Tag Archives: China

     Following is a question by the Dr Hon Chiang Lai-wan and a reply by the Secretary for Labour and Welfare, Dr Law Chi-kwong, in the Legislative Council today (January 16):
 
Question :
 
     The Government set up the Child Development Fund (CDF) in 2008 to provide funding to non-governmental organisations and schools for implementing matching funds for savings programmes and mentorship programmes. It is learnt that the participation in CDF has been poor, with only 17 000 children benefited since its establishment 10 years ago. On the contrary, in countries such as Singapore, the United Kingdom and Canada, universal programmes set up for providing long-term asset accumulation for children have received very positive responses. For instance, the take-up rate of the Co-Savings Scheme set up by the Singapore authorities for newborns was as high as 97% for certain birth cohorts.  In this connection, will the Government inform this Council:
 
(1) whether it has assessed if the scope of coverage of CDF is too narrow and its subsidy period too short, which have resulted in the poor participation in CDF;
 
(2) whether it will consider expanding the target beneficiaries of CDF from grass-roots children to all children as well as extending its subsidy period; if so, of the details; if not, the reasons for that; and
 
(3) whether it will draw reference from the practice of the Singapore authorities and set up a universal savings scheme for newborns, and allocate a sum equivalent to 1% of the Government’s recurrent expenditure for co-contribution with parents of the newborns (or by a third party) to the scheme annually?
 
Reply:
 
President,
 
     Having consulted the relevant bureaux and departments, I provide a reply to the Member’s question as follows:
 
     I wish to point out in the first place that the purpose and policy objectives of the Child Development Fund (CDF) set up by the Government are different from those of the overseas child savings schemes referred to by the Member. They should not be regarded in the same light.
 
     In fact, the CDF only targets at children aged 10 to 16 or students in Primary 4 to Secondary 4 from a disadvantaged background, with an aim of helping them develop savings habits and set their personal goals during the three-year participation period. Each child participating in a CDF project will be matched with an experienced volunteer mentor. With mentors’ guidance, participating children can build up self-confidence and learn to map out their future development paths. A special feature of the CDF is the joint implementation of projects by various parties including the families of participating children, private organisations offering sponsorship or volunteer mentors, non-governmental organisations or schools operating CDF projects and the Government.  We therefore consider it inappropriate to determine the effectiveness of the CDF only by the number of participating children, or compare CDF projects with other overseas schemes of an entirely different nature.
 
     Each CDF project, which lasts for three years, comprises three key components, namely Targeted Savings, Mentorship and Personal Development Plan. These components are designed to broaden participants’ horizons, enhance their abilities and personal qualities, and enrich their social experience.
 
     Each participant will join a targeted savings programme to save $200 per month over a two-year period. The targeted savings, which can be up to a maximum of $14,400, have 1:1:1 tripartite contributions from the participant himself/herself, private sector matching fund and Government’s special financial incentive. Participants may use the savings to realise their personal development plans (PDPs) in the third year of the project.
 
     At the same time, with CDF funding and volunteer mentors’ assistance, project operators/schools organise specially designed three-year projects for participating children and young people, teaching them how to formulate the PDPs and implement them using their own savings, matching fund and Government’s special financial incentive. Project operators/schools provide training and guidance for the participants, their parents/guardians and mentors throughout the three-year project period to facilitate their completion of the project.
 
     Despite that the Targeted Savings under CDF projects are made up of savings, matching fund and a financial incentive provided by the Government, they only form one of the components of the CDF which attaches importance to encouraging children from underprivileged families to accumulate intangible assets, such as positive attitude, resilience, social networks and so on, with a view to laying a foundation for their long-term development.
 
     The Labour and Welfare Bureau has earlier commissioned the University of Hong Kong to conduct the Study on the Longer Term Development of Child Development Fund Project Participants. The study results indicated that the three key components of the CDF projects could effectively enhance underprivileged children and youngsters’ ability in resource management and future planning, expand their personal networks and help them develop a persistent savings habit.  These benefits could enhance their academic and career development, and are fundamental to their future success and their ability to combat poverty. The consultant team conducting the above study did not say that the coverage of the CDF was too narrow, nor did it comment on the funding period.  Since the CDF is not simply a saving scheme, expanding its scope to cover all children in Hong Kong is inconsistent with its purpose and policy objectives.  Currently, the Government has no plans to extend the funding period.
 
