Tag Archives: China

     Following is a question by Dr the Hon Chan Han-pan and a written reply by the Secretary for Development, Ms Bernadette Linn, in the Legislative Council today (March 26):
 
Question:
 
     It has been reported that the current application procedures for lease of government land by way of short-term tenancy are complicated, and that the procedures for landowners to apply for payment of land premium also take a relatively long time, thus impeding economic development and the efficient use of government land resources to a certain extent. In this connection, will the Government inform this Council:
 
(1) whether the Government has compiled statistics on the respective average time taken from acceptance to completion of the procedures for each application for short-term tenancy of land and payment of land premium in the past three years (set out in a table);
 
(2) whether the Government will consider consolidating land resources which have been left vacant for a long time, such as offering several pieces of vacant government land in a certain district for lease as a package to statutory bodies or non-governmental organisations which will then be responsible for management and leasing arrangements, so as to expedite the effective use of land resources; and
 
(3) given that the current arrangement for charging land premium at standard rates has been extended to New Development Area projects under the Enhanced Conventional New Town Approach, whether the Government will consider extending the arrangement for charging land premium at standard rates to the entire territory; whether the Government will consider streamlining the process of granting land leases, such as establishing simplified procedures for granting leases and payment of land premium, so as to shorten the time taken for vetting and approval?
 
Reply:
 
President,
 
     Our reply to the various parts of Dr the Hon Chan’s question is as follows:
 
(1) Currently, short-term tenancies (STTs) are granted by the Lands Department (LandsD) mainly via open tender or direct grant. In relation to direct grant STTs for community, institutional or non-profit making uses, the LandsD will proceed to grant the tenancy if the applications receive policy support and are confirmed to comply with statutory or administrative requirements upon consultation with relevant departments. The processing time required for each case varies as the nature of each application may differ.
 
     In the past three years (2022 to 2024), the average processing time (from receipt of a valid application to completion of processing) for direct grant STTs for community, institutional or non-profit making uses is tabulated below:
 

Direct grant STTs for community, institutional or non-profit making uses
Year	2022	2023	2024
Average processing time	12.2 months	12.7 months	13.9 months

 
     As for lease modification and land exchange applications involving private land, if applicants accept the provisional basic terms offer (PBTO) issued by the LandsD, the LandsD will proceed to premium assessment and issue a premium offer. If applicants are not satisfied with the premium offer made by the LandsD, they may lodge an appeal and provide supplementary information. The time needed for premium negotiation for each case will vary depending on the complexity of the case, and may be affected by the applicants’ business considerations and market outlook.
 
     In the past three years (2022 to 2024), the average time needed for premium negotiation in respect of lease modification and land exchange applications approved and executed each year is tabulated below:
 

Year	2022	2023	2024
Average time needed for premium negotiation for lease modification and land exchange applications	8.5 months	5.8 months	7.8 months

 
(2) The vacant government sites currently available for rental applications by non-government organisations have been publicised online. It is noted that most of these sites may not have commercial values, a number of which may be secluded or even without vehicular access or other basic facilities. That said, if any external organisations are interested in simultaneously renting multiple sites for socially beneficial uses under the “package” arrangement as mentioned by Dr the Hon Chan, the Government is happy to explore further with the relevant organisations.
 
(3) In recent years, the Government continuously introduced a number of measures to streamline statutory and administrative procedures with a view to further expediting approval process and removing barriers for development. In terms of premium negotiation procedures, the LandsD will maintain close communications with applicants and endeavour to minimise the differences between both parties, such as allowing applicants to provide supplementary information during appeal, having face-to-face exchanges with applicants on various assessment parameters before processing the appeal. There is also a fast-track procedure for applicant’s second or third appeal. If the appeal applications meet the requirements for the relevant fast-track procedures, the LandsD will issue premium offer again within 24 working days after receiving the appeal, which will shorten the process of premium negotiation.
 
