. According to some service users, given that there is no sharing of the electronic patient records respectively kept by the DH and HA, they will be required to undergo the same medical checks they have received in clinics under the DH when they go to seek medical consultation in institutions under the HA. I find this unbelievable because there is already a system in place for the sharing of health records between private healthcare institutions and the HA. How come there is no sharing of the electronic patient records respectively kept by the DH and HA? However, I have been told that this is really the case. And, I have made enquiries in this respect, I cannot get a clear answer. I think something has to be done it this is really the case. People will find it pointless and a waste of time for them to undergo the same medical checks they have received in clinics under the DH when they seek services from institutions under the HA, and they just cannot understand why they have to undergo the same blood tests one more time. Therefore, I hope the Secretary would follow up the matter accordingly. A suggestion is put forward in the Policy Address this year to provide larger toilet compartments for the convenience of elderly people. It seems that people tend to regard this as a very trivial matter. Judging from another angle, it


5451

can also be regarded as a measure to advocate the spirit of loving and caring for the elderly. Nevertheless, carers of elderly people have told me that wheelchairs have to be used for elders with impaired mobility and the number of wheelchair-bound elders is on the rise. However, due to geographical constraints or the out-dated design of toilet facilities, toilets for persons with disabilities are not available in some public places. The unavailability of toilets for persons with disabilities will bring about very great inconvenience. For example, when a daughter is going out with her wheelchair-bound father or a son is going out with his wheelchair-bound mother, how can they make a visit to the toilet? It is therefore their opinion that toilets for persons with disabilities must be provided and furthermore, accessibility to toilet facilities must be ensured. As I observe, toilet facilities in some places are located in a position between two sets of staircases and while able-bodied persons will find no problem going there, how can wheelchair users and their carers visit the place? It is therefore necessary for us to try our best to figure out what other alternatives are available to help them solve their problems under various circumstances. I will only give these additional remarks for the time being because I have to reserve time for speaking in the remaining sessions. PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Does any other Member wish to speak in this session? (No Member indicated a wish to speak) PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): If no Member wishes to speak, I will now invite public officers to speak. A total of three public officers will speak in this session and they may speak for up to a total of 45 minutes. I now invite the Chief Secretary for Administration to speak first. CHIEF SECRETARY FOR ADMINISTRATION (in Cantonese): President, this debate session covers livelihood policies including population, poverty alleviation, welfare and medical services, elderly care and public health. I thank the 24 Members who have expressed their views over the past five hours. In


fact, when compared with 2013, fewer Members spoke and less time was used this year. In 2013, we were here debating the first Policy Address of the Chief Executive. We were also speaking in the debate session on policies concerning poverty alleviation, elderly care, support for the disadvantaged and population. A total of 36 Members spoke in that debate session and seven hours were used. A similar phenomenon appeared in the previous debate session, which was about land, housing, transport, environment and conservation. The second debate session that ended this morning lasted for three hours with only 15 speaking Members. In contrast, in 2013, 43 Members spoke and the debate lasted for nine hours. My immediate response to this phenomenon is that Members approve of the current-term Government's work and achievement on land, housing, poverty alleviation, elderly care and support for the disadvantaged. But I quickly ask myself not to be happy so soon. This may only be my wishful thinking. I believe some pan-democratic Members will put this phenomenon down to their tactic of saving their speaking time for the last debate session to criticize the SAR Government's administration. President, as Chairperson of the Commission on Poverty (CoP) and Chairman of the Steering Committee on Population Policy, I will focus on the work in these two respects and on the issues relating to retirement protection. I note that several Members' amendments touch on the pledge made by the Chief Executive on livelihood improvement and his performance in this regard. I will also respond to this in this debate session. The Secretary for Labour and Welfare and the Acting Secretary for Food and Health will later respond in greater detail in relation to their respective policy portfolios. The current-term Government strives to improve people's livelihood Creating harmony in society, support the underprivileged, taking forward social development are the goals the incumbent Chief Executive set out in his election manifesto on social welfare. Over the past three years or so, the Government has worked on poverty alleviation, care for the elderly and support for the vulnerable in accordance with the Chief Executive's vision on social welfare, that is, the vision that young people and adults should be self-reliant, and social security and social services should be used on helping those in need. The Government's determination and hard work are unquestionable. Instead of "having endless discussion", as Mr WU Chi-wai has claimed, the current-term Government has taken proactively actions to alleviate the poor and assist the


5453

disadvantaged. However, in face of the political reality of people blaming rather than fact finding, not telling right from wrong and criticizing for the sake of criticism, I think the best approach is to let the data tells the truth. The first set of data is about the Government's welfare spending. The welfare recurrent expenditures in the 2012-2013 financial year were $42.8 billion. I must add that these recurrent expenditures, in Mr WU Chi-wai's words, are easy to increase but difficult to reduce. In the 2015-2016 financial year, these expenditures were increased by $16.9 billion or 40% to $59.7 billion, far exceeded the 24% increase rate of the total government recurrent expenditures in the same financial year. The welfare recurrent expenditures now account for 18.4% of the total government recurrent expenditures, only after education which accounts for 22% of the total recurrent expenditures. The expenditures earmarked for the following financial year will not be released until next Wednesday when the Financial Secretary delivers his Budget speech. But a substantial increase in welfare expenditures is expected because the Low-income Working Family Allowance Scheme, for which the Government will fork out $3.1 billion as recurrent expenditures, will start receiving applications from May 2016 onwards. Regarding non-recurrent welfare expenditures, the Government respectively injected $15 billion and $10 billion in 2013 into the Community Care Fund and the Lotteries Fund to respectively take forward programmes to plug gaps in the system and to take forward the Special Scheme on Privately Owned Sites for Welfare Uses. The Government also announced in 2015 that $50 billion will be reserved for improving retirement protection. The second set of data is about the beneficiary groups and their numbers. In less than two weeks after it assumed office, the current-term Government announced the launching of the Old Age Living Allowance. The scheme has been in operation for almost three years, benefiting 430 000 elderly people aged 65 or above. The Low-income Working Family Allowance Scheme, which will start receiving applications from May 2016 onwards, is estimated to benefit 200 000 households, involving 700 000 people, in which 170 000 are children and young students. As of last December, the Community Care Fund which I mentioned above has totally rolled out 30 programmes, benefited more than 1.22 million people, in which about 280 000 are "N-have nots" who are not living in public housing and not receiving Comprehensive Social Security Assistance. Besides, the $200 million measure announced in the 2014 Policy Address to help ethnic minorities to integrate into society has, to date, provided additional support to schools to help approximately 16 800 non-Chinese speaking school children in learning Chinese.


CHIEF SECRETARY FOR ADMINISTRATION: President, at this juncture, I hope you will forgive me for switching to English, because I need to refute the allegations made by the Honourable Ms Claudia MO. She said that this Government's mentality in treating ethnic minority is as if they are official outcasts, and she also accused the Government of only paying lip-service to supporting the ethnic minority community in Hong Kong. This is totally unsubstantiated. As a matter of fact, the Chief Executive and this term of the Hong Kong SAR Government attach a lot of importance to integrating ethnic minority people in society, and as a result of that we have been according priority to helping ethnic minority people. As early as 2014, in the then annual Policy Address, we rolled out a full package of measures with an investment of HK$200 million to support ethnic minority people. I have with me a six-page note on all the measures that we have introduced to support the ethnic minority. If the Honourable Ms Claudia MO is interested, I will pass her a copy later on.

She also suggested that I should sit down and listen to people from Hong Kong Unison (Unison). I want to let her know that I have spoken to the former Chairman of Unison, Miss Margaret NG, as well as the current Chairman of Unison, Mr Stephen FISHER, who is of course a member of my Commission on Poverty. I have also received words of appreciation from organizations like Oxfam, the India Association and other ethnic minority associations in Hong Kong on the efforts made by this term of the Hong Kong SAR Government to support the ethnic minority community. CHIEF SECRETARY FOR ADMINISTRATION (in Cantonese): President, I will continue with my second set of data. Through the pilot scheme announced in the 2015 Policy Address, some 2 900 pre-school children with special education needs have received on-site rehabilitation services provided by subvented pre-school rehabilitation service operators. With the $470 million recurrent expenditure earmarked in this Policy Address for the regularization of the On-site Pre-school Rehabilitation Services, the service quota will substantially increase to 7 000. It is expected that the service queuing time can be substantially shortened or may even be unnecessary. This will facilitate young children with special education needs to grow up healthily and help ease parents' pressure. I note that Prof Joseph LEE also mentioned that we had a pilot scheme on pre-school rehabilitation supported by the Lotteries Fund, but he seemed unaware that after the completion of the pilot scheme, we have already earmarked


5455

$470 million recurrent expenditures to regularize the services. Prof LEE said that the quota was insufficient for the 12 000 children now waiting for the services. I believe his data is not very accurate. The data we obtained from the Social Welfare Department is that presently some 6 000 children are waiting for the services. So, when the services are regularized and the service quota is increased to 7 000, as I have just said, the waiting time is expected to be substantially shortened or may even be unnecessary. The third set of data is about the efforts made by CoP on poverty alleviation. Since its re-establishment in December 2012, the CoP chaired by me has been working sedulously on the mission entrusted on us by the Chief Executive. The CoP is composed of four Bureaux Directors and 20 non-official members, including Legislative Council Members of different political affiliations namely Mr LEUNG Che-cheung, Mr Michael TIEN, Mr CHEUNG Kwok-che and Mr Frederick FUNG. There are also representatives from the Hong Kong Council of Social Service, Oxfam Hong Kong and Society for Community Organization, who have been devoted to the well-being of the disadvantaged, as well as representatives from labour unions and the business sector. In the past three-odd years, the CoP has convened 31 meetings and its task forces 65 meetings. In September 2013, we announced the first official Poverty Line; and subsequently published the Hong Kong Poverty Situation Report 2012, 2013 and 2014. We held two CoP Summits. We are delighted to see the population in poverty has reduced to 960 000 and the poverty rate fell to 14.3%, both are at their lowest since these data were available in 2009. The CoP values the monitoring rendered by the public and the media. We thus have, apart from establishing a dedicated webpage, issued over 110 press releases to announce our work updates. President, if the three sets of data above still fail to convince Members of the commitment the current-term Government has on assisting the poor and the needy, still induce some Members to accuse the Chief Executive in their amendments of failing to honour his pledge made on livelihood improvement at the election, or even lead Ms Cyd HO to say that we have "completely evaded paying the debts" in respect of livelihood issues, then "What can I say?" is the only response I can make. But I deeply believe that fairness exists in people's hearts. President, I dare not hope that Legislative Council Members will be fair to the Government, but I find in this debate session the pro-establishment Members are fairer than democratic Members. Mr WONG Kwok-hing of the


pro-establishment camp explicitly thanked the Government for having finished improving the existing medical assessment arrangement for the Disability Allowance this year, so that he would not need to bring out that leg prop again. Mr Tommy CHEUNG also commended the Chief Executive for accepting the proposals of the Liberal Party to increase the number of lay members appointed to the Medical Council of Hong Kong and attract medical professionals from abroad. However, on the other hand, Dr Fernando CHEUNG of the democratic camp made no mention of the $470 million recurrent expenditures, as I just said, earmarked for plugging the problem of pre-school children with special education needs queuing for children rehabilitation services which he is very concerned about. Mr SIN Chung-kai said our welfare efforts were spin and of no substance. Mr CHEUNG Kwok-che said the 2016 Policy Address was inadequate in all respects. These democratic Members are unfair. Their biased words make me sad. However, Members can be unfair but the Government is fair. That is why we will do a serious re-think, and consider and study all constructive views and criticisms from both democratic or pro-establishment Members, such as Mr LEUNG Yiu-Chung's view that the existing Poverty Line fails to reflect the positive effect of public housing, which is a non-cash based benefits of policy intervention, and Mr LEUNG Che-Cheung's view that more resources should be reserved for "ageing in place". Continue to forge a consensus and together build the way forward President, I once said at a media interview that the current-term Government had overachieved in implementing the Chief Executive's election manifesto on poverty alleviation. I have clarified for a number of times that the Chief Executive did not make any promise on implementing universal retirement protection because the Chief Executive has made it clear that social security should be used to help those in need. However, I admit that there are still two major outstanding livelihood issues in the Chief Executive's election manifesto, which are to "examine issues relating to employees' overtime work conditions and arrangements as well as legislative proposals on standard working hours" and "progressively reduce the proportion of accrued benefits attributed to employer's contribution in the MPF account that can be applied by the employer to offset long-service or severance payments". These two issues both listed under Employee Benefits involve very complicated employment relations and have an impact on the business environment, especially on the small and medium


5457

enterprises (SMEs) the employers of which account for over 90% of the employers in Hong Kong. I believe Mr Jeffrey LAM also spoke from the perspective of the burdens of SMEs when he raised his concerns just now. To properly deal with these labour issues, one cannot simplify them into how committed the Government is. They involve the participation of the entire society, particularly the employer and the employee, and the business and the labour sectors. They must adopt an accommodating attitude and try to find a mutually acceptable option. The Government will continue to strive for a consensus through the Standard Working Hours Committee chaired by Dr LEONG Che-hung and the public consultation entitled "Retirement Protection, Forging Ahead" now underway. President, under the inevitable trend of population ageing, providing a more reassuring retirement protection to the elderly is an inescapable issue. The current-term Government has not put this complicated issue a low priority because it has less than one and a half years left in its term. The CoP kicked started in last December a six-month public engagement exercise to explore the way forward for retirement protection. Given there are still a few months before the exercise ends, I think both the Government and Members who represent public opinions should listen more to different views and initiate more rational discussions, rather than making pre-mature but conclusive decisions in this Policy Address debate. A Member claimed that the Government had already ruled out universal retirement protection or a universal, uniform amount old age grant system. It is true that the Government has stated its stand in the consultation paper that it has reservation about the "regardless of rich or poor" principle and option because, as a responsible Government, we have the duty to clearly explain the far-reaching effects of this option. As pointed out in the consultation paper, if the Government decides to give a monthly payment of $3,230 to all people aged 65 or above, regardless of rich or poor, as a form of universal old age grant, the increased expenditure will rise from $22.6 billion in the first year to $2,395 billion 50 years after the base year. So, a $100 billion injection, as proposed by Mr CHEUNG Kwok-che, only accounts for a small portion of that expenditure. What does a $22.6 billion recurrent expenditure represent? It represents 90% of the $25.8 billion recurrent expenditure for elderly healthcare, or more than threefold of the $6.8 billion now allocated to elderly services. The reality is that public resources are not infinite, and this option will lead to some other knock-on effects. Giving monthly cash grants to elderly people who do


not have any financial need will deprive elderly people with financial needs of more stable financial supports or deprive those who need medical or aged home care of receiving these services in a timely manner. Is this what we wish to see? Similarly, in order to support the "regardless of rich or poor" option, we will need to substantially increase tax or open up new taxes. This will increase employers and employees' immediate burden and lower Hong Kong's economic competitiveness. Will members of the public accept these consequences? I wish to emphasize that the SAR Government is duty-bound to provide comprehensive protection to retirees, including cash subsidies, public housing, healthcare as well as home, community and residential care services. The Government is delighted to explore ways to help elderly people with some assets to increase their income after retirement, so that they can manage longevity and investment risks, and explore how to make use of public policies to encourage family members to provide better support to their elderly members. I earnestly urge members of the public and different sectors will express more views on this extensive subject of retirement protection in the coming few months. Conclusion President, some are of the view that the poverty alleviation measures this year are only piecemeal hand-outs. In the early part of my speech, I said that in the past three-odd years, the current-term Government has put poverty alleviation, elderly care and support for the disadvantaged at the top of its agenda. Resources have been deployed to these ends first, and a number of policies and measures benefiting different target groups were launched in the past few years. If one wishes to comment on the current-term Government's work on livelihood improvement, one should objectively consider its work performance in the past three-odd years. If one only focuses on the new measures announced in this Policy Address, he is unfair and partial. President, with these remarks, I urge Members to support the Policy Address this year. Thank you, President. SECRETARY FOR LABOUR AND WELFARE (in Cantonese): President, I thank the 24 Members for their speeches and their precious opinions.


5459

This Government attaches great importance to the well-being of the public, and we are determined to build a caring and harmonious society. Since the establishment of our Bureau, the huge amount of resources being invested and the wide coverage of policy measures being implemented in the area of people's livelihood and welfare have clearly demonstrated our determination to improve people's living, and to provide timely, appropriate and effective assistance to the disadvantaged who are in need and who cannot provide for themselves . The total amount of our expenditure on social welfare has risen 48% from $40.3 billion in 2011-2012 to $59.7 billion in 2015-2016. In this financial year, the estimated recurrent expenditure on social welfare accounts for 18.4% of the recurrent expenditure of the entire Government, second only to education which accounts for 22%. In individual areas, over the past four years, the resources invested by the Government in elderly services have increased 55% from $4.4 billion to $6.8 billion. The recurrent expenditure on services for persons with disabilities has also increased nearly 50% from $3.7 billion to $5.6 billion. I deeply believe that with gradual commencement of a series of short, medium and long-term welfare measures, the quality and quantity of the services will surely have enduring improvement. Facing various severe challenges like the rapidly ageing population, shrinkage of labour force, earnest need for various kinds of welfare services and changes of family structures, this Government is adopting a positive and pragmatic attitude to rise up to challenges. We will absolutely not evade the problems. Let me quote a few examples:

(1) Shortly after the Labour and Welfare Bureau was set up, it introduced the Old Age Living Allowance already, which has benefited about 430 000 elderly people to date, accounting for 40% of the elderly population.

(2) The Guangdong Scheme is implemented for eligible Hong Kong

elderly people who choose to reside in Guangdong to receive the monthly Old Age Allowance.

(3) The poverty line has been set unprecedentedly to promote poverty

alleviation on all fronts.


(4) The $2 Public Transport Fare Concession Scheme will be extended to green minibuses in phases. At present, about 950 000 elderly people and eligible persons with disabilities are using the Scheme every day, and 950 000 people is a rather large number.

(5) On 3 May this year, the Labour and Welfare Bureau will formally

introduce the Low-income Working Family Allowance (LIFA) to provide financial assistance to the low-income working families, in particular families with children, without receiving Comprehensive Social Security Assistance (CSSA), with a view to encouraging self-reliance and alleviation of cross-generational poverty. In fact, the LIFA has been positively and highly appraised by the International Monetary Fund recently. In their view, the LIFA can encourage employment, enhance labour force, assist working grass-roots families and alleviate welfare pressure.

(6) In fact, over the past period of time, unemployment and low-income

CSSA cases have successively dropped for 77 months and 83 months respectively. The overall number of CSSA applications has also successively dropped for 58 months to the low level in 2002.

All of the above have shown our courage to undertake, to innovate, to be proactive, to be pragmatic and promising, as well as to seek change while maintaining stability. Individual Members have criticized the welfare policy mentioned in the Policy Address this year as being fragmentary and in lack of focus. These remarks are certainly not fair and have neglected the major belief that "no livelihood issue is too trivial". First of all, when devising and implementing the welfare policy, this Government has put great efforts in taking all matters into consideration from a holistic point of view. Therefore, the initiatives in respect of poverty alleviation, elderly care, support for the disadvantaged in the Policy Address this year are in line and inter-related with those in the policy addresses of the past three years. We should look at them in their entirety rather than understanding individual initiative in a separate way. Besides, the new initiatives and measures which will continue to be implemented are to extend our usual welfare policy directives. They consolidate, enrich, strengthen and modify the original foundation, and are moving forward in a gradual manner.


5461

Concerning elderly care, we plan to introduce Phase II of the Pilot Scheme on Community Care Service Voucher for the Elderly. The number of service vouchers will be increased from 1 200 vouchers in Phase I to 3 000 vouchers. The service options and value of service vouchers will be increased, while the service will be extended to all 18 districts in the territory. While the service voucher scheme is promoting a new concept of "money-follows-the-user", so that the elderly may freely choose services that suit their individual needs, it also encourages elders to "age in place". This is a good example of extending and enhancing supportive facilities for community elderly care services. I have to thank Mr Frankie YICK and Mr Michael TIEN for their full support in this regard. Through a multi-pronged approach, we will enhance the service quality of residential care homes for the elderly and those for persons with disabilities. The measures will include the following: The Social Welfare Department (SWD) will reorganize the structure and increase manpower. It will step up inspection, supervision of residential care homes for the elderly and prosecution against those illegal residential care homes. Besides, it will gradually upgrade 1 200 EA2 places under the existing Enhanced Bought Place Scheme to EA1 places, with a view to increasing the number of higher quality subsidized places and enhancing the overall quality of private residential care homes for the elderly. This is a good example of giving positive response to social concern in striving to improve residential care home services. In addition, we will increase funding to District Councils to promote the work of building age-friendly communities in the district level. We encourage different districts to participate in the certification scheme under the World Health Organization's Global Network of Age-friendly Cities and Communities. Through the Community Investment and Inclusion Fund, we assist public housing residents of different districts to build up mutual help network, so as to enhance care services for singleton elderly and families of elderly doubletons. We also introduce pilot schemes for foreign domestic helpers in order to provide them with training, enhance their knowledge and skills in taking care of the elderly. These policies involve various aspects like improvement to ancillary facilities, both software and hardware, support to the elderly, their family members and carers, strengthening of social network in the communities, and so on. These have fully reflected our comprehensive care to the elderly.


In helping the disadvantaged, we will invite the Community Care Fund to allocate some funding for the implementation of a pilot scheme, with a view to providing living allowance to the low-income carers of persons with disabilities. Since employment is the most important part in the integration of persons with disabilities into society, we will adopt a series of measures, including providing post-employment counselling to persons with disabilities. We will invite the Community Care Fund to implement two other pilot schemes, so as to increase the level of disregarded earnings for the disabled CSSA recipients, and to provide an additional monthly allowance of $5,000 to the eligible disabled people who are receiving Higher Disability Allowance and salary from employment, for employing carers so that they can fully show their talents through employment. All these specific policies are caring and have significant meaning to persons with disabilities, their family members and carers. They have also fully demonstrated the Government's determination in building an integrating and caring society. I have to thank Mr WONG Kwok-hing, who has fully recognized the efforts of the Labour and Welfare Bureau in seriously dealing with the review of Disability Allowance, especially the problem of people with loss of one lower limb in their application of Disability Allowance. The review covers five major areas with nine specific items. When answering your question during the meeting of Panel on Welfare Services on Monday, I clearly undertook that the improvement measures would gradually be implemented in the third and fourth quarters this year. Only if the applications of the people with loss of one limb who are eligible for Disability Allowance are approved, they can then enjoy the $2 concessionary fare in public transport. President, by breaking through the stereotypes and with the co-operation of the medical, welfare, political and academic fields, we seek to support the children with special needs. As the Chief Secretary for Administration said earlier, through the Lotteries Fund, we have allocated $420 million for the implementation of the Pilot Scheme on On-site Pre-school Rehabilitation Services in phases. It aims to provide on-site rehabilitation services to the children with special needs who are studying at more than 450 ordinary kindergartens or kindergarten-cum-child care centres. The multi-disciplinary service teams under the co-ordination of 16 experienced welfare non-governmental organizations (NGOs) will provide more than 2 900 pre-school rehabilitation services and training places. It will even provide professional support to kindergarten teachers/child care workers and parents. Whether in form or in scale, this Pilot Scheme is unprecedented in the social welfare sector. The Government has even exceptionally reserved $470 million every year as


5463

recurrent expenditure so that when this service is being regularized, as many as 7 000 places will be provided in phases to try to cover all the children with special needs. In this way, they can grasp the golden period before six years old to receive training and counselling, with a view to integrating into the mainstream education as soon as possible. We will also step up the Rehabus service, and provide bus services to and from the Hostels for Severely Mentally Handicapped Persons cum Day Activity Centres and Community Rehabilitation Day Centres. President, in fact, with an aim to fully utilize the land and through the multi-pronged approach, this Government has long been racing against time and fighting for every inch of land in order to increase residential and day care places so as to relieve the demand. From the projects already commenced, the works which are confirmed to be incorporated into the development projects, and the projects with planning work commenced through the Special Scheme on Privately Owned Sites for Welfare Uses, it is estimated that in the coming 10 years, a total of 25 000 places can be provided. In regard to the Special Scheme on Privately Owned Sites for Welfare Uses pursued jointly by the Labour and Welfare Bureau, the SWD, the Hong Kong Council of Social Service and more than 40 welfare organizations, if the 60 or so projects under the scheme are implemented, about 9 000 new elderly service places and 8 000 new rehabilitation service places will be provided. Besides, with the commencement of the flagship redevelopment projects on the former sites of Siu Lam Hospital as well as Kai Nang Sheltered Workshop and Hostel, together with the redevelopment project of turning three vacant primary school sites into integrated rehabilitation service complexes which the Labour and Welfare Bureau successfully fought for last year, as well as the 12 pieces of land which we have already reserved for facility expansion purpose, the projects which can be commenced in this term of Government can provide a total of about 6 200 rehabilitation service places. We will continue to explore the feasibility of introducing Residential Care Service Vouchers for the Elderly in the Elderly Commission. Targeting at the medium and long-term planning needs, the Labour and Welfare Bureau will continue to fully support the Elderly Commission in bringing about the Elderly Services Programme Plan.


Building on the past and preparing for the future, we will co-operate with the entire social welfare sector sincerely. Through the significant cross-sector policy platforms such as the Child Development Fund Projects, the Community Investment and Inclusion Fund, the Partnership Fund for the Disadvantaged, and so on, we will continue to promote tripartite partnership among the community, the business sector and the Government in doing well in poverty alleviation and supporting the disadvantaged. We will also encourage social participation, foster corporate social spirit with a view to helping more people in need. At the same time, we will continue to foster transgenerational harmony, and strengthen the positive social functions of families. The Low-income Working Family Allowance Scheme can help encourage more women to go to work, thus injecting the urgently needed labour force into society. We will also step up our supportive measures so to support women in fulfilling family and work commitments. For instance, we will strengthen child care services. From 2015-2016 onwards, the SWD has been gradually increasing in phases the number of places of extended hours service for children by about 5 000 at aided child care centres and kindergarten-cum-child care centres in districts with high demand. Among them, 1 200 places have already been provided since September 2015. On the other hand, through the Partnership Fund for the Disadvantaged, the Government has provided matching grants of $200 million to further encourage collaboration among business sector, the organizations concerned and schools for the purpose of launching more after-school learning and support programmes for primary and secondary students mainly from disadvantaged families to facilitate their whole-person development. The Dedicated Fund for After-School Learning and Support Programmes is now open for second round application by welfare NGOs as well as primary and secondary schools. The deadline for submission of application is 31 March this year. In addition to women, we will also actively step up the supportive measures of policies to release the labour force of other different society groups, such as ethnic minorities, so that they can show their talents while obtaining the support that they need. The Chief Secretary for Administration has just mentioned the support to the South Asians. Let me add some more information. Different government departments provide various kinds of services to the South Asians to cater for


5465

their needs, such as education support, employment support and training. We also provide social welfare and housing services. In 2016-2017, the Home Affairs Department will, through six support service centres and two sub-centres for ethnic minorities, continue to provide language learning classes, integration programmes and dedicated programmes for ethnic minority youths. We will continue to launch the Ambassador Scheme for Ethnic Minority Youths, and employ non-civil service contract staff who are familiar with the culture and languages of ethnic minorities, in order to facilitate the implementation of various measures. In order to encourage and support non-Chinese speaking students to integrate into the community and to adjust to the education system of Hong Kong as soon as possible, the Education Bureau will allocate an annual funding of about $200 million for the implementation of the "Chinese Language Curriculum Second Language Learning Framework" in primary and secondary schools. From the angle of second language learners, it helps to address the difficulties of the non-Chinese speaking students in learning Chinese as a second language with a view to helping them bridge over to mainstream Chinese Language classes. While the 2016 Policy Address announces the implementation of a free quality kindergarten education policy, we will also provide additional resources to kindergartens which admit eight or more non-Chinese speaking students. With these remarks, President, I urge Members to support the Motion of Thanks moved by Mr Andrew LEUNG. Thank you. SECRETARY FOR FOOD AND HEALTH (in Cantonese): President, I would like to thank Members for their views, criticisms or recognitions expressed in the debate today on the initiatives of the two policy areas of food safety and health in the Policy Address, and my response is as follows. With regard to New Agriculture Policy (NAP), a public consultation was launched last year and it was found that there was wide public support for the policy. Therefore, the Government has decided to implement the NAP to promote the modernization and sustainable development of local agriculture. Major measures include: setting up an Agricultural Park (Agri-Park); examining the feasibility of designating Agriculture Priority Areas; setting up a $500 million Sustainable Agricultural Development Fund; helping farmers move up the value chain and promoting marketing and branding of local agricultural produce; and so


on. Such measures will be launched progressively in stages depending on their complexity, respective procedural requirements as well as the availability of manpower and other resources. I wish to extend my special thanks to Mr Steven HO from the agriculture and fisheries sector for his views expressed just now on a number of issues concerning the Agri-Park, the resumption of private farmland and the protection to farmers and fishermen. Mr HO felt a bit sad but I would like to tell him the aim of the Government's Emergency Relief Fund is to provide immediate economic relief and the payment of grants under the Fund is for the purpose of rendering assistance rather than compensatory in nature. Having said that, attention has all along been paid by our colleagues in the Agriculture, Fisheries and Conservation Department (AFCD) to the conditions of the affected farmers and fishermen, and other loan funds will be made available to them if problems emerge and money is needed to help them resume business. It is hoped that efforts will be made as far as possible to offer assistance to the affected fish farmers. On the other hand, we will strengthen AFCD's testing services for equine diseases. This will help to upgrade our technical and scientific research standard in the testing of equine diseases, thus facilitating Hong Kong's development into a testing centre and transportation hub for international competition horses and creating opportunities for the relevant industries. The Government will, as always, put in place a comprehensive preventive and surveillance programme to reduce the risk of an avian influenza outbreak. In June last year, the Government commissioned a consultant to study and make recommendations on the future of the live poultry trade in Hong Kong, including whether the sale of live poultry should continue. The consultancy study is expected to be completed in the second quarter of this year and the Government will then consult the public on the consultant's recommendations. We attach great importance to food safety. Regulatory proposals will be formulated for edible fats and oils as well as nutrition and health claims on formula products and prepackaged foods for infants and young children under the age of 36 months. When working out the regulatory details, due consideration will be given to the views collected during public consultation, including views expressed by the Legislative Council Panel on Food Safety and Environmental Hygiene, and efforts will be made to ensure that the proposals to be introduced will comply with the requirements of the World Trade Organization. As for the regulation of metallic contamination of food, which Dr Helena WONG has mentioned earlier, we plan to conduct a public consultation on the issue this year.


