Tag Archives: China

     Following is a question by the Hon Holden Chow and a written reply by the Secretary for Transport and Housing, Mr Frank Chan Fan, in the Legislative Council today (December 18):

Question:
     
     The Chief Executive stated in this year’s Policy Address that the Government would expedite the implementation of the projects proposed in the Railway Development Strategy 2014, including the Tung Chung Line Extension, Tuen Mun South Extension and Northern Link, and would invite the MTR Corporation Limited (MTRCL) to commence the relevant detailed planning and design in the coming year. In this connection, will the Government inform this Council:

(1) whether it knows the time needed for MTRCL to carry out the detailed planning and design for the aforesaid projects, and when the authorities will give the public an account of the details of each of the new railway stations (including their locations as well as the arrangements for their entrances and exits);

(2) of the estimated time needed for completing the relevant public consultation processes; and

(3) given the continuous population growth in Tung Chung and the fact that it takes time to construct the Tung Chung Line Extension, whether the authorities will consider, prior to the commissioning of the Extension, enhancing the Green Minibus services in Tung Chung and introducing ferry services plying between Tung Chung and the Hong Kong and Kowloon regions, so as to meet Tung Chung residents’ outbound transport needs?

Reply:

President,

     My reply to Hon Holden Chow Ho-ding’s question is as follows:

(1) and (2) The Transport and Housing Bureau had invited the MTR Corporation Limited (MTRCL) to submit proposals for the implementation of the seven new railway projects under the Railway Development Strategy 2014. The MTRCL submitted proposals for the five railway projects of Tuen Mun South Extension, Northern Link (and Kwu Tung Station), East Kowloon Line, Tung Chung Line Extension and North Island Line to the Government successively. 

     Having examined the proposals submitted by the MTRCL and considered the urgency of and the land development potential that may be brought about by these projects, the Chief Executive indicated in the 2019 Policy Address that the Government would invite the MTRCL to commence the detailed planning and design for the Tung Chung Line Extension, Tuen Mun South Extension and Northern Link in the coming year, so that work on these three railway projects can commence as early as possible.    

     The detailed planning and design stage would involve a number of activities, including consultation with the public and stakeholders and resolution of the comments received, carrying out feasibility study, site investigation, project design, gazettal of railway schemes and handling of objections, carrying out environmental impact assessment, seeking authorisation of the railway schemes, as well as preparation of relevant agreements with the MTRCL. In particular, the Government and MTRCL would need to handle technical issues associated with the new railway projects, such as the impact on nearby residents, the environment and ecology arising from the railway alignment and its mitigation measures, the interface with existing railway network, utilisation of resources, etc. When the details of a proposed scheme such as railway alignment as well as location of station(s) and entrance(s) are available, the Government will consult the public in line with established procedures. In respect of projects for which the MTRCL had submitted the proposals, the time required for the detailed planning and design stage is preliminarily estimated as three to five years, including the time allowed for public consultation, subject to the degree of complexities of the projects and the progress of implementing the above activities.      

(3) At present, Tung Chung is served by a convenient, efficient and diversified public transport network. Apart from using the railway for travelling to and from various districts of Hong Kong Island, Kowloon and the New Territories, Tung Chung residents may also take franchised buses, ferries, green minibuses and taxis where appropriate to different destinations. In response to the population growth in Tung Chung, the Transport Department (TD) will continue to closely monitor the operation and service quality of the public transport services in Tung Chung, as well as the change in passengers’ demand for the public transport services. The department will introduce new services or request relevant existing operators to enhance or optimise their services (e.g. increasing the frequency) in a timely manner in order to further improve the public transport network of Tung Chung and the overall efficiency to meet passengers’ demand. Among others, the TD regularly reviews the utilisation of franchised bus service in different districts and works with the franchised bus companies for improving franchised bus service in districts by examining proposals submitted by the companies under the annual Route Planning Programme. These include proposals on introduction of new routes as well as adjustment of the existing service frequency, service hours and routes, in order to ensure the provision of adequate and proper franchised bus services to meet passengers’ demand. read more