     Children are the future of society and the future backbone of the community. The Government has always attached great importance to the growth and development of children, particularly those from a disadvantaged background. In this regard, the relevant government bureaux and departments have been adopting a multi-faceted and target-specific approach in various areas to facilitate the development of children in need and support their families. We hold the view that providing all children with a uniform payment or matching contribution by the Government for saving purposes irrespective of their financial background is not in line with our current strategy of creating more equal development opportunities for children from underprivileged families. read more

     Following is a question by the Hon Lam Cheuk-ting and a written reply by the Secretary for Transport and Housing, Mr Frank Chan Fan, in the Legislative Council today (January 16):

Question:

     At present, members of the Board of the MTR Corporation Limited (MTRCL) include four government officials, namely the Secretary for Financial Services and the Treasury, the Secretary for Transport and Housing, the Permanent Secretary for Development (Works) and the Commissioner for Transport. In this connection, will the Government inform this Council:

(1) of the respective roles and duties of the aforesaid four officials in the Board of MTRCL; and

(2) whether it knows the number of meetings convened by the Board of MTRCL since July 1, 2017; the respective numbers and percentages of such meetings attended by the four officials, as well as the reasons for each occasion (if any) of their absence from the meetings, and whether they appointed representatives to attend such meetings; if so, of the post titles of the appointed representatives; if not, the reasons for that?

Reply:

President,

     My reply to the Hon Lam Cheuk-ting’s question is as follows:

(1) Currently, the MTR Corporation Limited (MTRCL) Board comprises 20 members, among whom four are government directors. They are the Secretary for Financial Services and the Treasury, Mr James Lau, who was appointed as a non-executive director in his personal capacity pursuant to the MTRCL’s Articles of Association, and three additional directors appointed by the Chief Executive pursuant to the Mass Transit Railway Ordinance, namely the Secretary for Transport and Housing, Mr Frank Chan Fan; the Permanent Secretary for Development (Works), Mr Lam Sai-hung; and the Commissioner for Transport, Ms Mable Chan.

     Pursuant to the aforesaid Articles of Association and the Protocol adopted by the MTRCL Board, the Board focuses on handling matters on the Corporation’s overall strategies, corporate governance, and finances and shareholders, while the day-to-day running of the Corporation is delegated to the management, which reports to the Board. In this regard, the roles and responsibilities of the government directors are no different from those of the other directors of the Board. At the same time, government directors in the Board also represent the Government, relaying to the MTRCL the common concerns of the Government as well as the community about the management and operation of the Corporation.

(2) From July 2017 to December 2018, the MTRCL Board convened 21 meetings in total. In case a government director is unable to attend an MTRCL Board meeting owing to other official commitments, the usual practice is to arrange for an alternate director (Note) to attend the meeting on his/her behalf. The attendance rate of the four government directors or their alternate directors at the 21 meetings was around 90 per cent.  Records of attendances of government directors at MTRCL Board meetings in 2017 are set out in the Corporation’s Annual Report 2017. Records of their attendances at Board meetings in 2018 will be set out in the Annual Report 2018 to be released in due course. In response to Member’s question, the Government has tabulated information on the attendances of the four government directors and their alternate directors at Board meetings in the Annex.

Note: The alternate director who may attend on behalf of the Secretary for Financial Services and the Treasury is the Deputy Secretary for Financial Services and the Treasury (Treasury), Mr Andrew Lai;
the alternate directors who may attend on behalf of the Secretary for Transport and Housing are the Permanent Secretary for Transport and Housing (Transport), Mr Joseph Lai; the Under Secretary for Transport and Housing, Dr Raymond So Wai-man; the Deputy Secretary for Transport and Housing (Transport), Ms Rebecca Pun; and the Deputy Secretary for Transport and Housing (Transport), Mr Kevin Choi;
the alternate director who may attend on behalf of the Permanent Secretary for Development (Works) is the Deputy Secretary for Development (Works), Mr Vincent Mak; and
the alternate director who may attend on behalf of the Commissioner for Transport is the Deputy Commissioner (Transport Services and Management), Ms Macella Lee. read more

     Following is a question by the Hon Cheung Kwok-kwan and a written reply by the Secretary for Financial Services and the Treasury, Mr James Lau, in the Legislative Council today (January 16):
 
Question:
 