5467

A number of Members such as Mr Michael TIEN, Mr Tommy CHEUNG and Mr Steven HO have expressed grave concern about issues concerning public markets. They have commented on such issues as the expensive prices of food items and the need for environmental improvement, and have pointed out that there are vacant stalls in markets under the management of the Food and Environmental Hygiene Department (FEHD), and that focused efforts should be made by the Government to improve business environment. As far as the improvement of business environment of public markets is concerned, the Government has commissioned a consultant to make recommendations in this regard and we have proactively followed up on the improvement works of a number of public markets. Furthermore, regarding the installation of air-conditioning facilities in public markets which a number of Members have mentioned, starting from 1 July last year, we have lowered the threshold of tenants' support for the retrofitting proposal from 85% to 80%. There are now two markets which have obtained a tenants' support rate of over 80% and one of them is a beneficiary under the new threshold. We will take active actions to follow up the matter. With regard to the hawker problem, concern has also been expressed by Members such as Mr Steven HO and Mr CHAN Chi-chuen. On the development of open-air bazaars, the Government is open to any specific proposal. As mentioned by some Members earlier, a district-led approach is adopted to ensure that a balance will be struck between the operational considerations of hawkers and the environmental concerns of the local residents, and we must strive for a proper balance between the two. Assistance will be rendered as far as possible to project proponents for liaising with the government departments concerned as long as suitable sites can be located and support from the respective district councils (DCs) is obtained, while food safety and environmental hygiene will not be jeopardized. For Members' information, there is an actual example of the implementation of the policy this year, that is, the bazaar set up on Maple Street in Sham Shui Po during Chinese New Year. The bazaar is developed with a bottom-up approach, under which the FEHD has worked in co-ordination with the relevant DC after a proposal has been put forward by the latter. Some Members have expressed concern about the issues concerning columbaria. We are now continuing with our work to render full support to the Legislative Council in the scrutiny of the Private Columbaria Bill, with the aim of passing the Bill within the current legislative session so as to strengthen the


regulation of private columbaria. Apart from actively promoting green burials, we have also bear in mind the need to increase the supply of public niches. Over the past few years, we have consulted seven DCs on the use of eight sites for the proposed provision of about 450 000 new niches. We will continue to take forward new projects in this regard and have planned to consult five DCs on the relevant proposals in 2016. It is hoped that the proposals will be supported by various political parties and the district organizations concerned for early commissioning of the required community facilities. On the other hand, after the launching of a two-month territory-wide "Keep Clean 2015@Hong Kong: Our Home" Campaign in August last year, a regular meeting mechanism has been established with DC committees in charge of environmental and hygiene affairs. A meeting was held on 1 February this year to discuss ways to strengthen our work in keeping Hong Kong clean and strive for active district participation. Follow-up actions will be taken by regional staff of the FEHD and other departments on the relevant matters. Lastly, I would like to extend my special thanks to Mr Tommy CHEUNG, who has expressed appreciation for the administrative measures implemented to extend the validity period of a liquor licence to two years. We will continue with our enhancement of the administrative measures. With regard to public healthcare services, as pointed out by a number of Members, due to the challenges and the increase in service demand brought about by an ageing population, it is obvious to all that the public healthcare system is under immense pressure and full of challenges. A series of measures will be put in place to safeguard public health, to maintain quality healthcare services and to ensure the sustainable development of the services. Recognition and appreciation have been shown by a number of Members for our 10-year plan for hospital development to cope with the long term healthcare services demand. The number of public hospital beds will be increased by nearly 20% from about 27 000 at present to over 32 000, and over 90 new operating theatres will be provided. It is estimated that the total project costs will amount to $200 billion. On the other hand, the recommendations of the Steering Committee on Review of Hospital Authority (HA) will be implemented to enhance the overall operation and service standard of the HA. We have also commenced the


5469

development of the second stage of the Electronic Health Record Sharing System and have taken measures to enhance public healthcare services. Initiatives in this regard include providing 231 additional public hospital beds, increasing operating theatre sessions, increasing quotas for general out-patient consultation, providing additional quotas for consultation at the Accident and Emergency Department, establishing the fifth Joint Replacement Centre to cope with the ageing population, strengthening the services for critical illness and chronic diseases, extending the coverage of visits by the Community Geriatric Assessment Teams to residential care homes for the elderly, and kicking start the preparatory work on the setting up of a new Child Assessment Centre. Mr SIN Chung-kai has questioned just now if other timely improvement measures are available apart from this 10-year plan. I would like to inform Members that the construction of the Tin Shui Wai Hospital and the Hong Kong Children's Hospital will be completed and the two hospitals will then be commissioned for service within the next few years. Mr WU Chi-wai has also opined that a concrete timetable should be put forth for the planning of hospital projects. This is actually what we have always been trying to do but complicated procedures are involved in the provision or redevelopment of a hospital, and applications for resources and reports have to be submitted to different committees of the Legislative Council for deliberation. As mentioned by Mr WU, we have consulted the Wong Tai Sin DC on the arrangements for Our Lady of Maryknoll Hospital and recommendations have also been put forward in this regard. Besides, a new regulatory regime will be established to regulate private healthcare facilities and in the process, various stakeholders will be consulted on the relevant technical details. It is hoped that a bill will be introduced to the Legislative Council in the 2016-2017 session for deliberation. Preparatory work will also be made for the implementation of Voluntary Health Insurance Scheme, about which Mr CHAN Kin-por and Mr POON Siu-ping have expressed deep concern. Much has been done after public consultation to discuss with the insurance sector and the stakeholders with a view to proposing feasible protection measures which can meet social expectation. As far as Chinese medicine is concerned, we have gradually implemented the recommendations put forth by the Chinese Medicine Development Committee, including the development of Chinese medicine hospital, the development of the integrated Chinese-Western medicine, the expansion of the Hong Kong Chinese Materia Medica Standards (HKCMMS) Project as well as the setting up of a testing centre for Chinese medicines. Invitations have also


been issued in January 2016 to non-profit making organizations which are interested in developing and operating a Chinese medicine hospital at the reserved site in Tseung Kwan O to submit expression of interest to the Government. I understand the views of Mr CHAN Han-pan on Chinese medicine but would like to reiterate that in connection with registration under the HKCMMS Project, the requirement to register is necessary for safeguarding the safety performance and quality. Very close communication will be maintained with the relevant sector in this respect. Furthermore, with regard to the problem of antimicrobial resistance, a high-level steering committee to be chaired by the Secretary for Food and Health will be set up to tackle the threat of the problem to public health. To relieve the pressure of seasonal influenza on the public healthcare system (The buzzer sounded) … we have expanded the scope of the programme to provide free/subsidized seasonal influenza vaccination to cover all elders aged 65 or above and persons with intellectual disability. President, may I continue with my speech? PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Please finish your speech as soon as possible. SECRETARY FOR FOOD AND HEALTH (in Cantonese): It is also noted that the Community Care Fund (CCF) is considering implementing a pilot scheme to provide teenage girls from eligible low-income families with free cervical cancer vaccination. It has come to my attention that Prof Joseph LEE is concerned about other preventive health screenings and in this connection, observation will be conducted by the relevant science committee of the Centre for Health Protection on an ongoing basis and programmes will be launched once there are sufficient scientific justifications. A number of Members including Mr Tommy CHEUNG and Prof Joseph LEE have expressed concern about the issue of healthcare manpower. It is expected that the strategic review on healthcare manpower planning and professional development in Hong Kong (the Review) will be completed in the first half of this year. As first priority will be accorded to proposals related to doctors, the Government plans to introduce a bill into the Legislative Council in


5471

the first quarter to amend the Medical Registration Ordinance. The bill will seek to increase the number of lay members in the Medical Council of Hong Kong (MCHK) from four to eight, improve the MCHK's complaint investigation and disciplinary inquiry mechanism and enhance its administrative flexibility in admitting non-locally trained doctors. As pointed out by Mr TAM Yiu-chung, we hope that measures will also be put in place in the legislative exercise to provide for greater flexibility in offering service contracts to non-locally trained doctors. To meet the anticipated demand for healthcare manpower, the Government will, on the basis of the preliminary findings of the Review, increase the number of publicly-funded degree places in medicine, dentistry and other healthcare disciplines by 50, 20 and 68 respectively in 2016-2017 to 2018-2019. There are other measures on manpower arrangements but I will not go into details here. With regard to mental health, we will implement a three-year territory-wide education and promotion campaign to promote to the public the importance of mental health. The HA will, in collaboration with the Social Welfare Department, invite the CCF to consider implementing a pilot scheme based on a medical-social collaboration model to provide dementia care services to elderly people with mild or mild to moderate dementia in the community through the District Elderly Community Centres. We will also increase the number of psychiatric beds in Siu Lam Hospital with a view to clearing up cases of severe intellectual disabilities on the waiting list in phases in the coming three years. I hope Prof Joseph LEE would understand that we seek not only to handle dementia cases but have formulated a comprehensive mental health policy. The Review Committee on Mental Health will keep monitoring the implementation of the policy. As for the promotion of the development of primary care, we will continue with our work of formulating reference frameworks for specific population groups and chronic diseases, promoting the Primary Care Directory and establishing community health centres in various districts. With regard to community care services and public-private partnership, about which Mr LEUNG Che-cheung is deeply concern, $10 billion has in fact been earmarked for the purpose. The funding proposal is currently pending deliberation by the Finance Committee and it is hoped that an endorsement will be given as soon as possible. Primary care services will be enhanced so that members of the public will be


provided with the appropriate services, and the General Out-patient Clinic Public-Private Partnership Programme will also be extended from three districts to 18 districts. We are planning for the launch of the Colorectal Cancer Screening Pilot Programme in 2016 the earliest to provide subsidized colorectal cancer screening in phases for eligible Hong Kong residents aged 61 to 70 within three years. On the other hand, we also plan to extend the Pilot Study of Newborn Screening for Inborn Errors of Metabolism (IEM) on 1 April this year to cover 24 IEM. As far as tobacco control is concerned, we will strengthen the enforcement actions in statutory no-smoking areas by the Tobacco Control Office of the Department of Health, designate new no-smoking areas at bus interchanges located at the tunnel portal areas, enhance smoking cessation services and formulate legislative proposal in respect of the regulation of electronic cigarettes. I hope Mr Albert CHAN would understand that we have never made smokers our enemies and this allegation is incorrect. Resources have always been devoted to assisting smokers to quit smoking. As the Policy Bureau in charge of food and health, we are duty-bound to implement tobacco control measures and protect public health. Finally, I would like to say a few words on the dental care services for the elderly since a number of Members have talked about the issue. The Government attaches great importance to the demand for dental care services among elderly people and has launched the Elderly Dental Assistance Programme under the CCF in 2012. The Programme has been extended to cover elders who are Old Age Living Allowance recipients so that 130 000 elderly persons aged 80 or above can be benefited. We will review the effectiveness of the Programme and expand its coverage by phases so that elders in other age groups will also be benefited. The number of places in dentistry has also been increased with a view to providing more sufficient manpower resources in this regard in the future. Lastly, I also wish to extend my thanks to Prof Joseph LEE, who has put forward some new suggestions about such issues as hearing impairment, spending one's remaining years at home and rare diseases. We will continue to have discussions on the matters at the relevant panels. President, I hope Members will support the initiatives proposed in the Policy Address on medical and health and food safety. I am looking forward to working together with the Legislative Council and the general public to improve our healthcare and food safety systems.


5473

With these remarks, President, I beg Members to support the original motion. Thank you, President. PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Though it may appear to some Members that what the Government has done is not good enough, they should have heard enough from the Secretary. The third debate session ends. PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): We now proceed to the fourth debate session. The debate themes are "Education, Manpower, Youth, Arts and Culture and Sports". This session covers the following five policy areas: Education; Manpower; Youth; Arts and Culture; and Sports. Members who wish to speak in this session will please press the "Request to speak" button. MR TOMMY CHEUNG (in Cantonese): President, like the existing voucher system for pre-primary education, the so-called free quality kindergarten education policy mentioned by the Chief Executive in the Policy Address this year also overlooks students in private independent kindergartens. This is unfair to middle-class parents who will not receive any subsidy. The Liberal Party and I must express our disappointment. The Liberal Party always maintains that the policy direction of kindergarten education should be explored from the macro perspective with special emphasis on dovetailing with the population policy and social development of Hong Kong. It is necessary to impart a clear message to the public that population growth will be beneficial to our society in the long run. Hence, the Government should provide subsidy to all Hong Kong parents (including middle-class parents) in order to ease their financial burden of pre-primary education. It is only in this way that we can achieve the objective of encouraging childbirth to ease the ageing of our population. Kindergarten is in fact the foundation stage and indeed a very important stage in the process of education. The inclusion of pre-primary education in the scope of government subsidy is therefore only reasonable. But the intransigent


authorities have failed to grasp the opportunity to improve the voucher system, continuing to exclude kindergartens offering quality and diversified education from the scope of government subsidy. I bet that this will only put early childhood education onto the same wrong path walked by primary and secondary education a few decades ago. The quality of pre-primary education will surely decline continuously, thus impeding the dedicated efforts and development of the early childhood education sector. In the end, this will force some parents to look for other options, options like the Direct Subsidy Scheme schools in primary and secondary education. The same mistake in history will repeat itself. Actually, the exclusion of private independent kindergartens of high quality and also non-profit-making kindergartens charging higher tuition fees from the voucher scheme will in effect make it difficult for families with limited means to look for more and better choices for their children. This runs counter to the original intent of the scheme. The voucher system is most severely criticized for its narrow scope, which only covers non-profit-making kindergartens with tuition fees not exceeding a specified level. In the initial days of implementation, some ailing kindergartens managed to survive by switching to the non-profit-making mode. This has undoubtedly undermined the healthy ecology of pre-primary education. The incentive meant for encouraging the provision of quality education is completely nullified. I must advise the authorities that the resources dedicated to pre-primary education must be spent and allocated appropriately, so as to maximize efficiency and avoid ruining the good policy intent. The one merit of the voucher system is that users themselves can decide the allocation of resources, thus giving full play to market forces and encouraging diversity, the pre-requisite for enhancing benign competition among kindergartens. President, as projected by the Steering Committee on Population Policy, the population of Hong Kong will face rapid ageing and our labour force will shrink drastically. The authorities must formulate a satisfactory labour importation policy lest the competitiveness of Hong Kong may continue to decline.


5475

In the Policy Address, the Chief Executive's response to the request of the construction industry for labour importation is quite positive. It is unambiguously pointed out, "There is still a genuine need to import workers to cater for our development needs, on the premise of according priority to local workers in employment and safeguarding their wage levels". But when Secretary for Labour and Welfare Matthew CHEUNG was repeatedly questioned by Members at the relevant meetings of the Panel on Manpower as to whether the words on labour importation in the Policy Address could be taken to mean a change in the labour importation policy, he was very evasive and dared not give any affirmative answer. I must advise the authorities that instead of talking hawk and acting chicken, they should pluck up the courage of committing themselves to introducing measures that can achieve the instant effect of alleviating our acute labour shortage, or they will themselves ruin the long-term economic development of Hong Kong. I was therefore right in calling the Secretary as "Secretary for Long-term Economic Destruction". I must reiterate that labour importation is no deluge and ogre. In the 80s and 90s, the catering industry thrived primarily because the Government permitted the industry to import workers. This actually helped to "make the pie bigger", and in turn boosted local employment. President, the industry and I both feel helpless and worried when seeing the populist trend, opportunism and rising welfare demands in society in recent years. In fact, the business environment in Hong Kong is much worse than before. In recent years, our small and medium enterprises (SMEs) and micro enterprises have all been driven to a state of total exhaustion. I often refer to teaching people how to fish as an analogy. The moral here is that we must teach people how to fish and ensure that there are enough fish in the pond for fishing, rather than merely depending on handing out fish as a solution. However, as teaching people how to fish requires more support and its effect cannot be felt until after a long time, very few people have the patience to listen to me. This however does not mean that the Government should simply drift along the trend, generously accepting demands but refusing to meet the costs and requiring SMEs, particularly micro enterprises, to pay the bill for it.


Since the business sector can no longer ignore the incessant demands of trade unions, we must state our stance clearly and say no to the abolition of the arrangement for offsetting severance payments against Mandatory Provident Fund accrued benefits. Standard working hours, paternity leave, additional statutory holidays and biennial reviews of the minimum wage level will turn out to be poisonous candies in the long run. They look beneficial to employees, but in reality they will endlessly erode the competitiveness of Hong Kong, impair our business environment and reduce people's chances of upward mobility. I must advise the authorities that the past success of Hong Kong actually owed itself to the policy of "positive non-intervention". This policy is not about total inaction. Rather, it aims to create a favourable business environment as a means of enhancing the competitiveness of Hong Kong and enabling people to move upward along the social ladder. The authorities must therefore make up for lost time, drive industrial development for creating more employment opportunities, and reduce intervention in order to let our free market return to the right track. I must also emphasize that if the authorities really want to "make a bigger pie", they should not depend solely on large consortia and the financial and real estate industries. Instead, they should lower the entry threshold, so that more people can have opportunities of starting up small businesses and moving upward in society. Only the diversified development of society can sustain healthy economic growth. President, in view of the ongoing filibuster in Council meetings these days, you have reminded me that this Council may be unable to debate the motion with no legislative effect I put forward, even though it is the first on the list. Hence, since I still have a few seconds left today, let me just say a few words on this motion. This motion was also put forward by Ms Miriam LAU four years ago, but unfortunately, the Council likewise could not debate it at that time. I want to point out that the policy addresses of the Chief Executive over all these years have consistently overlooked the needs of the middle class, much to the disappointment of the Liberal Party and me. If such oversight continues, the middle class, which is an important force of social development, will surely join the choir of social grievances. Therefore, the authorities should address the problems faced by the middle class as early as possible. They should actively


5477

consider the advice of the Liberal Party on establishing a middle class commission. Both the Liberal Party and I believe that a high-level and cross-department commission can help the authorities to incorporate some indicators relevant to enhancing the strength of the middle class into its policies and measures. This can strengthen the momentum of upward mobility of the community and avoid imbalanced policy planning. President, I so submit. MR CHAN HAK-KAN (in Cantonese): President, I would like to talk about the youth policy in this debate session. In recent few years, social disturbances and protests have become more often in the community, and we have even seen the occupation of Central or even riots and the active participation of young people. I have chatted with some young people lately, and I would like to take this opportunity to reflect some of their views to Secretary for Home Affairs LAU Kong-wah, who has deep concern for youth policy. However, President, I may as well cover housing, land supply or even environmental problems in my speech. Before this meeting, I had quite a long struggle on whether I should speak on the youth policy in the second debate session before Secretary WONG Kam-sing or Secretary Paul CHAN. On second thought, I think if I leave this to the second debate session, the two Secretaries may just repeat their standard replies. If so, I choose to take this opportunity and give Secretary LAU Kong-wah an anatomy of the thoughts and aspirations of the young people of our times. President, as an ancient saying goes, "no theory is absolutely right and nothing is always wrong". A good government should formulate policies according to the needs of the times and revise its policies in response to situations in the community in order to keep close tabs on society and avoid being detached from the reality. Trends come and go in a fortnight, and our young people are also very quick and responsive sometimes. They have aspirations in many areas and they are creative in many ways. Hence it is necessary for our youth policy to focus on their needs so as to respond to their calls. I recall that a motion moved by me in the Council urged the Government to care about the education, employment, housing, home acquisition and business start-up problems faced by young people, and make all possible efforts to promote policies in these four areas. If the Government can provide more support to young people in these four areas, I believe the road for our young


people to grow up and mature will be happier and smoother, and they can realize their dreams more easily, develop their potentials and contribute to society in return. Housing problem is one of the major concerns of the young people of today. The current Government has implemented a number of housing policies and measures targeting on young people. But do Members still remember the Youth Hostel Scheme (YHS) launched by the former Chief Executive Donald TSANG during his office a few years ago? I do not know if the President has any clue about the latest progress of the YHS. As I myself have no clue about this, I have done some research on the Internet. At the initial stage of the YHS, the Government undertook to supply 3 000 hostel units ― at that time I put forth a proposal on this. Last year, when the Government announced the eligibility for application for YHS units, it revealed that only 270 hostel units ― less than 10% of the proposed target ― were available for application. Some young people have told me that if they apply for a YHS unit, on top of meeting the monthly income limit of less than $15,000, they have to give up their application for public rental housing; moreover, there will be a process of drawing lots, which makes the application even more difficult than winning the Mark Six. Therefore, the YHS virtually cannot help much to ease the housing problem faced by young people. Of course, the supply of 270 hostel units is better than none. Yet the construction of these 270 units were proposed by the Government several years ago, and since then the Government has not mentioned other youth hostel construction plan on other occasions. Hence I would like the Secretary to tell us later on, apart from the youth hostel projects in Tai Po and Sheung Wan, whether the Government would commission non-profit making organizations to operate more youth hostels in locations convenient for young people to travel to work or their daily activities in the future. Are there any suitable premises? I hope the Secretary can give me a reply. Most of these youth hostels are renovated from existing buildings. It would be best if some sites are available for building residential units for young people. Recently, certain property developer is willing to donate some sites for the development of residential housing for young people, but it seems that the Government did not buy the idea. I have heard that the issue has been passed to Hong Kong Housing Society for follow-up, but no decision has been made so far, can the authority concerned brief us on the latest development? Another issue, as mentioned by Secretary Paul CHAN from time to time, is that we need to construct more flats, not only for young people, but also for the public at large, yet finding suitable sites is such a big headache. I admit that this


5479

is an important issue. During my chat with young people, I noticed that they are very clear-headed. They cited a figure and I would like to share that with Members. They said the Government should also be held responsible for the shortage of housing sites today. The Chief Executive once mentioned that some 150 potential housing sites had been identified, and he hoped these sites would be rezoned as housing sites for housing development in five years. But in reality, the Government had rezoned only 46 sites out of these 150 sites so far. Less than one third of his term is left for the Chief Executive to discharge his duty, yet he managed to complete only one third of the rezoning work so far. How can he actualize his promise that he would do his best to rezone more sites for housing development? They have added that at first the Government has set the target of building 290 000 public housing units in the Long Term Housing Strategy, but later on it revised the target to 280 000 units. No matter what, we are still short of sites for the development of over 25 000 units. We should not criticize our young people for being ignorant to public policies. In fact they have done a lot of research. They want to tell us that the Government has not tried hard enough to actualize the target it set, it should take concrete actions instead of just announcing the target. Talking about land supply, here I would like to reiterate that the DAB fully support the North East New Territories New Development Areas Planning that the Government is working on. Moreover, we would like the Government to expedite the study on North East New Territories, and speed up the studies on brownfield, "Green Belt" zones with no ecological value and the development plan of artificial islands in the central waters. Otherwise, if the process from surveying studies to the completion of development takes 20 to 30 years, I am afraid the young people now waiting for public housing will become middle aged people by then. We also talked about the leisure activities that young people like to do, I asked if they still like to do shopping and watch movies. Many of them said they seldom do this now because it is quite expensive to do shopping, watch movies and dine out. Today, many young people enjoy hiking as much as their senior friends. Hence there is one point that they eagerly want me to tell the Government ― while they long for having their own home, they disagree with the Chief Executive's previous proposal of developing housing units for young people in country park areas. I therefore urge the Government to give up its plan on housing development in country parks. In fact, putting aside the sites within country park areas and with conservation values, now we still have over


23 000 hectares of potential housing sites. If the Government can speed up the rezoning process of these sites, according to the policy of giving development priority to brownfields, actually more units can be built on these sites to house the people in need. The young people are very concerned about the country parks because Hong Kong is a jungle of buildings where "green lungs" are scarce. The country parks are the biggest "green lungs" as well as significant sources of fresh water in Hong Kong. If the Government narrows the scope of country parks lightly, I believe not only the conservation groups, our young people would also have strong views on this. President, Members all referred to the riot occurred in Mong Kok in the evening of the first day of the Lunar New Year. We believe that the riot was planned by some "Hong Kong Independence" activists, and we saw many young faces in the riot. According to the news reports I read, some of the rioters under arrest were jobless young people. This incident reflects Hong Kong young people's indignation against the establishment. They complain about the lack of upward mobility opportunities, and that would prompt them to make extreme and outrageous behaviours. As I said earlier, education, employment, housing/home acquisition and business start-up are four inter-linked areas, each of which can promote young people's development in other areas. With a stable and comfortable home, young people can focus their energy on career development and pursuing education; similarly, in another way round, smooth career development can help young people realize their dream of home acquisition. No one can stay young forever. The unemployment of young people is a waste of their youth, and also a waste of the precious resources in the community. Secretary Matthew CHEUNG would refute that Hong Kong's overall unemployment rate is very low, but may the Secretary tell us the actual unemployment rate of young people? If my memory is correct, the figure should be close to 20%. I hope that given time, the situation would gradually improve, but this is an undeniable fact that we cannot turn a blind eye to. President, sometime earlier, I paid a visit to a recycling company owned by a young man in his thirties. He said his parents used to run a small business of trading waste carton paper and waste iron in the street. His parents used their hard-earned savings to support his study in Britain. Given the recycling


5481

background of his family, he studied environmental science in Britain where he was taught various technologies in recycling. He returned to Hong Kong with all those technologies. After a few years of frugal living, he managed to make some savings. He focused on developing new products based on the findings of his studies. He now runs a recycling factory in the EcoPark turning waste tyres into eco-blocks. This is indeed a very good example showing that a young man managed to develop his own business through his hard work. Nonetheless, I have to tell Members that this young man now faces a big problem ― there is no market for the eco-blocks in Hong Kong. As I time and again pointed out to Secretary WONG Kam-sing, the environmental industry developed by him only focuses on waste recovery, processing and recycling in the upstream, there is no market for the recycled products. Neither will the Government take the lead to buy these local made products. This will stifle the development of our environmental industry. This young man is now torn between two choices ― holding on to his recycling business, or starting another business despite his reluctance to let go. If he really gives up the business, this will be a loss to Hong Kong too. Of course, some would say this example shows that business start-ups may experience difficulty or failure. It is certainly not my wish that this case would be recorded in the Hansard as an example of business start-up failure. As for the Secretary, he would say that the Government encourages young people to start their own business, yet they may be exposed to big risks as business start-ups are highly risky. The Financial Secretary once said that among all attempts to start business, only 1% managed to survive, the remaining 99% all ended up in failure. That said, if young people do not even have the basic opportunities, where can we find the successful stories? I noticed that the Government is very supportive of young people's development in the cultural and creative industries. Through the example I cited above, I however want to remind the Secretary that young people can also find huge space for development in Hong Kong's environmental and recycling industries. Hence we should not only encourage young people to join the cultural and creative industries, and the example I cited just now proves that our environmental industry can also provide the space for development to young people.


Lastly, I want to mention the Youth Development Fund initiated by the Government and well-received by the public, it is indeed a very good platform helping young people to start their business. However, given its complicated application procedures and relatively narrow coverage, I would like to raise some concrete suggestions for the Secretary's consideration. Firstly, for many new businesses started by young people, rental payment is their biggest cost as well as source of pressure. We notice that many government premises, such as the government buildings where many public offices are located, have spacious lobbies on the ground floor. If young people or even some non-profit making organizations are allowed to set up booths to sell their products in these venues at low cost, this can help young people to start their business by reducing their operating cost. Besides, in some European countries and the United States, young people are allowed to park their vehicles by the roadside for the conduct of business activities. Can we consider allowing this kind of business activities in Hong Kong? The Government had previously organized art fairs and bazaars for young people in the outdoor areas of public parks and cultural centres, can these efforts be expanded? All these efforts fall under the responsibility of Secretary LAU, may he tell us if they can do more in order to give young people more opportunities to start their business? President, finally I would like to briefly comment on Policy Address this year. My view is that this Policy Address is a relatively practical and safe one, most of the proposals are in line with the policies implemented by the this term of Government in the past few years. I hope that this term of Government can make all possible efforts to actualize the promises it made in the Policy Address before the expiry of its terms of office. Here I would like to particularly refer to the Chief Executive's undertaking that he will do his best to increase land supply, housing supply and help to improve the upward mobility of young people. This is the end of my speech in this debate session. Thank you, President. MR CHRISTOPHER CHEUNG (in Cantonese): President, youth development and prospects are always a big subject in society. Therefore, I would like to talk about issues related to the youth. The youth development policies proposed in the Policy Address this year deserve our appreciation, as they can provide a platform for youth advancement. However, the Policy Address does not


5483

specifically mention any ways to deal with the increasingly radical actions of some young people, nor does it offer any solutions to the difficulties faced by the youth in property purchase. Efforts in this area are not comprehensive enough. I hope the Government can formulate more thorough policies in the future and enhance its performance on youth-related areas. Although the Policy Address has not given much treatment to youth policies, it introduces numerous measures for youth development, such as the Multi-faceted Excellence Scholarship, Youth Development Fund and Funding Scheme for Youth Internship in the Mainland, and so on. Young people with different aspirations can make use of these platforms to explore their roads ahead. They can plan for their own future with reference to measures in the Policy Address and improve their competitiveness through practice, while striving for advancement to truly become a pillar of society in the future. The Government's pragmatic policies in supporting young people do merit our appreciation. However, President, talking about youth issues nowadays, many people will be somewhat sad, worry about those "young people at risk" taking part in illegal Occupy Central, students of the University of Hong Kong besieging and charging their own campus, or even the young rioters attacking police officers on the first day of the Lunar New Year. We notice that some young people have wrongly interpreted and misunderstood the Basic Law. These young people do not have much affection towards the country and the Chinese race, while some of them are even influenced by the separatist ideology of "Hong Kong Independence". I think this is a dangerous signal. It is of paramount importance for the Government to guide them back onto the right track, yet the Policy Address is silent on this. I think that the Government's efforts in this regard are not comprehensive and meticulous enough. It cannot be denied that young people today are faced with very big problems like the difficulty to purchase a flat or the lack of upward social mobility. The financial services constituency to which I belong is an example. Hong Kong is an international financial centre, and our capital raising abilities rank among the best in the world. Furthermore, the State's financial reform and the financial co-operation between Hong Kong and the Mainland since our return to China have brought us endless business opportunities. However, owing to factors such as the Government's tilted policies, the revenue in most industries are mostly reaped by major financial corporations, while local small and medium enterprises are still operating under great hardship. Practitioners in the trade,


young people in particular, can barely have a share of the fruit brought about by the State's financial reform even after having devoted great efforts. It is thus understandable that they are discontented and aggrieved. But even though I can appreciate young people's discontent, I absolutely do not agree to their use of violence as a means of voicing their demands. I sincerely hope that these radical youngsters can examine their own actions. Can they behave recklessly simply because they want to express their aspirations? Can they transcend the law merely because they are hoisting the flag of democracy? After causing social disturbance, ruining the rule of law, destructing Hong Kong's image of civility and amiability, what good can these irrational, radical or even barbarous means of demonstration bring? Is it worth the while to become a rioter, bearing criminal liability and sacrificing one's bright future for a moment of aggressive impulse? President, apart from embracing their dreams and passion, young people also need to be pragmatic and stay calm. They must rationally analyse and distinguish right from wrong. They must never just try to blame the Government and complain about others. Instead, they must also examine the problems with themselves. Meanwhile, it is a trend for young people in Hong Kong to pursue their career in the Mainland to tap the rapid economic development driven by the State's reform and opening up. I hope young people can take the initiative to understand the state of affairs in the country, rather than getting easily influenced by others and criticizing almost everything, or even refusing to learn about their own country and neglecting the opportunities given to Hong Kong under the State's development. On the part of the Government, I believe that the authorities should proactively and earnestly enhance communication with young people, with a view to promoting mutual trust and understanding. Also, the Government should seriously consider bringing the voices of young people into the system by increasing the percentage of the youth in its consultation framework. In this way, they can make their voices heard without having to take to the streets along with radicals, and they will not be exploited by politicians with the malicious intentions of opposing China on every front and distorting the truth. Furthermore, the Government should establish a platform consisting of four areas to assist young people in pursuing studies, building career, purchasing property and starting a business, with a view to helping them to climb up the social ladder.