     Following is a question by the Dr Hon Kwok Ka-ki and a written reply by the Secretary for Security, Mr John Lee, in the Legislative Council today (December 18):

Question:
 
     It has been reported that on August 8 this year, a Hong Kong resident then employed by the British Consulate-General in Hong Kong took a business trip to the Mainland, and was detained by Mainland law enforcement authorities on the same day.  He alleged that during his detention, he was subjected to inhuman treatment.  He was released after 15 days of administrative detention, and he is now seeking asylum in a third place.  In this connection, will the Government inform this Council:
 
(1) as the aforesaid person has said that Mainland law enforcement officers had claimed that they would report his case to his family members by sending a letter to the Interpol for onward transmission to the Hong Kong Police Force (HKPF) and then to his family members, whether HKPF have received such a letter; if so, of the reasons why HKPF have not passed on the letter to that person’s family members; if not, whether HKPF will gain an understanding from the Mainland law enforcement authorities if the letter had been sent;
 
(2) since the aforesaid person claimed that he was told that he would be taken back to the Mainland if he received media interviews and spoke publicly about anything other than the alleged offence that he had committed, of the measures in place to protect the personal liberty of that person upon his return to Hong Kong, and whether, after he was released by the Mainland law enforcement authorities, the Government has contacted him to offer any assistance that he may need;
 
(3) whether the Government will gain an understanding from the Mainland law enforcement authorities in respect of the allegations made by the aforesaid person, and express unequivocal condemnations to the relevant authorities if the allegations were found to be substantiated;
 
(4) whether it knows the number of Hong Kong residents who were subject to administrative detention on the Mainland in each of the past three years;
 
(5) whether it knows the procedure to be followed by the Mainland law enforcement authorities for notifying the family members of a Hong Kong resident who is subject to administrative detention, as well as the number of times for which such procedure was followed by the relevant authorities in taking law enforcement actions, in each of the past three years;
 
(6) of the reasons why administrative detention is not covered by the scope of the current notification mechanism set up between HKPF and the Mainland law enforcement authorities; whether both parties will discuss the expansion of the scope of the notification mechanism to cover administrative detention; and
 
(7) whether it knows the number of Hong Kong residents currently employed by the various consulates-general in Hong Kong; of the measures to ensure that such persons have access to the assistance they need when they are subject to administrative detention on the Mainland?
 
Reply:

President,
 
     The Hong Kong Special Administrative Region (HKSAR) Government always attaches importance to cases in which Hong Kong residents are detained or imprisoned outside the territory. It also takes heed of their legal rights and strives to provide them with assistance. At the same time, any person must abide by local laws when they are outside Hong Kong. The HKSAR Government will not and also considers it inappropriate to interfere in the enforcement actions under the jurisdiction of any authorities outside Hong Kong.
 
     When Hong Kong residents are detained or involved in criminal litigations or proceedings in the Mainland, the Immigration Department (ImmD) and/or Offices of the HKSAR Government in the Mainland will, depending on the circumstances of individual cases and the wishes of the assistance seekers (usually the family members of the Hong Kong residents concerned), inquire of the assistance seekers about details of the cases and explain to them the relevant legislation, regulations and criminal procedures in the Mainland; remind the assistance seekers to consider engaging lawyers in the Mainland to act as their legal representatives and give legal advice on their cases; and if necessary, provide information on the lawyers’ associations in the Mainland. At the request of the assistance seekers, Offices of the HKSAR Government in the Mainland will also assist them in conveying their requests to the relevant Mainland authorities through the established mechanism as appropriate.
 
     In respect of the alleged case cited in the question which was also reported by the media, the Mainland authorities have stated that the subject was in administrative detention for 15 days for soliciting prostitution in breach of the Law on Penalties for Administration of Public Security, and that during the period the Mainland authorities had in accordance with the law protected the various legal rights of the subject. Therefore, our reply to Dr Hon Kwok does not imply our acknowledgement of the allegations and details mentioned in the question.
 