     The TransUnion Limited (TransUnion) is the major credit reference agency in Hong Kong and it holds the personal data and credit records of 5.4 million members of the public. Earlier on, some reporters collected from the public domain the personal data of certain public figures and obtained, using such data, from TransUnion’s website the credit records of those public figures, thereby revealing that the website had a serious security loophole. This incident, coupled with the fact that several other incidents of massive leakage of clients’ personal data by commercial organisations have occurred recently, has aroused grave public concerns about the issue of information security of commercial organisations. In this connection, will the Government inform this Council:
 
(1) whether it knows the channels through which TransUnion collects the credit data of members of the public, and the scope of such data;
 
(2) given that at present, if members of the public indicate that they do not consent to financial institutions’ provision of their personal data to TransUnion and access to their credit records, financial institutions will not approve their applications for personal loans or credit cards, whether the Government will review and improve this situation with a view to enhancing the protection for the privacy of members of the public;
 
(3) whether it has studied how other jurisdictions regulate financial institutions’ handling their clients’ personal data and credit records;
 
(4) whether it will review the role of credit reference agencies and consider subjecting such agencies to the regulation of the Hong Kong Monetary Authority; if so, of the details; if not, the reasons for that;
 
(5) given that certain personal data of public officers, such as government officials and councillors, can be easily found through searching on the Internet, whether the Government will study how, on the premise that the transparency of governance will not be undermined, the protection for the personal data of such public officers against abusive use can be enhanced; and
 
(6) whether it will examine conferring greater law enforcement powers on the Office of the Privacy Commissioner for Personal Data to enhance the protection for the privacy of members of the public?
 
Reply:
 
President,
 
(1) TransUnion mainly collects credit information from credit providers, public records and individuals. The scope of credit information collected by TransUnion is governed by the Code of Practice on Consumer Credit Data (PCPD Code) issued by the Privacy Commissioner for Personal Data (Privacy Commissioner), which includes among others (please see section 3.1 of the PCPD Code for details):
 
(i) general particulars of an individual (such as name, address, contact information, date of birth, Hong Kong Identity Card Number or travel document number;
 
(ii) credit information of an individual (such as credit application data, account general data, account repayment data); and
 
(iii) public record and related data (such as legal action for recovery of a debt, judgements for monies owed, information on the declaration or discharge of bankruptcy).
 
(2) Proper risk management plays a positive role in the day-to-day operations and long-term development of the credit market. For banks, using consumer credit data from Credit Reference Agency (CRA) is for assessing credit applications and conducting credit reviews is an essential part of the banks’ credit risk management system during the processing of customer applications for loans, credit cards, or other credit facilities. Banks require complete information for accurate assessment of customers’ creditworthiness, and better credit risk management, which reduces bad debts and ensures the stability of the banking system. Borrowing costs for borrowers with good credit ratings could also be reduced.
 
(3) Although regulatory arrangements for CRA vary from jurisdiction to jurisdiction, the main policy objective remains the protection of personal data privacy. In Hong Kong, banks must take reasonable and practicable steps to provide customers with the relevant Personal Information Collection Statement when collecting personal information from customers. This is a common practice elsewhere.
 
(4) The TransUnion incident involved suspected unauthorised access to customer data, which is a personal data protection issue. The Personal Data (Privacy) Ordinance (PDPO) has clear legal provisions on the protection of personal data privacy. Under the PDPO, CRA, when providing credit reference services to banks and other credit providers in Hong Kong, must comply with the PDPO and the PCPD Code issued under the PDPO. The PCPD Code covers requirements relating to the collection, accuracy, use, security, access and correction of data, including the requirement for CRA to take appropriate measures to protect personal credit data in its daily operations to prevent improper access. The Privacy Commissioner is responsible for enforcement and supervision in relation to the PDPO and the PCPD Code.
 
     The Hong Kong Monetary Authority (HKMA) has no plan to subject CRA to financial regulation. The HKMA regulates banks to safeguard depositors and promote the stability and soundness of the banking system. Credit reference services do not affect depositors and the soundness of the banking system. Therefore, TransUnion, like other third-party service providers, does not need to be regulated by the HKMA. The Privacy Commissioner will continue to be responsible for supervisory work for protection of personal data privacy. The HKMA will make reference to the outcome of the investigation being conducted by the Privacy Commissioner, and assist the Privacy Commissioner in liaising with the banking industry to review whether the contractual arrangements between the banking industry and CRA can be improved.
 