     Also, to expedite the processing of specific types of lease modification applications, the Government introduced a standard rate approach for charging premium in the past few years, which provides applicants with an alternative option in addition to the conventional assessment mechanism, through promulgating in advance a set of standard rates for providing certainty. For example, apart from the standard rates applicable to the land exchange applications in new development areas (NDAs) under the “Enhanced Conventional New Town Approach” as mentioned, the Government introduced the standard rates for charging land premium for exemption of gross floor area arising from the adoption of Modular Integrated Construction in end-2022; regularised the standard rates applicable to the redevelopment of aged industrial buildings (IBs) across Hong Kong in end-2023 to provide continued incentive for redevelopment of aged IBs and thereby expedite urban renewal; and rolled out the standard rates arrangement for lease modifications involving development of agricultural land in the New Territories (NT) outside NDAs to unlock the development potentials of agricultural land in the NT. The Development Bureau will continue to keep the implementation of standard rates under review, and will further study whether to expand the standard rates approach for charging premium approach in light of implementation experience and relevant policy considerations.
      
     To adopt a facilitating and collaborative mindset as a “facilitator”, the LandsD has implemented measures to further expedite the processing of lease modification and land exchange cases. In terms of the approval process, the LandsD has already streamlined the local consultation process. For cases where local consultation had already been conducted at the stage of planning application, the LandsD will avoid repeated consultation as far as practicable during the lease processing stage. In addition, prior to consulting relevant bureaux/departments regarding the development projects, the LandsD will hold partnership meetings in advance with the applicants on a need basis so as to clarify the key elements of the applications and discuss other potential issues that may need to be tackled with the applicants early, thereby expediting approval process. Also, the LandsD will accept requests for advance processing of lease modification and land exchange applications in association with rezoning applications approved by the Town Planning Board under section 12A of the Town Planning Ordinance with a set of development parameters clearly defined/firmed up. This means that there is no need to wait until the whole statutory rezoning procedure is completed before the processing could commence. read more

     Following is a question by the Hon Lam San-keung and a written reply by the Secretary for Constitutional and Mainland Affairs, Mr Erick Tsang Kwok-wai, in the Legislative Council today (March 26):

Question:

     Article 5 of the Basic Law provides that Hong Kong’s “previous capitalist system and way of life shall remain unchanged for 50 years”. The President of the State has also repeatedly praised that “one country, two systems” is a good policy which “must be adhered to in the long run”. Moreover, there are views that the Extension of Government Leases Ordinance (Cap. 648), which came into force in July last year, ensures that the vast majority of land in Hong Kong will have the leases automatically extended for a term of 50 ‍years upon their expiry in 2047. However, it is learnt that the international community and global investors have all along been worried that there is a “2047 time limit” for Hong Kong’s capitalist system. In this connection, will the Government inform this Council of the efforts made to allay the concerns of the international community about the 2047 time limit, and how to strengthen the relevant publicity work in the future?

Reply:

President,

     The reply to the Hon Lam San-keung’s question is as follows:

     At the meeting celebrating the 25th anniversary of Hong Kong’s return to the motherland in 2022, President Xi Jinping said that, “‘One country, two systems’ has been tested repeatedly in practice. It serves the fundamental interests of not only Hong Kong, but also those of our country and the nation, so there is no reason for us to change such a good policy, and we must adhere to it in the long run.” President Xi reiterated in his report to the 20th National Congress that “the policy of ‘one country, two systems’ is a great innovation of socialism with Chinese characteristics. It has proven to be the best institutional arrangement for ensuring sustained prosperity and stability in Hong Kong after its return to the motherland. The policy must be adhered to over the long term.” These fully demonstrate to the world the Central Authorities’ firm commitment to the principle of “one country, two systems”, which will not be altered, nor shaken. Further, it is essential to ensure that “one country, two systems” is fully and faithfully implemented in Hong Kong without being bent or distorted, and will always advance in the right direction. To make it clear to the world that it is our country’s enduring policy to implement “one country, two systems” resolutely, fully and faithfully, and to showcase the historic and significant achievements made under “one country, two systems” since its implementation, the HKSAR Government will continue to spare no effort in external promotion and telling the good stories of “one country, two systems” and Hong Kong. This includes widely promoting the successful implementation of “one country, two systems” and Hong Kong’s various strengths and opportunities through overseas visits by senior officials in meeting with dignitaries, the business sector, the media and Chinese groups, and through different activities organised by the overseas Economic and Trade Offices, such as meetings with local governments and organisations, media interviews and seminars. We will also actively encourage different organisations to host major international events in Hong Kong, bringing people from all over the world and all walks of life to witness the rapid development of Hong Kong and our remarkable achievements in the implementation of “one country, two systems”. read more