     Regarding the question raised by the Member, my reply after consultation with relevant departments is as follows:
 
(1) to (3) In respect of the case mentioned in the question, upon receipt of request for assistance from the subject’s family on August 9 this year, ImmD immediately inquired about and followed up the matter via the HKSAR Government’s Economic and Trade Office in Guangdong, and provided appropriate assistance and advice according to his family’s wishes. Meanwhile, the Police also received report from the subject’s family and classified the case as missing person. In late August, the subject returned to Hong Kong upon release, and he has not raised further requests to the HKSAR Government for assistance. Other issues mentioned in the question are details of the case and we will not comment on them.
 
     Law enforcement agencies outside Hong Kong, including those of the Mainland and overseas, do not have the authority to enforce laws in Hong Kong. If law enforcement officers of non-Hong Kong jurisdictions take law enforcement actions in Hong Kong, this will contravene Hong Kong laws. If there is any illegal act, the Police will handle in accordance with the law. Any person who is worried about his or her personal safety may contact the Police direct.
 
(4) to (7) Under the current reciprocal notification mechanism, the Mainland and the HKSAR should notify each other of the following two kinds of cases regarding residents of the other side: i) the imposition of criminal compulsory measures or institution of criminal prosecutions; and ii) unnatural deaths. 
                         
     The Mainland authorities notify the HKSAR Government of criminal compulsory measures imposed on Hong Kong residents suspected of having committed crimes, including detention, arrest, putting on bail and residence under surveillance. From January to November this year, the Mainland authorities made 855 notifications concerning the imposition of compulsory measures on Hong Kong residents, involving 659 Hong Kong residents who were suspected of having committed crimes such as drug abuse, fraud and smuggling. After receiving notification from the Mainland, the HKSAR Government will inform the family members of the Hong Kong resident concerned as early as possible of the imposition of criminal compulsory measures on him or her in the Mainland, so that the person’s family members may consider and decide whether to engage a local lawyer or to render other assistance to the person. They may also seek assistance from the HKSAR Government where necessary.
 
     Cases of administrative detention commonly involve unlawful acts committed by the subjects concerned in the Mainland in breach of the Law on Penalties for Administration of Public Security. Such cases do not fall within the reciprocal notification mechanism. Despite this, the Mainland law enforcement agencies will notify the family members of the subject in accordance with the laws and regulations of the Mainland, although the subject may not want the case to be disclosed to his or her family members. In any event, upon receipt of requests for assistance from Hong Kong residents, ImmD and/or Offices of the HKSAR Government in the Mainland will provide appropriate assistance having regard to the circumstances of the cases and the wishes of the assistance seekers. 
 
     The Administration does not maintain the figures requested in the question.  read more

     The Centre for Food Safety (CFS) of the Food and Environmental Hygiene Department today (December 18) announced that a celery sample was detected with cadmium, a metallic contaminant, exceeding the legal limit. The CFS is follo… read more

     Following is a question by the Hon Jimmy Ng and a written reply by the Secretary for Transport and Housing, Mr Frank Chan Fan, in the Legislative Council today (December 18):

Question:
 
     The Chief Executive indicated in this year’s Policy Address that she would invite the Hong Kong Housing Authority to explore the redevelopment of its six factory estates for public housing use. Such factory estates are located in Kwai Chung/Tsing Yi, Tuen Mun, Sha Tin, Kwun Tong and Sham Shui Po respectively, providing a total of over 8 200 factory units. In this connection, will the Government inform this Council:
 
(1) of the expected completion dates for collecting research data, setting out the initial thinking and formulating the implementation timetables for the redevelopment projects; whether it has studied how a conversion option compares with a demolition and redevelopment option in the following two aspects: (i) the various items of expenditure required (e.g. expenditure on enhancing fire service facilities), and (ii) the number of public housing units that may be provided (and the ratio of units, among such units, available for rent to those for sale);
 