5485

Furthermore, I consider that the Government should step up publicizing the benefits of "Belt and Road" to young people's development, so that they can take better advantage of the opportunities brought by the initiative. President, Chairman MAO once said, "The world is yours, as well as ours, but in the last analysis, it is yours." Therefore, more weight should be given to opinions of young people. The Government and various sectors in society should also provide wider platforms and opportunities for youth development. In fact, most of the young people in Hong Kong are ambitious and enthusiastic. I believe that they will achieve the success they deserve as long as they can be humble, less complaining and more diligent in realizing the Lion Rock spirit. I so submit. Thank you, President. MR IP KIN-YUEN (in Cantonese): President, before going into education problems, I would like to talk about the Mong Kok incident as it is everyone's concern. I feel rather sad to see the series of clashes between the people and the Police in the streets of Mong Kok on the night of the Lunar New Year's Day and the injuries of many reporters, members of the public and police officers in the incident. After the incident, on the second day of the Lunar New Year, the Hong Kong Professional Teachers' Union (HKPTU) issued a statement condemning all acts of violence, as they would only cause more harm to the people rather than solving problems. Moreover, those resorting to violence will have to bear the consequences and liabilities for their acts. Violence would only intensify the conflicts in the community, and our society would have to pay an even greater price for that. We do not wish to see the continuation of these hostilities, and I would like to express my sympathy to those injured in the incident. President, apart from condemning acts of violence, it is also necessary for us to find out the cause of the incident and the related problems, and what can be done to rebuild people's confidence in Hong Kong. If we consider this a serious incident, should we look into it by setting up an independent commission of inquiry? Over the years, we have accumulated rich experience in the conduct of independent inquiries, including the one to investigate the collision of vessels near Lamma Island in 2012. At that time, notwithstanding the Police's decision to carry out criminal investigation into the incident and arrest the captain


involved, LEUNG Chun-ying still decided on the next day of the tragedy that a commission of inquiry should be set up under the Commissions of Inquiry Ordinance (Cap. 86) to inquire into the incident. The objective of setting up an independent commission of inquiry is to avoid the recurrence of similar incidents as well as to address the problems at their roots. What on earth were the forces at work behind the violent clashes we saw recently? In this Council, we have heard many different analyses, but which one carries the truth? The Government said that compared with the riots broke out in the 60s, the recent Mong Kok incident is very different in nature and completely another story. If that is the case, why can we not conduct an investigation? Putting aside the riots in the 60s, I personally had experienced an incident critical to the education of Hong Kong, back then an independent commission of inquiry had been established. Not long ago, an independent commission of inquiry had also been set up to investigate the series of incidents relating to lead in fresh water supply in public housing estates. We hold that an independent commission of inquiry should be set up in order to find out the cause of the Mong Kok incident and come up with solutions subsequently. In addition, we are of the view that this is a very serious incident. This year, a number of my friends have told me that exactly because of this incident of clashes, they have a strong feeling that Hong Kong is no longer the same. If the incident is such a significant concern of the public and has aroused intense discussion in the community, why do we just put it aside instead of finding out the truth? Are we trying to evade the problem? If we really want to directly address the issue instead of diverting the attention, we should conduct a thorough investigation. May I ask, apart from setting up a commission of inquiry, do we have other better ways to address the issue? If there is none, should we officially set up an independent commission of inquiry to find out the truth through judicial means? I think this is the time for various parties to conduct introspection and review. The Government, in particular, should review whether its administration and policies over the years have let the people down, as the incident was a violent outburst of public indignation reflecting that the people were on the verge of despair. Over the years, the Government has resorted to all sorts of institutional violence, in some cases, it even disregarded the public and their opinions. It is the time for us to consider whether the Mong Kok incident was triggered by public indignation and grievances; whether in-depth investigation should be conducted into the incident; if there is suspicion that the


5487

incident might have linkage with the rise of localism, or that it was instigated by certain people behind, whether an investigation should be conducted in order to give an account of all these doubts. The commission of inquiry should be impartial and independent instead of favouring any side. We have to figure out "what made this happen" ― here I borrow the phrase from an article written by the President ― we have to find out what has made the atmosphere of our society to worsen. If we disregard the problem and fail to rectify it by setting up a commission of inquiry, it is highly likely that we would see the recurrence of similar clashes and conflicts in the future, and by then we will be held responsible for not making the right decision today. President, I would like to return to the education problems, which in fact have considerable relevance to the changes in the macro-environment we discuss today. President, what I find interesting is, compared to the SAR Government, the Central Government seems to have more insightful observation in this respect. The 13th Five-Year Plan endorsed by The Fifth Plenary Session of the 18th Central Committee of the Communist Party of China closed in October last year in Beijing elaborated the country's vision for Hong Kong. Moreover, roughly a month later, President XI Jinping expressed the opinions that Hong Kong should "promote harmony" and "foster consensus on development" during his attendance of the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation meetings in Manila, the Philippines. I think the SAR Government should bear in mind these two opinions when making policies. Moreover, these two points are inter-related and very valid to the current situation of Hong Kong, hence they are absolutely important. But what happens now in Hong Kong is running counter to the direction of these opinions. In fact, there are many examples showing this deviation under the administration of LEUNG Chun-ying, including, among others, his handling of the appointment of the Chairman of the Council of the University of Hong Kong (HKU). Originally, LEUNG Chun-ying can appoint a capable and respectable person to chair the Council in order to restore harmony in HKU and foster consensus on development. Nonetheless, his final decision has aroused even stronger antagonism and dissension. The people of Hong Kong have a feeling that LEUNG Chun-ying is acting in a way exactly opposite to the advice given by the Central. (THE PRESIDENT'S DEPUTY, MR MA FUNG-KWOK, took the Chair)


At the end of December last year, which was just one or two months earlier, despite the opposition of the teaching staff, students and alumni of HKU, LEUNG Chun-ying appointed Arthur LI as the Chairman of the Council of HKU by exercising his power as the Chancellor of HKU. Throughout the period before the announcement, there were many voices opposing to appointing Arthur LI as the Chairman. The referendum conducted among the students shows that 90% of the HKU students held an opposing view, the opinion survey conducted among the staff shows that 87% of the staff members were against the appointment. I, as the convenor of the HKU Alumni Concern Group, had prompted the HKU Convocation to hold an Extraordinary General Meeting on 29 November. At the meeting, 98% of the participants opposed the appointment of Arthur LI as the Chairman of the Council. Almost all the stakeholders of HKU, be they students, staff members or alumni, expressed strong opposition to the appointment. They were of the view that Arthur LI was not the right person to chair the Council. But LEUNG Chun-ying disregarded all these opposing voices, and ironically enough, announced the appointment of Arthur LI on the New Year's Eve, which was meant to be a time for festive celebration. In recent years, unlike the tradition, LEUNG Chun-ying has time and again appointed some highly controversial public figures to be board members of educational institutions. Let me cite the example of Lingnan University. In October 2015, LEUNG Chun-ying appointed HO Kwan-yiu and CHAN Man-ki, two public figures of great controversies, to join the Council of Lingnan University as new members. The appointment had aroused strong criticism from staff, students and the community, worrying that LEUNG Chun-ying would offer council member appointments as political rewards and turn the councils of educational institutions into his "private clubs" or political tools, and such twists would eventually undermine the institutional autonomy. All these appointments, one after another, are in fact a defiance of public opinions. They give the public a feeling that LEUNG Chun-ying attempts to interfere with the policies of educational institutions by exercising all the powers he has as the Chancellor of educational institutions under the relevant provisions of the law. Hence one of the most important tasks before us is to reform the governance structure of educational institutions from its fundamentals and systems in order to avoid the operation of educational institutions being interfered by the Chief Executive in his capacity as the Chancellor of these institutions.


5489

Academic freedom and the autonomy of educational institutions are core values clearly provided for under Article 137 of the Basic Law. Nonetheless, in the previous year, the academic freedom and institutional autonomy in Hong Kong had met unprecedented challenges. Some educational issues or some issues concerning academic freedom or institutional autonomy now face unusual political interference. Under this circumstance, how can the people feel assured? When our people all worry that the SAR Government is the biggest controlling hand behind the scene, how can we promote harmony and foster consensus in the community? We are absolutely disappointed with this kind of interference. The Government should seriously review this issue. Deputy President, I would like to switch my focus to the fourth Policy Address given by LEUNG Chun-ying. Originally, Policy Address this year is better than those given in the previous three years as it has touched upon more educational issues. But this actually reflects that there are many educational issues outstanding in Hong Kong due to the Education Bureau's failure to address and settle these issues over the years. Some of the measures put forth in the Policy Address are only policy proposals rather than concrete decisions to solve problems. There are still a range of problems that has not been touched upon or just briefly mentioned in the Policy Address, for example, the low teacher-to-class ratios in secondary schools, the employment difficulty faced by young teachers, the lack of timetable for the implementation of small class teaching in secondary schools, the decision to maintain the Territory-wide System Assessment (TSA) for Primary Three students, the operating difficulties faced by full-time kindergartens, the lack of salary protection for kindergarten teachers, inadequate UGC-funded places, and so on. These show that government policies still seriously fall short of social expectation and needs. The measures proposed in the Policy Address not only address the problems on the surface instead of touching the crux, they may even create other problems. I dare to say that this term of Government led by LEUNG Chun-ying has done nothing to formulate the blueprint for our long-term education development so far. Neither does it has the determination and guts to invest in education. However, it keeps increasing its control over education. For instance, its decision on the mandatory reduction of the number of seats for teachers' unions and education organizations in the Council on Professional Conduct in Education is in fact trampling the autonomy of the teaching profession. The education policies implemented by the Government are disappointing.


Deputy President, Hong Kong education is famous in the world for its quality and strong foundation. Nonetheless, in recent years, many Hong Kong people are very disappointed with our education policies. Why do they have such a feeling? This question must be replied to. Here let me cite a few examples to respond to the Policy Address. The first problem is about the contract teachers in primary and secondary schools. Over the last four years, I have been paying attention to the phenomenon of young teachers taking up the posts of contract teachers or teaching assistants in primary and secondary schools. Both inside and outside the Council, I and other teachers have been calling for addressing the dilemma faced by contract teachers by expanding the teaching establishment. But up till now the Government has refused to address the difficulties of contract teachers. The Government only provides various types of cash grant to schools for hiring contract teachers as the solution to the problem of increasing workload in schools. In the 2014-2015 school year, there were 2 420 and 1 400 contract teachers serving in secondary schools and primary schools respectively, while the total number of contract teachers in Hong Kong can be rounded up to 4 000, it has not counted in the large number of teaching assistants. I maintain that using short-term cash grants to meet the long-term manpower needs of schools is absolutely unadvisable. Even though some cash grants are provided recurrently, this is still not an ideal solution as it cannot provide a suitable and stable working environment to teachers. Moreover, it will create grievances due to the difference in pay between permanent teachers and contract teachers. To solve the problem of difference in pay, we should make contract teaching posts permanent by improving the establishment of teaching posts and create more regular teaching posts. In this Policy Address, finally there are signs showing that the Government is willing to face the problem. The Government has taken the first step by announcing in the Policy Address that schools may turn the existing Senior Secondary Curriculum Support Grant as well as Career and Life Planning Grant into regular teaching posts from the next school year. However, the first step has been taken in the wrong direction, it may therefore bring undesirable consequences rather than genuine improvement. If the existing grants are turned into regular teaching posts, young teachers may find it even more difficult to secure their jobs. If young teachers are likely to be dismissed immediately because of this improvement measure put forth by the


5491

Government, is it an unrealistic measure failing to pinpoint the crux of the problem? In addition, this measure would only add to the manpower tension of schools. When different schools and contract teachers have to fight for the newly created regular posts, various conflicts would be aroused and that would undermine the teamwork of schools. The teacher-to-class ratios, or the establishment of teachers, of our schools have not been properly reviewed for years. The teacher-to-class ratio for primary, junior secondary and senior secondary schools is still maintained at 1:1.5, 1:1.7 and 1:2.0 respectively. In fact the ratios have been set at a rather low level as compared with our neighbour areas. Moreover, given the increasing complexity and diversity of school affairs and that many schools are short of manpower, many teachers need to work long hours due to overload of work. The manpower shortage would not only have direct impact on the quality of teachers, we even see a trend of reduction in elective subjects lately because some schools cannot offer more elective subjects due to the shortage of manpower. To genuinely resolve the shortage of teachers and the problems faced by young contract teachers and teaching assistants, there is nothing we can do except inputting new resources to expand the establishment of teaching posts in schools. After the release of the Policy Address, I noticed that on an occasion, the Chief Executive once said that they would study the possibility of increasing regular teaching posts. This is certainly a positive sign. I hope the Government can proactively work on this, so that the relevant study can commence very soon. This proposal, if realized, would provide a stable working environment to contract teachers where they will receive the same pay as other regular teachers. This in return will help to elevate the quality of the education of Hong Kong. Another problem I want to talk about is the measures to maintain the stability and strength of schools as well as the teaching force (known as the "three maintaining measures") that the Government introduced to address the decline in the number of Secondary One students. I and the HKPTU have repeatedly urged the Government to pay heed to the decline and its impact on the establishment of teachers. We have reiterated time and again that if the Education Bureau overlooks the fallout from the decline in the number of secondary students, it would have far-reaching impact on our secondary education. For example, schools have to narrow the choices of elective subjects


for senior secondary students due to the reduced manpower. The Policy Address this year initiated to extend the retention period for surplus teachers from one year to three years, and such extension can be applied till the 2017-2018 school year. Around 130 teachers will be involved. This is a good initiative, yet is it sufficient to address the problem? The HKPTU has done a research on this issue. Actually, the population of secondary students will only stabilize in the 2017-2018 school year, and mind you that the growth will be very slow as it is a rebound from the bottom of a rift. When will the number of secondary students return to a reasonable level when we now still have over 4 000 surplus places in Secondary One classes? The 2020-2021 school year will be the soonest. The Government should therefore be far-sighted in its policy making. However, the existing policies are utterly inadequate to help schools when they have to deal with the changes in these few years. In my view, it is reasonable to allow the schools that have reduction in classes under the Voluntary Optimisation of Class Structure Scheme or the "three maintaining measures" to extend the retention period for their surplus teachers to 2020. The Government should use the decline in the population of secondary students as an opportunity to scale down the size of each class. To raise the quality of education, even without the decline in the number of students, the Government should implement small class teaching (no more than 25 students in each class) in secondary schools in the long run. Small class teaching should be consistently implemented in all secondary schools in Hong Kong. Deputy President, another focus of the Policy Address this year ― the Belt and Road Initiative ― will also affect our education as the Government want to promote the Belt and Road Initiative through the curriculum and a scholarship is set up for that purpose. The Belt and Road Initiative is undeniably a significant policy of the country, and the intention to let our students learn more about it is natural and justifiable. But in view of the current situation, is it necessary to make use of the entire curriculum and education system to promote the Belt and Road Initiative, and even call on schools to fully support this policy? We disagree to doing so. In addition, the announcement of making an injection of $1 billion for setting up a Belt and Road scholarship has aroused strong controversies. The Government repeatedly emphasizes that the injection will be made to the scholarship fund, and they will only use the investment return from the fund to subsidize students. But as the scholarship is planned to benefit 100 students by


5493

giving each student a maximum subsidy of $120,000 a year for a total of four years, the expenditure on subsidizing these students will be amounted to $48 million, or nearly $50 million, each year. At this moment when we still have many educational issues that need to be improved by government funding, like the problems relating to regular teaching posts and the salary scale for kindergarten teachers, and the heavy debt burden of many tertiary students, why does the Government want to squander on setting up a Belt and Road scholarship rather than to help our students and schools? It is absolutely unadvisable to freeze $1 billion public money merely for setting up a scholarship fund, and spend $48 million on the provision of scholarship each year. Neither will the public support setting up a scholarship like that. The Government should seriously review if this new policy is worthwhile. The provision of 15-year free education is a focal point of the Policy Address this year, and it has drawn a lot of public attention. I think LEUNG Chun-ying regards this as one of the highlights of the Policy Address. This has been a long-awaited policy for the education sector. However, after the release of the Policy Address and after listening to the briefings organized for the education sector by the Education Bureau afterwards, we feel deeply worried ― what is supposed to be big good news turns out to be a nightmare. What we heard is, according to the method and subsidy level proposed by the Government, the subsidy that schools will finally get may be even lower than the subsidy level they are currently entitled to. Therefore, it will be impossible for us to improve the quality of early childhood education, front-line teachers may even face pay cut or be sacked. Are these the consequences we want to see and the results we want to achieve? Parents would feel disappointed too. Under the new free kindergarten policy, only 70% of kindergarten students studying in half-day kindergartens will be provided free kindergarten education, in other words, the remaining 30% of students will not be benefited. Moreover, it is believed that the free education policy will not benefit the students of whole-day and long whole-day kindergartens, hence they will have to pay relatively higher school fees. Eventually, as only half of the kindergarten students in Hong Kong will receive free education under this policy, the effectiveness of this policy will also be cut by half. In fact, we can find many demonic details in the policies. After going through the entire report, we can sense that the subsidy to be granted to kindergartens in the future would be even lower than the subsidy they receive


now. I have summarized four points ― Firstly, the resources for whole-day and long whole-day kindergartens are insufficient; secondly, the seniority and qualifications of teachers are nullified due to the lack of a mandatory salary scale; thirdly, the insufficient basic half-day unit subsidy in the plan will eventually affect the quality of teaching; and fourthly, small scale kindergartens are likely to face operating difficulties as the subsidy level will be based on the number of students. Originally, we look up to the 15-year free education announced in the Policy Address as an opportunity, but now we are deeply worried by what is put before us. What we find worrying is, while the operating hours of whole-day and long whole-day kindergartens double or triple that of half-day kindergartens, such difference is not reflected in the subsidy they receive. It is therefore even more difficult for the 246 long whole-day kindergartens now serving grass-roots families to ease their operating difficulties. These kindergartens still have to curb the pay of their teachers, and the working parents of grass-roots families still have to pay school fees for their children. This is my first point. Secondly, as we mentioned just now, there is no salary scale in place for kindergarten teachers. The education sector has long called for the establishment of a salary scale for kindergarten teachers in order to reflect the seniority, qualification and working experience of teachers. As now the subsidy to kindergartens is made in the form of one-off grant, teachers are only paid the median salary, which is also their maximum salary. Very often, teachers cannot get a salary compatible with their experience and years of service. They do not have other choice but submission, or else they can only resign or some may even be dismissed. Eventually, it turns out that experienced kindergarten teachers would not stay on their jobs. Is this the healthy ecology of kindergartens we desire? Furthermore, the unit subsidy cost currently proposed is $32,900, but Members should note that this is the cost projected for 2017. In fact, the existing ceiling of $33,770 set for the school fee of half-day kindergartens has already exceeded the unit cost for 2017. Plus the impact of inflation, I believe all kindergartens would feel that they are under great pressure. Some small-scale kindergartens would also face difficulties. Why do we not consider dividing the subsidy into two parts ― the basic subsidy and a subsidy calculated by the number of students ― instead of basing the subsidy entirely on the number of students, which is regarded a highly undesirable method?


5495

I still have a bit of speaking time left. I would like to briefly talk about the TSA issue. The public are enraged by this issue, and we have heard strong voices from the community opposing the TSA. But the Government still said they would conduct a trial run, and despite the results of the test, the TSA would be fully implemented in 2017. Later on, the Government somehow unofficially said things may not necessarily turn out in this way. May I ask what is going on here? I would like the Secretary to give a reply on this. MR GARY FAN (in Cantonese): Deputy President, this debate session is on education and the youth policy. I would like to talk about the ruling handed down by the Court less than an hour ago on the charge of assaulting a police officer in the Civic Square on 26 September 2014 brought against a Scholarism member, Derek LAM. He was acquitted by the Court. The case of Derek LAM can explain how the inability of so many Hong Kong people and young people to vent their grievances has led to the present political predicament in Hong Kong. Why did Scholarism come into being? Why did Derek LAM, a young student, choose to fight in the forefront? The reason is that soon after his assumption of office, Secretary Eddie NG, who is sitting in the Chamber now, sided with Chief Executive LEUNG Chun-ying, who has just been described by Sir David TANG this afternoon as "even worse than LI Peng", to roll out "brainwashing" national education. The participation of young people in social movements triggered the Umbrella Movement in 2014. They dashed into the Civic Square, which is accessible to ordinary citizens, and started the movement. On the night of Lunar New Year's Day and in the early hours of the second day of this Lunar Year, Derek LAM was at the scene of the clash between the Police and people, and he put up both hands in an attempt to calm down both sides. However, he was again prosecuted arbitrarily by the Government. Hong Kong is now trapped in the situation of failure in governance because the administration of the SAR Government focuses only on politics and struggles, and neglects people's livelihood. Deputy President, the SAR Government has all along devoted insufficient resources to policies on people's livelihood. During the 10 years between 2005 and 2014, the annual increase in education expenditure was only 3.1%, which was lower than the average increase of 4.9% and much lower than the annual increase of 7.4% for infrastructure expenditure in Hong Kong. In other words,


the Government's infrastructure expenditure was two times its education expenditure. The Government repeatedly uses a shortage of land as an excuse and sounds out its intention of developing country parks. It also says that enormous amount of public fund would be spent on constructing artificial islands in the central waters and Lantau would be developed. The North East New Territories (NENT) development project also lets us know that the Government already gave up procedural justice. Under government pressure, the Finance Committee had to approve the funding for the advance works of the development project. The Government would carry out infrastructure projects that are controversial and disturb people's life, but it is unwilling to use its huge financial strength for improving people's livelihood. Two weeks ago, Mr CHAN Hak-kan of the Democratic Alliance for the Betterment and Progress of Hong Kong said that I supported the development of brownfield sites in the New Territories but opposed the development of North East New Territories. He accused me of being self-contradicting. I would like to tell Mr CHAN clearly that as far as the NENT development project is concerned, what I support is the development of the golf courses in North East New Territories, and I oppose the ruining of the homes of the residents in North East New Territories. If he wants to defame me, he should give some other better arguments. The Government says that it will adopt a multi-pronged approach to increase land supply, but then it categorizes the development of brownfield sites as long-term urban planning. On the other hand, projects involving huge controversies and serious environmental hazards, such as the development of North East New Territories, the construction of artificial islands in the central waters, the development of Lantau, and so on, are categorized as medium- and long-term land supply, and the Government will spend enormous and astronomical amounts of public funds on their expeditious implementation. Deputy President, the Government is not willing to spend more resources on policies to improve people's livelihood. Then, how about the free early childhood education that Hong Kong people have been striving for more than 15 years? The Policy Address this year mentions that only half-day kindergarten students would get full subsidy. Since some kindergartens rent private property as school premises, more than 20% of the parents of kindergarten students will still need to pay part of the tuition fees after receiving subsidy. As for whole-day and long whole-day kindergarten students, the Government will not provide full subsidy and the parents will need to pay part of tuition fees.


5497

The Secretary for Education Eddie NG, who is present at the moment, also admitted in a meeting of the Panel on Education that by excluding 22% of half-day students whose parents would still need to supplement tuition fees and the 45 200 whole-day and long whole-day students out of the total 150 000 kindergarten students, actually only 80 000 students (about half of the total number of students) would get full subsidy of tuition fees after the implementation of this policy. The remaining half of the kindergarten students cannot enjoy genuine free education. Hence, Neo Democrats urges the Government to provide a schedule for implementing genuine 15-year free education. We view that the scheme introduced under the Policy Address this year should not be the ultimate scheme for free early childhood education. Deputy President, the Government could always think of many high-sounding excuses for undertaking "white elephant projects". The Guangzhou-Shenzhen-Hong Kong Express Rail Link (XRL) is an example. Despite cost overrun and delay, and the uncertainty of whether the cost and expenditure of the project will be balanced in the future, the Government insisted on seeking supplementary provision. However, as for policies concerning people's livelihood, such as 15-year free education and universal retirement protection, the Government does not have the enterprise and determination to face difficulties. Instead, it only finds different reasons to shift the blame. The SAR Government's dictatorial style of administration will not gain any recognition from Hong Kong citizens, especially young people. When formulating policies, the Government very often does not listen to the aspirations of young people. The Policy Address proposes to inject $1 billion into the scholarship fund so as to encourage more students from the Belt and Road countries to enrol in undergraduate courses in Hong Kong. The education sector has been criticizing that the Government is unwilling to increase the number of local university places, and the shortage of places has rendered many students who can satisfy university entrance requirements unable to get a place. The Government now goes so far as to attract students from the Belt and Road countries, and young people who are eligible to study in local universities are diverted to the Mainland through the expanded Mainland University Study Subsidy Scheme. Neo Democrats thinks that this approach sets the wrong priority. In order to tackle the surge of student movements and social movements in recent years, the Government wants to send young people to the Mainland to receive ideological education.


Deputy President, Hong Kong citizens and young people are worried that the future of Hong Kong society will be dominated by new Hong Kong people. The Government does not want to exercise its authority under Article 22 of the Basic Law to vet and approve entry applications from people holding One-way Permit, so that it can reduce the impact of the One-way Permit System on our population. All provinces and cities in the Mainland have authority to vet and approve the entry of migrants into Hong Kong. The Hong Kong SAR Government is the one and only one place which, under "one country, two systems", can only blindly accept enormous amount of One-way Permit applications approved by the Mainland authorities. According to the figures from the Immigration Department, 8 655 persons were arrested between 2008 and 2015 for intending to enter Hong Kong through bogus marriages and 1 550 persons were convicted. Neo Democrats thinks that the figure mentioned above is only the tip of the iceberg and also reflects the fact that the Immigration Department is incompetent in law-enforcement concerning the fraudulent practice to obtain One-way Permit. The SAR Government has never recognized that localist awareness has become the mainstream of Hong Kong society. As young people have expectations about the future of Hong Kong, they are determined to protect the traditional culture, core values and systemic advantages of Hong Kong. Deputy President, during the debate yesterday, Mr LAM Tai-fai mentioned several times that he was worried that Hong Kong would become a second-tier city in China. I have a similar concern, but my analysis is different. In order for Hong Kong to continue its success, we have to retain our systemic advantages and safeguard "one country, two systems" in the sense that Hong Kong's style of governance should not be continuously "Mainlandized" as what LEUNG Chun-ying is doing. Today, the SAR Government and Members belonging to the pro-government camp only condemn the resistance acts of young people on moral high ground. But they have not pondered any seriously on and tried to understand why they would resist even though there is a high price to pay. The Government is even unwilling to set up a select committee to find out the reasons for the clash between the Police and people. The Government has set up numerous advisory committees. There even exists a committee on the reduction of salt and sugar in people's diet. The clash in Mong Kok was very serious, but how come the Government is unwilling to learn from the British-Hong Kong administration, which set up a special


5499

committee to find out the causes of the 1967 Riots and adjust the strategy of governance? Instead, the Government just puts forward a range of excuses to reject the setting up of a committee. This reflects that the Government is totally unwilling to face the problems, sincerely understand the aspirations of young people and truly review the practice of the Police in dealing with demonstrations. By resorting to the way of overwhelming rationality by power, LEUNG Chun-ying's administration cannot gain trust from Hong Kong people, especially young people. Deputy President, when looking back at the institutional violence inflicted by LEUNG Chun-ying over the past three years or more, from the "one country, two systems" White Paper, the 31 August Decision of the Standing Committee of the National People's Congress, and the implementation of the NENT development project to the passing of supplementary provision forcibly for the XRL project, Hong Kong people have increasingly felt that there is no way to improve the Hong Kong society, and young people also think that their voices are not taken into serious consideration by the Government. Therefore, if the SAR Government only condemns young people's participation in resistance acts without examining its own faults in governance in the past years, and if it continues to use all the power it has, remains confrontational in mentality and adopts high-handed means to govern Hong Kong … Apart from the 31 August Decision of the Standing Committee of the National People's Congress, the Umbrella Movement has also made the SAR Government lose the support and trust of Hong Kong people. The credibility of the Hong Kong Government would only diminish continuously. Hence, it is hoped that the SAR Government can think carefully when formulating youth and education policies and understand the real needs of Hong Kong people. Deputy President, these are my remarks in this session. I would like to leave some time to talk about other policy areas. I so submit. DR HELENA WONG (in Cantonese): Deputy President, in respect of education, the most outrageous item in the Policy Address of Chief Executive LEUNG Chun-ying this year must be the injection of $1 billion into the Targeted Scholarship Scheme to increase the offers from 10 per year to about 100 per year in phases. To lavish $1 billion on students from the Belt and Road countries to study in Hong Kong is tantamount to putting the cart before the horse. The


establishment of the Belt and Road scholarship fund is generosity at the expense of taxpayers. The aspirations and financial pressure of local students studying in self-financing tertiary institutions and their parents are totally ignored. Deputy President, the Democratic Party thinks that when the Government uses public funds, especially education resources, it should give priority to the needs of local parents and students. However, this Policy Address shows us that the Government is doing the opposite. Perhaps, if the needs of local students have been well taken care of, people may not oppose the Belt and Road scholarship fund so strongly. Nevertheless, Deputy President, we all know that about 70 000 secondary students take the Diploma of Secondary Education Examination every year, and only about 18% students of them can get publicly-funded first-year-first-degree places. (THE PRESIDENT resumed the Chair) In 2015, more than 24 000 Secondary Six day-school students attained the minimum admission requirements of "33222", but could all these 24 000 students obtain publicly-funded first-year-first-degree places? No. It is because in order to minimize its expenditure, for so many years the Government has only been subsidizing 15 000 publicly-funded first-year-first-degree places a year in all eight universities. There were 24 000 students qualified for university education, but there were only 15 000 places. Just think about it. Who would take care the further studies of nearly 10 000 students who were eligible for university education and those students who did not meet the minimum admission requirements? The Government almost ignored them. The implementation of associate degree programmes is just a morbid thing the Government has invented to mislead the public into believing that the Government has helped many students to their further studies. All the figures in the documents from the Government, the Policy Address and the meeting minutes of the Panel on Education of the Education Bureau are exaggerated, saying that about 46% of young people in the relevant cohort now have access to degree-level education. However, as I mentioned earlier, there are only 15 000 first-year-first-degree places, so how come 46% of young people have access to degree-level education? The figure is clearly "inflated" because many students cannot enter the eight public-funded institutions, and they need to


5501

enrol in some self-financing first degree or associate degree programmes. Hence, Government's claim that 46% of young people have access to degree-level education is a mere exaggeration. And, there can be more exaggeration. The Government says that if those studying associate degree programmes are included, nearly 70% of young people have access to tertiary degree programmes. This is really a great exaggeration. Secretary, the figure is overstated as 70%. If the Government is really taking care of so many Hong Kong students, we should, of course, praise the Policy Address. However, the Government is now cheating people. How many associate degree places are funded by the Government? The Government only provides 1 000, or even fewer, funded-places, and other places are mostly paid by students and parents themselves, and students studying these programmes need to work part-time or take out a loan. Of course, the Secretary would say that students could apply for financial assistance and loan. But the incomes of many families are unstable, and this makes some students not eligible for application. Hence, the Government should not exaggerate that 46% or 70% of students have access to tertiary degree programmes, while in actual fact only 18% of young people can go to university. The number (of funded-places) leads to intense competition for university places among Secondary Six graduate students in Hong Kong. On average, every two students meeting the requirements compete for one first-year-first-degree place. One of them can become a first-year undergraduate student, while the other one has to look for a pathway on his own, searching for self-financing institutions, private institutions or self-financing associate degree programmes. It is because only very few associate degree places are funded by the Government. How about other countries, Secretary? You often travel to other countries several times a year. You should know whether other countries treat young people in the same way. Unlike Hong Kong students, who face great difficulty in entering university, secondary school leavers in Europe and the United States can enter public-funded universities with a rate of 50%. Japan has a figure of nearly 50%. Singapore is a small place where there are only three universities, but 25% of secondary school leavers can enter public-funded universities. While there are eight universities in Hong Kong with the ninth one coming, why are there only 18% of secondary school leavers entering into universities? The figures of Taiwan and South Korea are ever more amazing. Taiwan is famous for having a large number of universities, and the figure is 94.4% with nearly all secondary school leavers can go to university; as long as


you are willing to study, there will be universities willing to accept your application. Currently we may not need our Government to follow the example of Taiwan because this poses Taiwan some new problems, that is, university graduates cannot find a job. Nevertheless, should we be so mean as to pitch at 18%, offering only 15 000 funded places? South Korea also has a high figure of 70% of secondary school leavers going to funded universities. Hence, the funded university enrolment rate in Hong Kong is the lowest among all the developed and neighbouring countries. Is this very shameful? I absolutely would not be feeling proud of being a Hongkonger when talking about this. It is because the Government has failed taxpayers, young people and parents. We definitely have the ability to increase the number of first-year-first-degree places, but the Government only introduces associate degree programmes. This indeed gives young people very great frustration. After they finish the two-year programmes, what should they do next? The Secretary should make it clear whether associate degree programmes are a kind of transitional arrangements, and whether they are final destinations. Originally, we think that it is a final destination. Students will go out to work after two years of studies. But things have turned out to be just the opposite. Young people in Hong Kong want to study. Hence, most of them apply for other degree programmes after graduating from associate degree programmes. Currently, the Government can only provide some top-up degree programmes, and there is an increase of only several thousand places every year only. This is just better than nothing. But those students who cannot get a top-up place have to pay for two more years of studies. Secretary, do you know how much money they have borrowed after studying two years and then two years? If they enter funded universities, the tuition fee may only be $40,000 or more per year, which is less than $50,000. However, if they study self-financing associate degree programmes, self-financing degree programmes or private degree programmes, on average the tuition fee is $50,000 to $60,000 or even up to $110,000 per year. They would already run up heavy debts after completing the programmes. Even if they can find a job, the salary is around only $10,000 per month. Even if they do not eat and drink, how many years do they need to clear the debts? Therefore, no wonder there are so many young people who hate the Government and are angry. The Government has not taken care of them and is not willing to increase the number of funded university places. But then the


5503

Government wants to take care of students from other countries studying in Hong Kong. This is tantamount to putting the cart before the horse. I have chatted with many friends. They said this was just ridiculous. They asked us to initiate resistance movements and appeal to all Hong Kong students to refuse to pay tuition fees. Does the Government want to push young people to take this step? President, you know that the Policy Address does not propose any substantial increase of funded first-year-first-degree places, and not only this, there is even a plan to cut the number of funded associate degree places, which is now minimal, in the next three years. The number of publicly-funded associate degree places, which accounts to only a small proportion of the resources, will be reduced from 3 598 in the year 2016-2017 to 3 195 in the year 2018-2019. Even out of this small number of places, 403 places will be cut in the next three years. These places are for our own students. And then the resources are used to assist students from other countries. If these resources can be used to increase Hong Kong's funded university places, so that more students can study in funded universities without bearing heavy loans and feeling at a loss again after two years, and then two more years … Recently, a daughter of one of my friends has just completed a two-year self-financing associate degree programme. She told me that she was very happy because she successfully applied for a degree programme of the University of Hong Kong through non-JUPAS. She needed to start from scratch from the first year and study for four years, that means she needed to spend six years in total (The buzzer sounded) … During those six years, she had to pay the tuition fees for two years without being funded. She spent two years studying an associate degree programme and then went to university. During this period, how much time and resources of hers were wasted? President, this is why I speak … PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Dr WONG, the speaking time is up. DR HELENA WONG (in Cantonese): … oppose the Policy Address. DR CHIANG LAI-WAN (in Cantonese): President, on behalf of the DAB, I rise to speak on the part of the Policy Address on the manpower policy.


