Author Archives: hksar gov

     The Government yesterday (February 22) exercised the power under the Prevention and Control of Disease (Compulsory Testing for Certain Persons) Regulation (Cap. 599J) to make a “restriction-testing declaration” with effect from 6pm yesterday, under which people (hereafter referred to as “persons subject to compulsory testing”) within the specified “restricted area” in Sha Tin (i.e. Chung Kwan House, Chung On Estate, Sha Tin) were required to stay in their premises and undergo compulsory testing. Persons subject to compulsory testing were required to stay in their premises until all such persons identified in the “restricted area” had undergone testing and the test results were mostly ascertained.
 
     In addition, the Government issued a compulsory testing notice yesterday, requiring any person who had been present at the above building for more than two hours from February 9 to February 22, 2022, even if they were not present in the “restricted area” at the time when the declaration took effect, must undergo compulsory testing on or before February 24, 2022.
 
     The Government finished the compulsory testing exercise at around 12.45pm today (February 23) and carried out enforcement action in the “restricted area” afterwards to verify that all people in the “restricted area” had undergone compulsory testing in accordance with the requirements of the relevant declaration and compulsory testing notice. The Government announced that the enforcement operation ended at around 2.45pm today.
 
     The Government delivered food pack to persons subject to compulsory testing to facilitate their meal arrangements. The Housing Department also set up a hotline for people restricted by the declaration to make enquiries and seek assistance.
 
     The Government thanks persons subject to compulsory testing for their support and understanding. With everyone’s co-operation and efforts, coupled with the tireless efforts of the testing contractors, residents have been informed about their testing results by SMS notification. After finishing the compulsory testing exercise at around 12.45pm today, the Government took enforcement action in the “restricted area” immediately to verify that all people in the “restricted area” had undergone testing according to the requirements of the declaration and the compulsory testing notice. Persons who could present an SMS notification containing a negative test result as proof of having undergone the compulsory testing could leave the “restricted area” through the designated exit after providing personal information to a prescribed officer. The enforcement operation was completed at around 2.45pm. Test records of 44 persons subject to compulsory testing were checked. One person was found to have not undergone compulsory testing and compulsory testing order was issued to him. Taking into account the above situation, the Secretary for Food and Health revoked the “restriction-testing declaration” in accordance with Cap. 599J (see attachment).
 
     The Government reminded the households who have not answered the door to contact the Government for arrangement of testing as soon as possible after reading the notices put up by the Government, in the hope of eliminating the possible risk of further spread of the virus in the community.
 
     The Government thanks all participating government staff and the testing agencies for their hard work. The Government is also grateful to those subject to compulsory testing for their support and understanding, and their full co-operation during this period in undergoing testing and waiting for the results at home.
 
     The Government will seriously follow up on the compliance situation of the compulsory testing notices and the “restriction-testing declaration” by persons subject to compulsory testing. Any person who fails to comply with the compulsory testing notices commits an offence and may be liable to a fixed penalty of $10,000. The person will also be issued with a compulsory testing order, requiring him or her to undergo testing within a specified time frame. Failure to comply with the order or the “restriction-testing declaration” is an offence and the offender may be liable to a fine of level 4 ($25,000) and imprisonment for six months. read more

     Following is a question by the Hon Dominic Lee Tsz-king and a written reply by the Secretary for the Environment, Mr Wong Kam-sing, in the Legislative Council today (February 23):

Question:

     Some residents living in the housing courts near Shan Tong Road in Tai Po have relayed that the traffic noise from Tolo Highway has caused serious nuisance to their lives. According to the results of the residents’ own measurement, the noise levels recorded in some residential units were close to 80 decibel (dB). However, they said that the measurement results were not agreed by the Environmental Protection Department (EPD). In this connection, will the Government inform this Council:

(1) whether EPD has formulated criteria or guidelines for the measurement of traffic noise levels at residential units located near vehicular roads; if so, of the details (including the criteria for selecting locations for measurement); if not, the reasons for that; whether EPD will visit the units of the housing courts located near Shan Tong Road to measure the traffic noise levels;

(2) given that the Government has installed noise barriers and paved roads with low noise surfacing materials along the relevant sections of Tolo Highway, whether it has evaluated the effectiveness of such measures in reducing noise; if so, of the details (including the noise level reduced in terms of dB); if not, the reasons for that;

(3) whether it has plans to replace the solid sound absorptive panels currently installed along Tolo Highway with transparent noise barriers, so as to further reduce the noise nuisance to the residents nearby; if so, of the details and timetable; and

(4) whether it will consider imposing more stringent noise restrictions on the relevant sections of Tolo Highway, as well as paving roads with low noise surfacing materials and retrofitting noise barriers along more sections of the highway, so as to reduce the traffic noise nuisance to the residents nearby; if so, of the details; if not, the reasons for that?