(5) and (6) The protection afforded by the PDPO applies to all data subjects. Personal data obtained in the public domain (including the Internet), regardless of the identity of the data subject, are protected by the PDPO. The Government is open to amending and improving the PDPO. Currently, the Constitutional and Mainland Affairs Bureau, together with the Office of the Privacy Commissioner for Personal Data (PCPD), has commenced reviewing the relevant regulations and penalties of the PDPO, and studying proposals including the establishment of a mandatory breach notification mechanism. The PCPD is now conducting compliance investigations on recent data breaches. The Government will keep a close watch on the investigations by the PCPD and reach a view on how the PDPO could be improved, having regard to the investigation results and recommendations by the PCPD, to enable the PCPD to effectively strengthen the regulation in relation to protection of personal data. read more

     Following is a question by the Hon Wu Chi-wai and a written reply by the Secretary for Home Affairs, Mr Lau Kong-wah, in the Legislative Council today (January 16):

Question:
 
     A lifeguard union has pointed out that currently, public swimming pools, public beaches and private swimming pools are often plagued by the problem of not having sufficient number of lifeguards on duty.  In this connection, will the Government inform this Council:
 
(1) of the number of private swimming pools issued with a licence by the Food and Environmental Hygiene Department (FEHD) under the Swimming Pools Regulation (Cap 132 sub leg CA) (the Regulation) as at December 31 last year, with a breakdown by District Council district set out in a table;

(2) as the Regulation stipulates that the licensee of a swimming pool shall, at all times during which the pool is open to swimmers, deploy not less than two lifeguards possessing valid certificates of competency in life saving and first aid to be in attendance at the pool, of (i) the number of inspections of licensed private swimming pools carried out by FEHD officers for this requirement, (ii) the respective numbers of cases of FEHD receiving reports and substantiating that a licensee has breached this requirement, and (iii) the details of the follow-up actions taken by FEHD on the substantiated cases, in each of the past three years; 

(3) as a lifeguard union has pointed out that the pay levels of the lifeguards of the Leisure and Cultural Services Department (LCSD) are lower than the market levels, resulting in recruitment difficulties and insufficient lifeguards at public swimming pools and public beaches, of the respective pay levels of newly recruited civil service lifeguards and contract seasonal lifeguards under LCSD in each of the past three years, and how such pay levels compare with the market levels; and

(4) as LCSD requires that all serving and newly recruited lifeguards must possess the Pool Lifeguard Award and the Beach Lifeguard Award issued by the Hong Kong Life Saving Society, whether it knows the number of persons who took the examinations for lifeguard awards in each of the past three years; if such figures are not available, whether it will compile such statistics; whether it will adopt new measures to attract more people to take such examinations for lifeguard awards?

Reply:
 
President,
 
     As regards the various parts of the question, after consulting the Food and Health Bureau and the Leisure and Cultural Services Department (LCSD), my reply is as follows:
 
(1) In accordance with the Swimming Pools Regulation (Cap 132CA) (the Regulation), any artificially constructed pool used for swimming or bathing and to which the public have access (whether on payment or otherwise) or which is operated by any club, institution, association or other organisation, is required to obtain a swimming pool licence from the Food and Environmental Hygiene Department (FEHD), unless not more than 20 residential units is served and the public have no access to it. As at December 31, 2018, there were 1 277 licensed swimming pools in Hong Kong. A breakdown of the number of licensed swimming pools by District Council districts is set out at Annex 1.

(2) Monthly inspection is conducted by the FEHD staff when the licensed swimming pool is open to swimmers to ensure compliance of the Regulation and licensing conditions by licensees. The inspection frequencies may be increased if necessary. According to the Regulation, the licensee of a swimming pool shall, at all times during which the pool is open to swimmers, deploy not less than two lifeguards possessing valid certificates of competency in life saving and first aid to the pool, unless modification to the requirement is approved by the licensing authority.
 
     During inspection, if FEHD staff found that licensed swimming pool breaches the Regulation, the licensee will be immediately prosecuted. If the licensee fails to comply with the relevant licensing conditions, including the provision of required number of lifeguards at the swimming pool as specified in the licence, warning will be issued to the licensee immediately. If the licensee fails to rectify the irregularities within the specific time or repeatedly violates the licensing conditions, FEHD will consider suspending or cancelling the licence.
 