First, I would like to talk about life planning, an issue which has drawn quite some attention in society in recent years. There is this saying: Success consists in planning. As many young people hope that they can have a smoother path in life, they should make early planning. We strongly hope that while in secondary school, they can have the opportunity to experience different industries in order to understand where their interest lies and grasp the employment situation in the future market. Then, they can better equip themselves and know which subject to choose if they pursue university education. Also, after choosing the subject, they can foresee what opportunities there are in the market for them to develop upon graduation. We are very happy to see what the Government points out in paragraph 191 of the Policy Address: "schools may turn the existing Senior Secondary Curriculum Support Grant as well as Career and Life Planning Grant into regular teaching posts from the 2016/17 school year". This shows that the Government is proactively facing the problem of having insufficient teachers for life planning. However, we also hope that the Education Bureau can consider one point. At present, life planning cannot be accomplished by one teacher. He may play a pivotal role in arranging for life planning for each student, but a lot of work requires help from other teachers. We have recently conducted a survey and found that at the moment, many teachers have not received formal training in life planning. Thus, we propose that the Education Bureau should explore the inclusion of life planning as a compulsory subject for teacher education, and teachers teaching life planning should have accredited qualifications. This will make life planning more professional and enhance its professional quality and status. Apart from an understanding of students' interest and ability, another aspect of life planning is also very important, that is, students should have the opportunity to experience different industries. The earlier secondary students can experience the different industries, the better chance they stand to choose an occupation which suits them more. I have recently learned of an example related to the Vocational Training Council (VTC). A student was admitted to the Department of Civil Engineering of the University of Hong Kong but after studying for one year, he discovered that he did not like the subject. Eventually, he enrolled in a gardening programme offered by the VTC as he loved coming into contact with nature more. I believe if he had learned of his interest earlier, he would not have wasted one year. Yet, we also know that right now, many young people only discover that they are not interested in the course they have


5505

chosen after spending four years, but time and money has been wasted. Also, it is not possible for them to start a new course. Therefore, it is very important to let young people have an early understanding of what they aspire to. So, we propose that the Government should take the lead and establish an internship platform with various institutions and organizations in society. Through this platform, the Government can liaise with different commercial enterprises and institutions, or even non-profit-making organizations in society to offer internship to secondary students for them to practise three days, one week or two weeks during their long holidays. To students, this can help them better understand what things are like in different industries. Finally, I would also like to talk about standard working hours. At present, we all know that employees have to work for long hours. Society in general hopes that the Government can formulate a policy on working hours as soon as possible. Nonetheless, the Standard Working Hours Committee (the Committee) has failed to reach a consensus despite lengthy discussion. Discussion between employers and employees on standard working hours has also ended in deadlock. This is not good to both sides and the major victims are those employees who are now working overtime without compensation or other protection. The Committee has earlier commissioned a consultancy to conduct a survey, and the findings show that 93% of the employees polled consider that employment contracts should be required to specify the number of working hours and the method of overtime compensation. Over 80% of the employers are also in favour of this arrangement. This reflects that both employers and employees agree to the need for enacting legislation to require that employers and employees sign employment contracts which include details on working hours. We consider that contract specification is the first step towards working on the basis of standard working hours, and it is also the major framework for future discussion. Thus, we hope that the Committee can consider "walking on two legs". Apart from introducing contractual working hours in the near future, in-depth discussion on standard working hours should also continue at the same time in order to reach a consensus. Such measures taken together can offer protection to employees who are now always working overtime but are not given any compensation. I so submit.


MR TANG KA-PIU (in Cantonese): President, this is the first time I rise and speak on the Motion of Thanks. In other words, I can speak for 30 minutes. I have considered whether it would be better for me to speak during the third or the fourth session. If I speak during the third session, the Chief Secretary will be in attendance but one of the themes for the fourth session is manpower and I expect Members from the commercial sector will also express their views. Mr Tommy CHEUNG who is the second to speak has spelt it out very clearly, and I believe he represents the commercial sector. He says the commercial sector objects to the scrapping of the MPF offsetting mechanism but favours massive importation of labour. So, he approves of the Policy Address. I will express the views of The Hong Kong Federation of Trade Unions (FTU) on this Policy Address. In fact, several colleagues have clearly expressed some views in other sessions. I realize the Chief Secretary is emotional when she speaks just now. We know very well that when compared with the previous ones, this Policy Address proposes to spend more on welfare, poverty alleviation and education, and has responded to the needs of various social groups. It has even responded to labour groups and some proposals by poverty concern groups, including the proposal on low-income working family allowance. Nonetheless, when we talk about having to pat the "tiger's buttocks", that is, the "commercial sector's buttocks", the Government will get cold feet as if it is afraid of them. Of course I can understand. For Members representing the commercial sector, such as Mr Vincent FANG of the Liberal Party, he has expressed frankly at a forum when he asks: Which sector has more votes in the Election Committee? Does the commercial sector or the labour sector hold more votes? Once such message has come out, even though the "good fighter" Chief Secretary and Secretary Matthew CHEUNG have originally indicated clear stance on the scrapping of the offsetting mechanism, nothing has been mentioned in the Policy Address. Is the commercial sector really so domineering? I am just wondering how the commercial sector sees the present society. Mr Christopher CHEUNG represents the professionals and the commercial sector. He says the country is opening up, the economy continues to do well and will cater for the small and medium enterprises, and he is also concerned about whether the young employees stand to benefit. Looking from this perspective, have employees in general benefited from economic development? If we only look at the figures, the situation is not too bad. Over the last two decades, Hong Kong's economy in aggregate has doubled, the GDP per capita has seen a cumulative increase of 60%. Deducting inflation rate, the average annual


5507

growth is 2.5%. Yet, can employees in general feel it? From 1995 to 2015, we have more money in our pockets, so, we should be able to maintain our family in a more dignified way and be more generous. We can develop our career and we should be able to turn down employers' reasonable demand for overtime work or refuse to work overtime without compensation. Yet, we find that this is not the case. Recently, the Standard Working Hours Committee has not stopped doing research and has come up with some figures. Mr Stanley LAU Chin-ho, a member from the commercial sector, says that if standard working hours are set at 44 hours per week with the overtime rate at 1.5 times, employers have to pay an additional $10-odd billion. This has drawn immediate responses from employees, Members or netizens. They ask in return if it means that employers have taken away $10-odd billion from us every year. We are being exploited because we do not have standard working hours at present. Many employees are working overtime without compensation. Even if they have time-off, it cannot be regarded as extra compensation. Therefore, Hong Kong employees come second to no one in one ranking ― Hong Kong people work 2 606 hours each year, giving them the top spot among 71 cities with the best economy. It just so happens that property prices in recent years have spiralled. Commodity prices in Hong Kong rank sixth globally while our working hours rank first. What about income for employees? If we take a look at the Real Index of Payroll per Person Engaged from the fourth quarter of 2005 to the fourth quarter of 2014, the index has dropped from 117 to 113 within this decade. In other words, commodity prices have increased, working hours have continued to grow but there has been no apparent income increase. Let us not forget that the present unemployment rate is relatively low. When the economy further worsens this year and unemployment rate soars, what will the situation be for employees? I strongly wish to relay such circumstances to the Chief Secretary in the third session, though she should be well aware of it herself. However, we do not wish that the Government is working from the poverty alleviation perspective when addressing the needs of employees. Hong Kong employees do not want to apply for welfare payment. They just have no alternatives. What they want most is to be self-reliant. Three big issues haunt the employees ― having no money after retirement, wages fail to catch up with inflation and long working hours. Not much progress has yet been made in these years. Thus, I would like to elaborate these issues in detail in this speech.


Of course, compared to the length in the Policy Address devoted to manpower or labour, my speech may be very long. To be fair, labour relations aside, on the livelihood level, the performance of the current-term Government has not been bad or is even good. It has responded in all aspects. The Community Care Fund can also reach all classes and should be applauded. However, the FTU serves the workers on one side and the grassroots on the other. Although the grassroots have given their applause, the workers say they are not happy. What should we do? In the last two decades, Hong Kong's economy has shown signs of hollowing out, leaving behind only the servicing industry which offers middle or low income, and there is also a lack of progression pathway. The Government's initiative in implementing the outsourcing system and the tendering system makes it one of the promoters and culprits. Under such circumstances, we strongly hope that the Government can think of ways to further diversify the economy. Over the past decade, we see that the country has offered us special assistance to boost our economy and employment, but can each and every member of the public be benefited? Can they bring home a handsome income? I have just quoted some figures of the Census and Statistics Department. From the fourth quarter of 2005 to the fourth quarter of 2014, the Real Index of Payroll per Person Engaged has dropped. Where has our GDP gone? It has turned into profits or rent for the bosses, and I believe that rent has taken up the lion's share. In the last decade or so, The Forbes has frequently published the Billionaires list. It is rather boring as the top 10 Hong Kong billionaires on the list are always those several property developers. From the later part of the 60s to date, they have remained renowned, and this proves that after so many years, Hong Kong's industries and economy have been controlled by this group of people with vested interests. Therefore, in the last two years, there always have been people talking about "1%", which means that 1% of the population has taken up the lion's share of global wealth. This is something which can be proved. According to Credit Suisse's Global Wealth Report 2014, in 2014, 1% of Hong Kong people have owned 52.6% of the territory's wealth. In other words, the money held by 99% of the population is less than the wealth owned by that 1% of the population. So, I earnestly hope that the SAR Government can "transcend" and realize these problems and address them. Although the commercial sector will oppose, I would like to tell them that we have to join hands to tackle these big enterprises and those with vested interests. I sincerely hope that the SAR Government will think about these problems. We always say that we have to follow the example


5509

of Singapore. In 2011, Hong Kong's Gini coefficient was 0.537, what about Singapore? Singapore's Gini coefficient in 2013 was 0.43, that is, the disparity between the rich and the poor in Singapore was not as serious as ours. What had it done? Last year, Singapore added a tax band, the wealth tax, to subject those earning the highest income to bigger commitment to the country and society. The actual amount of tax may not be substantially higher but this is a kind of political gesture. The Government is telling the entire Singaporean society that when economic development reaches a certain level, not all people can benefit but the interests of some of those with vested interests will become bigger and the Government has to step in. Has our Government stepped in? I sincerely hope that under "one country, two systems", the HKSAR Government can "transcend" such interests and let every member of the public benefit from the real benefits brought about by economic development, instead of continuing to respect voices from all sides. It should not sit back and relax and allow those with vested interests to keep on clinging to the vast and ever-growing interests. I do not object to the Government's poverty alleviation measures. However, if poverty alleviation only serves as a kind of patching up and fails to trickle down any help to those who cannot meet the basic needs, I believe this is not what we expect to see. Many people say that minimum wage will have implications in various aspects. I remember the first year I became a Member of the Legislative Council, we frequently debated the implication of minimum wage on society. Here, I would like to take great pains to repeat the positive implications of minimum wage. This is the last year for the current-term Legislative Council, and I have only six more months to represent the labour sector. So, I must state clearly that this is a good policy. It is not as simple as giving employees more money in their pockets. Some people say that minimum wage will push up inflation. In this connection, Secretary Matthew CHEUNG has made many fair comments. He says regarding the main cause of inflation ― especially when inflation was very high two years ago ― 70% is attributed to rent and imported raw materials, and the impact of minimum wage on inflation is not obvious. Second, some people say that minimum wage will lead to unemployment for the middle- and old-aged employees. However, if we look at the report on unemployment, employment for the employees aged between 50 and 65 is even better than the young people. This means that employers are willing to hire them and do not mind their older age. Moreover, we have noticed recently that even the age limit for a security guard licence has been further relaxed. This is evident that minimum wage basically will not affect employment for the middle- and old-aged people. The most important is that the


Hong Kong society often talks about relying on itself. We also hope that the general public will be self-reliant, people can have a job to maintain their family and do not need to apply for Comprehensive Social Security Assistance (CSSA). Since minimum wage took effect in May 2011, the number of CSSA recipients ― especially from the three groups of unemployed, low-income and single parent ― has dropped by 30% to 40%. We hope that the number of CSSA recipients will keep falling, in particular the unemployed and people with low-income which I just mentioned. Thus, minimum wage can have positive effect on the entire society and encourage workers to be employed. Back to the point I made earlier. Be it the issue of standard working hours or the scrapping of the MPF offsetting mechanism, individual trade unions or the labour sector is not trying to fight for political achievement. Instead, we firmly believe that this is a basic aspiration which will do the entire society good. Take the scrapping of the MPF offsetting mechanism as an example. I remember this subject became the focus in 2014. According to the media, the Chief Executive intends to bring it up in the Policy Address but several major trade associations contact the Office of the Chief Executive. They exert pressure on the Chief Executive and say words in a temper. Finally, nothing is mentioned in the Policy Address. Before long, we receive a report from a worker who thinks that long service payment and the MPF are two separate sums. When the companies set up the MPF scheme, they guarantee their employees that after the implementation of the MPF, what they get upon retirement will definitely be better than just having provident fund but it turns out not to be the case. All their pension has been offset. Back then, how would these employees only have 5% as provident fund? The rate was 10% or 15%. Therefore, many workers and workers who are approaching retirement are very worried. Even if there is no MPF, they think they would at least have long service payment, but the two are in fact from the same account. I remember nothing was mentioned about the scrapping of the MPF offsetting mechanism in the Policy Address that year. We held a press conference afterwards to arouse society's concern. The next day, I noticed that newspaper reports and editorials, especially those on the Hong Kong Economic Journal and am730 which hold a more moderate stance and have a better understanding of the commercial sector or commercial operation, all favoured the scrapping of the offsetting mechanism by the Government. Many economists also put forward the same view. They may not focus on whether workers can get more. They just ask one question: Since the Government has emphasized


5511

that the MPF is for people's retirement, how can it tolerate having the MPF subject to a persistent loophole? Moreover, that is a substantial loophole as the MPF can be used to offset both severance pay and long service payment. The MPF system has in fact lost its purpose of providing for retirement protection. Of course, Anna WU, the former Chairman of the Mandatory Provident Fund Schemes Authority, has made it very clear and even calls this a political burden. Thus, trade unions are not demanding that the Government make an undertaking so that they can gain scores. Rather, we firmly believe that setting standard working hours and addressing the MPF offsetting issue will surely be beneficial and constructive for the entire society. We will stand our ground. Here, we would also reiterate that we recognize the efforts made in this Policy Address and the previous ones by the Government on people's livelihood, welfare and housing. But, we are disappointed with a lack of government efforts in regard of labour affairs. The Government says that it is addressing these problems through various committees. Since the Government has so much respect for the committees, we of course hope that it will continue to handle manpower and labour issues through the committees and in accordance with existing mechanisms. We have not expected that paragraph 135 of the Policy Address will state: "there is still a genuine need to import workers … on the premise of according priority to local workers in employment and safeguarding their wage levels … review the effectiveness of the enhancement measures under the Supplementary Labour Scheme". If the Government has great respect for committees, from the 50s up to now, the Labour Advisory Board (LAB) in Hong Kong has transformed from an appointment system to the present election system. The LAB has gained adequate recognition. Of course, it is not a statutory body. Is this the reason for the Government to try to bypass it and come up with something else to expand the importation of labour? We unequivocally oppose that. The Government is so assertive and makes it explicit in the Policy Address that "there is still a genuine need to import workers". Has the Government consulted the LAB? Representatives from the commercial and labour sectors sit on the LAB. In the past, the LAB gave the entire society a very clear message: Not all applications for foreign labour would be turned down or approved. The decision will be made in accordance with society's actual need and whether there are enough workers and labour force to fill the positions. The LAB will be rational in vetting and approving applications. Therefore, this has been a


well-established system, and there have always been successful cases for the importation of labour. We have to respect this system. However, the Government comes up with that idea of importing labour for multiple works projects. Excuse me, this has not secured the consensus of the LAB, and employee members will also not endorse it for the Government. Of course, we hear that the Chairman of the LAB ― who is also the Commissioner for Labour ― comes out to express boldly that there is no need to secure the consensus of the LAB. The LAB will only give opinions in general and the Government can make its own decision. Yet, I have to advise Secretary CHEUNG and the Commissioner for Labour that if they exercise their discretion on this issue, they will definitely put themselves on the line. In other words, they no longer need the support of employees for government policies. I earnestly urge the Secretary and his team to discuss explicitly what role the LAB exactly plays when dealing with the existing Supplementary Labour Scheme (SLS). Even if some people consider that Hong Kong does not have enough labour force, I, TANG Ka-piu, always cite the example of Singapore. Is Singapore not importing a large number of workers? I just want to point out that under the existing mechanism of the SLS, applications will be vetted and approved rationally but if the authorities intend to bypass the SLS and the LAB, it will only turn the labour sector away from the LAB. This is not something the Government wants to see. Therefore, I strongly wish that the Government can give special treatment to this issue, especially when you have mentioned about importing labour for multiple works projects. I remember during a regular meeting of the Panel on Manpower held two days ago on Tuesday, the Government says in a high-profile manner that a Construction Industry Recruitment Centre (CIRC) has been established. I, Mr KWOK Wai-keung, Mr POON Siu-ping and labour union representatives have attended the opening ceremony. We have out-numbered trade association representatives. All labour unions have sent representatives to attend to give their full support because we firmly believe that the prospect for the construction industry is good. Through the annual pay increase negotiations, employers and employees have established a fine pattern which should be able to attract people to join the industry. The situation would be better if there can be better employment recruitment, and importation of labour will not be necessary. Since the SLS has come up with the idea of importing labour for multiple works projects, on the meeting held on Tuesday, we ask colleagues from the Labour Department who are in charge if training centres for the construction industry and


5513

the CIRC can follow suit. Is it possible to implement job-matching across multiple works projects for local workers? The authorities have not considered this. Why can importation of labour be allowed for multiple works projects? Why do the authorities not help local workers from this perspective and consider their needs? I have to point out in particular that in order to support their families and be able to work standard working hours, a group of workers aged over 30 who formerly may have worked in other industries have joined the construction industry instead ― Surely, the construction industry is close to implementing standard working hours and overtime work is compensated. This is very apparent. However, they are most worried that under the outsourcing system and the "gang leader" system, they can only follow one particular "gang leader" and cannot be guaranteed work every day. Therefore, local construction industry workers are paid on a daily basis while imported labour are paid monthly. If workers are imported for multiple works projects, the foreign labour will be fully exploited and this will in a way undermine the competitiveness of local workers. It will be lying if we say employment of local workers will not be affected. Thus, can the CIRC established by the Government carry out job-matching for multiple works projects? If it can, we will give credit to the Government. Secretary, is this possible? Otherwise, we will consider that he is actually discriminating against local workers. We have given a lot of opinions. We firmly believe that there will be countless new blood to join Hong Kong's construction industry, especially some more mainstream trades, for example, plank fixing and bar bending. Also, we have sufficient labour force and do not need to import foreign workers on a large scale. Secretary, on the issue of foreign labour, although I believe we have been arguing persistently for some time, I very much hope that we can go back to the basic position. Right now, trade unions are very down to earth. They listen to the people who are expressing their views on the Government. If the Government respects us, it would mean that it is also respecting the aspirations of the general public. Therefore, I wish that the Government can have a comprehensive and thorough understanding. We do not want to see our people slip from a grass-roots family to the underprivileged class and have to rely on government welfare. We definitely do not want to see this.


I have to say particularly that although minimum wage has been implemented, we have noticed that … In particular, Oxfam has recently published a report on poverty in Hong Kong. It shows that from 2010 to 2015, income growth for grass-roots families falls below inflation rate. When our economy goes downhill in the days to come, we are worried about the problems encountered by the grass-roots families or even the middle-class families when they withstand these economic changes. We wish that the Policy Address has taken these issues into account. In the soon-to-be delivered Budget, the same problems will have to be addressed. So, gear up. Last year, we came into contact with staff of the Labour Department. They said the number of applications filed for the Protection of Wages on Insolvency Fund in 2015 reached a peak after the 2008 financial tsunami. Thus, the labour sector will pay close attention to the ensuing situation. We wish that the Secretary will not only respond later, but will also introduce some corresponding or alleviating measures which can put the hearts of employees at ease in next week's Budget. Then we can resist the anticipated economic downturn together. President, lastly, I would like to give a summary of being a Member representing the labour sector. Apart from the debate on the Budget, I believe there will be no other platforms in the coming days for Members to discuss the major policies of the SAR Government, especially when the agenda of the Council … Just as what Mr Tommy CHEUNG says, although the motion he proposes has been placed as the first item, he is not sure if that will be discussed in the Council meeting. Motions proposed by other Members which are placed further down the agenda may simply go untouched. Thus, I wish that the Secretary can address or tackle three issues together with the labour sector: First, employees are much worried about having no money after retirement; second, employees' pay, though they may get promotions, cannot catch up with inflation; and third, working hours are excessively long. I hope that the Secretary can work with the SAR Government to pragmatically address these three issues. Then, I believe all political parties and the generations to come will give the Government thunderous applause. I so submit.


5515

MR POON SIU-PING (in Cantonese): President, the Chief Executive has delivered his Policy Address and the general comments of the public are in the negative. According to the opinion poll conducted by the Public Opinion Programme of the University of Hong Kong, over half of the people interviewed are dissatisfied with the Policy Address and less than 20% of the people interviewed are satisfied with it. Society is divided. The SAR Government all along has low popularity and it is hardly surprising that people have responded negatively to the Policy Address. The disappointing thing is that although the Policy Address highlights "Foster Harmony" and "Share Prosperity" in its title, it does not attempt to find out why there is no harmony in society, nor does it provide any specific measures to promote social harmony. We find that the words and deeds of the SAR Government and the way it administers policies discourage social harmony. There was an obvious example last month. The Chief Executive attended a luncheon organized by the business sector, at which he said that he had to thank the business sector on behalf of the public for their tax payment, because the Government could make use of the revenue from profits tax, which hits a record high this year, to improve people's quality of life. It is understandable that the Chief Executive wishes to placate the business sector, but the general public find it sarcastic that the Chief Executive should have to thank the business sector on behalf of the Hong Kong public for their tax payment. The profits tax rate in Hong Kong is 16.5%, which is probably one of the lowest in the world. Besides, major sources of profits such as stock dividends received and estates inherited are exempt from tax payment. On the other hand, Hong Kong is one of the places in the developed region with the widest wealth gap. I do not see why Hong Kong people have to thank the business sector just because the business sector has paid tax on time or they have contributed to the record-high profits tax revenue this year. Quite the opposite, a record-high profits tax revenue shows that the business sector has made handsome profits from the hard-earned money of the people in the past financial year. The business sector ought to thank Hong Kong people instead. But the Government has reversed the logic and asked the public to thank the business sector which has reaped exorbitant profits. His words do no good to social harmony. From 1996 to 2011, the highest income group in society accounted for 20% of the population and the amount of tax paid by this group of people had been less than 10% of their income, but their income equalled to 55% of the total income of all Hong Kong people. According to the Chief Executive's logic of thanking the


business sector, do Hong Kong people need to thank these business tycoons or the "kings of the working class" for paying tax, so that the Government can improve the quality of life of Hong Kong people? When the incumbent Chief Executive was not yet the Chief Executive in 2010, he wrote in a newspaper article saying that the financial policy of the then SAR Government had two fallacies. One is the misconception that trickle-down effect can benefit different levels of society and the other is the absence of an awareness and policy of wealth distribution. If we compare the Chief Executive's words then and his words of thanking the business sector now, we will find that he has played a sleight of hands and altered his standpoint. The economic outlook of Hong Kong this year is gloomy and not promising. In the second half of last year, some investment institutions already predicted that the unemployment rate this year would rise to 4.5%, and the employment sizes of import/export trades, wholesale trades, tourism, financing, insurance and real estate would shrink and the only exception would be the construction sector. Before the arrival of the Chinese New Year, the Government released the retail sales figures for the whole year of 2015, indicating that the value of total retail sales had decreased by 3.7% compared with 2014, and that the performance was worse than the time when Hong Kong was hit by the SARS epidemics in 2003. In the face of a slackened Mainland economy and a volatile global economy, the Government has hardly said anything in the Policy Address about how it is going to lead Hong Kong through this adversity. On the contrary, the Chief Executive only emphasizes our edge of having the Mainland as our hinterland and sings praises of "Belt and Road", showing his serious detachment from the real situation of society. The first ones to suffer this economic setback are grass-roots workers. Sarcastically enough, the labour issue described with in greatest detail in the Policy Address is labour importation. It is said that the processing of labour importation applications in the construction industry will be expedited. But then, other issues directly affecting grass-roots workers are not mentioned or just briefly touched on in the Policy Address. In paragraph 135 of the Policy Address, the Government says that there will be a shortage of about 10 000 to 15 000 skilled workers in the construction industry for the coming few years, and that there is still a genuine need to import workers to cater for our development needs. The fact is that labour has all along been imported into Hong Kong. The Labour Advisory Board is charged with the duty to monitor labour importation and approve these applications, so as to meet the development needs


5517

of Hong Kong. The labour sector is against any deviation from established labour importation schemes in the name of scheme enhancement. Such enhancement in effect will weaken the existing mechanism for monitoring labour importation. To date, the Labour Advisory Board has not approved any labour importation applications submitted under the enhancement measures of the Supplementary Labour Scheme. The enhanced scheme is not yet implemented, but the Chief Executive already says in the Policy Address that the Government will review the effectiveness of the enhanced scheme. This is a total disregard of reality. In the past when I voiced my views to the Chief Executive on his policies, I repeatedly said that I supported the Government in developing infrastructure to enhance people's quality of life. But infrastructure projects should be undertaken evenly in all times and are supposed to counteract the rises and falls of the economy. The Government now thirsts for grandiose projects and achievements. It presses ahead with different large-scale projects concurrently, and has thus created a man-made manpower shortage. This is the cause of the so-called manpower shortage in the construction industry. In the face of an economic downturn in Hong Kong and a rising unemployment rate, and given the fact that the Construction Industry Recruitment Centre of the Labour Department, as mentioned in the Policy Address, has come into operation in January, and that the Government will collaborate with the Construction Industry Council to boost the skills of the construction industry to attract new entrants, I do not think it is necessary at the present stage to take forward the so-called enhancement measures of the Supplementary Labour Scheme. In order to induce young people to join the construction industry, industrial safety, apart from pays and benefits and job satisfaction, is equally important. At present, one serious and fatal industrial accident takes place in the construction industry every two weeks on average. This is totally unacceptable. Two points are mentioned in the Policy Agenda in respect of industrial safety, including protecting workers' safety while working at height and urging workers to use standard-conforming mobile working platforms, and requesting them to use safety helmets with chin straps. But these measures are far from enough. Besides, I do not know why it is said in the Policy Agenda that the Government will establish a task force to explore the proposals put forward by an inter-departmental working group, so as to improve protection for injured employees in high-risk industries. I put a question on the special task force to


the Government when we examined the Estimates of Expenditure in 2014 at the Legislative Council. At that time, Secretary for Labour and Welfare Matthew CHEUNG replied that the special task force was being followed up by an internal working group comprising representatives of the relevant bureau/departments, and it was expected that the study would be completed by the end of 2014. The Secretary did not say that the Government would establish another task force to explore the proposals put forward by the inter-departmental working group. The Government now unreasonably complicates the machinery by proposing in the Policy Agenda another task force to look into the proposals of the task force. If this is not a half-hearted effort made by the Government to take forward the Chief Executive's pledge made in his election manifesto, I cannot think of any other valid intention of the Government. Regarding the part on labour in the Policy Address, I must talk about the enactment of legislation on standard working hours. It is said in the Policy Address that the Standard Working Hours Committee has completed an extensive public consultation exercise and a comprehensive survey on working hours, and that the Committee will conduct a second round consultation shortly. I hope the second round consultation will not continue to focus on some vague issues. The consultation must put forth specific legislative proposals to address the problem of long working hours. President, the Legislative Council passed the amendments to a Member's motion on "strengthening vocational education" in November last year. In the Policy Address, the Government says that it will earmark a site in the urban district to develop a Vocational Training Council campus, and adds that the Government attaches importance to vocational education. However, as I said in the motion debate, in order to strengthen vocational education, the Government must review the associate degree system, so as to avoid associate degree programmes and vocation education vying for students who do not pursue further education in traditional schools. The Government should also reinforce the job stability of the front-line staff of Vocational Training Council and include vocation education as one of the conditions for employment in the Government's employment policy. The Government must take a multi-pronged approach to bring forth the robust growth of vocational education in Hong Kong. President, I so submit.


5519

MR MA FUNG-KWOK (in Cantonese): President, the term Belt and Road Initiative is the key word in the Policy Address this year. The term has caused lots of controversies as it is mentioned more than 40 times in almost 30 paragraphs in the Policy Address. The Belt and Road Initiative is an important economic, diplomatic and political development strategy of China. Since the population of Belt and Road countries accounts for 63% of the global population, and 29% of the gross world product, the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region (SAR) should not turn a blind eye to that. For that reason, the Chief Executive proposes in the Policy Address that we should grasp the opportunities presented by the Belt and Road Initiative, because it is something we have to do and we ought to do. Members should remember the first motion debate in the beginning of this session proposed by Mr Martin LIAO ― "Seizing the opportunities brought about by 'One Belt One Road' and seeking new directions for Hong Kong's economy". This Council passed the motion as amended by Mr Christopher CHEUNG, Mr CHAN Kam-lam and me with 44 votes for it and seven votes against it. In my amendment, I urged the Government that it should not only develop Hong Kong into the fundraising hub, offshore Renminbi hub, trade and investment hub, hub for service professionals as well as logistics and transportation hub under the Belt and Road Initiative, but it should also take the opportunities brought about by 'One Belt One Road' to help promote the development of local culture and arts and the creative industry. The Government mentions in the Policy Address how the culture sector can play a part under the Belt and Road Initiative. I am quoting that paragraph, "On the cultural front, Hong Kong offers the freedom and an environment conducive to artistic creation and cultural diversity. Coupled with our efficient immigration control policies, we can attract artists, art groups and cultural organizations from all over the world to perform, exhibit works or participate in seminars and forums in Hong Kong. Over the past years, Hong Kong has had cultural exchanges at different levels with some Belt and Road countries. Hence, we can play an active role in cultural exchanges under the Belt and Road Initiative." (End of quote) President, I welcome the fact that the Government gives recognition to the industry for playing a part under the Belt and Road Initiative. But the Policy Address only briefly introduces the current work of the local culture sector. However, the Government has not provided an answer as to what the sector can


do in the future and how the Government would help the industry. Thus, it is rather disappointing as it only gives us an impression that the Government is paying lip-service only and there is nothing new at all. As a matter of fact, Hong Kong has a unique cultural background, and it has a history of broader ties and connections with the Chinese and non-Chinese communities along the coastal regions in the Asia-Pacific and Indian Ocean. We should be able to manifest our strengths as a go-between in promoting the relationship between China and Belt and Road countries. According to the 2011 population census, a total population of 450 000 ethnic minorities were residing in Hong Kong, and sizable Indonesian, Filipino, Indian, Nepalese and Pakistani communities were engaging in all sorts of businesses. They are all permanent Hong Kong residents. If they are willing to help, they can make their contributions in respect of their languages, cultures and professions. Hong Kong should enhance the communication among different races by way of promoting the cultural exchanges and mutual understanding of different ethnic groups. I think that the SAR Government may sponsor more cultural activities for ethnic minorities and host culture festivals featuring these regions or nations. This will not only help to enhance racial harmony among different cultures and races, but will also strengthen Hong Kong's status as a world city in Asia. Furthermore, the Government should enhance its efforts in strengthening public education, so that the public will take an open attitude towards them and treat cultural diversity with respect. It should also encourage and support local culture and arts groups to conduct cultural exchanges in these regions. I consider that the Belt and Road Initiative would provide great opportunities to the development of China. If we are to seize the opportunities, we should put forward more concrete propositions to assist and organize all sectors in the community, including the culture sector, and to give the impetus for facilitating the development. In fact, the SAR Government should understand that the community at large is not familiar with the Belt and Road Initiative. In the meantime, since Belt and Road countries were not our important trade partners or key points for exchanges in the past, it is not easy for us to have a general grasp of their languages, cultures and social conditions. For that reason, the Government should strengthen its research efforts and do something concrete in the spheres of exploration and understanding, so as to allow the Hong Kong community to have a better understanding and a good grasp of the relevant state policies and specific arrangements, and to take corresponding measures in order to find a new way out for Hong Kong's economic and cultural development.