Reply:

President,

     The Government has all along committed to adopting a multi-pronged approach in mitigating road traffic noise impact on members of the public. Our initiatives include requiring project proponents that are planning for new developments (such as those of roads, residential or new towns) to conduct traffic noise impact assessments to reduce potential noise problems; regulating by law the noise emission levels of first registered vehicles; and where practicable and subject to resource availability, resurfacing existing roads with low noise materials and retrofitting noise barriers/enclosures thereon.

     When planning for the construction of new expressways or improvements to existing ones (such as Tolo Highway), the government departments concerned are required under the Environmental Impact Assessment Ordinance (EIAO) to provide suitable noise barriers/enclosures and low noise road surface to reduce road traffic noise, with a view to ensuring that the noise levels at nearby residential premises comply with the required standards. When planning for new residential development projects, project proponents are also required under the Hong Kong Planning Standards and Guidelines (HKPSG) to conduct traffic noise impact assessments and adopt necessary noise mitigation designs and measures to tackle potential noise issues. Such noise mitigation designs and measures, as well as their purposes, have to be stipulated in the deeds of mutual covenant and sales brochures of the residential buildings concerned.

     Our reply to the question raised by the Hon Dominic Lee Tsz-king is as follows:

(1) As required under the EIAO technical memorandum or HKPSG, traffic noise impact assessments and measurements are made at one metre from the external facade of noise sensitive receivers (such as living rooms and bedrooms) that rely on opened windows for ventilation.

     As required under the EIAO, upon completion of the construction of new expressways or improvements to existing ones, the government departments concerned have to monitor traffic noise during the operational phase to verify that the mitigation effects of the noise barriers/enclosures and low noise surfacing materials provided are no less than the estimations made in the corresponding environmental impact assessment (EIA) reports.

     Regarding the housing court near Tolo Highway and Shan Tong Road as mentioned by the Hon Lee, the Environmental Protection Department (EPD) measured traffic noise levels at the bedrooms of the two most affected units in November 2021 upon receipt of traffic noise complaints. The noise levels measured were 67 dB(A) and 64 dB(A), reflecting that traffic noise levels at the two units did not exceed the traffic noise limit of 70 dB(A) L10(1 hour).

(2) When the Highways Department (HyD) carried out the widening of Tolo Highway between Island House Interchange and Tai Hang in 2009, an EIA was completed in accordance with the EIAO requirements. As recommended in the EIA report and subsequent environmental review (ER), the HyD took necessary noise mitigation measures, which included installing noise barriers of about 10 kilometres in total length and laying low noise surfacing materials along the carriageway of that section of Tolo Highway, to mitigate traffic noise impact on nearby residential premises such as those in Shan Tong New Village and Lai Chi Shan, etc. After completion of the widening works, the HyD proceeded with the measurement of traffic noise as required in the Environmental Monitoring and Audit Manual to verify effectiveness of the noise mitigation measures. The results indicated that their mitigation effects were comparable to those concluded in the EIA report and subsequent ER. Hence the measures were effective in mitigating the impact of traffic noise on nearby residential premises.

(3) The choice between solid sound absorptive panels and transparent panels always depends on the actual circumstances. Replacement of solid sound absorptive panels used on the section of Tolo Highway near Shan Tong Road in Tai Po by transparent panels will, rather than reducing noise nuisance, increase traffic noise levels at nearby residential premises because transparent panels are not sound absorptive and will reflect traffic noise instead. Since transparent panels can improve visual quality and make drivers feel more comfortable, the EPD and HyD have explored the feasibility of replacing certain solid sound absorptive panels by transparent panels on other sections (e.g. between Island House Interchange and Ma Liu Shui Interchange) of Tolo Highway that are not subject to the influence of noise reflection by transparent panels. Replacement works will be carried out when the relevant noise barriers are repaired or replaced in future.