(2) whether it will, in formulating the estimated expenditures and relocation arrangements for tenants for the redevelopment projects, draw reference from the experience in earlier years of converting factory estates into Un Chau Estate Phase 5 in Cheung Sha Wan or Wah Ha Estate in Chai Wan; if so, of the details; if not, the reasons for that;
 
(3) whether it will consider, on the premise of fully utilizing the plot ratios of the sites on which such factory estates are located, demolishing such factory estates and redeveloping them into public rental housing (PRH) estates, so as to shorten the waiting time for PRH as far as possible; if so, of the details; if not, the reasons for that; and
 
(4) as it has been reported that the current occupancy rates of such factory estates are 99 per cent, how the Government will, in tandem with increasing public housing supply, properly address the demand of existing factory estate tenants for such kind of units; whether it will consider retaining one factory estate for lease applications by existing tenants who wish to continue their operation; if so, of the details; if not, the reasons for that, as well as the details of the compensation package for the tenants (including the amounts of relocation allowance and compensation) and the estimated expenditures involved?

Reply:

President,
 
     Our consolidated reply to Hon Jimmy Ng’s question is as follows:
 
     In response to the Chief Executive’s initiative in the 2019 Policy Address, the Hong Kong Housing Authority (HA) is exploring the feasibility of redeveloping individual factory estates for public housing use, particularly to increase the supply of public rental housing (PRH) units, taking into account individual site conditions and arrangements, as appropriate.
 
     As all six factory estates are situated in industrial or industrial-office areas, technical assessments are required to ascertain the feasibility of residential use, including public housing development, at these sites. Rezoning will also be required to change the use of the sites for residential purpose in accordance with the Town Planning Ordinance. The HA has already commenced relevant assessments. Since the assessments are still at preliminary stage, we are unable to provide details on expenses, flat production, etc. Upon completion of the study, the HA will release the findings and recommendations at appropriate time. The HA will take account of the findings and recommendations of the study and views of other stakeholders before deciding whether individual factory estates would be demolished for public housing use. For the individual factory estates that will not be redeveloped, we will study the improvement works required to fulfil the statutory requirements and the related estimated costs after the enactment of the Fire Safety (Industrial Buildings) Ordinance.
 
     In view of the tight supply in housing land, the Government has been actively identifying suitable sites for public housing development in different parts of the territory. We will consider all suitable sites, regardless of their size, for public housing development so as to make the best use of the scarce land resource and optimise the site potential. In the process, the principles of cost-effectiveness and sustainability will be adopted. Based on the above consideration of efficient and optimal use of land, HA’s study will focus on the feasibility of the redevelopment option.
 
     Regarding the ratio between PRH and subsidised sale flats (SSFs) upon redevelopment, in accordance with the prevailing practice, the HA will maintain the flexibility among different types of public housing to cater for the demands of PRH, Green Form Subsidised Home Ownership Scheme and other SSFs, and adjust their supply in a timely manner to better respond to the market changes and the housing needs of the community at large. Based on the concept of “inter-changeability”, in planning public housing projects, the HA will consider a number of factors including local housing needs and the community aspiration as a whole.
 
     In HA’s previous exercises for the clearance of factory estates, an advance notice of 18 months would be given to affected tenants for vacating the premises. Rent increase would be frozen until clearance, and an ex-gratia allowance would be paid to affected tenants to assist them in relocating or terminating their business. If the HA decides to clear its existing factory estates, it will make reference to previous practices and make appropriate arrangements according to the circumstances.
 