5521

As to the work of developing the local culture, the Policy Address has partially addressed the aspiration I have been advocating for many years, such as adding a dedicated person in charge of cultural matters in the Beijing Office. I believe this can provide more support to the local cultural sector when they participate in cultural exchange programmes on the Mainland. I also hope that the deployment of personnel in charge of cultural matters can be expanded gradually to other Mainland offices at suitable localities or overseas economic and trade offices in the longer term, and that they can be renamed as economic, trade and cultural offices in order to reflect the functions and duties of these offices in relation to culture. As to the Government's decision of offering free admission to the permanent exhibitions of designated Leisure and Cultural Services Department (LCSD) museums a standing practice, I think it is extremely worthy of support, because that will enable members of the public to have more opportunities to appreciate culture and arts. It can also help schools, teachers and students to enrich the contents and resources of their visual arts curriculum. With regards to the construction of the West Kowloon Cultural District project, it is being carried out in a steady fashion, and I consider that the Government should further focus on supporting the complementary software development for culture and arts, so as to synchronize with the gradual completion of its hardware and to achieve balanced development. President, the Government has not proposed any new policy to support the development of the local culture and arts industry except the above proposals. I therefore wish to remind the SAR Government that the local cultural sector still has a lot of aspirations, and the Government is duty-bound to listen and address these aspirations. Venue resources are the key concerns of the cultural sector. It is explicitly stated in the Policy Address that the industrial building revitalization policy would cease at the end of March this year. Yet, the survival issue of culture, recreation and arts groups would not be solved along with the cessation of the industrial building revitalization policy. In fact, besides the rental hike issue, some activity venues and workshops have received warnings on a regular basis for failing to comply with the lease conditions, and some are even forced to relocate to other places due to this reason. I urge the Government to relax the restriction on the non-industrial uses of industrial buildings, so that culture, recreation and arts groups may make use of industrial units in a reasonable,


sensible and legal manner. The Government should also make reference to supportive measures given to the testing and certification industry by waiving the fees to be paid for the application for temporary waiver, so as to minimize the restriction on arts groups and allow them to conduct activities and operate in industrial buildings. Apart from industrial buildings, the Government should also adopt different strategies to open up more venues for the development of the cultural sector, including stipulating in the land sale conditions that venues for culture and arts activities should be provided, speeding up the planning of the Lok Ma Chau Loop, and making better use of vacant schools buildings by encouraging schools to open up their facilities and space. As to the training of talents, arts or design-related programmes in tertiary institutions of Hong Kong are in abundance. Nevertheless, the number of students who select the visual arts (VA) subject under the New Senior Secondary Academic Structure (NSSAS) has remained low in recent years. The Government should enhance the matching up between the VA programmes in tertiary institutes and the number of students who select VA subject under NSSAS, so as to make it an option for students to take arts in their life planning. And at the same time, the Government should also enhance the recognition of artists and arts administrators in society, and improve the prospects of advancement and development of arts administrators. A more critical point is how the Government should handle the development of local cultural development from a longer-term and more macroscopic perspective? As far as the structure of the Government is concerned, the local cultural and arts sector generally hopes that a dedicate Policy Bureau can be set up to co-ordinate cultural work within the Government. Unfortunately, the policy address last year tactfully announced the shelving of the culture bureau, and it is not mentioned in the Policy Address this year. Although the Government has decided not to set up a culture bureau, the work in reviewing our cultural policy should not come to a standstill. The last review of our cultural policy was conducted some 15 years ago. Will the Government re-consider setting up a culture bureau with a view to formulating a cultural policy which is in line with our social development and which can meet the need of the culture and arts sector?


5523

With regards to measures relating to performing arts and publishing, it is proposed in the Policy Address that the Government will actively consider the option of requiring developers to include cinemas in their development projects as appropriate in the terms and conditions of the land lease, and to inject an additional $400 million into the CreateSmart Initiative. We will definitely support these measures. However, these are measures already proposed in the policy address and budget last year, or they are just the continuation of the initiatives last year. There is nothing new at all. I wish that these measures, as proposed in the policy address and budget last year, can be implemented as soon as practicable. When compared to our counterparts in neighbouring regions or when we take a look at what these governments have done to the development of their industries or the cultural development in these regions, the local publishing industry has all along been having a feeling of being a "orphan", because we have been neglected by the Government for so many years. How can we fully utilize Hong Kong's cultural and geographical advantage to make Hong Kong the Chinese language books hub? How can local bookstores have more room for survival? How can we promote reading in society? How can we draw young people to join the creative writing and publishing trade? How can the local publishing industry open up room for business on the Mainland? I hope the Government will speed up its consideration process. For example, the industry expects the Government to introduce the public lending right system to its library services, so that we can show our respect to intellectual property by implementing this policy on the one hand, and such a policy may encourage local creative writing on the other. Should the Government actively consider that? President, regarding sports policies, I have all along been urging the Chief Executive to fulfil his election manifesto by establishing a sports commission to manage the development of local sports and giving an overhaul to the local sports strategy of promoting sport in the community, supporting elite sport, and making Hong Kong a centre for major international sports events. We should also follow the example of Singapore, Taipei and the Mainland by proposing the policies and objectives of developing and promoting our local sports industry. In addition, I have all along been urging the Government to strengthen its support to local athletes, including elite and retired athletes. Eventually, the Chief Executive announces in the Policy Address this year that the Government will appoint Mr YEUNG Tak-keung, Deputy Secretary for Home Affairs, as the Commissioner for Sports. The sports sector has all along


been anticipating that the post should be taken up by an expert in the trade and yet the appointment this time around may not necessarily fulfil the trade's aspiration, but after all, the fact that the Chief Executive has honoured his election manifesto is beneficial to local sports development. As a matter of fact, in spite of Commissioner YEUNG's civil service background, he has ample participation and has been paying close attention to sports affairs. The sports sector and I expect that he will strengthen the tie between the trade and the Government in a bid to exert concerted efforts to promote local sports development. What is more important is that we hope different departments within the Government can fully co-operate with the Commissioner for Sports, work in co-ordination with him as far as inter-departmental policy is concerned, and take some more integrated measures with a view to facilitating the development of local sports. President, the Commissioner for Sports has a duty to examine all aspects of Hong Kong's sports development and the needs of the sector. I believe the implementation of the Multi-purpose Sports Complex (MPSC) at Kai Tak is one of his primary tasks. The sports community and I eagerly hope that the MPSC can be completed by the year 2020-2021. At the same time, we also hope that the MPSC could accommodate more sporting events, within or outside the proximity of the MPSC. The MPSC should include a flexible venue design to meet the need of different sporting events as well as other cultural activities, such as large-scale concerts. In addition, in order to develop a water sports centre of the Victoria Harbour, the Government should make use of the nearby nullah and improve the surface water quality of the waters within the original runway area. The Government should also give consideration to the design of a road system surrounding the entire Kai Tak Development Site, so as to facilitate marathon, race walking, cycling and motorsport events or competitions which require a circuit or racetrack. In so doing, we can make the MPSC an important home base which can support the sustainable and diversified development of local sports. In addition to building a single sports ground, the Government should also open up diversified sporting venues in the community. I am glad that the Government has launched batch I of the Restored Landfill Revitalisation Funding Scheme (RLRFS), so as to allow local culture and recreation groups to build sports facilities on restored landfills. At the same time, I also hope that the Government can expedite the construction of some community recreation and sports facilities according to its planning standards. Besides, I hope that the

http://www.hab.gov.hk/en/policy_responsibilities/Recreation_Sport_and_Entertainment_Licensing/mpsc.htm

http://www.epd.gov.hk/epd/tc_chi/environmentinhk/waste/prob_solutions/landfill/application.html

http://www.epd.gov.hk/epd/tc_chi/environmentinhk/waste/prob_solutions/landfill/application.html


5525

Government will provide the necessary incentive to encourage more schools to open their school premises to sports groups outside teaching hours, in order to relieve the huge demand for sporting venues. Moreover, it is announced in the Policy Address that the Government will formulate a career programme for retired athletes in order to enhance the opportunities for their post-retirement career development and to strengthen the support to be given to athletes. Local elite athletes have been working very hard to achieve good results for Hong Kong, so the Government should enhance the support to them in various aspects, such as helping them to further their studies, to continue with schooling and to seize post-retirement career opportunities and to elevate their social and professional status, so that they can concentrate on their sporting careers without any worries. We also hope that more young people can thus see the career prospects of being an athlete, and that more young people can be attracted to a sporting career. Moreover, the Government should consider augmenting the coverage of elite athletes and helping more athletes to participate in different sporting events, so as to allow different sporting events to stand a chance to be selected for elite training programmes. As to local sports development, in addition to the hard efforts of athletes, the background support provided by sports administrators is indispensable. The SAR Government should take measures to devise a qualification framework for professionals, with a view to improving the salaries and fringe benefits of sports administrators, building the promotion ladder for sports administration and attracting more people to join the sports administration profession. At the same time, the Government should take more active measures to boost commercial sponsorships for the sports industry, and to enhance the development in areas such as the sales of sports apparatus, sports training, sports medicine and research. And the development of these areas just needs the backup of professional sports administrators. President, as far as the four constituencies that I represent are concerned, namely the sports, performing arts, culture and publication sectors, I consider that the Policy Address this year is seeking to honour the pledges made during the election, and there are areas worthy of our support. Nevertheless, as the needs and views of the sector are not all met and adopted, the Government should further enhance its support for the culture, sports and creative industry. I hope that the SAR Government will actively study and launch new policies in addition to those policies mentioned in the policy address. The Government should also strengthen the training of people in order to match with the hardware.


President, next I wish to speak on the part concerning education in the Policy Address this year. After years of discussions, at last free kindergarten education will be implemented. This is a policy that I support. However, the Government should understand that the current proposal is not entirely satisfactory. For example, according to the proposal, only about 70% of kindergarten students in the future can enjoy free kindergarten education, and the remaining 30% of them will still need to pay school fees. The pay scale wanted by the pre-primary education sector has not been materialized. The fact that the Government will provide funding according to numbers of students will only help sizable kindergartens to receive more resources. Perhaps this has fallen short of the expectations of some people, but this proposal is, after all, an important milestone in pre-primary education development. Along with my support of implementing the proposal as soon as practicable, I consider that the Education Bureau should pay attention to several things, so as to improve the entire policy as soon as possible under practical conditions. First of all, it is the problem about the Hong Kong Planning Standards and Guidelines. Education Bureau expresses that the 730 half-day and 250 full-day places for every 1 000 children in the age group of three to five will be revised to 500 each respectively. Education Bureau expects that the demand of parents and students for full-day places will increase, but it seems that Education Bureau has not drawn up a timetable to explain when that objective can be achieved. If we are to achieve that objective, we should put in place measures to encourage school sponsoring bodies to run full-day schools. But the question is that according to the current proposal, the subsidy for the operation of full-day schools will only be 1.3 times of half-day schools. Before the Administration makes the decision, has it ever made any assessment of whether the assistance can provide adequate incentive for school sponsoring bodies to operate full-day kindergartens? Has it made any assessment on the impact of manpower deployment of schools after adjusting the proportion of places? Will there be a shortage of teachers? Furthermore, theoretically, given the Hong Kong Planning Standards and Guidelines has been modified, the number of students who can enjoy full free education in future will decrease. Has the Administration put any assessment mechanism in place to review the policy in relation to the basic subsidy for half-day unit on a regular basis, so as to avoid criticism that free education exists in name only? Besides, the Government should pay attention to the fact that when the salaries and remuneration packages for all grades of kindergarten teachers are formulated, they are more or less the same as primary school teachers and staff

http://www.edb.gov.hk/en/about-edb/legco/policy-address/2016_EDB_Panel_Paper_Eng.pdf


5527

members of primary schools. Yet, the scope of the packages are for reference only, and kindergartens can still negotiate with their staff on a case by case basis. The original intent of imposing less restrictions is to allow kindergartens to use the resources in a more flexible way, but perhaps the approach cannot solve the "seasonal price" problem of kindergarten teachers' salaries and remuneration packages. For that reason, after implementing the free kindergarten education policy, the Administration should examine whether there is an improvement in the salaries and remuneration packages of kindergarten teachers and staff members and whether they are competitive, so as to safeguard the stability of the teaching team as well as to attract people to join the profession. Thirdly, the current policy is devised on the basis of financial resources. But what parents have all along been anticipating is that besides free of charge provision of kindergarten education, what more important is about quality kindergarten education. The Administration always tries to evade topics such as the curriculum and teaching objectives of kindergartens by using "diversity in kindergarten development" as an excuse. There are pros and cons to adopt this approach. The pro is that it can enable kindergartens to have a more stable transition in the course of implementing free kindergarten education because that involves less changes. But the con is that no active measures are put in place to ensure the quality of education in future, and it is thus impossible to ensure that public money is put to good use and let the public know the Administration's policy objectives and anticipation. I consider that the Government should take an active stance in an appropriate fashion, so as to ensure kindergartens to enjoy autonomous development on the one hand, and ensure the delivery of quality education on the other. (THE PRESIDENT'S DEPUTY, MR ANDREW LEUNG, took the Chair) Deputy President, the Policy Address proposes that the Administration should advance its review of ways to extend the scope of the subsidy of the Mainland University Study Subsidy Scheme, with a view to assisting more students with financial needs to pursue further studies in the Mainland. I fully support the proposal. In fact, the advantage of students pursuing further studies in the Mainland is that they can familiarize themselves with the situation of China, grasp the opportunity in the midst of China's development, and pave their way for their career development in the Mainland after graduation. Even if they


opt to return to Hong Kong for work after graduation, they will be able to help local enterprises to engage in the Mainland's commercial, financial or other servicing industries, and to benefit from the rapid economic development in the Mainland. According to the Administration's figures, more than 3 000 students are pursuing further studies in the Mainland. Among these 3 000 students, they are enrolled via one of the following three ways, namely the Scheme for Admission of Hong Kong Students to Mainland Higher Education Institutions (Admission Scheme), the Joint Entrance Examination (JEE) for Hong Kong, Macao and Taiwan students, and independent recruitment programmes conducted by Mainland universities, with each assuming one third of the total market share respectively. Nevertheless, only students admitted via the Admission Scheme may enjoy the government subsidy. Since the figures show that quite a high percentage of students are enrolled through other programmes, I hope the Administration will consider extending the subsidy to other admission programmes for local students who pursue further studies in the Mainland, so as to allow more choice for local students on top of selecting local tertiary institutes. Deputy President, the announcement of injecting $1 billion into the scholarship fund for attracting more students from the Belt and Road countries to study in Hong Kong has caused some controversies. In fact, besides attracting overseas talents, the Government needs to take whatever that is readily available in Hong Kong and to nurture local talents. In this connection, I hope the Administration will consider with due care by slightly changing the target applicant, that is, to appropriately redistribute 100 quotas to local students and students from the Belt and Road countries, with a view to facilitating two-way exchanges by sending local students to study in schools in Belt and Road countries. This will not affect the objective of student exchanges on the one hand, and it can also address public concerns on the other. Furthermore, the Government may introduce a working holiday system for people working in these countries, so as to facilitate and encourage more local young people to seek temporary residency and job opportunity in these Belt and Road countries. What is more important is that the SAR Government should provide the essential education to these young people first, so as to allow Hong Kong students to communicate and exchange with ethnic minority students, to experience and to have a better understanding of different cultures. At the same time, it may also design and promote relevant information, research findings and

http://www.info.gov.hk/gia/general/201510/19/P201510190297.htm





https://www.cpr.cuhk.edu.hk/en/press_detail.php?id=1060


5529

the concept of education for all within the Belt and Road Initiative by making use of existing tertiary education resources, and to popularize of the relevant knowledge and concerns within the Belt and Road regions and in Hong Kong. Deputy President, I wish to add something about the development of tourism in the last part of my speech. In view of the volatility of the global economy, the fluctuation in the stock market and a slowdown in development, Hong Kong cannot stay apart. All trades and professions start to feel a decline in the number of tourists and the impact of weakening spending. According to statistics, Hong Kong registered a total of 59 million person trips last year, but a 2.5% drop this year, which is the first time for Hong Kong to register a decline since the SARS outbreak in 2003. About a year or two ago, Hong Kong people were clamouring about too many tourists and about supporting facilities in tourist spots, public space and public transportation being crammed with tourists. People kept complaining. Now this is history. MTR carriages are no longer packed with travellers from the Mainland, fewer Putonghua speakers can be found on the street, and the number of vacant shops in tourist districts such as Mong Kok and Causeway Bay is on the rise or is worsening steadily. I believe a lot of people can feel it. The hotel and retailing industry even said they were experiencing a winter chill. Of course, Hong Kong's tourism industry has been over reliant on an unitary extensive development mode and has been blindly pursuing a higher tourist turnout. That will not only cause an unbearable overload in major tourist spots and shopping districts as well as a rent hike, the fact that shops targeting mainland tourists opened in rapid succession has already reduced the operation space for shops that serve local residents. A decline in tourists will definitely cause an impact on the tourism industry, but fortunately, while the number of Mainland tourists has dropped 3% when compared with the figure of last year, there is only a mild decline in the number of tourists from other origins, and the number has even slightly increased. Among them, tourists from Thailand and the Philippines have increased 9.1% and 10.9% respectively, while there is obvious growth in the number of tourists from India, Vietnam and the United States. I hope that faced with a change in operation and the source visitors, I hope the Government and the trade can re-adjust the strategy they adopted in the past by targeting on some high-value tourists. We should let them experience various aspects of Hong Kong and feel Hong Kong's culture and the city's characteristics.

http://www.straitstimes.com/business/economy/budget-2016-may-help-workers-firms-through-winter-chill

http://www.koreatimes.co.kr/www/news/culture/2016/03/320_200760.html


With regards to long-term planning, the Chief Executive proposes to take the forward planning studies on the Tourism Node at Kai Tak and Lantau in this year's policy address. Although the resistance will possibly be quite strong as they involve various stakeholders, in particular the development plan of Lantau, which is criticized by some environmental groups and conservation activists, I still hope the Administration will spend some time on listening to the views from all sides and strike an appropriate balance as much as possible. I especially wish to put forward a proposal here, that is, I hope the Administration will use culture and creative industry as a new impetus to further propel our economy, create job opportunities and promote the tourism industry. As the hardware of the West Kowloon Cultural District project and the MPSC at Kai Tak are being built and implemented, we should now consider ways to make good use of our resources, with a view to attracting more tourists to come and visit Hong Kong. The tourism industry is one of the pillar industries of Hong Kong, which accounts for 5% of Hong Kong's Gross Domestic Product and employs 270 000 employees. Therefore, it is worthwhile for the Government to put in more financial and manpower resources and to introduce more development plans. In fact, I note that some people are of the opinion that at present, matters relating to tourism are being co-ordinated by the Commerce and Economic Development Bureau, promoted by the Hong Kong Tourism Board and supervised by the Travel Industry Council. This arrangement is not ideal at all. Besides, it seems that not a single government department is responsible for the longer-term planning and review of matters relating to tourism. Therefore, there are voices calling for the establishment of an independent and dedicated Policy Bureau to deal with tourism affairs. It is certainly good it there is a dedicated bureau to take care of the matters, but I consider that it is quite reasonable that culture, sports and tourism policies should receive holistic consideration. In so doing, we can take care of the spiritual life of the public as well as their physical well-being, and this dedicated bureau can also consider ways to foster and breed the charisma and attractiveness of our city simultaneously. For instance, the world renown Hong Kong Sevens, the Harbour Race, the Standard Chartered Hong Kong Marathon, the Cheung Chau Bun Festival, the Tai Hang Fire Dragon Dance, the Hong Kong Dragon Boat Carnival, and the Fomula E Championship to be held later this year, and so on, are large-scale events comprising all the cultural, sports and tourism elements.

http://www.hab.gov.hk/en/policy_responsibilities/Recreation_Sport_and_Entertainment_Licensing/mpsc.htm

http://hksevens.com/

http://www.hkharbourrace.com/?lang=hk

http://www.hkmarathon.com/Event_Info/2016_Race_Handbook.htm

http://www.discoverhongkong.com/us/see-do/events-festivals/highlight-events/cultural-celebrations.jsp

http://www.discoverhongkong.com/us/see-do/events-festivals/highlight-events/cultural-celebrations.jsp

http://www.discoverhongkong.com/eng/see-do/culture-heritage/living-culture/tai-hang-fire-dragon-dance.jsp

http://www.discoverhongkong.com/us/see-do/events-festivals/highlight-events/dragon-boat-carnival.jsp

http://www.discoverhongkong.com/us/see-do/events-festivals/highlight-events/dragon-boat-carnival.jsp

http://www.hkaa.com.hk/tc/news_detail.php?id=93#.VujJidJsOgB


5531

A better synergy among culture, sports and tourism and better results can be achieved through the co-ordination of a dedicated cultural, sports and tourism Policy Bureau, provided that such a Policy Bureau is established. Deputy President, I so submit. MR CHUNG KWOK-PAN (in Cantonese): Deputy President, just now, several Members of the labour sector criticized the business sector. I thus would like to use a bit of time to … None of them is here now, but I will not request a headcount to summon them back … to say a few words on the way they criticized the business sector. To begin with, they talked about how the Chief Executive thanked the business sector for paying tax. The business sector does not need the Chief Executive to thank us. No matter where we operate our business, we have to pay tax if we make profits. This is our responsibility. Hence, we do not need the Chief Executive to extend any special thanks to the business sector. Besides, Members of the labour sector said that 1% of the people in Hong Kong owned 50% of the wealth. I do not believe that this 1% of the population who constitute the business sector ― you may call them tycoons, rich people or whatever ― and who now own 50% of the wealth, were all born with a silver spoon in their mouths or were born wealthy. When they were young, they were also a member of the working class. They started up some small businesses after saving up enough money. With perseverance and hard work, their businesses flourished. As a Bureau Director has aptly put it, the money they have does not come from nowhere, nor were they born rich. No, certainly not. They persevered with their business, clinging to the Lion Rock spirit of the old days. They accumulated wealth and they paid tax. It is the responsibility of the business sector to pay tax, after which it is the Government's responsibility to redistribute wealth to the needy. What is more, Members of the labour sector said Hong Kong should levy a "rich man tax", so on and so forth. But is the Government running out of money? The Government has $3,000 billion. We make money and pay tax to the Government. But the Government puts all the money in the "big pool" and does not use it, or does not know how to use it. This is the problem. What is the use of paying more tax to the Government? Right? Therefore, do not blame the business sector. What has happened after out tax payment? Is the Government running out of money? It has trillions.


Another point they mentioned is that we make profits from the hard-earned money of the workers. Do you know that many bosses are "no pay" employers? When the economy goes down, or when employers cannot receive the money owed to them, they will use any money available to give salaries to their employees, rather than giving themselves an income. They are truly "no pay" employers. So, would Members of the labour sector please do not polarize the employers and employees whenever they touch on the subjects of standard working hours or Mandatory Provident Fund offsetting arrangement. This is an extremely bad thing to do … though none of them is here now. Deputy President, I now return to the subject of education and youth development. In the paragraphs of the Policy Address on Youth Development, the Chief Executive says right in the beginning that "the Government attaches great importance to youth development". But if you take this Policy Address and ask any youngster on the street whether the work on youth development done by the current-term Government is helpful to them, I believe 100% of them will say that they do not think the SAR Government has attached any importance to youth development. We all know that many incidents took place recently. Many disputes were started by young people. They have many grievances. One of their justifications is that the Government does not listen to their views. The Government truly needs to seriously review why young people have such ideas. Certainly, this is a complicated issue. A number of Bureaux Directors are here, the Secretary for Education in particular. He should look into this issue and see how he can deal with it through education. Education does not receive too much treatment in the Policy Address. Many education polices are mainly about the Mainland, such as the Mainland University Study Subsidy Scheme, the Funding Scheme for Youth Internship in the Mainland and a $1 billion scholarship to encourage students from the "One Belt One Road" countries to study in Hong Kong. Hong Kong is an international city. Why is this international city tilted to the Mainland? And why is it not tilted to overseas countries? Why no policy and resources are set aside to establish a subsidy scheme for studying overseas or joining overseas internship programmes? And why is there no subsidy scheme for our students to study and learn in the 66 "One Belt One Road" countries? Why are these schemes unilateral and not bilateral?


5533

The Chief Executive also said that Hong Kong could perform the role of a "super-connector". A "super-connector" should have two-way connection. Why is it only one-way connection now? This policy gives people the feeling that the Government only looks northward. Certainly, it is necessary to look northward, but the policy should be bilateral, rather than unilateral. Besides, regarding attracting talents and manpower, Members of the labour sector repeatedly brought up the subject of labour importation just now. We, the business sector, are of the view that foreign labour should be imported when it is necessary to do so, but I very much object to using the term "imported labour". Even construction workers are professionally trained. Does any layman know how to perform iron fixing work or erect formwork? Not everyone knows how to perform these tasks. They have to be professionally trained and must learn how to do these tasks. Why can't we call them professional technicians? Why do we have to call them imported labour? It is stated in the Policy Address that the Government will inject $200 billion to hospital construction within the next 10 years, and it will also construct 480 000 housing units within the next 10 years. There are also many infrastructure projects in the pipeline. The Planning Department just contacted us, saying that the Government planned to take forward a large-scale infrastructure project in Lantau; if the project got the go-ahead, it would cost several hundred billion dollars. Who is going to carry out these future projects? Should we ask all Hong Kong people to work in the construction industry? The Hong Kong Children's Hospital at Kai Tak is an example. The Government has already pointed out that there will be a shortage of 200 doctors after the commissioning of the hospital. The Government has again committed the error of having constructed the hardware but forgetting the supporting software (manpower). Who will construct the $200 billion hospital? Of course, we absolutely will employ local workers first. Do you think it will not incur any cost to import workers to Hong Kong? Apart from wages, you have to provide them with board and lodging. So, do not just focus on saying that imported workers will bring about serious problems. Besides, the Chief Executive once said that he wished to give Hong Kong people better quality living space and living environment through his housing policy. Just take a look at the newly constructed housing flats and we will see that they are get increasingly small. How could people have quality living space and living environment there? In the past, a 500 sq ft flat was considered very


small. Nowadays, some flats can be as small as 200 sq ft, but their price is not cheap at all. Why? It is because the construction cost is expensive. At present, the construction cost for an ordinary flat is about $4,000-$5,000 per sq ft. Why is it so expensive? It is because the construction industry does not have enough workers for housing construction, thus pushing up the property costs. Hong Kong people end up buying small and expensive flats. Public grievances thus mount. Hence, do not just say that imported labour will definitely harm Hong Kong. It may be beneficial to Hong Kong as well because housing construction can proceed at a faster pace, which in turn can lower property prices, and more residential care homes can be built for the elderly. Talking about residential care homes, these homes do not have enough manpower as well. What can be done? Hospitals, residential care homes for the elderly, infrastructure projects and housing construction all lack manpower. What can be done? Hence, when it comes to manpower, the formulation an appropriate labour policy is necessary. Deputy President, there is one more point which very few Members have mentioned and it is the ageing population. Hong Kong will face an ageing population, especially when the people born in the "baby boom" in the 50s and 60s start to enter a "retirement boom" 10 years later. This can be an opportunity for young people to move upward. It is because when people of our generation retire, the younger generation will have many opportunities to climb up the social ladder. The young people may be worried and disappointed about their chance of upward mobility. Perhaps 10 years later when we all retire, they will have many job opportunities. Thank you, Deputy President. MR DENNIS KWOK (in Cantonese): Deputy President, when a debate was held on the Policy Address last year, I spoke in the relevant debate session on the issues concerning students with special educational needs (SEN). I will still do so this year and talk about the need for a policy on special education again. As we look back, it is true that efforts have been made and new policies have been formulated by the Government for SEN students over the past few years, such as the creation of the post of Special Educational Needs Co-ordinator (SENCO) with funding from the Community Care Fund. Apart from launching


5535

the Pilot Scheme on On-site Pre-school Rehabilitation Services at the end of last year, it is also proposed in the Policy Address this year that an additional Child Assessment Centre be set up to fulfil the performance pledge of providing assessment and professional diagnosis within six months. This is a very important point because for children with SEN, early identification and the provision of early support are crucial. If early intervention is available, the future development of children with SEN will basically be the same as mainstream students and the key is early identification and early intervention. It is both encouraging and pleasing to have these policies implemented and we think that children with SEN do require attention and support from the community and the Government. As I mentioned last year, long-term and persistent support should be given to special education and the resources allocated for this purpose should be increased. As for our position, we consider enacting a special education law the most effective way to ensure policy continuity and consistency. Therefore, over the past two years, I have started drafting a special education law with Dr Fernando CHEUNG and his office staff and the entire blueprint is already available. Why is it necessary to commence legislative work in this regard, that is to introduce a Member's bill? It is because as witnessed in the special education development of other countries, a special education law is also adopted as the most basic starting point. Only by doing so can a policy on special education develop in a long-term and steady manner without the need to rely on the temporary support of short-term and minor remedial measures. Hence, it is indeed necessary to enact a special education law. Even though it is not possible to strive for the enactment of the legislation in the short run, we hope that through this law drafting exercise, the community and the Government can be urged to draw a bottom line for the needs of SEN students. One of the areas which requires attention is the training and resources for teachers and front-line staff in special education. Actually, the Secretary for Education should be aware of our needs in this respect because I have pointed out repeatedly at meetings of the Panel on Education that the ratio of teachers and professional workers to SEN students should be enhanced and increased, and it is also very important to improve training for teachers and upgrade the quality of such training. As mentioned earlier, I have been working on the enactment of a special education law over the past few years, during which my working team visited many different organizations and met with various parents' groups, teachers,


social workers and professional therapists. As advised by a number of education psychologists, the current problem with the Education Bureau actually lies in manpower shortage and inadequate training, rendering its resources inadequate to support further development in this regard. As a result, those who are attending programmes in education psychology or interested in receiving the relevant training in order to take up the post of SENCO are not provided with the necessary resources and support. In the 70s or 80s, teachers might attend a one-year training programme in special education on the recommendation of school principals. In the 80s, this programme included a 16-week course, which was immediately followed by a 18-month internship programme. However, for some unknown reasons, the programme has been reduced to a 90 to 120-hour thematic course. Every school may appoint one of its teachers to attend the course but that is all. Teachers appointed to receive the training may find this very demanding because they will be required to attend the course while engaging in teaching work at the same time. As for the knowledge they acquired through the training course in special education and how it may be applied in their daily work, only very limited opportunity and training are provided for putting the theory into practice. Under such circumstances, can these trained teachers develop the knowledge or the ability required to manage the needs of SEN students in school? The answer is in the negative. Therefore, in order to ensure the effectiveness of integrated education, great importance must be attached to the work and training of teachers and professional workers. But as can be seen now, there is no policy support at all in this regard. Hence, I hope the Secretary would examine ways to increase resources so that professional qualifications or certificates could be awarded to a greater number of teachers who are interested in pursuing a career in special education. They should be given the chance to receive comprehensive and enhanced training and conduct professional exchanges, thereby developing their own worksheets in the field. They will then return to their work at school with confidence that they have genuinely acquired the necessary knowledge and training, which will put them in a better position to target their efforts towards helping SEN students. The work of front-line workers now is to bring about changes to the situation of SEN students when they are at the most important stage in their life. They have no time to waste. As I have said at the beginning of my speech, if