     Mobile Libraries 3, 9 and 11 will suspend services during designated periods in April for maintenance, a spokesman for the Leisure and Cultural Services Department announced today (March 26).      Mobile Library 11… read more

      Following is a question by Dr the Hon Ngan Man-yu and a written reply by the Secretary for Security, Mr Tang Ping-keung, in the Legislative Council today (March 26):
 
Question:
 
     Under the laws of Hong Kong, a foreign domestic helper (FDH) whose contract is terminated prematurely is permitted to remain in Hong Kong for 14 days after the termination of the contract or the remainder of the permitted stay, whichever is earlier. However, my office has recently received a number of requests for assistance involving FDHs who, after being dismissed, were suspected of making false accusations against their employers of maltreating them or child abuse, etc., in order to apply to the Immigration Department (ImmD) for extension of stay in Hong Kong as visitors and take up illegal employment. In this connection, will the Government inform this Council:
 
(1) at present under what circumstances may FDHs’ applications for extension of the limit of their stay in Hong Kong as visitors be accepted by the ImmD after they have been dismissed by their employers; of the relevant procedures, requirements, and restrictions and validity period of their visas (e.g. whether they are allowed to work with their visas and whether they can re-enter Hong Kong after leaving);
 
(2) of the number of applications received by the ImmD for extension of the limit of stay in Hong Kong as visitors in the past three years, together with a breakdown by the type of applicants, reasons for extension of stay, and the outcome of the applications (including the number of approved and rejected cases); and among them the number of such cases involving FDHs;
 
(3) of the number of law enforcement operations conducted by the departments concerned in the past three years to combat illegal workers, and the respective results of such law enforcement operations; the number of illegal workers found during the law enforcement operations who were FDHs and those who had extended their stay in Hong Kong as visitors, and the respective results of such law enforcement operations; and
 
(4) whether the Government has considered stepping up cooperation with other departments to further combat the situation of FDHs overstaying in Hong Kong and engaging in illegal employment, and reviewed the existing mechanism for FDHs to extend the limit of their stay in Hong Kong as visitors and considered revising the related policies, so as to prevent FDHs from engaging in illegal activities by abusing the mechanism; if so, of the details; if not, the reasons for that?
 
Reply:
 
President,
 
     Having consulted the Labour Department (LD) and the Immigration Department (ImmD), my reply is as follows:
      
(1) In accordance with the prevailing foreign domestic helper (FDH) policy of the Government, an FDH shall leave Hong Kong upon completion of employment contract or within two weeks from the date of contract termination, whichever is the earlier. The main purpose of this “two-week rule” is to allow sufficient time for FDHs to prepare for their departure, during which they are not allowed to take up any employment, whether paid or unpaid.
 
     FDHs will only be allowed to extend their stay in Hong Kong as visitors in exceptional circumstances. Such exceptional circumstances include where an FDH has to attend a tribunal hearing because of labour or monetary disputes, and where an FDH has to stay in Hong Kong to assist in criminal investigations, etc. In this connection, the FDH is required to submit an application for extension of stay to the ImmD. He/She must provide supporting documents (e.g. documents issued by the LD or the Labour Tribunal to prove that his/her labour dispute case has been accepted or is being processed) before the application will be considered. The duration of extension of stay granted will be determined based on the relevant purpose of stay and individual circumstances. The ImmD will continue to exercise stringent gate-keeping and thoroughly examine every application from FDHs for extension of stay in Hong Kong as visitors.
      
     After leaving Hong Kong, these FDHs may re-enter Hong Kong as visitors, no different from other visitors.
      
     Under the Immigration Ordinance (Cap. 115), any person (including FDH) who takes up any employment, whether paid or unpaid, in contravention of the condition of stay during his/her stay in Hong Kong as a visitor shall be guilty of an offence. Upon conviction, he/she is liable to a maximum fine of $50,000 and up to two years’ imprisonment.
 
(2) The statistics on the number of applications received by the ImmD for extension of stay in Hong Kong as visitors in the past three years are tabulated below:
 

Year	2022	2023	2024
Number of applications (applications involving FDHs)	684 096 (7 673)	334 861 (5 506)	303 385 (7 625)
Number of approved applications (applications involving FDHs)	635 104 (4 710)	314 240 (3 898)	278 537 (6 153)
Number of rejected applications (applications involving FDHs)	9 216 (2 690)	4 339 (1 445)	2 808 (1 235)

Note 1: Applications processed in a year may not totally be those received in the same year.
 