(4) The Government has provided proper noise barriers on Tolo Highway as required under the EIAO, and the whole Tolo Highway has been paved with low noise surfacing materials to reduce road traffic noise. In addition, the impact of traffic noise from the said section of Tolo Highway on the recently built residential premises has been addressed by their developers in accordance with the HKPSG requirements through adoption of appropriate noise mitigation designs and measures (e.g. one of the newly built housing courts in Shan Tong Road has its units designed in such a way that the noise tolerant parts like kitchens and toilets are arranged facing Tolo Highway and architectural fins are also installed). Since the traffic noise impact on these newly built residential premises has been duly addressed, it is not necessary to retrofit additional noise barriers on Tolo Highway. read more

     â€‹The Government yesterday (February 22) exercised the power under the Prevention and Control of Disease (Compulsory Testing for Certain Persons) Regulation (Cap. 599J) to make a “restriction-testing declaration” effective from 2.30pm yesterday, under which people (hereafter referred to as “persons subject to compulsory testing”) within the specified “restricted area” in Sha Tin (i.e. Heng Fung House, Heng On Estate, Sha Tin, excluding Conservative Baptist Ming Yan Church, Conservative Baptist Heng On Bradbury Study Center and the Family Planning Assocation of Hong Kong Ma On Shan Women’s Club on G/F.) were required to stay in their premises and undergo compulsory testing. Persons subject to compulsory testing are required to stay in their premises until all such persons identified in the “restricted area” have undergone testing and the test results are mostly ascertained. In addition, the Government issued a compulsory testing notice yesterday to any person who had been present at the building for more than two hours from February 9 to February 22, 2022 to undergo compulsory testing on or before February 24, 2022 even if they were not present in the “restricted area” at the time when the declaration took effect. As a mutant strain is involved, for prudence’s sake, vaccinated persons and persons who have recently been tested are also required to undergo testing. The Government finished the compulsory testing exercise at around 2pm today (February 23) and is now carrying out enforcement actions in the “restricted area” to verify that all people in the “restricted area” have undergone compulsory testing. The Government will further announce the revocation time of the declaration.
      
     Starting from around 2pm today, persons in the specified “restricted area” in Sha Tin who have undergone testing and are able to present SMS notifications with negative test results or wear wristbands as proof of having undergone testing may leave the “restricted area” through the designated exit after providing personal information to a prescribed officer.
      
     The Government set up temporary specimen collection stations in the “restricted area” yesterday and requested persons subject to compulsory testing to collect combined nasal and throat swab samples at the stations to undergo a COVID-19 virus test before 10pm yesterday. As at 10pm yesterday, around 2 100 people within the “restricted area” had undergone testing. Around 160 cases tested preliminarily positive and around 15 indeterminate cases were found. The Centre for Health Protection of the Department of Health will arrange follow up actions.
      
     Regarding cases tested preliminarily positive in the specified “restricted area”, the Government has provided additional food packs, health advice for persons tested preliminarily positive pending admission to hospitals or isolation facilities, disinfection products and surgical masks to these persons and their household members pending follow-up arrangement.
      
     Moreover, the Government also assigned staff to visit around 810 households, among which 50 households did not answer the door. The Government will take measures to follow up.
      
     The Government reiterates that enforcement actions will be taken seriously. Any person who fails to present an SMS notification with a test result or wear a wristband as proof of having undergone testing breaches the compulsory testing notice and may be liable to a fine of $10,000. The person will also be issued with a compulsory testing order, requiring him/her to undergo testing within a specified time frame. Failure to comply with the compulsory testing order or the “restriction-testing declaration” is an offence and the offender may be liable to a fine of level 4 ($25,000) and imprisonment for six months. read more

     Police today (February 23) reclassified an assault occasioning actual bodily harm case in Yuen Long yesterday (February 22) as murder.      At around 8.30pm yesterday, Police received a report t… read more

     Following is a question by the Hon Steven Ho and a written reply by the Secretary for Food and Health, Professor Sophia Chan, in the Legislative Council today (February 23):
 
Question:
 
     Some fishermen have relayed that illegal fishing using highly destructive methods, such as electric fishing, has been found in the eastern, southern and western waters of Hong Kong, and that the problem is serious. However, the Government has failed to eradicate illegal fishing and, as a result, the livelihood of law-abiding Hong Kong fishermen (including Hong Kong and Macao floating fishermen) has been badly affected, whilst fisheries resources and marine ecosystem have been severely damaged. In this connection, will the Government inform this Council:
 
(1) of the expenditure, staffing establishment and number of patrol vessels involved in the work of combating illegal fishing in each of the past two financial years and in the current financial year (as at January this year); the waters patrolled by law enforcement officers and the number of patrols conducted, the number of joint operations conducted, as well as the number of cases in which illegal fishing was found during these operations, together with a tabular breakdown of the figures and their respective percentages by fishing method;
 