5537

early identification and early intervention can be provided, a great change may be caused in the entire life of SEN students. Therefore, this is an area of work which we should not neglect. We might not have much scientific knowledge of the issue of SEN 10 to 20 years ago but in the past 10 years, but there has been marked advancement in both the development of special education and our awareness of the issue. Hence, as far as policy formulation and resource allocation are concerned, efforts must be made to enable the various supporting services to keep up with the latest development trend. We therefore hope that the Secretary would actively enhance the policy in this regard and continue to work hard for the well-being of SEN students. Thank you, Deputy President. DR KENNETH CHAN (in Cantonese): Deputy President, Hong Kong is facing a lot of conflicts which are difficult to solve, that is, the deep-rooted conflicts as mentioned by China. In what areas do these conflicts occur? I believe that a lot of people who care about Hong Kong, or even the public officers sitting opposite to me, know that very well. They are the China-Hong Kong conflict, the generation conflict, and the conflict between government officials and the public. Under the "one country, two systems" principle, Hong Kong has made it to 2016. How can we move onward to 2017 and beyond? This is the question, concern and worry of many people. Problems created by all these conflicts are faced by us every day, and we all know how serious they are. What path can Hong Kong take? Can this Policy Address give us the answer? We cannot see any answer. The Government has not given any answer to the acute conflict that Hong Kong people are feeling in their everyday experience ― it is unable to give us any answer. What we can see is the Belt and Road, and the Belt and Road, then again the Belt and Road, and then again the Belt and Road ― this is the only theme of the Policy Address. I think that instead of responsibly tackling all these conflicts for which he is partly responsible, LEUNG Chun-ying and his team are just trying to protect themselves. As to how we should fix the serious split of society through a gradual process and how we should alleviate the China-Hong Kong conflict, the generation conflict, and the conflict between government officials and the public ― including the conflict between the Police and the public ― we are


unable to see any measures. Therefore, I note with no surprise that according to an opinion poll after the announcement of the Policy Address, people simply cannot see any relevance of this Policy Address to themselves. We are unable to see if he has provided any direction for a solution, or if he has made any endeavour or standpoint. He only emphasizes the Belt and Road Initiative. He has all along been trying to protect himself. For that reason, the public opinion poll has clearly shown that this Policy Address is the worst one since the LEUNG Chun-ying Government assumed office. Perhaps individual officials might have talked on certain bright spots or certain policy areas, but on the whole, this Government has no legitimacy at all. It has departed from public opinions. It fails to target and face the problem squarely. It has no ability to solve the problems. I really want to put one question to Secretary Eddie NG, who is sitting opposite to me and worked so hard to promote patriotism education and national education years ago. Was he already aware a long time ago that a "red-header document" on Hong Kong would be issued this year, that is, 26 January 2016, and title of the document is "Opinions of the leading party members' group of the Ministry of Education (MOE) in relation to launching an in-depth patriotic education campaign within the education system"? Regarding the document (reference number (2016)4) which consists of five major items and 14 paragraphs, was he already aware of it a long time ago? Has he been consulted? He has been to Beijing recently, right? Has he actually been involved in that? Has he actually expressed his views? Has he actually done anything or not done anything, or has he not said anything about it? The part involving Hong Kong can be seen in paragraph 9, and it reads, "To enhance patriotic education for young students in Hong Kong, Macao and Taiwan. To host exchange programmes for Hong Kong and Macao young people, teachers and students of institutes of higher learning in the Mainland (the "10 000 people programme"), so as to strengthen the construction of a platform for Sister Schools among primary and secondary schools in Hong Kong and Macao and those in the Mainland." The guiding principle of this document is to launch an in-depth patriotic education campaign, to enhance our awareness of the greatness of our socialist Motherland, the nature of one-party dictatorship and the inevitability of the primary stage of socialism, and so on. If we read this guiding principle and paragraph 9 together, we will realize that it is in fact the "brainwashing curriculum of national education". They are trying to graft brainwashing national education into Hong Kong. When we are still deceiving

http://www.moe.edu.cn/srcsite/A13/s7061/201601/t20160129_229131.html

https://books.google.com.hk/books?id=C9bLCgAAQBAJ&pg=PA155&lpg=PA155&dq=%22one+party+despotism%22&source=bl&ots=fYachlMAnX&sig=mccQtkdWiZOJfT4BEYbs09AZePQ&hl=zh-TW&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjQgIeqq9PLAhVD2WMKHZ9QCvEQ6AEIQDAI#v=onepage&q=%22one%20party%20despotism%22&f=false

http://chinadigitaltimes.net/2013/01/word-of-the-week-primary-stage-of-socialism/


5539

ourselves and saying that the education policy is within the realm of our "high degree of autonomy" under "one country, two systems", we can already see that perhaps they do not even bother to put on any gloves when trying to put their red hands into the heart of Hong Kong's education system. Veteran China watcher and current affairs commentator, DING Wang, wrote the following commentary in the Hong Kong Economic Journal (Quote), "Beijing's leading party members' group of the state organ has abandoned the approach of third encounter using white gloves … The ruling party has laid down work directives especially for Hong Kong, Macao and Taiwan to launch national education activities among Hong Kong and Macao students … Such expressions have never been found … but that signifies that accelerated attempts will be made to turn the two places red and blur the boundaries. The autonomous administration of schools, the freedom of thought and academic freedom are perhaps facing a bigger crisis." (Unquote) Deputy President, such messages and all the aggressive and proactive actions taken by the Central Committee of the Chinese Communist Party have aroused the anxieties of Hong Kong people, parents and schools. This will only instigate more conflicts, resistance and boycotts. And, even before we realize it, the consultation periods for two consultation papers of the Education Bureau have expired. One of them is the well-known paper which examines whether we should teach simplified Chinese characters in schools. It is the consultation paper on Updating of the Chinese Language Education Key Learning Area (KLA) Curriculum. The paper has gone into detail about enhancing the national identity through a new Chinese Language curriculum. The proposal has caused backlashes in society. I receive a large amount of emails and short messages on a daily basis which earnestly seek our attention to that. Is it a spin-off of the brainwashing national education? Is it trying to seize the opportunity to graft that into the Chinese Language Education KLA through the promotion of the learning of traditional and simplified Chinese characters and national identity education? We all know that under "one country, two systems", we use traditional Chinese characters and speak Cantonese. In society, there is not any special reason and demand for requiring primary students to learn and study simplified characters. The use of simplified characters should come as something spontaneous, and they may be used as the need arises. The simplified Chinese character "爱" for "love" does not contain the component of "心" (heart), unlike the traditional character "愛". The simpilfied character "亲" for "intimacy"does not contain the component of "見" (sight),

http://www.ejinsight.com/20131101-hkej-today-highlights/

http://language.chinadaily.com.cn/2007-10/31/content_6219108_10.htm

http://language.chinadaily.com.cn/2007-10/31/content_6219108_10.htm

http://language.chinadaily.com.cn/trans/2014-07/31/content_18221717.htm

http://www.edb.gov.hk/en/curriculum-development/renewal/

http://www.edb.gov.hk/en/curriculum-development/renewal/

http://chinesehacks.com/lessons/chinese-director-says-simplified-characters-too-crude/




unlike the traditional character "親". In a way, somewhat jokingly, we may say that in the simplified system of Chinese characters, "love is without a heart and intimacy is without sight". Will this cause more unnecessary rows and conflicts in the course of learning and examinations? These consultations will only create rows, and they are unnecessary. Likewise, Belt and Road is added as an element in an internal consultation brief of the Education Bureau entitled "Updating the Personal, Social and Humanities Education Key Learning Area Curriculum". At the same time, justice and human rights education are deleted from the original curriculum document and it only emphasizes that we should abide by the law. The Government tells us that we need not worry, that we should not be so nervous, and that people should not over-interpret it and politicize the whole thing. Nevertheless, who is politicizing the matter? The fact is that highly politicized education policies will only cause the strong backlash of the education sector. If we take no action, parents will take action. I am really thankful to the fact that the Education Bureau has in a way united us in a continuous campaign of resistance and boycotts. Has Secretary Eddie NG, who is responsible for the education policy, ever thought of one question? He assumed office during the national education crisis, and he should know very well that the conflict in this aspect is very acute in society, that it will infuriate people easily and that a new round of struggle may emerge any time. If he has any sense of responsibility as a government official, should he just consider the whole thing a job he is paid to do? Does he have the slightest bit political sensitivity? How is he going to teach and the Belt and Road Initiative in schools? He may not think that it is difficult. Is he going to tell me that it is as easy as asking students to read the speeches of President XI Jinping and the Policy Address of LEUNG Chun-ying? Does he mean that in all classes on the Belt and Road Initiative, students can just learn XI's speeches and LEUNG's Policy Address and do some exercises? Should we learn Belt and Road Initiative in this way? Should we really engage in such propaganda in school? Should we really create such a politically-oriented atmosphere in our education system? Should we just learn by rote and chant a load of slogans like this? What exactly does the Government want? What has this Government done in respect of the education policy? What result does it wish to achieve? Can you explain the whole thing to Hong Kong people honestly? You may say that a lot of people in society do not know this subject well, so you must promote it. But what we should promote instead should actually be trade, commerce and industrial development. Sadly, he has been called or praised as the best example of a "super-connector".


http://www.edb.gov.hk/attachment/tc/curriculum-development/renewal/PSHE/brief_PSHE%20KLA_C.pdf

http://www.edb.gov.hk/attachment/en/curriculum-development/renewal/PSHE/brief_PSHE%20KLA_E.pdf

http://www.edb.gov.hk/attachment/en/curriculum-development/renewal/PSHE/brief_PSHE%20KLA_E.pdf


5541

Recently, I have read an article about an interview of Mr Raymond YIP, Deputy Executive Director of the Hong Kong Trade Development Council ― a lot of Members present in this Chamber or officials should know him ― he is an honest man. I wish to quote what he said in this interview, (I quote): "The aim of the State's Belt and Road strategy is to open a window for foreign trade corporations. Because everybody is longing for broader co-operation prospects and more room for development. Nevertheless, how can corporations integrate themselves into the state's, regional and global development trend according to individual circumstances? I believe we are still in a stage of trial and error." (End of quote) Actually it is only a concept. After it is proposed, everybody wants to check what the situation is like. In fact, they are just looking for business opportunities, in laymen terms, and they are just trying to make a living. Why should it be mystified like this? Mr Raymond YIP notes the areas that Hong Kong companies should pay attention to when they are going to make investment and develop projects, including the understanding of the investment situation, practices and culture of different regions, because he is concerned that Hong Kong companies are not familiar with some of the Belt and Road countries. What should we learn when we study the Belt and Road Initiative? Do we really know where the difficulties and risks lie? Or, are all provinces and cities, including Hong Kong and Guangdong (The Chief Executive even calls Hong Kong as "Hong Kong City" and this really downgrades the SAR), supposed to put forward policy documents hastily once XI Jinping has raised the banner of "Belt and Road"? For example, Guangdong Province has issued a paper entitled the Guangdong-Hong Kong-Macau Big Bay Area for the promotion of regional integration. Not too many Hong Kong people are aware of this document, because none of us care about it or we have no access to these documents. Yet, Hong Kong is being planned, consolidated and integrated. Should we bring up the following concepts for discussion in our education process? It turns out that under the Belt and Road Initiative, there are chain reactions and Hong Kong is being planned, absorbed and integrated. Will cross-boundary issues, including the "co-location arrangements", "Self-drive to Guangdong Province", "Individual Visit Scheme" or some cross-boundary pollution issues and environmental issues be touched upon or involved in the so-called education process? In Shenzhen, for example, they use lime to conduct a chemical decontamination test in Shenzhen Bay, and it is said that they are going to construct a large-scale wind farm in Zhuhai waters. How will they affect Hong Kong? Should we show our concern? How should

http://hkmb.hktdc.com/en/Keyword/Guangdong-Hong-Kong-Macau-Big-Bay-Area

http://hkmb.hktdc.com/en/Keyword/Guangdong-Hong-Kong-Macau-Big-Bay-Area



http://www.gov.hk/en/residents/transport/crossboundary/selfdrivetogd.htm

http://www.tourism.gov.hk/english/visitors/visitors_ind.html




we respond? How will the consequences of the Belt and Road Initiative affect our interests and identity? Perhaps everybody considers that there is no need to discuss and show any concern, thinking that we should just trust them. Now we have to get out of Hong Kong and establish friendly relationship with the 10 ASEAN states, including Indonesia, Thailand and other countries. This is of course very important. But what should Hong Kong's students and members of the public do according to the Education Bureau's plan? For example, after last year's Erawan shrine bomb attack in Bangkok, a Hong Kong journalist was detained as soon as he arrived at Thailand to cover the bombing case. He was detained just because he brought with him a bulletproof jacket and a helmet to facilitate his photojournalistic mission. We have to make our voice heard and rescue him. But when we are having a heated debate as the great fanfare of the Belt and Road Initiative begins, how should the Administration help Hong Kong's investors, journalists, students or teachers to understand other countries? The Government should not just say that this is a good thing, that more than 60 countries are trying to improve the relationship with us, that this is a part of the great socialist Motherland's international strategies, and we have to rise peacefully. As a result, we have to set down the Belt and Road strategy, and Hong Kong, in its capacity as a part of China, must render its co-operation and seek business opportunities. Nevertheless, what about the risks? What about the languages, cultures, governance, degrees of corruption-free practices, the rule of law and judicial independence and other factors of other countries? Mr GUI Minhai was reported missing in Thailand and reappeared in a television interview several months later. How will these powerful agencies display their efficiency in Belt and Road countries, and how can they evade the local legal and judicial systems? Can Hong Kong people keep a safer distance from the issues arising from the Belt and Road Initiative? How should we comprehend the summit between the United States and the ASEAN as well as all sorts of political contests? If the Government says that all of these are too complicated and should not be dealt with within a limited time frame, then it would be better not to deal with them at all. What worries me most is that we may simply accept everything without any doing any thinking and learn XI's speech and LEUNG's Policy Address, keep on promoting the brainwashing national education and learn from the leaders since the issues were too complicated and we will not deal with all of them. This is the worst-case scenario.

http://www.bangkokpost.com/news/crime/890144/case-dropped-against-hk-journalist-over-flak-jacket

http://www.bangkokpost.com/news/crime/890144/case-dropped-against-hk-journalist-over-flak-jacket



5543

A lot of Hong Kong people can actually feel and are worried about the China-Hong Kong conflict in the education sector. According to some academic discourses, Hong Kong people somewhat love their "greyish" identity which is full of conflicts. They say that they have mingled the Chinese culture with the western culture very well and they can make use of the two cultures to capitalize on their strength. This is a kind of pragmatism which is quite flexible. Nevertheless, much emphasis has been put on fostering the national identity since the reunification. Since the Administration fears that people's heart have not fully returned, the Government has been trying to push patriotic education, national education, patriotism and patriotic thoughts, and so on. However, all of these will only make us more anxious and concerned that we will lose our inherent advantages and flexibilities. A book written by Amartya SEN, a Nobel Prize winner and welfare economist who comes from India and currently working in the Harvard University, is worth reading ― since Secretary NG loves to read ― the Chinese title of the book is 《身份與暴力：命運的幻象》, and the original English title of the book is Identity and Violence: The Illusion of Destiny. He warns us of the singularity of human identity, he says "the insistence, if only implicitly, on a choiceless singularity of human identity not only diminishes us all, it also makes the world much more flammable … and yet identity can also kill ― and kill with …"(End of quote) In today's Hong Kong, we can see a lot of young people who are restless and disturbed. They think that their aspirations are not taken seriously all along, their identity is increasingly distorted and trampled on, their fate is no longer in their own hands, and the present society and even the future society is not in the grasp of the new generation of Hong Kong people. All the aspirations to justice, equal participation, democracy and the right of speech ― to have a say ― are all deprived, distorted and overridden. The Government constantly picks on them and considers them as troublemakers. That is, they are not "good boys" or "good girls" that we usually say. These troublemakers are portrayed as disobedient and defiant and young people who do not accept fate. Then they are isolated, ostracized and suppressed, and they are depicted as trouble-makers. All these descriptions are no good at all. In this social system, how should we respond if some young people who are insisting on pursuing their dreams and justice, who are not seeking ease and comfort, and who are not coming to terms with being planned and doing lowly

http://www.chinahush.com/2012/01/25/peking-university-professor-says-some-hong-kong-people-are-dogs/

http://www.chinahush.com/2012/01/25/peking-university-professor-says-some-hong-kong-people-are-dogs/


work for their entire life, tell us ― the older generation ― their dissatisfaction with the current situation and their vision for a breakthrough for Hong Kong? How should we respond if they say that there is injustice in society which needs tackling and reform? Have we reflected on our shortcomings, have we done any self-examination and provided the positive response? Or have we been obsequious all along? The Youth Parliament in the United Kingdom consists of democratically elected members elected from various constituencies. Youth councils are also set up in more than 20 European Union countries. Young people will determine what to be discussed and proposed and will seek mutual and interaction with officials on an equal basis. What do we have in Hong Kong? The Commission on Youth will only convene some "badly distorted" forums and political shows for public officers. We have never faced squarely, reflected on, comprehended, accepted and resolved all the grievances. As a university associate professor, I am deeply distressed by the serious confrontation, the civil disturbance that took place on the first day of the Lunar Year because I saw Hong Kong people fighting against one another and hurting one another other and this society must thus move on with heavy injuries. At the same time, we can see that the SAR Government is not doing any self-examination at all. It turns out that the person who has the biggest power is the person who wants to bear the least responsibility. Over 2 000 members of the public ― including the initiator, the former Chief Secretary for Administration Mrs Anson CHAN, Mr Joseph WONG, Mr CHING Cheong and the Rev YUEN Tin-yau, and so on ― requested the SAR Government to set up an independent inquiry commission to investigate the incident, instead of adopting the political ploy of the communists to determine the nature of the incident, stigmatize it in a way similar to the approach of the 26 April editorial in 1989 and then stop pursuing it. What is the remote cause of it? What are the facts and the entire course of events? Regarding governance, what are the shortcomings that warrant a self-examination? It is not only the education policy that needs to be reviewed. We also need to look at governance and the scope of youth policies. What proposals should we make to improve them and how can we mend the broken relationship as soon as practicable? All of these are problems we should be tackling. Nevertheless, we can only see suppression and words that confuse the cause and effect. We can see some

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UK_Youth_Parliament

http://www.methodist.org.hk/h/1/10/


5545

gestures ― mere political gestures which cannot even seal the gap, let alone rooting out the causes. This will only cause more conflicts, more confrontations, and they are "flammable" and totally unpredictable. We need to look into the root of these social conflicts. And as a member of the academia engaging in the research of society and sociology, I must point out that these conflicts will not vanish just because they have made a few casual comments. Vigorous condemnations, further crack down and suppression will only add fuel to the next level confrontation. A vicious cycle is actually in the making. They may think that, good, let us fight, as we will win in any case. Of course, this type of fighting and struggle among Hong Kong people is only a short-term victory to the ruler. But to Hong Kong, it is definitely a degradation. There is actually a formal name for this kind of confrontation, it is called "mutually assured destruction", the short form is MAD, that is, mad. The Government always tell us to be rational, to be civilized. Well, may I ask the Government to take this step first? Isn't it a rational and civilized step to form an independent inquiry commission? Why has the Government rejected civilization and rationality? It will not solve the problem by entrusting some government department to do the investigation by themselves. When the truth is not known and justice not done, there will be no peace. There will be no harmony, not to mention peace. I want to tell my students that the communists got their power through the use of violence. They say, "Power grows from the barrel of the gun." Over the years, the fight has never stopped, and it will go on. Talking about violence, they are second to none. I will not be so naive as to think that things can be straightened out by talking casually about peace and rationality. Nor will I think that we can solve the problem by resorting to violence. This uncivilized system is plagued with ruthlessness, resentments, conflicts and suppression, and everybody is the victim of this system. If Chief Executive LEUNG Chun-ying stays on and even gets re-elected, then there will be no peace in Hong Kong. Regrettably, we have seen a lot of bloody crackdown in the history of democracy movements and struggles. I am worried that no subjective wish can avert such suppression. We cannot just leave it at that by calling for everybody's restraint. They will take place one after another. I wish to cite the words of a Polish forerunner of democracy. He told people not to engage in vandalism, looting and burning. He said that if people wanted to build their own republic,

https://books.google.com.hk/books?id=k6R1w6wQ2N0C&pg=PA258&lpg=PA258&dq=%22power+grows+from+the+barrel+of+the+gun%22&source=bl&ots=iD-23OESBS&sig=33JmgkAVrei9QDDp-b_6S0M1C8E&hl=zh-TW&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjdv4O4s9bLAhXDGpQKHeNUDXgQ6AEIKTAD#v=onepage&q=%22power%20grows%20from%20the%20barrel%20of%20the%20gun%22&f=false


to build their own civil society, they should make use of these powers, these resources and these thoughts and wisdom to create our own destiny. This was the origin of the Solidarity Union. These are precious experiences. I wish to share them with all my students within this limited time frame. I so submit and I oppose the Motion of Thanks. MR LEE CHEUK-YAN (in Cantonese): Deputy President, Dr Kenneth CHAN said earlier that there were many conflicts. I will wait till tomorrow before I discuss the conflicts relating to governance. Today, I will focus on the conflict caused by uneven distribution, which in fact is the conflict between 1% and 99% of our population. The uneven distribution I talk about is actually found between 1% and 99%. Employers of small and medium enterprises (SMEs), which Mr CHUNG Kwok-pan mentioned earlier, are included in the 99% I talk about. They have no money to pay wages, and they too are victims. This 99% includes workers and the SMEs, while the other 1% is made up of big consortia and property developers in Hong Kong. The latter squeeze Hong Kong dry and the resultant uneven distribution give rise to a conflict. Yet, the Government itself does not want to solve the problem. I have proposed an amendment to the Motion of Thanks, urging LEUNG Chun-ying and the Secretary to honour their promise regarding standard working hours and the scrapping of the offsetting arrangement under the Mandatory Provident Fund (MPF) System. The Government keeps asking the people to come to a consensus. The point is that if there is a consensus, the Government will not need to be here. We ask for collective bargaining but the Government has been reluctant to establish a platform. It only says that both sides have come to a consensus and working in accordance with the consensus will be fine. Take the Copyright (Amendment) Bill 2014 as an example. If there is a consensus, do we still need Gregory SO? After the conclusion of the four-side meeting, he said there was a consensus and he would work according to the consensus. Yet, everyone knows that there is in fact no consensus. Secretary, what you and LEUNG Chun-ying have promised has still not come true. May I ask for how many years has the issue dragged on? Secretary, you should know best because since the time of Donald TSANG's


5547

Government, it has been said that standard working hours will be looked into and in 2013, the Standard Working Hours Committee was established. I can remember the Committee's undertaking that it will submit a report within two years, that is, by the end of 2015. But up to this moment, no report is in sight. Apparently, the Government has no intention to enact legislation in this legislative session. Secretary, do you know how many employees will be disappointed? I have to redeem this from you on their behalf. In addition, Secretary, I also have to ask you to honour your undertaking on behalf of the family members of a worker in the exhibition industry. The worker died of fatigue at work. He started to work at 9 am at the Hong Kong Convention and Exhibition Centre. We think that Hong Kong is very prosperous, as a lot of conventions and exhibitions are held here, but do we know the miseries of the workers? He worked from 9 am to after 9 pm and finally died a sudden death. What is the working condition like for workers in the exhibition industry? For the shift from 9 am to 6 pm, they can earn $650. If they continue to work from 6 pm to 12 am, they can earn $650 more. In other words, even if they work from 9 am to 12 am, they can only earn $1,300. When will the Government enact legislation on standard working hours? Moreover, I am also making a claim on the Secretary on behalf of parents who cannot go home to have dinner with their children. When can they enjoy a balance in work and family life? The Government has been championing a family-friendly environment, but when will it implement measures in this regard? They have to work 12 or 13 hours each day, so how can they have time to take care of their children? I am making the claim on the Secretary for those people who only have work commencement time but no off-duty time. Although they are told that work finishes at 6 pm, they have to work overtime without compensation every night until 8 pm or 10 pm. This is the situation we can see now. When they leave work after 10 pm, the MTR is more crowded than any other time of the day. Secretary, Hong Kong's present situation is caused by uneven distribution. Employees have to exchange time for wages to support their families but the Secretary has on the contrary done nothing. He just boasts of how capable he is and how proactive he has been in promoting standard working hours. Secretary, you have been talking about standard working hours for years. No one will believe you any more. Why is the Government suddenly talking about having a second consultation? At the time of the first consultation, two groups were


already established to study working hours and carry out consultation, and the poll findings showed that 67.1% of the employees and 56.1% of the employers ― over 50% from both sides ― were in favour of setting standard working hours. However, the Secretary ignored the findings. The Secretary said that in principle, the consultation concluded that legislation should be enacted to regulate working hours but there was opposition to an across-the-board approach. The authorities will study contractual working hours, that is, employees will sign contracts specifying the number of working hours and that overtime work will be compensated. Finally, under the so-called "big framework" of contractual working hours, the "small framework" will be examined. This means that they will examine the issues of whether legislation should be enacted to prescribe standard working hours for employees with low wages, low skills and low bargaining power. Since the authorities are only looking into it without undertaking to enact any legislation, members from the Labour Advisory Board have withdrawn en masse. (THE PRESIDENT resumed the Chair) The Standard Working Hours Committee puts forth four directions: just examine the "big framework"; just examine the "small framework"; examine the "small framework" together with the "big framework"; examine neither the "big framework" nor the "small framework". Everybody knows that the Committee is only setting out all the possible combinations. However, Secretary, we are demanding the enactment of legislation on standard working hours. Actually, the "small framework" is too small as it only applies to employees earning low wages. Why can't those earning high wages be compensated for overtime work? Anyway, I am not going to say anything more. When the authorities are not even willing to make an undertaking with regard to the "small framework", they are in a way mucking things up. What in fact is the attitude of the Government? Is it because commercial interests are involved that LEUNG Chun-ying is going back on his words? Why can't he just admit that they are not setting standard working hours because the commercial sector opposes? He dares not admit that and just drags on without doing anything. Another thing I would like to redeem is the offsetting of severance payment under the MPF System. For some unknown reasons, this has suddenly been included in the consultation on universal retirement protection. The


5549

Government says that the offsetting arrangement has undermined retirement protection for employees. This is no secret. From 2000 to date, $25 billion of the employees' MPF benefits has been offset. In 2014 alone, the amount offset reached $3 billion. After offsetting, how much is left for the employees when they retire? They may have several dozen thousand dollars, or not even a cent. The MPF System is intended to provide for employees' retirement and not for employers to offset severance pay, but the Government has turned a blind eye to it for 15 years. LEUNG Chun-ying said in his manifesto that he would gradually scrap this. However, he has taken no action up to now. We all know that it is impossible for the Government under LEUNG Chun-ying to address standard working hours and the MPF offsetting mechanism. All these have to be left to the next Chief Executive who will start from scratch. If LEUNG Chun-ying remains the Chief Executive ― this of course is not my wish ― he can still drag on. President, regarding these two issues, the Labour Party has been redeeming from the Government for years on behalf of the employees. I have been proposing amendment to the Motion of Thanks almost every year, only to be disappointed. Therefore, I can only express regret this time. Yet, we actually hope that the promise will be honoured one day, just as I welcome the implementation of a minimum wage by the Government. Talking about the minimum wage, I am also furious. When the authorities implemented the minimum wage, they said that the biennial review could be changed to an annual review. But in the end, they are again cheating us. The review is still conducted every two years. When I met with LEUNG Chun-ying earlier, I asked him if there would be a review this year and a wage increase on 1 May 2016. He replied in the negative as the authorities would carry out the review every two years. During his election, he said he was concerned about the grassroots and people's livelihood but in fact, he was just lying. When all the conflicts add up, they will naturally erupt. We do not want to see the conflicts keep erupting. But the Government continues to procrastinate. Finally, we can only painfully watch our society split. President, I propose my amendment with the hope that the Government will look squarely at this livelihood issue under its governance. Thank you, President.


DR LAM TAI-FAI (in Cantonese): President, any country or place in the world, be it poor and backward or rich and advanced, will attach very great importance to education since it is obvious to all that if the authorities are not doing a good job and have no planning in education, or have appointed a wrong man for the job as in the case of Hong Kong, it will be very difficult for the country or place to develop its competitive edge and survive. Consequently, there will be disturbances and turmoil in society. Does the Mong Kok riot have anything to do with the Government's performance in education, including national education and civic education? The Government should do some serious self-examination and review. President, talking about national education, due to Secretary Eddie NG's dereliction of duty in handling the national education issue, the Chief Executive LEUNG Chun-ying was forced to shelf the plan to introduce national education as an independent subject during his term of office, depriving many students in Hong Kong of the opportunity to get to know and understand the country. With the intensification of conflicts between the people of the Mainland and Hong Kong, I think Secretary NG is definitely the one who should assume the greatest responsibility for the losses and problems in this regard. This is the area of work during his term of office with which I am most dissatisfied, and I think the Central Authorities also find this deeply regretful and disappointing. President, knowledge can change one's life and science and education can lead to national rejuvenation. It is thus obvious that education does have an impact on a person's life and the rise and fall of a country or place. This is the reason why the Hong Kong Government has, before and after the reunification, injected huge amounts of resources into education and its expenses on education have amounted to over $70 billion in each of these two years. The money has been spent. But have we achieved good development in education? It is most regrettable and saddening for me to say that our development in education has remained stagnant. As we all know, this can mainly be attributed to the fact that the Bureau Director in charge of education affairs of Hong Kong is a layman. He is fond of travelling but fails to do practical things, and he lacks political wisdom and good judgment in executing his duties. President, the past few years has been an eventful period for the education sector of Hong Kong. The sector has been plagued with problems and hit by wave after wave of turmoil, plunging everyone into a state of panic and leading to


5551

complaints from parents. As the Secretary has mishandled or does not know how to handle the problems he encounters, minor problems have evolved into major problems and major education problems have evolved into social problems or even political problems. The incident concerning the Territory-wide System Assessment (TSA) is a good example to illustrate the point. Due to his mishandling of the case and his failure to grasp opportunities for actions, he is caught in a dilemma. The public are seething with anger and society is thus charged with negative energy. It was reported that when asked by some members of the media recently about the achievements he managed to make during his term of office in the previous few years, the Secretary surprisingly answered that he had completed the Report on the Review of the TSA and had never taken any sick leave over the previous three years. President, the fact that he has never taken any sick leave in three years can at best prove that he is physically strong and is in good health, but how can this be regarded as an achievement? Such a remark is adequate evidence to prove that there is something wrong with his thinking, that he is immature, and that he should take leave to have a rest. If the TSA has been properly implemented, why is it necessary for him to take the remedial measure of setting up a committee to conduct the review? If this Review Report, which is a result of the remedial action taken, can also be regarded as an achievement, then the low performance standards he sets for himself must be obvious. No wonder his popularity rating has kept dropping like the trading prices of penny stocks in the stock market, and has even dropped to -43 lately. I do not know how low the rating should drop to before the Chief Executive can realize the need for reviewing his criteria of appointing the best person for a job on the basis of merit. Having to make such remarks really saddens me a lot but I must get these off my chest. President, the development of education is an articulated train of links, with universities, secondary schools, primary schools and kindergartens each playing an equally important role. All along, all the dissatisfaction of the primary education sector with the Government over the establishment and rank structure of primary schools has led to the accumulation of enormous grievances. In their opinion, they have been unfairly and unreasonably treated by the Government. As a matter of fact, the primary education sector has, over the years, continued to reflect their demands and views to the Government, launch campaigns and give explanation in a bid to urge the authorities to squarely


address the long-standing problem of the staff establishment of primary schools. Regrettably, the Secretary has continued to stick to his viewpoint and turn a deaf ear and a blind eye to them. He has over all these years ignored and refused to address this long-standing problem. This has dealt a serious blow to the morale and development of primary school teachers, causing quite a number of them, the young ones in particular, to reluctantly quit their job and leave the education sector out of their concern for the need to face reality and their personal development. I hope that if the Secretary really wants to do some practical things and attain some achievements during his term of office, he will conduct a review of the staff establishment and rank structure of primary schools in the remaining term of his office, and what I ask of him is just a kick-off of the review. President, it would be fair to say that the Policy Address this year has done nothing in the area of higher education. Except for encouraging research and education, all other issues of great concern to the higher education sector and the core issues concerning the future development of the sector are completely ignored. These issues include the increase in the number of subsidized university places and the regulation of self-financing post-secondary programmes. I believe the President also knows very well that there are over 26 000 students who can meet the minimum university admission requirements every year, but the number of subsidized university places over the past few years has remained at the level of 15 000 a year. Simply put, over 10 000 qualified students cannot be offered a university place every year. For these students who have not been admitted to university, what can they do? Those who would like to further their studies will be forced to enrol in self-financing programmes or study abroad. However, it would not be possible for grass-root families to afford the costs incurred and if their children would really like to further their studies, they would be left with no other alternative but to take a loan, rendering them heavily in debt upon graduation. In the face of such a plight and under such circumstances, how can young people be satisfied with the Government's performance and give it their support? I can tell all of you that the Government's popularity among young people will only diminish gradually. President, the Government has been reluctant to face squarely the problem of varying quality of self-financing programmes. Many complaints have in fact been lodged about the lack of regulation of self-financing programmes. But in


5553

order to save face and maintain the attainment rate of universal higher education, the Government has put quantity before quality and would never bother to exercise any regulation, thus allowing the provision of self-financing programmes to develop without any regulation. As we can see, the incident concerning the Lifelong College can adequately highlight the negligence as well as the improper supervision on the part of the Government. After the incident, the Government stated that an in-depth investigation would be carried out. But nothing has been heard so far about its work in this regard. The Secretary has always said that he would strive to do practical things. I hope he would really do some practical things about the incident and the regulation of self-financing programmes, so that students will no longer be misled and made to suffer. If the Secretary wishes to make any achievements, please step up investigation of the Lifelong College incident and reveal the whole truth. President, I so submit on the policy area of education. MR TAM YIU-CHUNG (in Cantonese): President, I have known Secretary NG for a long time. I remember that in the early 80s, he was already a human resources director well-versed in labour relations. He hosted some international conferences and invited me to speak on the labour movement in Hong Kong as a trade union representative. The Secretary speaks much better English than I do. I admired him very much back then. I would not have imagined I would meet him again in the Legislative Council three decades later. When I heard Dr LAM Tai-fai's scathing criticism against him earlier, I could not help feeling unhappy. I advise the Secretary to communicate more with Dr LAM Tai-fai to seek his advice. Dr LAM Tai-fai may have given good advice, but he may also have picked on the Secretary. Having responded to Dr LAM Tai-fai's speech, I would also like to respond to Mr IP Kin-yuen and Dr Kenneth CHAN. They have mentioned the Mong Kok riot and think that there should be an in-depth investigation. I share their view. I believe the Police will definitely conduct an in-depth investigation as they have to identify the backstage manipulator. Judging from some information which has been made public or from television broadcast, it should be a planned incident; otherwise, how could it be possible for so many people to show up on an occasion like this? I think an in-depth investigation must be conducted, so as to collect evidence and bring the matter before the Court.