     The HA currently has six factory estates providing a total internal floor area of approximately 200 000 square meters. According to the information of the Rating and Valuation Department, the total stock of private factory premises in the territory was around 16.41 million square meters as at end-2018, including vacant units of around one million square meters. read more

     Following is a question by the Hon Tony Tse and a written reply by the Chief Secretary for Administration, Mr Matthew Cheung Kin-chung, in the Legislative Council today (December 18):

Question:

     Under the Basic Law, the Hong Kong Court of Final Appeal Ordinance (Cap. 484) and the Judicial Officers Recommendation Commission Ordinance (Cap. 92), the Chief Executive may, on the recommendation of the Judicial Officers Recommendation Commission (JORC) and upon the endorsement of the Legislative Council, appoint judges from the common law jurisdictions outside Hong Kong as non-permanent judges from other common law jurisdictions (other CLJ judges) of the Court of Final Appeal (CFA).  The candidates for such judges are generally put forward by the Judiciary for JORC’s consideration.  Since the reunification of Hong Kong, only judges/retired judges from the United Kingdom (UK), Australia, New Zealand and Canada have been appointed as other CLJ judges, and 10 out of the 15 current other CLJ judges come from UK.  In this connection, will the Government inform this Council:

(1) whether it knows, since the reunification of Hong Kong, the jurisdiction from which each of the appointed other CLJ judges came and the number of CFA cases heard by each of them;

(2) whether it knows the criteria and procedures based on which the Judiciary identifies the candidates for other CLJ judges;

(3) whether it knows, since the reunification of Hong Kong, if the Judiciary has put forward candidates from jurisdictions other than UK, Australia, New Zealand and Canada for other CLJ judges; if the Judiciary has not, of the reasons for that;

(4) whether it knows if JORC may consider candidates for other CLJ judges, apart from those put forward by the Judiciary, put forward by other persons or those who nominate themselves; if JORC may, whether JORC has considered any candidate of this type since the reunification of Hong Kong; if JORC may not, of the reasons for that; and 

(5) whether the Government and the Judiciary conducted any review in the past 10 years of the procedure for identifying and recommending candidates for other CLJ judges; if so, of the review outcome; if not, whether they will conduct such a review shortly?

Reply:

President,

     Based on the information provided by the Judiciary, the Government should like to reply to the Question as follows:  

(1) The non-permanent Judges from other common law jurisdictions of the Court of Final Appeal (CLNPJs) have come from the United Kingdom, Australia, New Zealand and Canada.  Details are at Annex. 

     The Court of Final Appeal (CFA) has invited a CLNPJ to sit on the Court to hear and determine almost all of the substantive appeals, save for a few exceptions, since July 1, 1997.  The Judiciary does not have readily available statistics on the number of CFA cases heard by each CLNPJ. 

(2) In accordance with Article 92 of the Basic Law (BL 92), judges of the HKSAR shall be chosen on the basis of their judicial and professional qualities.  The Judicial Officers Recommendation Commission (JORC) makes recommendations to the Chief Executive (CE) on all judicial appointments in strict accordance with BL 92.

     All CLNPJs are judges or retired judges of the most eminent standing with profound judicial experience who enjoy the highest professional status and reputation, with good track records of judicial services in their respective jurisdictions, all of which are common law jurisdictions with whose legal systems Hong Kong has the closest connection.  Many of them were/are retired Chief Justices of their respective jurisdictions.

(3) and (4) The discussions of JORC should be kept strictly confidential and should not be disclosed.  According to section 11 of the Judicial Officers Recommendation Commission Ordinance (Cap. 92), if any JORC member or other person, without the CE’s permission, publishes or discloses to any unauthorised person the contents of any document, communication or information which has come to his knowledge in the course of his duties under or in connection with the Ordinance, he shall be guilty of an offence. 

(5) According to Article 88 of the Basic Law, judges of the courts of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region (including CLNPJs) shall be appointed by the CE on the recommendation of an independent commission composed of local judges, persons from the legal profession and eminent persons from other sectors.  The JORC is the independent commission.  The mechanism has been working satisfactorily.  The Chief Justice has advised the Government that there is no need to review the existing mechanism at the moment.  The Government agrees with the position of the Chief Justice. read more