(2) of the following figures in connection with illegal fishing in each of the past two financial years and in the current financial year: (i) the number of complaint cases received, (ii) the number of cases in which illegal fishing was found during patrols or joint operations but no arrest could successfully be made, (iii) the number of persons arrested and the number of cases involved, (iv) the number of repeated offenders arrested and the number of such cases, (v) the number of persons convicted and the number of such cases, and (vi) the highest and lowest penalties imposed on the convicted persons (set out in a table);
 
(3) when the Government first started using real-time satellite data to help track illegal fishing vessels whose licence numbers were covered; as some fishermen have pointed out that many of these vessels hide their tracks by deactivating the satellite positioning function, whether it has assessed if such tactic will affect the effectiveness of satellite data application, and whether it will adopt other means (using paintballs and other new technologies, for instance) for enhancing law enforcement efficiency;
 
(4) of the number of cases in each of the past two financial years and in the current financial year where the Government, under the existing notification mechanism, transferred to the Guangdong provincial authorities for follow-up information concerning mainland fishing vessels engaging in illegal fishing in Hong Kong waters found during patrols; among them, the respective numbers of cases of successful arrest and conviction; if there were no successful cases, whether it has evaluated the effectiveness of the notification mechanism; and
 
(5) whether the legislation will be amended to impose heavier penalties on illegal fishing, and whether additional resources will be allocated to step up law enforcement efforts?
 
Reply:
 
President,
 
     My reply to the question raised by the Member is as follows:
 
(1) The expenditure and manpower involved in combating illegal fishing by the Government over the past three years are tabulated as follows:
 

Year	Expenditure ($ million)	Manpower (number of staff)
2019-20	16.9	18
2020-21	19.2	34
2021-22 (revised estimate)	25.9	34

 
     From mid-August 2020 onwards, the Agriculture, Fisheries and Conservation Department (AFCD) has increased the number of vessels deployed for targeted patrols at irregular hours (including night time and early morning) from three to seven to combat illegal fishing under the Fisheries Protection Ordinance (Cap. 171 of the Laws of Hong Kong) and the Marine Parks Ordinance (Cap. 476 of the Laws of Hong Kong).

     The numbers of patrols conducted by the AFCD and its joint operations mounted with the Marine Police in all areas of Hong Kong waters over the past three years are tabulated as follows:
 

Location		Year
		2019-20	2020-21	2021-22 (as at end January 2022)
Marine parks and marine reserve (Located in Hoi Ha Wan, Yan Chau Tong, Sha Chau and Lung Kwu Chau, Tung Ping Chau, Cape D’Aguilar, the Brothers and Southwest Lantau)	Number of patrols	3,154	3,080	2,842
	Number of joint operations	23	13	19
Other waters (mainly include: (i) Po Toi, Lamma Island, Cheung Chau, Shek Kwu Chau and Soko Islands; (ii) the Brothers, Sha Chau, Lung Kwu Chau and Deep Bay; and (iii) Mirs Bay and Ninepin Group)	Number of patrols	1,625	1,657	1,641
	Number of joint operations	41	67	116

 
     Information on illegal fishing practices detected during patrols and joint operations over the past three years is tabulated as follows:
 

Illegal fishing practices	2019-20		2020-21		2021-22 (as at end January 2022)
	Number	%	Number	%	Number	%
Shrimp trawling	16	38.1	57	47.1	43	55.1
Hang trawling	2	4.8	8	6.6	2	2.6
Stern trawling	0	0	1	0.8	0	0
Pair trawling	8	19.0	13	10.8	8	10.3
Purse seining	0	0	1	0.8	0	0
Gill netting	11	26.2	30	24.8	17	21.7
Cage trapping	5	11.9	5	4.1	2	2.6
Long lining	0	0	3	2.5	3	3.8
Set netting	0	0	2	1.7	2	2.6
Others	0	0	1	0.8	1	1.3

(2) The numbers of operations against illegal fishing activities conducted by the AFCD over the past three years are tabulated as follows:
 

Item	Year
	2019-20	2020-21	2021-22 (as at end January 2022)
Number of complaints received	161	166	138
Number of cases relating to illegal fishing activities detected during patrols or joint operations (number of cases in which no arrest was made)	56 (41)	128 (109)	89 (77)
Number of successful arrests (number of persons arrested)	15 (24)	19 (66)	12@ (20)
Number of successful convictions (number of persons successfully convicted)	14 (22)	20 (63)	8 (16)
Minimum and maximum penalties imposed	Minimum – fine of $500; maximum – imprisonment for two months	Minimum – fine of $550; maximum – imprisonment for six weeks	Minimum – fine of $1,000; maximum – imprisonment for six weeks
Number of repeat offences (number of repeat offenders)	0 (0)	0 (0)	0 (0)

@ Four are still in the progress of investigation.
 