Note 2: The figures only reflect the number of applications but not the actual number of applicants. An applicant may apply for extension of stay more than once.
 
     The ImmD does not maintain other statistical breakdowns mentioned in the question.
 
(3) and (4) As mentioned above, under the prevailing policy, FDHs will be allowed to extend their stay in Hong Kong as visitors only under exceptional circumstances, and during the extended stay, they are not allowed to take up any employment. We will keep reviewing the relevant policy to ensure its continued effectiveness.
 
     The Government has been adopting a multi-pronged strategy, including increase in penalty, strict law enforcement, and conducting publicity and education, so as to combat illegal employment (including FDHs taking up illegal employment during their stay in Hong Kong as visitors). Details are as follows:
 
(i) Increase in penalty
 
     It is a serious offence to engage in illegal employment. Illegal workers, employers as well as aiders and abettors of illegal employment will be liable to prosecution in accordance with the Immigration Ordinance. The Government amended the Immigration Ordinance in 2021 by increasing the penalty on employers of illegal workers so as to reflect the gravity of the offence. Under the amended Immigration Ordinance, the maximum penalty for an employer employing a person who is not lawfully employable, i.e. an illegal immigrant, a person who is the subject of a removal order or a deportation order, an overstayer, or a person who was refused permission to land, has been significantly increased from a fine of $350,000 and three years’ imprisonment to a fine of $500,000 and ten years’ imprisonment. The High Court has laid down sentencing guidelines that the employer of an illegal worker should be given an immediate custodial sentence.
 
(ii) Strict law enforcement
 
     Various law enforcement agencies (LEAs) (including the ImmD, the Hong Kong Police Force (HKPF) and the LD) have been proactively collecting intelligence and conducting joint operations to raid premises suspected of having illegal employment activities in order to combat the employment of illegal workers.
      
     To specifically tackle FDHs in breach of condition of stay and the relevant employers’ violations, the ImmD will timely conduct various special operations to raid the black spots of illegal employment according to intelligence. Apart from prosecuting FDHs in breach of condition of stay, the ImmD will also take law enforcement actions against intermediaries or agents that aid and abet these FDHs.
      
     According to the ImmD’s record, the number of law enforcement operations against illegal workers (including joint operations with other departments including the HKPF, etc.) in the past three years is tabulated below:
 

Year	Number of operations
2022	15 759
2023	17 248
2024	17 906
2025 (as at February)	2 863

     Besides, when conducting regular workplace inspections to enforce labour laws, the LD will check employees’ proof of identity and records of employees kept by employers under the power conferred by Part IVB of the Immigration Ordinance to deter employers from employing illegal workers. Cases of suspected illegal employment detected will be referred to relevant LEAs for follow-up. The number of referrals by the LD in the past three years is as follows:
 

Year	Number of suspected illegal employment cases referred to relevant LEAs
2022	99
2023	123
2024	137
2025 (as at end of February)	25

     The numbers of FDHs arrested, prosecuted and convicted for illegal employment in the past three years are tabulated below:
 

Year	FDHs^
	Arrested	Prosecuted	Convicted
2022	318	242	224
2023	415	343	318
2024	326	267	216
2025 (as at February)	47	35	23

^ Refers to FDHs or overstaying former FDHs at the time of arrest
 
Note: Persons prosecuted/convicted may not be arrested/prosecuted in the same year.
 
(iii) Publicity and education
 
     In addition to sparing no effort to take law enforcement actions, the Government has all along been co-operating, and will continue to actively co-operate, with the relevant Consulates-General in Hong Kong to step up publicity and education for newly arrived FDHs about the fact that illegal employment in Hong Kong is a serious offence liable to imprisonment. The LD also promulgated the revised Code of Practice for Employment Agencies in May 2024, requiring employment agencies to thoroughly brief FDH job seekers on FDH-related immigration regulations.
      
     The ImmD does not maintain other statistical breakdowns mentioned in the question. read more

Attention TV/radio announcers: Please broadcast the following as soon as possible:      Here is an item of interest to swimmers.      The Leisure and Cultural Services Department announced toda… read more