In Mr IP Kin-yuen's opinion, the Mong Kok riot took place because the disappointment of some people has changed into despair. Today, I have read an article recommended by Mr WONG Ting-kwong. It is written by Dr LI Hui, Associate Professor of the Faculty of Education of The University of Hong Kong (HKU). He analyses the causes of the incident from eight perspectives relating to philosophy, society, the economy, people's mindset, psychology, the education reform, logic and the rule of law. Mr IP Kin-yuen may be pre-occupied with the campaign against the Chairman of the Council of HKU. Yet, I advise him to read this inspiring article to understand the causes of the incident. I have also heard many Members talk about education, especially the free quality kindergarten education policy to be formally implemented from the 2017-2018 school year, and the increase in the number of scholarships offered to students from the Belt and Road countries to study in Hong Kong. As regards the free quality kindergarten education policy, the DAB and I give our full support. I hope that after operating for some time, the authorities can look into the possibility of further increasing support for whole-day and long whole-day kindergartens, so as to benefit more children and parents who need the education service of whole-day and long whole-day kindergartens. Moreover, I also hope that the authorities will further observe if adequate support measures are in place for kindergartens which are of a smaller scale, so that they will not be left out of competition as a result. A number of pan-democratic Members criticize the increase in offers under the Targeted Scholarship Scheme to attract students from the Belt and Road countries to study in Hong Kong. They lash out at the Chief Executive for only catering for foreign students and neglecting local students. Also, they consider that the scholarships cannot help promote Hong Kong's participation in the development of the Belt and Road Initiative. I wish that when the Secretary speaks later, he will clarify the injection of $1 billion into the scholarship fund. If my understanding is correct … I have heard him say that it is a seed fund, and the Government is only establishing the scholarships with investment return. Besides, the actual expenditure for the first year is only $1.2 million. However, according to Mr IP Kin-yuen just now, $48 million is required each year. What exactly is the specific figure? If it is the former, I do not think that the amount involved is huge. Maybe we can increase it gradually instead of jumping immediately to $48 million. For the Government to fully implement free kindergarten education, a recurrent expenditure to the tune of $6.7 billion is involved. In comparison, a smaller amount of money is needed to expand the Targeted Scholarship Scheme. Therefore, the allegation does not stand.


5555

Worldwide, many developed countries, the United States and Britain for instance, have offered scholarships to young overseas elite students to study in their universities and research institutes. Apart from taking in overseas talents, the scholarships are offered to enhance the pool of local talents. More importantly, through the scholarships, a network of external connections with overseas regions can be built. This can further facilitate the business development of British and American enterprises overseas. Students from the Belt and Road countries who are awarded scholarships to study in Hong Kong are surely local young elites. When they complete their studies and return to their countries, they very often will become economic and trade and political elites and leaders in these countries and regions. As they have been exposed to Hong Kong's education and culture, they will have a good impression on the Hong Kong society. In addition to promoting Hong Kong's culture in their own countries, they will also help to drive co-operation when their countries and regions engage in economic and trade and infrastructural engineering co-operation with Hong Kong. As these students on scholarships from the Belt and Road countries and regions are attending lectures and living with Hong Kong students, Hong Kong students will understand them more. This can help to broaden their vision. When students have more exchange opportunities, it will also bode well for their future development. Therefore, we must not look at the proposed quota increases under the Targeted Scholarship Scheme with a narrow perspective. In the little time that remains, I would like to respond briefly to Dr Kenneth CHAN. He says he is an Associate Professor and reads extensively, but his conclusion worries me greatly. He says that as long as LEUNG Chun-ying is around, there will not be peace in Hong Kong. He ends by citing Poland as an example. He says the Polish Solidarity has established its own Republic. I am not sure if he is citing this example to tell students that there is no prospect if they remain as employees. Is he telling them that they should follow the example of Poland and establish their own republic, that is, they should mount a colour revolution? If this is his purpose, I am really worried. Once students believe in his thought, incidents like the Mong Kok riot may continue to happen. MR YIU SI-WING (in Cantonese): President, over the years, Hong Kong has been able to enjoy steady economic growth and thus amass adequate fiscal reserves, and the Government has been offering various forms of subsidies and


welfare to the disadvantaged groups in society. To address the problem of retirement protection arising from population ageing and also to provide livelihood protection, the Government implemented the Mandatory Provident Funds (MPF) Scheme in 2000, then the Statutory Minimum Wage regime in 2011. Employees can thus enjoy basic protection, but the operating costs of enterprises have increased at the same time. The pressure on small and medium enterprises (SMEs) is especially heavy, but since they have no choice, they can only put up with the burden as much as they can. The active efforts of the labour sector to fight for standard working hours and the abolition of the MPF offsetting arrangement are of course supported by the majority of employees, but this is a nightmare to SMEs which account for 90% of the local business sector and hire 1.3 million people. On the issue of standard working hours, it is stated in the Chief Executive's Policy Address that the Standard Working Hours Committee will conduct a second round of consultation shortly and submit a report as soon as possible. The business sector, the tourism sector included, generally opposes the implementation of standard working hours. Standard working hours may be effectively implemented in the general circumstances of the industrial or administrative sectors, but Hong Kong is a services-based economy in which many enterprises, especially SMEs, adopt flexible working hours as a means of lengthening their hours of services. The setting of standard working hours will result in less flexibility, adding to operating costs and also affecting service quality. The tourism industry is an example. Due to job nature and time differences, staff in the sector usually have more flexible working hours compared to other industries, regardless of whether they are tour escorts, tour guides, drivers or even supporting staff. Their working hours can never be standardized. Tour escorts and tour guides have to offer services and deal with contingencies anytime during their outbound travels. They have to be on standby all the time. Even if it is in the middle of the night, they cannot possibly decline requests from tour members for the reason that they are off duty. Experienced supporting staff of travel agents are also required to stand by all the time to deal with emergency issues relating to hotel rooms booking or transport overseas. Similarly, there are also occasions when coach drivers cannot go off duty on time as a result of unforeseeable issues like traffic congestion or delays in sightseeing journeys. It can be said that it is inevitable for drivers to work overtime on reasonable grounds.


5557

I expect that other services sectors similar to the tourism sector will also face this challenge in manpower allocation. In my opinion, the authorities should assess whether we have the right conditions for implementing standard working hours on the basis of the unemployment rate, the job nature of different sectors and Hong Kong's competitiveness. It is not worthwhile to press ahead when there are so many disadvantages. The abolition of the MPF offsetting arrangement is even more unsuitable for SMEs. According to statistics, wages account for 35% of the total operating costs of enterprises in Hong Kong. Implementing standard working hours and abolishing the MPF offsetting arrangement will impose a heavy burden on SMEs, which have contributed enormously to employment and tax revenue in Hong Kong without enjoying much government support in return. From another perspective, SMEs can also be regarded as a disadvantaged group. Most SMEs already have cash flow flows, so they simply cannot reserve huge capitals for meeting severance payments and long service payments. Some enterprises may choose to wind up their business if the abolition is bulldozed through, while some others may dismiss employees with long years of service before the policy comes into effect. Both scenarios are detrimental to the stability of Hong Kong, and are harmful to enterprises and employees. When the Government lobbied the commercial and industrial sectors for supporting the launch of the MPF System years ago, one major promise made was that employers' contributions to MPF schemes would be used for offsetting long service payments. It was because of this promise that the sectors finally reached a consensus to support MPF. The Government must honour its promise, instead of pressing ahead in spite of opposition. President, the section of the Policy Address on youth development mentions that additional resources will be deployed to expand the Funding Scheme for Youth Exchange in the Mainland and the Funding Scheme for Youth Internship in the Mainland. I welcome the deployment of additional resources to expand the Schemes. Young people need to broaden their horizons and step outside Hong Kong. They must get to know the world and more importantly, the Motherland. The Mainland is vast in territory and rich resources. In recent years, it has achieved rapid economic development, generating many business opportunities. Many countries have thus arranged study or exchange tours in China for their young nationals. As Hong Kong is part of China, there is all the more reason for our


young people to increase their knowledge of the history, affairs and people's sentiments in the Motherland through different channels. Apart from giving young people more knowledge, exchange and internship experience in the Mainland can also enhance young people's competitiveness in the job market. Besides the two Schemes mentioned above, schools can also receive subsidies on study tours from institutions and the Government. Some schools will commission travel agents to organize study tours on their behalf, while some others may organize these tours on their own. As far as I understand, the tours organized by travel agents and those by schools themselves have different requirements regarding tour leaders. According to the requirements laid down by the Travel Industry Council of Hong Kong (TIC), study tours operated by travel agents must be accompanied by licensed tour escorts with relevant experience. But tours organized by schools are not bound by this requirement. As a matter of fact, tour escorts from travel agents are more experienced than teachers in dealing with contingencies. In respect of insurance, the Code of Business Practice on Study Tours of the TIC requires all teachers and students joining study tours organized by travel agents to take out suitable comprehensive travel insurance. However, under the Guidelines on Study Tours Outside the HKSAR issued by the Education Bureau, the Bureau will only provide subsidies on obtaining Block Insurance Policy to teachers and students participating in such tours, without mandatorily requiring the purchase of such protection. Should tours organized by schools meet with accidents, tour escorts and receiving organizations at destinations will not be able to make corresponding arrangements for different students who are covered by insurance, not covered by insurance or covered by other policies. In order to strengthen protection for study tours organized by schools, I drafted a letter to the Secretary for Education and proposed the following: first, at least one teacher accompanying study tours organized by schools themselves must have prior experience in leading a certain number of such tours, or such teacher must hold a valid Tour Escort Pass issued by the TIC. Second, the level and scope of protection under the Block Insurance Policy for different study tours must be standardized. The Bureau subsequently responded to my recommendations in its reply, stating its support that study tours can only be escorted by teachers with experience of leading relevant outbound tours, and it encourages the teachers concerned to take Certificate Course for Outbound Tour Escorts organized by the TIC. The Bureau further said that, apart from


5559

subsidizing the purchase of Block Insurance Policy, the authorities would also remind participating parents and students to take notice of the need to get extra travel insurance as appropriate. The Education Bureau only issues a friendly reminder instead of laying down a compulsory requirement. This cannot meet the need of study tours for more professional arrangements and greater insurance protection. I hope that in addition to financial support offered to study tours, the Bureau can thoroughly understand the actual problems faced by these tours during their travels, so that outbound students and parents can receive more extensive and assuring protection. President, I so submit. MS CYD HO (in Cantonese): President, I will speak mainly on education in this debate session. Education is the process of personality cultivation. It is not about vocational training and the training of technocrats, and most importantly, it is not about the training of obedient citizens. But certain additions and deletions proposed by the consultation paper entitled "Updating the Personal, Social and Humanities Education Key Learning Area Curriculum" published by the Education Bureau in November 2015 have aroused our grave concern. In the curricula for Primary One to Primary Three, the two words "and participative" are deleted, and the whole expression thus reads: "to identify behaviours that one should practise in order to be a responsible citizen". What does the consultation document add in then? It adds in the aim of acquiring basic knowledge about "the principle of 'one country, two systems' and some basic ideas of the Basic Law". In fact, the same changes are found in the curricula for Primary One to junior secondary school: "to have basic knowledge about 'one country, two systems'", "to know the Basic Law", "to understand the purposes and functions of social norms, rules and law" and "the constitutional background and the general principles of the Basic Law", and so on. In brief, it aims to teach a student how to be a national or subject of a country. And, what does it delete? The deleted contents include those that I have mentioned just now: behaviours that a citizen should practise in order to be participative in society, "to reflect on the balance between conformity to social norms and personal identity", "to develop civic competency in order to participate in local affairs ", "importance of justice in society", and "rights and responsibilities of the individual arising from different roles". In brief, it deletes contents that teach a student how to be a citizen and a human being.


In fact, this is deeply worrying. We fear that national education will come back in disguise. Members can refer to the media interview conducted with Dr LEUNG Yan-wing, Associate Professor in the Department of Education Policy and Leadership of The Hong Kong Institute of Education. He said that he could not follow the Education Bureau's justification for removing the topic of justice from the contents. Referring to justice as an important social value, he said that children should start to learn this concept as early as possible, preferably in kindergarten, not in junior secondary schools as originally said. However, this topic is even deleted from the curriculum for senior secondary schools now. Dr Kenneth CHAN has mentioned the book entitled Identity and Violence written by Nobel laureate Prof Amartya SEN. I would like to add one or two points here. In fact, the author also points out that if a person insists on having only one identity, he will develop a strong tendency to reject others who do not have the same identity as him. He will then show no tolerance towards them, and more seriously, he may even forget his other roles in society. He may forget that he is also someone's parent or child. He may also forget that he still belongs to a certain religious group consisting of fellow believers and peers. In the end, he may lose his human nature and end up living with only one single identity. If the single identity which people insist on happens to be the identity as the subjects of their country, then they will perceive allegiance as their only duty. In this way, the whole country can easily become a belligerent nation. We can observe how some emergent terrorist groups in the world have succeeded in using a single identity as a means of inducing their followers' stubborn recourse to violence. People thus influenced forgotten their other social and family roles, and not only this, they have also forgotten that other people also have their families, parents and children. Therefore, they will turn rather non-human and totally lose their capacity of rejecting violence in their conduct. If students in a society know nothing about justice, then after they have grown up, they will not realize that they should stand up for justice in the face of unfairness or corruption. In that case, how can every one of us combat corruption together and protect the weak from being bullied? Eventually, the Law of the Jungle will prevail in society. In particular, governments can do whatever they want with the institutionalized authority and public power they enjoy under the establishment, eroding the rights of everyone in the end.


5561

The new contents of the curricula are political topics like the Basic Law and the principle of "one country, two systems". It is alright to introduce them and there should be no disputes. However, the deletion of basic civic education concepts is of great concern to us. The teaching materials give students knowledge about the Basic Law and "one country, two systems", but we just wonder what they will say on the several interpretations of the Basic Law by the Standing Committee of the National People's Congress. What will they say on the "co-operation of powers" stated in the White Paper on "The Practice of the 'One Country, Two Systems' Policy in the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region" issued by the State Council Information Office? Will they tell students objectively that there should be separation of powers and checks and balances in the world? President, family education is the last bulwark when school curricula can no longer give children any citizenship education. But as early as the stage of junior primary school, parents can no longer spend too much time with their children due to the Territory-wide System Assessment (TSA). The tricky nature and unreasonable requirements of the TSA far exceed the capability and capacity of Primary Three pupils. These children do not even dare to read any extra-readers. I mean, they dare not do so. They wish to read and they like to read, but they have already given this up of their own accord. From this we can see how our system has failed and how it has impeded students' development. Last year, parents initiated a spontaneous campaign for the abolition of the TSA, putting forward a plan to boycott class or even the assessment. It was only because of this campaign that the Education Bureau eventually agreed to reduce the rate of participation in the TSA this year to 10% of all primary schools in Hong Kong. However, why are the authorities so intransigent? Why don't they abolish the assessment altogether? Is the escalation of parents' opposition the only way to make the authorities abolish the assessment? Honestly, young people in Hong Kong are not exactly oblivious of what is right and what is wrong, and what is good and what is evil. They may not have employed the right tactic. But they want to have choices, and they hope that they can have the ability to choose. However, their words are often twisted by the Government when they try to give dissenting views and take part in serious discussion. The Government simply suppresses all dissenting opinions by distorting the truth through its public opinion machinery. Once young people turn impatient or angry, they will take actions. Such actions may well be the


kind of disorder that happened during the late hours of the past Lunar New Year's Day? The last thing we wish to see is the transformation of their anger into street violence. However, if the Government only seeks to suppress young people without trying to understand their anger and appease them, the consequence can be even more serious. Civility is already passé these days. It is very difficult, if not impossible, to rebuild it. We are all suffering the ill consequence of the escalation of institutionalized violence and street violence. If the Government still stubbornly refuses to make concession, while keep on destroying the new generation with institutionalized violence, it will indeed push an entire generation of young people towards the brink of violence, and the whole of Hong Kong will pay an even higher price. MR MARTIN LIAO (in Cantonese): President, Hong Kong is not endowed with rich natural resources, yet over the decades, it has developed into a metropolis in Asia, contributing immensely to the endeavour of our country to go global. Our main asset has been manpower talents. Apart from nurturing our own talents, we also strive to draw talents from all over the world and in this way, everybody has been able to give play to their abilities, thus turning the tiny fishing village we used to be into a competitive world city. If we are to sustain our competitive edge in this regard, education must play an indispensable role. In respect of education, the focus of the Policy Address this year must be early childhood education. The Chief Executive has finally proposed the implementation of a free quality kindergarten education policy from next year onwards. The provision of additional subsidies by the Government can surely help alleviate the burdens of parents, yet parents whose children are enrolled in whole-day kindergartens must still pay tuition fees. Though the Government says that the proportion of whole-day kindergarten places will be increased in the long run, only 40% of the places in non-profit-making kindergartens will be free-of-charge at most. The Secretary for Education has mentioned that more places in whole-day kindergartens will be added according to the demand of parents in the future. But no timetable can be confirmed at the moment. Does the Government really understand that many parents do prefer whole-day childhood education for their children?


5563

According to a survey conducted by community organizations, more than 83% of parent respondents with children attending whole-day kindergartens stated that if their children were not admitted to whole-day education, their working time or their spouses' working time would definitely be affected. Whole-day kindergarten places accounted for 30% of the overall figure in the 2014-2015 school year, while places in kindergartens offering both half-day and whole-day education comprised 50% of the whole. The Government should not be stingy if it intends to support parents whose children are enrolled in whole-day kindergartens. Instead, ample resources should be deployed so that parents can truly benefit from the free early childhood education policy and their kids can receive quality kindergarten education. The Policy Address proposes that, to attract more students from the Belt and Road countries to study in Hong Kong, the Government will increase the number of offers under the Targeted Scholarship Scheme, currently 10 per year, by about 100 in phases, and inject $1 billion into the scholarship fund for this purpose. The proposal has caused heated disputes in society. In particular, some people had the initial misconception that the scholarship will be used for subsidizing Mainland students to study in universities in Hong Kong, and that places for local students will be taken away. President, there are more than 60 countries along the Belt and Road, including countries in Southeast Asia, South Asia, Central Asia and the Middle East and some African and European countries, but it covers no student from the Mainland. Furthermore, starting from this year, all new non-local students in sub-degree, undergraduate, and taught postgraduate programmes offered by the eight institutions funded by the University Grants Committee (UGC) should be admitted through over-enrolment outside the approved UGC-funded student number targets. In other words, all the 15 000 first-year first-degree places funded by the UGC each year are offered to local students, and the argument that resources for local students are taken away is simply not tenable. President, since the 2012-2013 academic year, the Targeted Scholarship Scheme for first-year non-local undergraduate students has been in place and open to students from the member countries of Association of South East Asian Nations, as well as those from India and Korea. The Scheme is not new at all. The extension of its coverage to students from Belt and Road countries can help local institutions to attract high calibre students from different places in the long


run, and this is beneficial to enhancing peer group diversity in the institutions. This will also broaden local students' exposure to the cultures and beliefs of different races. However, while the Government adopts measures to attract students from other places to study in Hong Kong, it really should not forget the demand for university places among local students. Each year, there are over 25 000 students in Hong Kong who can satisfy general university admission requirements, but only 15 000 first-year first-degree places funded by the UGC are available. If the extra 10 000 or so students wish to further their studies, they will have no choice but enrol in self-financing programmes or study overseas, yet it may not be easy for average families to bear the cost involved. As a result, such youngsters are worried about the uncertainties ahead, and it is understandable that they have grievances. Meanwhile, as the saying goes, "every trade has its masters". The Government should also strengthen the planning of vocation training so that young people who may not be suitable for university education can have other routes ahead. Moreover, more publicity and education is also necessary to cultivate greater public awareness and recognition of vocational education. On the other hand, the Government should encourage young people qualified for university admission to choose their majors on the basis of personal interest rather than any utilitarian considerations of career prospects, because such considerations may well make students unable to realize their potentials and adversely impact the diversified development of our economy. Can we imagine how confined in scope the future development of this society will be, if all students only go for disciplines with financial prospects? In fact, if young people can really plan their way forward on the basis of their interest, they will most likely excel in their chosen areas and give play to their potentials. President, the riot on the second day of the Lunar New Year in Mong Kok is the most serious outbreak of violence in defiance of the law in recent years. We must strongly condemn such violence and must not allow a handful of radical separatists to ruin our precious asset, the rule of law. We must not allow them to damage our economic prosperity and upset our social harmony and stability. Their extreme acts of vandalism, arson and attacking law-enforcement officers are totally unacceptable. I am deeply saddened by the participation of local university students in this riot. I fully support the Police in their efforts to enforce law and order and bring the rioters to justice. I so submit.


5565

MR TONY TSE (in Cantonese): President, young people play a decisive role in the future development of Hong Kong. Many young people are striving to make their dream come true by starting their own business. Different trades and industries will have impetus for further development if encouragement and assistance can be given to more young people in starting their own businesses. However, young people have to face a lot of difficulties and problems when they try to start their own businesses. For example, with only very limited capital, it would not be easy for them to rent an office. If they are working in the field of research and development, they will even have to make investments for a number of years before some achievements or returns can be yielded, and they may even suffer losses in the end. Therefore, I welcome the Government's proposal of setting aside $2 billion to set up an Innovation and Technology Venture Fund. Nevertheless, will the Fund benefit entrepreneurs in the innovation and technology industry only? Entrepreneurs in other areas are also faced with a lot of difficulties and they would also like to receive appropriate support from the Government. I therefore hope that the Government will not neglect the aspirations and needs of start-ups in areas other than innovation and technology. President, let me take the architectural, surveying and planning sectors which I represent as an example. As reflected to me by a number of young professionals, they have also encountered a lot of difficulties in starting their own businesses back then. Given the expensive office rentals at present, renting an office has already imposed a very heavy burden on them. I have therefore suggested that Hong Kong may follow the example of other countries and make available some spaces in university campuses for use as offices so that fresh graduates may rent the places at low costs. Furthermore, by making universities the incubators of these young entrepreneurs and the providers of the related support and assistance, we can lay an important foundation for the success of young entrepreneurs. Besides, it has also come to my attention that many public works projects are of a very large scale and thus, I have repeatedly suggested to the Government that where practicable, large-scale works projects should be split into smaller projects and the experience requirements for bidders should be appropriately lowered. Young professionals and small and medium enterprises (SMEs) with


fewer resources and less experience will then be given the chance to take part in the bidding for the projects, and they can thus accumulate experience and build up confidence in their future development. In this connection, credit should be given to the Architectural Services Department, which has accepted the suggestion in recent years and cut back the proportion of bundled contracts for district minor works projects so that young professionals and SMEs may also take part in the bidding for the projects. The arrangement is a good start as it is welcomed by trade members. I hope the Government (Secretary LAU Kong-wah in particular) would work more vigorously and implement more district minor works projects so as to provide more opportunities to young professionals and SMEs and help them move upward. President, the future of Hong Kong hinges on our young people and it is the responsibility of each and every one of us to instil in them a correct set of values, so that they will know how to distinguish between right and wrong and understand the importance of abiding by the law and maintaining law and order. Young people have shown much more concern for various social affairs in recent years and have participated much more actively in the discussions of these issues. Encouragement and support should be given in this regard and hence, I suggest that posts of young observers should be created in the Government's consultative structure so that an additional channel would be available for them to express their views. Besides, with regard to a small group of radical youngsters who have used violent means to express their discontent and aspirations, I think they might have been incited by some trouble-makers. As a result, without giving thorough consideration to the possible consequences and liabilities, they have come to glorify such unlawful acts of violence as "militant struggles", much to the rejection of the community. Such an unhealthy trend must be corrected as early as possible, lest the overall interests of Hong Kong may be seriously undermined by those who have tried to use all sorts of twisted arguments to absolve themselves from such unlawful acts of violence. President, I so submit.


5567

MR CHRISTOPHER CHUNG (in Cantonese): President, I would like to express my views on culture under the area of home affairs in this session. In paragraph 63 of the Policy Address, the Chief Executive mentions that over the past years, Hong Kong has had cultural exchanges at different levels with some Belt and Road countries. Hence, we can play an active role in cultural exchanges under the Belt and Road Initiative. I would like to point out that cultural exchanges are an effective way to foster "people-to-people bond" with the Belt and Road countries. Cultural exchanges can foster mutual understanding, mutual co-operation and mutual respect among people of different countries. In more than 60 Belt and Road countries, we can find a number of ethnic groups and many different religions. Among those places, in the past, Hong Kong might have more contact with the Southeast Asian countries on the Maritime Silk Road, including Thailand, Vietnam, the Philippines and Singapore. However, Hong Kong may have not too much understanding about and contact with places in South Asia, Middle Asia, Middle East, Europe, Africa and Eastern Europe. From the address of the Chief Executive and the paper of the Home Affairs Bureau ― the Secretary is in the Chamber at present ― I cannot see any concrete plans from the Government which can reflect the active role played by Hong Kong in cultural exchanges. I suggest that they should consider taking Hong Kong as the central point in organizing some activities like cultural years, arts festivals or film weeks, art biennial exhibitions and international music festivals, in order to foster cultural exchanges. We should make good use of this Belt and Road opportunity to introduce Hong Kong artists to the Belt and Road countries and districts. Hong Kong has long been building up co-operation frameworks and platforms, and even signing memoranda on co-operation through Mainland and overseas authorities. For example, under the Greater Pearl River Delta Cultural Co-operation mechanism, Guangdong, Hong Kong and Macao have set up the Greater Pearl River Delta Cultural Information Net, through which messages on various kinds of cultural activities, cultural exchange projects, performance information and exhibitions of the three places are distributed. In the future, we must grasp the Belt and Road opportunity in order to step up cultural exchanges and co-operation with overseas places. These should include exchanging arts and cultural information with various places and assisting


local artists in participating in the activities concerned, with a view to fostering a more diversified and flourishing development of culture and arts in Hong Kong, and assisting our artists in moving into the international arena. Apart from overseas places, I also want to talk about the Mainland market. In respect of the Mainland market, Hong Kong artists have usually been groping their way forward. With the rapid development of the Mainland economy and the ever-expanding middle class population, a huge cultural and arts performance market is formed. These well-off families or middle-class people are in pursuit of higher-level quality living with cultural elements. They want to have more contact with high quality performing arts or visual arts that suit their tastes and aspirations. Moreover, in terms of hardware, the Mainland has recently invested a large amount of resources in the building of many professional theatres, performance venues and exhibition venues. They have also successfully cultivated a large group of audience who are in pursuit of fine arts and fine theatrical pieces. According to the Survey Report on Development of National Professional Theatres released by the Ministry of Culture last year, as at the end of 2013, there were 873 professional theatres in the Mainland. During the whole year, 40 500 shows were staged in these professional theatres, attracting a total number of 32.29 million people. Every year, the grand theatres in operation will invite international major performing arts groups, major orchestras, dance companies and renowned classical singers to perform in China. Facing the strong aspiration of the Mainland people towards culture and art, should the SAR Government also give some strategic consideration and conduct some studies, with a view to actively assisting Hong Kong artists and arts groups in exploring the Mainland market? As I understand, the Secretary for Home Affairs led the nine major performing arts groups in Hong Kong to visit Beijing last month. They mainly visited the performance venues in Beijing and met the principal officials in the Ministry of Culture of the nation, with a view to exploring opportunities for co-operation. I think this is the first step taken by the Government after it has been urged by us all these years to do more work. Nevertheless, in addition to these major theatrical companies, I think the Government should also pay attention to the opportunities for small and medium arts groups to perform in the Mainland, not only in Beijing, but also in Shanghai and even other second or third-tier cities. The Government should also promote such activities.


5569

Over the past few years in the Council, I have repeatedly asked the Government to deploy some government officials from the Leisure and Cultural Services Department to its offices in the Mainland, so that they can understand the arts market there and liaise with the arts groups and local officials concerned, with a view to serving the cultural workers and arts groups in Hong Kong. These are my remarks in the aspect of culture. Thank you, President. PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Does any other Member wish to speak in this session? If no Member wishes to speak, I will invite the public officers to speak. A total of three public officers will speak in this session. They may speak for up to a total of 45 minutes. I will first invite the Secretary for Labour and Welfare to speak. SECRETARY FOR LABOUR AND WELFARE (in Cantonese): President … (Mr LEUNG Yiu-chung stood up) PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Secretary, please wait for a moment. I could not see earlier that Mr LEUNG Yiu-chung has already indicated a wish to speak. Mr LEUNG Yiu-chung, please speak. MR LEUNG YIU-CHUNG (in Cantonese): President, I am sorry. President, I would like to talk about education in this session. In recent years, due to the rapid development of the post-secondary education market and the lack of increase in the number of subsidized places, more and more self-financing programmes have emerged. Besides, society now requires people to have higher academic qualifications and has been advocating the importance of academic qualifications. In order to live a better life in the future, many young people want to further their studies. However, it is unfortunate that due to insufficient subsidized places and the lack of any mechanism for monitoring the fees of self-financing programme, many young people can only continue their studies by borrowing loans from the Government.


In 2014-2015, 49 487 post-secondary students applied for loans under the Financial Assistance Scheme for Post-secondary Students. At the same time, 39 283 post-secondary students applied for loans under the Non-means-tested Loan Scheme for Post-Secondary Students. It is a pity that there are only 15 000 undergraduate places funded by the University Grants Committee (UGC) per year. Last year, more than 25 000 candidates of the Hong Kong Diploma of Secondary Education Examination met the minimum requirements of university admission. In other words, the gap is 10 000 places. When the supply cannot meet the demand for funded places, even if a candidate can meet the minimum requirements of university admission, getting a score of 3, 3, 2, 2 and 2 in the respective subjects, he may still fail to get a place in any publicly-funded undergraduate programmes and can only pursue a self-financing programme or Associate Degree programme. Under the circumstances, these students have to pay exorbitant and uncertain …"uncertain" refers to the fact that tuition fees fluctuate all the time and are exorbitant and uncertain. As a result, many young people can manage to get admission to undergraduate programmes only after many twists and turns. President, although they can be admitted to undergraduate programmes, their loans are getting higher. For those students who can get UGC-funded places, even though the tuition fees are lower, the low income ceiling and the strict means test for grants have still made it necessary for many grass-roots students to borrow loans to meet their tuition fees and living expenses. Besides, the threshold of application for financial assistance for post-secondary students is very high. For instance, the application threshold of a family with four people or above for full financial assistance is even higher than the poverty line. Since many people in grass-roots families are casual workers who do not have sufficient certified documents or stable income, their children's applications for student assistance will be affected. Hence, I hope that colleagues from the Education Bureau can consider making improvement in this aspect, so as to make it less difficult for these families to apply for assistance. Moreover, if a student who cannot pass the means test of the loan scheme is unable to pay his learning and living expenses with his own income or the income of his family, his only recourse is to apply for a loan under the non-means-tested loan scheme for tertiary students. Under this scheme, interest is charged once the loan is drawn down, and the risk-adjusted factor also needs to be taken into calculation. The amount of debt will thus be getting large.