     In addition, the number of complaints about illegal fishing activities received by the Marine Police over the past three years were 67, 86 and 68 respectively.
 
(3) Since March 2021, the AFCD has deployed the real-time satellite identification system to help identify fishing vessels covered by the system that engage in illegal fishing. The system can assist with enforcement investigation and tracking by analysing real-time satellite data in relation to these vessels, such as their navigation speeds, directions, vessel digital identities, licence numbers and past trips, etc. Besides, the system can help the AFCD analyse black spots of illegal fishing, the number of vessels involved and the operation time, so that the AFCD can deploy resources and conduct enforcement operations to combat illegal fishing more effectively.
 
     In addition, to obtain more aspects of information on illegal fishing, the AFCD also works with fishermen associations to gather intelligence regarding illegal fishing by using their fishing vessels. Together with the analysis of real-time satellite data, the AFCD is able to deploy enforcement operations more effectively.
 
     Since the use of paintballs may involve special equipment and a certain level of force, we must consider carefully the relevant risks. Moreover, if a vessel engaging in illegal fishing has escaped from the scene, it would be difficult to identify the persons involved in the crime even if the vessel is discovered by the AFCD later again. Therefore, there are constraints in using paintballs to mark vessels for subsequent investigation and evidential purposes. During its enforcement operations, the AFCD’s primary strategy is still to intercept suspicious vessels as far as possible by practical means, and board the vessels to collect evidence of illegal fishing with a view to enhancing the effectiveness of law enforcement. The AFCD will continue to explore different ways to enhance the efficiency of law enforcement.
 
(4) To combat illegal fishing activities conducted by cross-boundary vessels, the AFCD exchanges real-time information, shares intelligence and collaborates with the Guangdong Provincial Marine Comprehensive Law Enforcement General Brigade and its relevant law enforcement branches, including the Shenzhen and Zhuhai Municipal Marine Comprehensive Law Enforcement Teams, during its routine enforcement. For example, upon detection of Mainland fishing vessels that are conducting fishing activities in Hong Kong during its enforcement operations, the AFCD will notify the relevant law enforcement teams in the Mainland. If the circumstances allow, the law enforcement teams in the Mainland will deploy patrol vessels to the water boundary to provide assistance. The AFCD will also transfer information of the Mainland fishing vessels alleged to have conducted illegal fishing activities or the suspected Mainland fishing vessels which are detected during patrols to the Guangdong Provincial General Brigade for further actions. Over the past three years (2019-2021), the number of cases in which vessel information was transferred by the AFCD to relevant Mainland authorities were 12, 49 and 44 respectively. Since August 2020, the Mainland authorities have conducted follow-up actions and made replies with regard to 22 Mainland vessels referred by the AFCD. Such actions include detention of and education for persons on board, and requiring the vessel owners to undertake not to cross the boundary again, and in certain cases a maximum fine of RMB 32,000 had been imposed for the persons involved. To strengthen enforcement on both sides, the AFCD will continue to collaborate with the Marine Police and Mainland authorities so as to enhance information exchange and formulate joint operations together to combat cross-boundary illegal fishing activities.
 
(5) Under the Fisheries Protection Ordinance, any person who uses prohibited fishing gear for fishing is liable to a maximum fine of $200,000 and an imprisonment for six months upon conviction. Besides, under the Marine Parks Ordinance, any person who carries out illegal fishing activities in marine parks and marine reserve is liable to a maximum fine of $25,000 and an imprisonment for one year upon conviction. Since the implementation of the relevant legislations, the maximum penalty imposed have been a fine of $100,000 and an imprisonment for three months, as well as confiscation of fishing gears involved in the cases, including ropes, nets and winches etc. We consider that the penalties imposed by the court are having certain deterrent effect. The AFCD’s enforcement operations on combating illegal fishing have borne fruit upon consolidation of internal resources, gathering of intelligence regarding illegal fishing from fishermen together with the analysis of real-time satellite data. The Government will continue to allocate resources and deploy technologies appropriately to combat illegal fishing activities. read more