Month: April 2025

LCQ20: Planning for vacant kindergarten premises 
Question:
 
     It has been reported that nearly 80 kindergartens in Hong Kong have ceased operation in the past four years, and some of the premises of these kindergartens are located in public housing estates or government properties. In this connection, will the Government inform this Council:
 
(1) of the statistics on kindergartens ceasing operation in the past five years, including geographical distribution, floor areas of the involved premises, and whether the premises concerned are government properties (including those of the Hong Kong Housing Authority); if the premises concerned are government properties, of their current or planned uses;
 
(2) given the persistent low birth rate and population ageing in Hong Kong, whether the Government will consider converting some of the vacant kindergarten premises in its possession to elderly homes or other elderly facilities; if not, of the reasons for that; and
 
(3) given that the Government had announced in the 2019-20 Budget that it would allocate $20 billion to purchase properties for accommodating welfare facilities, but as of March 31, 2023, the Social Welfare Department had only used about $150 million of that funding for such purposes, and there are views that the measure is obviously ineffective, whether the Government will first make good use of the aforesaid vacant kindergarten premises for welfare purposes and consider reallocating all or part of the aforesaid funding for other purposes?
 
Reply:
 
President,
 
     Kindergartens (KGs) in Hong Kong are all along privately run with diverse modes of operation. Individual school sponsoring bodies (SSBs) or operators may, having regard to their different development targets and circumstances, consider setting up KGs at a variety of premises, such as self-owned premises, privately-leased premises or premises in public housing estates. Every year, there may be new registrations of KGs in different districts, or some KGs may decide to cease operation owing to a variety of factors (such as profitability and tenancy matters).
 
     Having consulted the Housing Bureau and the Labour and Welfare Bureau, the consolidated reply to the three parts of the question is as follows:
 
(1) The number of KGs which ceased operation in the past five school years is tabulated at Annex 1. The number of vacant KG premises located in non-domestic premises under the Hong Kong Housing Authority (HA) upon termination of the tenancy and surrender of the premises is tabulated at Annex 2.
 
     If the tenant of a KG premises located in a public housing estate ceases to operate the KG during the tenancy period or decides not to renew the tenancy upon expiry, the HA will notify and invite the Education Bureau (EDB) to consider whether there is a need to nominate new non-profit-making KG SSBs or operators to rent the relevant units. Factors to be considered include the supply of and demand for KG places in the areas concerned, whether the floor area, location and building condition of the vacant KG premises are suitable for reallocation for KG development. Upon confirmation that the vacant KG premises are not required for EDB Kindergarten Premises Allocation Exercise through which SSBs or operators are nominated to rent the vacant units at a concessionary rate (approximately half of the market rent), the HA will offer such vacant units for lease at market rent through open tender for other organisations to operate KGs. If the units cannot be leased out through open tender for KG operation, the HA will consider converting the units for other uses (including welfare purposes) so as to make good use of resources. Any proposed change of use of the units will be subject to the outcome of feasibility studies, including whether it is in compliance with the Buildings Ordinance (Cap. 123) and relevant regulations, land use restrictions, planning restrictions, environmental factors and views of residents or stakeholders.
 
(2) To address the increasing demand for elderly services arising from an ageing population, the Social Welfare Department (SWD) increases the supply of subsidised residential care places through a multi-pronged approach, such as liaising with relevant departments to identify suitable sites for the construction of new contract residential care homes for the elderly (RCHEs), or converting vacant government premises/school sites into RCHEs. Nonetheless, KG premises are not suitable for the provision of RCHEs as their settings and facilities are generally speaking not designed for providing residential care services for frail elderly persons.
 
(3) The Government has all along been adopting a multi-pronged approach to identify suitable sites or premises for the provision of welfare services to meet their acute demand.
 
     The SWD has been maintaining close contact with relevant departments to identify suitable sites in the development or redevelopment of public housing estates and urban renewal projects for providing welfare facilities. The Government also endeavours to increase the provision of welfare facilities as appropriate through the Land Sale Programmes and the Special Scheme on Privately Owned Sites for Welfare Uses. In addition, the Government will make the best use of available government accommodation including vacant school premises and explore whether they are suitable for conversion into welfare facilities.
 