     Of the complaints concerning licensed swimming pools received by the FEHD in the past three years, there were 19 cases (in 2016), 12 cases (in 2017) and 14 cases (in 2018) against insufficient provision of lifeguards respectively. These complaints were found unjustified after investigation. During the period, there was no issue of warning, prosecution and suspension or cancellation of the swimming pool licence by FEHD in relation to insufficient provision of lifeguards at swimming pools.
 
(3) At present, civil service lifeguards recruited by the LCSD belong to the Artisan grade, with the starting pay point at Master Pay Scale point 5 (currently $16,790). The Government adjusts the civil service pay scales under the established mechanism to adjust the pay for civil servants (including civil service lifeguards). The department has not encountered difficulties in recruiting civil service lifeguards.
 
     As regards to the non-civil service contract (NCSC) seasonal lifeguards, in view of the short-term job nature, the mobility of NCSC seasonal lifeguards is comparatively higher. In order to maintain the attractiveness of the pay of seasonal lifeguards, LCSD adheres to the principle of keeping the pay of seasonal lifeguards broadly comparable with that of their private sector counterparts. To this end, starting from 2004, reference has been made to the local private employment market in terms of pay level of lifeguards and other important relevant factors, including LCSD’s fiscal position and the Composite Consumer Price Index, etc. in determining the annual pay adjustment for seasonal lifeguards.
 
     The salaries of civil service lifeguards and NCSC seasonal lifeguards recruited by the LCSD in the past three years are set out at Annex 2.

(4) The numbers of persons who took part in the examinations in respect of the Pool Lifeguard Award and Beach Lifeguard Award in the past three years, according to the information provided by the Hong Kong Life Saving Society (HKLSS), are set out at Annex 3. The HKLSS is the only body recognised by the International Life Saving Federation for assessing and awarding lifeguard qualifications in Hong Kong. LCSD will work closely with the HKLSS to encourage enhancement of publicity and promotional activities by the affiliated clubs to attract more people to participate in life-saving awards training and examination. read more

     Following is a question by the Hon Kenneth Leung and a written reply by the Secretary for Security, Mr John Lee, in the Legislative Council today (January 16):

Question:

     Under the Cross-boundary Movement of Physical Currency and Bearer Negotiable Instruments Ordinance (Cap. 629) (the Ordinance), which has come into operation since July last year, if a traveller who arrives at a specified control point from a place outside Hong Kong is in possession of a large quantity of currency and bearer negotiable instruments (CBNIs) (i.e. CBNIs of a total value of more than HK$120,000), he or she must make a written declaration to an authorised officer. Moreover, a traveller who is about to leave Hong Kong, or who arrives in Hong Kong (other than at a specified control point) from a place outside Hong Kong, must disclose, upon the requirement of an authorised officer, whether he or she is in possession of a large quantity of CBNIs, and a person disclosing that fact must make the aforesaid written declaration. Such declaration is also required for import or export of a large quantity of CBNIs under other circumstances as specified in the Ordinance. Regarding the implementation of the Ordinance, will the Government inform this Council:

(1) of the number of declarations received by the Customs and Excise Department (C&ED) since the Ordinance came into operation and the total amount of money involved, with a breakdown by declarations made (i) by travellers and (ii) under other circumstances;

(2) of the number of breaches of the declaration or disclosure requirements uncovered by C&ED since the Ordinance came into operation, as well as the respective numbers of (i) written warnings issued and (ii) prosecutions instituted against the persons concerned, and the total amount of money involved;

(3) whether it has allocated additional manpower and other resources to C&ED for the enforcement of the Ordinance at various control points; if so, of the details; of the mechanism for selecting travellers for examination for the enforcement of the Ordinance, and the number of such examinations conducted to date; and

(4) of the channels through which the Government has publicised such declaration or disclosure requirements to inbound travellers and Hong Kong residents, so as to prevent them from inadvertently breaching the law?

Reply:

President,

     The Cross-boundary Movement of Physical Currency and Bearer Negotiable Instruments Ordinance (the Ordinance), commencing operation from July 16, 2018, implements Recommendation 32 of the Financial Action Task Force to detect cross-boundary transportation of large quantities of currency and bearer negotiable instruments (CBNIs), for anti-money laundering and counter-financing of terrorism. The Customs and Excise Department (C&ED) is the major law enforcement agency of the Ordinance.