5571

Before the student can get a job, he is already indebted. President, we do not wish to see that students are up to the neck in debt when they graduate. They will not find this acceptable. During the election in 2012, the Chief Executive, LEUNG Chun-ying, stated that education was a social investment. Nevertheless, in the four Policy Addresses in his term of office so far, the issue of commercialization of education has not been directly dealt with. In fact in the long run, education expenditure will bring about economic growth to society, and enhancing social productivity will also be beneficial to the growth of the individual and social development. Over the past few years, only the senior year places of funded undergraduate programmes have been increased, but the root of the problem, that is insufficient funded undergraduate places, has not be dealt with. In the 2015 Policy Address, various UGC-funded institutions are advised to consider ways to use the tuition fees collected to benefit their students. Unfortunately, this is only an empty talk without any action taken. In the Policy Address this year, LEUNG Chun-ying only highlights the policies which have been in place, but does not respond to the concern of society over post-secondary education. The Government says in the Policy Address this year that it considers injecting $1 billion into the targeted scholarship fund, but we all know that the targeted areas actually refer to the Belt and Road countries. This is for overseas students to study in Hong Kong. Although the Government has allocated more resources, this is not particularly beneficial to local students. The Government emphasizes that beside this subsidy, there are also initiatives like the Funding Scheme for Youth Exchange in the Mainland and the Funding Scheme for Youth Internship in the Mainland, there are still many arguments in the community, and not many people may be willing to participate in them. Therefore, I raise a very simple request. Will the Government consider offering interest-free loans to students? In the long run, the best way is to follow the examples of Germany and Switzerland by offering free post-secondary programmes to students. Besides, in regard to the $1 billion scheme, can it be two-way instead of one-way? This means that apart from having foreign students to study in Hong Kong, local students will also be allowed to study in other countries, not only in the Mainland, so that they can have more opportunities to exchange their experience and knowledge, as well as to broaden their horizons. This will be beneficial to the development of young people in Hong Kong. With enhancement of their knowledge, personal standard and other aspects, they can assist in the development of society.


PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Does any other Member wish to speak in this session? (No Member indicated a wish to speak) SECRETARY FOR LABOUR AND WELFARE (in Cantonese): President, I thank the 22 Honourable Members for their speeches just now. Manpower is a precious asset of our society and also a force driving the sustainable development of the economy. At the same time, employment is the means of making a living for people, the foundation of harmony, and an important indicator of social prosperity and stability. Hong Kong is facing the double challenge of a rapidly ageing population and a dwindling workforce. Therefore, the present Government attaches a great deal of importance to manpower development and talent training. Under a multi-pronged approach, we have sought to promote employment for various social groups and safeguard workers' rights and interests, in a bid to build a harmonious labour relationship. The labour market in Hong Kong is generally stable, and the unemployment rate has remained low at 3.3%, a level close to full employment. But due to obvious downside risks in the short-term economic outlook, especially the persistent sluggishness of inbound tourism, financial market fluctuations, and also unclear external economic circumstances, the local employment outlook is marked by uncertainties. We must remain highly vigilant. The Government fully understands the aspirations and concerns of the labour sector regarding the continuous improvement of workers' rights and interests. At present, the Government is handling and examining three major issues, namely a policy on working hours, the offsetting arrangement under the Mandatory Provident Fund System (MPF System) and also the request of some in the labour sector for additional statutory holidays. These issues are being handled respectively at three levels: the Standard Working Hours Committee (SWHC), the Commission on Poverty (CoP) through its public engagement exercise entitled "Retirement Protection Forging Ahead", and also the Labour Advisory Board (LAB). First, as everybody knows, the formulation of a policy on working hours is an extremely complex and highly controversial issue. It will produce extensive and far-reaching impact at various levels, such as the overall employment market,


5573

manpower demand, labour relations, work culture, the business environment, economic development and the competitiveness of enterprises. Since establishment, the SWHC has been doing many tasks in full speed, including an extensive public consultation exercise in 2014 and a thorough statistical survey on working hours. The SWHC is now further exploring a policy direction for working hours appropriate to Hong Kong, and will conduct the second (final) phase of consultation. It will submit a report to the Government as soon as possible after the consultation is completed. The MPF offsetting arrangement is closely related to the major issue of retirement protection, and it also involves the interests of various stakeholders. Changing the existing arrangement will affect employees' post-retirement welfare and the operating costs of employers, especially small and medium enterprises. Besides, the community has not yet reached a consensus on this issue. The CoP is conducting a six-month public consultation exercise on retirement protection, and consultation on other issues including the offsetting arrangement will also be conducted in that context. We will listen carefully to the views of various sides and consider the issue holistically. I hope the community can make good use of this consultation exercise and come up with a feasible proposal that can balance the interests of various social sectors and deal with the offsetting issue satisfactorily. Regarding the request of the labour sector for the alignment of statutory holidays with general holidays, the Labour Department already reported to the LAB and the Legislative Council Panel on Manpower (the Panel) on the findings of a survey done by the Census and Statistics Department on Hong Kong employees taking statutory holidays and general holidays, and the views of members were also gauged. The LAB is still holding discussions on this issue. Once an agreement is reached, the Government will determine the way forward. The Government fully understands employers' concerns and worries about these several issues. We will continue to adopt a positive and pragmatic attitude in striving for a reasonable balance between employees' interests and employers' affordability, with a view to improving employees' rights, interests and protection. Some individual Members are concerned about labour importation. I must emphasize that in processing all applications under the Supplementary Labour Scheme (SLS), the Labour Department always respects the role of the


LAB in the existing mechanism. The SLS mechanism is very clear. Any application must be preceded by open recruitment, and the wage level must not be lower than the median market wage, so as to ensure that local workers can enjoy priority in employment. The Labour Department has always upheld stringent criteria in its vetting and approval of every application for labour importation. Our principle is to allow a pragmatic, appropriate, limited and focused importation of labour to meet genuine manpower shortage and demand on the premise of protecting the overall interests of Hong Kong and ensuring employment priority for local workers, with a view to sustaining the social and economic development of Hong Kong. The Construction Industry Recruitment Centre newly set up by the Labour Department already commenced operation early last month for the purpose of enhancing the support for recruiting local construction workers. For better liaison with the construction industry and for the convenience of construction workers, the new recruitment centre is located in the Kowloon Bay Training Centre of the Construction Industry Council (CIC). This can enable the new recruitment centre and the CIC to achieve synergy in areas such as drawing new blood, skills training and recruitment. Over the past years, the joint efforts of the Government, employers, employees and various stakeholders have borne some fruit in respect of improving workers' rights and interests. Let me encapsulate such results here. First, the statutory minimum wage has been operating smoothly since its implementation in May 2011. As Honourable Members know, the latest seasonally adjusted unemployment rate is 3.3%, showing a drop of 0.3% against the figure of the quarter before minimum wage implementation (that is, the period from February to April 2011). Total employment likewise increased drastically by 261 600 after minimum wage implementation, reaching 3.8 million, with over two-thirds being women. The increases in the numbers of older and low-skilled women are especially noticeable. Besides, the average monthly employment earnings of full-time employees in the lowest decile group (that is, the group of the lowest-paid employees) have increased by 42.5% as compared with the figures of the quarter before minimum wage implementation. Discounting inflation, the increase in real terms is 17.6%. All this can show that the implementation of the statutory minimum wage has produced positive effects on encouraging employment and improving the earnings of low-income employees.


5575

Second, it is the implementation of a dual-track approach for the Work Incentive Transport Subsidy Scheme (WITSS). The Government formally implemented a dual-track approach for the WITSS in 2013 as a means of enhancing the flexibility of the WITSS and enabling working people to apply for the subsidy on an individual or household basis with regard to their individual circumstances. By the end of January this year, the Labour Department already granted subsidies totalling over $1.2 billion to around 100 000 applicants. Third, statutory paternity leave was formally implemented on 27 February (the ninth day of the Lunar New Year) last year to provide eligible male employees with three days of paid paternity leave. Fourth, the Government has raised the amounts of totally 18 items of employee compensation since 5 March last year, and the rates of increase range from 5.73% to 44.4%. The rates of increase for 10 items are over 10%. Such rates of increase can enhance the protection for the 10 000 or eligible persons. This year, a series of measures beneficial to workers will be rolled out one after another. First, as Honourable Members know, the Labour and Welfare Bureau will launch the Low-income Working Family Allowance (LIFA) on 3 May. The LIFA is aimed at encouraging employment and providing support to grass-roots working families. In our estimation, 200 000 grass-roots working families involving 700 000 grass-roots people can be benefited. In the case of an eligible four-person household with two children, for example, the subsidy can amount to as much as $2,600 a month, and we project a government expenditure of as much as $3 billion in the first year. The LIFA will likewise benefit employers, because it can unleash the potential of labour force, enhance Hong Kong's productivity, and in turn foster the economic development of Hong Kong. Second, the Labour Department will operate a trial scheme under which job-seekers with disabilities in need of emotional counselling are to be provided with such support, so as to help them manifest their abilities in the workplace. Third, in order to assist disadvantaged people with special needs, the Employees Retraining Board (ERB) will offer programmes tailor-made for older and ethnic minority job-seekers. The ERB will also expand the courses under the Modular Certificates Accumulation Scheme, so that trainees (especially female trainees) who are unable to enrol on full-time courses can make flexible study arrangements and acquire recognized qualifications. The ERB will also set up a part-time vacancy referral platform called the "Smart Starter" as a means


of providing vacancy referrals and follow-up services for graduates who are new-arrivals. The Labour Department will enhance its series of services. Among others, the Employment Programme for the Middle-aged has been expanded to cover part-time positions rather than just full-time positions, so as to respond to market demand more flexibly. With a view to enhancing employee protection, the Government gazetted the Employment (Amendment) Bill 2016 (the Bill) on 12 February last week (Friday). The Bill seeks to empower the Labour Tribunal to make an order for reinstatement or re-engagement as requested by an employee in a case of unreasonable and unlawful dismissal without the need to first secure the employer's agreement if the Tribunal considers that the making of such an order is appropriate and practicable. The Bill will be introduced to the Legislative Council on 2 March. I hope Honourable Members can endorse it as soon as possible. Besides, the Protection of Wages on Insolvency Fund Board (the Board) is now reviewing the coverage of the Protection of Wages on Insolvency Fund (the Fund) and also an adjustment of the levy rate. Apart from the current financial position of the Fund, the Board must also take account of other relevant factors, including the possible additional payouts of ex-gratia payments arising from the review of the Fund's protection coverage, and also a judicial review pending hearing before the Court of Final Appeal on the ex-gratia payment of severance payment. Once the case is concluded, we will give overall consideration and finalize the review outcomes. After the review outcomes are ready, the Government will consult the LAB and the Panel. In addition, the Minimum Wage Commission has commenced a new round of review on the statutory minimum wage rate based on an evidence-based principle. It will submit a recommendation report to the Chief Executive in Council in the fourth quarter of this year. What is more, the 340 000 foreign domestic helpers working in Hong Kong are likewise the targets of our protection. To strengthen the regulation of employment agencies and further protect the rights and interests of foreign domestic helpers and employers, the Labour Department is now preparing a code of practice for the industry. The code will set out the statutory requirements noteworthy to employment agencies, acts to be avoided by employment agencies, as well as good practices.


5577

Speaking of young people, the Working Holiday Scheme (WHS) has been well received by young people. In the year ahead, we will definitely step up our efforts, in the hope of signing new WHSs with more countries, or increasing the reciprocal quotas with the relevant countries at present. The WHS has been well received by young people, and around 70 000 Hong Kong youngsters have broadened their horizons outside Hong Kong under the WHS since its implementation. In the case of promoting occupational safety and health, the Labour Department will also continue to organize large-scale promotion and publicity campaigns apart from law-enforcement and education, with a view to raising the occupational safety and health standards and awareness in the construction industry and the food and beverage services industry. Having regard to the specific circumstances of the construction industry, the Department will continue to focus on systemic risks in works procedures and seek to control works hazards at source. Regarding the safety of working at height, the Department will step up efforts to promote the use of working platforms that meet safety standards, persuade workers to wear safety helmets with chin straps while working at height, and enhance the promotion of renovation and repair works safety in the property management sector. The department will also continue to step up the promotion of occupational safety and health awareness among ethnic minorities. On improving work injury protection for employees in high-risk industries, an inter-departmental working group co-ordinated by the Labour Department has completed a preliminary internal study on the existing work injury protection for injured employees, and is prepared to form a task force comprising representatives of the relevant Policy Bureaux, departments and public bodies to seriously follow up the proposals put forward by the working group, and consult stakeholders and the industries concerned. Some examples include the stepping up of promotion and publicity among employers on taking out sufficient labour insurance policies, and the rationalization of the preparations for medical assessment. One concern put forth by Honourable Members earlier on is about employees' occupational safety and health under inclement weather conditions. The Labour Department attaches a great deal of importance to the occupational safety and health of employees. And, the existing occupational safety and health legislation already provides for the general duty of care on the part of employers: every employer must ensure the safety and health of all his employees so far as


reasonably practicable. The relevant legislation also stipulates that any person in charge of a workplace must ensure the provision of adequate drinking water in the workplace, and in the case of a construction site, a room or covered area where workmen can take shelter under inclement weather conditions. Targeting on the risk of heat strokes, the CIC has issued a set of guidelines requiring construction contractors to arrange an additional rest period of 15 minutes for workers during the period from May to September every year. The Labour Department has formulated related codes of practice and guidelines for employers and employees, and has also conducted publicity activities and specific inspections to ensure that employers have effectively implemented such codes and guidelines. An employer in breach of the relevant statutory requirements is liable to a maximum fix of a $500,000 and six months' imprisonment upon conviction. Honourable Members, the prosperity and stability of Hong Kong have always been closely related to the harmonious labour relations built up by the joint efforts of employers, employees and the Government. We should safeguard and treasure these relations together. Labour relations are never a zero-sum game in which "one side wins and the other side loses". Instead, employers and employees can seek common ground while accommodating differences in the interactive process and in turn create a win-win situation together with an attitude of mutual accommodation, pragmatism and sincere co-operation. The Government will definitely do its utmost to facilitate the forging of a consensus between employers and employees on various labour-related issues. With these remarks, President, I earnestly ask Honourable Members to support the original motion. Thank you. SECRETARY FOR EDUCATION (in Cantonese): President, I would like to thank Members for their valuable opinions on the new education initiatives in the 2016 Policy Address. The incumbent Government attaches great importance to nurturing the next generation and that starts with education. Our ambition and mission is to provide students with a comprehensive and balanced learning opportunity in order to inspire their potential and lay a good foundation for them to pursue holistic development and lifelong learning. It is our wish that they can make academic achievements, apply what they have learned and make contributions to Hong Kong and the country.


5579

President, as several meetings and documents lately have touched on kindergarten education, I will only highlight the main points in the Policy Address. Providing quality kindergarten education is the first step towards fostering the growth of the next generation. With the efforts of all stakeholders over the years, the development of Hong Kong's kindergarten education will attain a new milestone. Inheriting the features and advantages of the model of private operation, diversification and multiple choices of existing kindergarten education, the Government has decided to launch a free quality kindergarten education policy from the 2017-2018 school year. It is expected that there will be a substantial increase in the amount of government resources allocated to kindergarten education. Recurrent expenditure will rise from the current $4.1 billion to $6.7 billion in the 2017-2018 school year, and the quality of kindergarten education will be enhanced on various fronts. Thus, we should not only focus on resources and quantity but also on quality when we look at this policy. I would like to discuss seven major parts: (1) provide eligible local non-profit-making kindergartens with a basic subsidy for a three-year quality half-day service for all eligible children. It is estimated that about 70% to 80% of the places in half-day kindergartens will become free-of-charge; (2) further improve the teacher-pupil ratio from 1:15 to 1:11, to establish a career ladder and provide competitive remuneration for kindergarten teachers to strengthen support for students with diverse needs and the professional team; (3) review the Guide to the Pre-primary Curriculum; (4) refine the Quality Assurance Framework. Mr MA Fung-kwok earlier has expressed particular concern about these parts. On the review and refinement of curriculum, we will particularly enhance the governance and transparency of kindergartens and step up the Government's monitoring efforts; (5) strengthen support for needy students, non-Chinese speaking students and students with diverse learning needs; (6) enhance parent engagement and parent education; and (7) improve school premises and facilities and explore feasible measures to increase kindergarten premises in the long run. At present, under the education voucher scheme, half-day, whole-day or long whole-day kindergartens get the same subsidy. Under the new policy, in order to unleash the potential of the local labour force to tie in with the population policy and to match the need of some families for extended care service, the Government considers that it is necessary to provide extra subsidy for whole-day and long whole-day kindergartens. Under the principle of responsibility sharing by the Government and parents, the Government proposes that the level of


subsidy for whole-day service should be 30% more than the subsidy for half-day service; as for long whole-day kindergartens, the amount will increase to 60% to cover the long operation hours and more days for classes. There are also other subsidy options for whole-day and long whole-day kindergartens, for example, special subsidies for cooks and admission of more non-Chinese speaking students. I have to explain in this regard. Several Members have talked about this. Mr IP particularly asks if our subsidy is adequate. I will not go into detail again here but I would like to cite three actual examples to show our full commitment in terms of resources. First, for half-day kindergartens admitting 200 students, they can now receive $4.5 million in subsidy. Under the new measure, the subsidy will become $6.6 million, which is an increase of 46%. For whole-day kindergartens admitting 90 students, the present subsidy is $2 million. Under the new measure, the subsidy will become $4 million which is double the current amount. For long whole-day kindergartens admitting 90 students and receiving a subsidy of $2 million, the subsidy will increase to $4.9 million, or 1.4 times what they are getting now. Here, I would like to discuss primary and secondary education. This year, the Policy Address proposes to strengthen support for students with diverse learning needs. The Government is now expanding the School-based Educational Psychology Service (SBEPS) as planned. Mr KWOK has also particularly mentioned the need in this regard earlier. I am very happy to tell Members that it is anticipated to cover all public sector primary and secondary schools in the territory in the 2016-2017 school year, which will mean further enhancement to the SBEPS. Starting from the 2016-2017 school year, the Education Bureau will progressively improve the ratio of educational psychologist to school to 1:4 for public sector primary and secondary schools with a large number of students with such needs. This is to facilitate schools to provide students with special educational needs with more comprehensive and routine case follow-up and intervention service, and to ramp up preventive and developmental efforts. Teachers are the key factor for the successful implementation of curriculum and education policies. To enhance the implementation of the senior secondary curriculum, and strengthen life planning education and related guidance services, as well as to take into account teachers' aspiration for regular teaching posts and the need for flexibility regarding school management, from the 2016-2017 school year, schools can turn the existing Senior Secondary Curriculum Support Grant as


5581

well as Career and Life Planning Grant into regular teaching posts to provide about 1 000 regular teaching posts. Moreover, aided secondary schools in need may apply to extend the retention period for surplus teachers up to the 2017-2018 school year. We hope that the above measures can boost teachers' morale and further stabilize the teaching force. There has been much discussion on the Belt and Road Initiative. Here, I want to emphasize in particular that the implementation of the Belt and Road Initiative announced by the country at the end of March 2015 has in fact brought many new opportunities to Hong Kong's future development. In view of this, we feel the need to encourage more outstanding students from the Belt and Road countries and regions to pursue undergraduate education in Hong Kong. The Government proposes that from the 2016-2017 school year, a Belt and Road scholarship will be introduced under the Targeted Scholarship Scheme which comes under the HKSAR Government Scholarship Fund. President, I must emphasize that the scholarship is already in place with 10 offers each year. We hope to increase the offers to 100 in phases. Therefore, this scholarship is not particularly new. Rather, the offers have been awarded for a period of time and as we think that the time and conditions are right, we come to this special decision. We will inject an additional seed fund of $1 billion. Let me assure Mr TAM that this is a seed fund. Thereafter, the investment income will be used to fund the scholarship. Last December, we rolled out the Hong Kong Scholarship for Belt and Road Students (Indonesia). From the 2016-2017 school year, up to 10 scholarships will be offered to outstanding Indonesian students who enrol in publicly-funded Hong Kong universities to cover the tuition fees for whole-day first-year-first-degree programmes. We propose to gradually expand the Belt and Road scholarship to cover other Belt and Road countries and regions. The fund for the first year is around $1.2 million. In response to Mr TAM's enquiry, we confirm the amount is $1.2 million. Our main purpose is to make students' learning and competitiveness, as well as the raising of diversified cultural qualities as the theme. We wish that individuals will not make groundless, unnecessary speculation of the original objective. Some Members are concerned about whether granting scholarships to overseas students will be unfair to local students. Actually, we are aware that other regions, for example, Singapore, Australia and many European and American countries have also granted similar scholarships to foreign students. In this regard, we must emphasize that recruiting non-local students for post-secondary programmes in Hong Kong will help diversify and


internationalize the local education sector and enhance the competitiveness of our students and Hong Kong as a whole. At present, we have provided support through various schemes for Hong Kong students to go to places around the world. I have to emphasize in particular that we are "going global" and not inviting people to come. For instance, we have provided support for Hong Kong students to go on exchanges and internships in various places around the world, including the Belt and Road regions to broaden the vision of local students. One very good example is the Scheme for Subsidy on Exchange for Post-secondary Students to subsidize local post-secondary students participating in learning experience and exchange activities outside Hong Kong. Since its launch in January 2015, the Scheme has benefited almost 1 500 local post-secondary students and the amount involved is about $18 million. We have also subsidized local students, through the Hong Kong Scholarship for Excellence Scheme, in pursuing studies in world renowned universities outside Hong Kong. Taking into account the 92 awardees of the first cohort of the Scheme so far, the amount of subsidy involved in the first year is about $60 million. In addition, in 2014-2015, we gave out $170 million under the HKSAR Government Scholarship Fund to benefit 8 000 students. In the same year, $3.6 billion in grants and loans was made available to help a total of 68 000 students. There are views that the SAR Government can consider subsidizing some Hong Kong students to pursue their studies in the Belt and Road regions. The Education Bureau will consider such proposals carefully and proactively. After years of efforts, 46% of our secondary school leavers in the relevant age cohort have access to undergraduate courses. Together with other courses, the ratio of students receiving tertiary education has reached 70%. The Government's annual investment in higher education amounts to $19.5 billion. Take 2016 as an example. On average, the unit cost for each subsidized university student is $269,000, an increase of 18.9% as compared with 2015. This shows that we attach great importance to investment in this regard and there are many supporting resources. There is one thing I would like to mention here. Dr Helena WONG said earlier that only 18% of our students have subsidized places. Allow me to correct her. At present, the ratio has reached 24%. So, out of 15 000 students … Due to population change, the ratio has reached 24%. Moreover, not many people have noticed that as from 2015, we are adding 1 000 places annually. When particular industries or professions are in need, we will buy these places from some self-financing institutions to provide another kind of subsidized places. If we include the 5 000 higher top-up places, the figure is quite significant. We have also taken the continuous drop in population into


5583

account. In the last two years, there were 62 000 graduates each year but in a few years' time, the figure will fall to 42 000. President, say we have 42 000 students, 40% will mean less than 20 000. Therefore, we have to be careful when drawing up plans to meet demand in this regard. Mr IP has mentioned a lot on academic freedom and institutional autonomy. I would like to emphasize in particular that academic freedom has always been a significant social value which Hong Kong praises highly. It is safeguarded by the Basic Law and is the cornerstone for the success of Hong Kong's higher education sector. The HKSAR Government has all along been committed to implementing the Basic Law, and safeguarding academic freedom and institutional autonomy. The eight institutions subsidized by the University Grants Committee (UGC) are independent and autonomous statutory bodies. They have their respective ordinances and articles of association to define their establishment purpose, functions and governance structure. The ordinances have prescribed the powers and freedom to be enjoyed by the institutions for fulfilling their establishment purpose and functions. The UGC also plays a very important role. On one hand, the UGC supports academic freedom and institutional autonomy. On the other hand, it also takes into consideration society's reasonable concern and accountability expectation and ensures the proper use of public funds. In fact, the UGC Notes on Procedures have clearly defined the role of the UGC, the Government and the various institutions in the higher education sector. The Notes on Procedures sets out the five main areas of institutional autonomy, including selection of staff, selection of students, curricula and academic standards, acceptance of research programmes and allocation of funds within the institutions. The Government and the UGC have always worked in accordance with the law, followed the institutions' ordinances and the UGC Notes on Procedures, respected and safeguarded the institutions' academic freedom and autonomy. I have to briefly mention the part on vocational and post-secondary education. As it has said that we have accepted all the recommendations of the Task Force on Promotion of Vocational Education, I will not repeat here. President, I would like to use one or two minutes here to make some clarifications. We are very grateful to the opinions given by the Honourable Members in the debate, but I wish that individual proposals or discussion can be based on facts. There are a few points I would like to mention. Dr Kenneth


CHAN says students begin to learn simplified characters from primary school. We do not have any documents to this effect. The Chinese Language Education Key Learning Area Curriculum Guide has been in force since 2002. It has been purposely singled out by some people as a new item. I strongly hope that such a move will not lead to unnecessary disruption or crisis which will disturb the public with incorrect information. This is my first point. Secondly, Ms Cyd HO mentions that we do not simply teach the value of the sense of national identity under values education. I have to emphasize here that among the five forms of education under whole-man education, all primary and secondary schools stress that values education on values and attitude will be tackled through various approaches. I would like to specially highlight seven important values, including perseverance, respect for people, sense of responsibility, sense of national identity, commitment, care and integrity. So, it is not simply the sense of national identity. There are these seven important components. Therefore, I particularly point them out here. Lastly, I would like to express gratitude to all Members. The Government will consider Members' opinions in great detail to refine our policies. The Education Bureau wishes to implement the short-, medium- and long-term measures put forward in the 2016 Policy Address with Members, the academic sector and stakeholders to build a better learning environment for our next generation. With these remarks, President, I implore Members to support the Motion of Thanks moved by Mr Andrew LEUNG. Thank you. SECRETARY FOR HOME AFFAIRS (in Cantonese): President and Honourable Members, I would like to thank Members for their speeches. Let me further elaborate our work in the areas of youth development, arts and culture and sports. Many Members are concerned about the policies on youth development. In fact, over the past few years, the Government has launched a number of new measures and devoted additional resources to the promotion of youth development. We will continue to take forward the work in this area, foster a culture of multi-faceted excellence and provide diversified learning, training and personal development opportunities for young people with different aspirations.


5585

As Mr Christopher CHEUNG and Mr YIU Si-wing said, young people should equip themselves and broaden their horizons, seize the opportunities brought by the Belt and Road Initiative and look beyond Hong Kong. In this connection, we will appropriate additional resources to the Funding Scheme for Youth Exchange in the Mainland and the Funding Scheme for Youth Internship in the Mainland in 2016-2017 in order to provide more internship and exchange opportunities for young people in the Mainland. We will continue to promote the International Youth Exchange Programme and the Summer Exchange Programme in other countries and expand these two programmes to more Belt and Road countries with a view to broadening the international horizons of young people. Meanwhile, we will allocate resources to sponsor the exchange activities related to the Belt and Road Initiative organized by community bodies, and promote the efforts of fostering people-to-people bonds between Hong Kong and the Belt and Road countries and regions. Mr Christopher CHEUNG also touched upon the work to help young people start their own businesses. This is indeed an aspect that we attach a great deal of importance to. To this end, we will proactively materialize the $300-million Youth Development Fund, which aims to work with non-governmental organizations, on a matching fund basis, to assist young people in starting their businesses. In addition, the Fund will support innovative youth development activities that are not covered by existing schemes. The preparatory work of the Fund has completed. It will be launched after funding approval is given by the Legislative Council. As for the progress of the Youth Hostel Scheme (YHS) that Mr CHAN Hak-kan is concerned about, currently five projects are being processed. The proposed youth hostels located in Yuen Long, Tai Po, Sheung Wan, Mong kok and Jordan respectively will provide a total of 2 700 units. We plan to seek funding approval from the Legislative Council for two YHS projects in this legislative session. As Mr Tony TSE said, we hope the Public Works Subcommittee and the Finance Committee can approve the applications for funding of these projects as early as possible, so that constructions projects which are fully ready can commence as soon as possible. We will continue to liaise closely with other non-governmental organizations interested in joining the Scheme, and hope that more new projects would be rolled out in the future. The first batch of units under the Scheme is scheduled to complete and be ready for leasing to young people in 2018 the soonest.


We have been endeavouring to develop new arts venues for young artists and renting studios to them at concessionary rent to young artists. Just now Mr MA Fung-kwok raised his concern in this regard. In fact, in recent years, the Government has provided additional resources to the Hong Kong Arts Development Council (HKADC) for the development of art venues. In addition to the "ADC Artspace" in operation located at Genesis in Wong Chuk Hang, we support the collaboration between the Tai Po District Council and the HKADC to convert a vacant school building in Tai Po into an arts development centre, which will provide space for performing artists and arts groups for art creation, rehearsals and arts promotion activities. Moreover, we propose to provide art venues, studios and facilities to visual artists and media artists at affordable rent in the future development of a site in Aberdeen. We hope that the applications for the funding of the two projects mentioned above can be scrutinized and approved by the Public Works Subcommittee of the Legislative Council as early as possible, so that these venues for creation will be available to young artists soon. On the development of more arts and culture facilities, the foundation works of the East Kowloon Cultural Centre in Ngau Tau Kok commenced in January this year. The centre is scheduled to provide service in 2021. Besides, the West Kowloon Cultural District will have its first batch of cultural and arts facilities, including the M+ Pavilion, Xiqu Centre, M+ museum and Freespace (comprising the Black Box and the Outdoor Stage), ready for opening in phases starting from mid-2016 to 2019. The Lyric Theatre Complex comprising a 1 450-seat theatre and two small-and-medium theatres is scheduled for completion in 2021. Following the completion of a number of new arts and cultural facilities in Hong Kong in the next five years, more venue options will be available to local and international performance groups. I would like to thank Members for supporting the proposal to offer free admission to the permanent exhibitions of designated museums under the Leisure and Cultural Services Department (LCSD). The month-long free museum admission under the "Appreciate Hong Kong" Campaign has been well received by the public. The number of visitors to certain museums has even doubled as compared to the same period last year. Later on, the LCSD will propose amendments to the Public Health and Municipal Services Ordinance in order to expeditiously turn free admission to the designated museums into a standing practice.


5587

Mr MA Fung-kwok was also concerned about the promotion and transmission of intangible cultural heritage. We will continue to proactively protect intangible cultural heritage through research work and through the preservation, promotion and transmission of such heritage. At the same time, we will encourage members of the public to participate in the protection of intangible cultural heritage. We are screening the 480 items covered by the local intangible cultural heritage inventory in a bid to identify a list of items with high cultural value and requiring urgent preservation for the compilation of the first representative list of intangible cultural heritage for Hong Kong. Besides, we plan to set up a resource centre for intangible cultural heritage at the Sam Tung Uk Museum in Tsuen Wan. In this centre, exhibitions on topics relating to intangible cultural heritage will be organized on a regular basis. On cultural exchange, the Asia Cultural Co-operation Forum that we organize on a regular basis provides the platform that facilitates cultural exchanges between Asian cultural ministers. It is also an occasion for us to negotiate and sign memorandum on cultural exchange with other governments. It is our hope that the next forum to be organized in 2017 can extend invitation to more Belt and Road countries in Asia with a view to stepping up Hong Kong's cultural exchange and co-operation with various Asian countries and enhance our position and image as a cultural city of Asia. I absolutely agree with Mr Christopher CHUNG's notion of enhancing our bond with other countries through cultural exchange. In fact, many arts groups and artists have managed to stage their performance in overseas countries and the Mainland with the funding provided by the Home Affairs Bureau. We look forward to having more cultural exchange of this kind in the future. According to the decision in the Policy Address, we announced the appointment of the Deputy Secretary for Home Affairs as the Commissioner for Sports on 1 February. The Commissioner for Sports will be responsible for the co-ordination and implementation of the sports policy, including co-ordinating among various government bureaux and departments, National Sports Associations and relevant organizations. He will continue to promote and achieve the sports policy objectives of the Government, namely to promote sports in the community, to support elite sports development, and to make Hong Kong a hub for major international sports events. The appointment will provide the Commissioner for Sports with a clearer mandate in terms of functions and responsibilities, thereby enhancing his liaison with sports organizations both within and outside Hong Kong.


We will continue to support the strategic development of the Hong Kong Sports Institute (HKSI). We aim to develop the HKSI into a world-class elite athletes training institution which provides training and various support for elite athletes preparing for the 2016 Olympics and Paralympics, and other major international sports events. President and Honourable Members, this is the year of the Olympics. As at this moment, our young athletes are qualified to compete in six Olympic sports, including women's marathon, two swimming events, two sailing events and one road cycling event, and it is likely that our athletes would be qualified for more sports events in the Olympics. Despite the heavy and gloomy atmosphere in the community, I still call on the people of Hong Kong to cheer our elite young athletes on. We hope they can use their positive energy to score new records for Hong Kong. Thank you, President. SUSPENSION OF MEETING PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): The fourth debate session ends. I now suspend the meeting until 9 am tomorrow. Suspended accordingly at 9.52 pm.

official record of proceedings thursday, 18 february 2016 ...€¦ · prof sophia chan siu-chee,...

Documents