     In parallel, the SWD identifies suitable premises for purchase in the private market for welfare purpose. As at end-November 2024, the SWD has spent about $240 million for the purchase of five premises for operating a Parents/Relatives Resource Centre, a Support Centre for Persons with Autism and a neighbourhood elderly centre, and for providing on-site pre-school rehabilitation services. The progress of purchasing premises depends on the availability of suitable properties in the market and various external factors, including whether the properties for sale have fire safety and barrier-free access facilities, whether the size and location meet operational requirements, whether the surrounding land uses are compatible with welfare uses, and whether the selling prices fall within the acceptable price range determined by the Government Property Agency (GPA) with reference to market value. The SWD and the GPA will continue to identify and purchase premises for the provision of welfare facilities in accordance with the ambit of the funds approved by the Finance Committee of the Legislative Council.
Issued at HKT 14:25

NNNN

LCQ11: Student financial assistance schemes for tertiary students 
Question:
 
Regarding the various student financial assistance schemes (SFASs) administered by the Student Finance Office (SFO) of the Working Family and Student Financial Assistance Agency, including (i) the Tertiary Student Finance Scheme—Publicly-funded Programmes, (ii) the Financial Assistance Scheme for Post-secondary Students, (iii) the Non-means-tested Loan Scheme for Full-time Tertiary Students, (iv) the Non-means-tested Loan Scheme for Post-secondary Students and (v) the Extended Non-means-tested Loan Scheme, will the Government inform this Council:
 
(1) among the students enrolled in recognised University Grants Committee-funded or publicly-funded programmes in each of the past five academic years, of the respective numbers of students who had successfully applied for the aforesaid SFASs and the percentages of those who had been granted full level of assistance, as well as the respective total amounts involved;
 
(2) of the respective numbers of default cases of the aforesaid SFASs (i.e. cases with two or more consecutive overdue quarterly instalments/six or more consecutive overdue monthly instalments) and the average amounts in default in such cases in each of the past five academic years, as well as the respective total amounts in default and their percentages in the total amount of loans granted under the schemes concerned;
 
(3) in respect of the default cases of the aforesaid SFASs in each of the past five academic years, of the respective numbers of (i) letters issued to loan borrowers by the Department of Justice before legal proceedings were initiated or judgments were obtained, and cases where Charging Orders, Writs of Fieri Facia and Garnishee Orders were enforced, and (ii) cases in which the SFO wrote off the outstanding loans, as well as the respective total amounts of such write-offs and their percentages in the total amount of the loans;
 
(4) whether it will consider further lowering the annual interest rates of the loans under the aforesaid SFASs and extending the standard loan repayment period, so as to alleviate the burden of loan borrowers; if so, of the details; if not, the reasons for that;
 
(5) whether it has provided further support measures for students who are unable to repay loans under the aforesaid SFASs due to financial pressure, including allowing them to suitably defer the repayment and opt for Individual Voluntary Arrangement under reasonable circumstances, so as to help them tide over difficulties; if so, of the details; if not, the reasons for that; and
 
(6) as there are views that the continuous rising trend of students defaulting on loan repayments under the aforesaid SFASs may be related to their poor financial management, whether the Government will allocate additional resources to enhance financial management education in schools, so as to help students in making proper financial planning; if so, of the details; if not, the reasons for that?
 
Reply:
 
President,
 
     The Government’s policy on student finance is to ensure that no student is denied access to education due to a lack of means. The Student Finance Office (SFO) of the Working Family and Student Financial Assistance Agency currently administers five student financial assistance schemes for post-secondary and tertiary students, including two means-tested financial assistance schemes (namely the Tertiary Student Finance Scheme – Publicly-funded Programmes and the Financial Assistance Scheme for Post-secondary Students which provide grants and/or living expenses loans) and three non-means-tested loan schemes (namely the Non-means-tested Loan Scheme for Full-time Tertiary Students, the Non-means-tested Loan Scheme for Post-secondary Students and the Extended Non-means-tested Loan Scheme which provide loans to applicants for paying tuition fees).
 
     Our reply to the questions raised by Reverend Canon the Hon Peter Douglas Koon is as follows:
 
(1) Registered full-time students taking up an exclusively University Grants Committee-funded or publicly-funded student place of recognised post-secondary programmes may apply for financial assistance under the Tertiary Student Finance Scheme – Publicly-funded Programmes or the Non-means-tested Loan Scheme for Full-time Tertiary Students. The relevant figures of these two schemes in the 2020/21 to 2024/25 academic years are set out at Annex I.
 
(2) Cases with two or more consecutive overdue quarterly instalments/six or more consecutive overdue monthly instalments are regarded as default cases. Figures relating to student loan default under the five student financial assistance schemes in the 2020/21 to 2024/25 academic years are set out at Annex II.
 
(3) If loan repayers do not respond or settle the arrears after the SFO’s repeated reminders and urge, the SFO will proceed to take legal recovery actions on the defaulted loan accounts. In addition, the SFO will only consider writing off outstanding loans when the defaulted amounts are confirmed to be irrecoverable (for example when the loan borrower concerned has deceased while his/her indemnifier is unable to repay the loan, or both the loan borrower and his/her indemnifier are bankrupt). Figures relating to legal recovery actions and write-offs under the five student financial assistance schemes in the 2020/21 to 2024/25 academic years are set out at Annex III.
 