     Under the Ordinance, a traveller who arrives in Hong Kong via a specified control point (Note) and is in possession of a large quantity of CBNIs (i.e. the total value of which is more than HK$120,000) must use the Red Channel under the Red and Green Channel System and make a written declaration on the CBNIs concerned to an C&ED officer. A traveller who is about to leave Hong Kong, or who arrives in Hong Kong not via a specified control point, must disclose upon the request of an C&ED officer whether he or she is in possession of a large quantity of CBNIs and, if so, make a written declaration. 

     For a large quantity of CBNIs imported or exported in a cargo consignment, an advance declaration must be made to the C&ED through its online Currency and Bearer Negotiable Instruments Declaration System (CDS).

     Persons in breach of the declaration or disclosure requirements under the Ordinance are liable to a maximum penalty of a fine of HK$500,000 and imprisonment for two years. Travellers who breach the relevant requirements for the first time and have not been previously convicted of money laundering or terrorist financing offences, and whose CBNIs are not reasonably suspected to be crime proceeds or terrorist property, may discharge their statutory liability by making a payment of HK$2,000 in accordance with the Ordinance. Other cases are subject to criminal prosecution.

     To assist travellers and relevant trades to comply with the new requirements, during the first three months of the commencement of the Ordinance, the C&ED issued written warnings as appropriate to persons who breached the declaration or disclosure requirements under the Ordinance for the first time.  

     For the questions raised by the Hon Kenneth Leung, the reply is as follows:  

(1) Since the commencement of the Ordinance and up to December 31, 2018, the C&ED received 10 186 declarations made by travellers, which involved CBNIs of a total value of around HK$113.2 billion. For cargoes, the C&ED received 4 863 declarations which involved CBNIs of a total value of around HK$621.2 billion.  

(2) In the first three months of the commencement of the Ordinance (i.e. July 16 to October 15, 2018), the C&ED detected 23 non-compliance cases, and issued 20 and three written warnings to travellers and persons responsible for the cargoes concerned respectively. After those three months and up to December 31, 2018, the C&ED detected 32 non-compliance cases committed by travellers, and all travellers concerned made a payment of HK$2,000 in accordance with the Ordinance. For cargoes, one non-compliance case was detected in which one person was arrested. The case is under investigation. The 56 non-compliance cases mentioned above involved CBNIs of a total value of around HK$41 million.

(3) For enforcing the Ordinance, the C&ED has made suitable redeployment of existing manpower and added 44 permanent posts. The C&ED has also procured four cash detector dogs and necessary equipment (e.g. cash-counting machines) to support law enforcement. Since the implementation of the Ordinance, the C&ED has been conducting inspections of travellers and cargoes at control points under a risk management approach. As the number of inspections involves enforcement operational planning, it is not appropriate to disclose the information concerned. 

(4) The Security Bureau (SB) and C&ED rolled out extensive public education and publicity on the requirements of the Ordinance before and after its commencement, including the production and broadcast of television and radio Announcements in the Public Interest (APIs); making arrangements to broadcast the APIs at control points and on local and cross-boundary conveyances; and displaying and distributing publicity materials on the Ordinance and placing advertisements through other suitable platforms (e.g. travel agencies, money changers and online media). Before the implementation of the Ordinance, the C&ED also conducted briefings for organisations which frequently moved CBNIs into and out of Hong Kong (e.g. banks and security escort companies), at which the operation of CDS was explained and demonstrated to facilitate making declarations for cargoes. The SB and C&ED also publicised the requirements of the Ordinance with the assistance of Hong Kong’s Economic and Trade Offices around the world, and introduced the Ordinance to other jurisdictions and law enforcement agencies through various appropriate channels (e.g. the World Customs Organization).

Note: There are currently 15 specified control points under the Ordinance, namely Lo Wu Control Point, Hung Hom Station, Man Kam To Boundary Control Point, Sha Tau Kok Boundary Control Point, Hong Kong-Macau Ferry Terminal, China Ferry Terminal, Lok Ma Chau Boundary Control Point, Hong Kong International Airport, Tuen Mun Ferry Terminal, Shenzhen Bay Port Hong Kong Port Area, Lok Ma Chau Spur Line Control Point, Kai Tak Cruise Terminal, Ocean Terminal, West Kowloon Station of the Guangzhou-Shenzhen-Hong Kong Express Rail Link (other than the West Kowloon Station Mainland Port Area), and Hong Kong-Zhuhai-Macao Bridge Hong Kong Port. read more