(4) and (5) The means-tested financial assistance schemes provide non-repayable grants to students for meeting their tuition fees and academic expenses, as well as low-interest loans for meeting their living expenses. The interest rate of the loans concerned is currently set at 1 per cent per annum.
 
     The non-means-tested loan schemes provide loans for students who do not intend to undergo or fail to pass the means tests for paying their tuition fees. The schemes concerned are operated according to the principles of “no-gain-no-loss (NGNL)” and “full-cost recovery”. The interest rate is also derived on a NGNL basis and comprises a risk-adjusted-factor rate (reduced to zero since July 2012), and will be adjusted regularly or in response to changes in the market interest rates in accordance with the established mechanism. The current interest rate of non-means-tested loans is 1.795 per cent per annum, which is far below the interest rate for unsecured loans in the market in general. A further reduction of the annual interest rate may result in abuse of the schemes, encourage unnecessary borrowing and increase the future repayment burden of students. Furthermore, subsidising further reductions with taxpayers’ money will deviate from the intent of the schemes and principle of prudent finance.
 
In respect of repayment arrangements, the standard repayment period has already been extended to 15 years having regard to the repayment burden of loan borrowers. Moreover, new graduates can choose to commence loan repayment one year after graduation. Loan borrowers with proven repayment difficulties (e.g. financial hardship, further full-time study or serious illness) may apply to defer repayment of their loans without interest for up to a maximum of two years, meaning that the repayment period of the borrowers concerned can be up to 17 years.
 
Furthermore, to ease the financial burden of student loan repayers amid the COVID-19 epidemic, the Government has been providing an interest-free deferral arrangement for loan repayment for five years from April 1, 2020 to March 31, 2025, (suspension period). In other words, the entire repayment period can be up to 22 years. Eligible student loan repayers are not required to repay the principal and instalment interest payable during the suspension period. The annual administrative fee chargeable on all loan repayment accounts under the non-means-tested loan schemes is also waived at the same time. New loan repayers who have graduated or completed their studies during the suspension period may choose to further defer the commencement of loan repayment for a maximum of one year after March 31, 2025.
 
For loan borrowers with genuine difficulties in repaying their loans, the SFO will provide assistance on a case-by-case basis, such as working out adjustments to the repayment plan, or allowing them to opt for Individual Voluntary Arrangement under the Bankruptcy Ordinance.
 
(6) The SFO has all along been promoting education on financial management, and reminding applicants to carefully consider their needs and repayment abilities before applying for and deciding to take out the loans. The SFO also updates information on its website from time to time to promote the message of financial prudence, credit management and responsible borrowing, as well as the possible consequences of default in loan repayment, so as to strengthen the deterrent effects.
 
The SFO also collaborates with various post-secondary institutions. Apart from communicating with their student affairs offices from time to time to provide them with the latest information on loan application and messages about financial management for students, the SFO also distributes relevant promotional materials to institutions for use in their annual student activities. This helps instil a prudent attitude towards financial management in students while reminding them of the points to note in making applications under the financial assistance schemes for post-secondary and tertiary students.
 
In addition, in collaboration with the Investor and Financial Education Council (IFEC), the SFO promotes, through its website, the IFEC’s financial education platform “The Chin Family” and its annual financial education campaign “Hong Kong Money Month”, to provide financial management information to student loan applicants and their parents, and educate them about the importance of early financial planning.
Issued at HKT 15:37

NNNN

LCQ20: Quality of lunch boxes of primary school lunch suppliers 
Question:
 
     It is learnt that as most primary schools in Hong Kong are whole-day schools now, students of these schools have to have lunch at school, and many students eat lunch boxes pre-ordered by schools from lunch suppliers (pre-‍ordered lunch boxes). However, many parents have relayed that the quality of pre-ordered lunch boxes varies, and some students find them unpalatable or discard them just after having a few bites, causing worries about inadequate nutrition uptake in students. There are views that while requiring lunch suppliers to provide nutritious lunches, the Nutritional Guidelines on Lunch for Students published by the Department of Health provide no specific recommendations on the overall food quality of the lunches. On the other hand, it has been reported by Mainland media that many primary schools on the Mainland are equipped with their own canteens, providing students with lunches prepared by cooks on site that are both nutritious and delicious. In this connection, will the Government inform this Council:
 
(1) whether it will consider formulating guidelines on the overall food quality of pre-ordered lunch boxes to ensure that students can enjoy lunches that are both nutritious and delicious;
 
(2) in the past three years, whether it received complaints from parents about the food quality of pre-ordered lunch boxes; if so, how the complaints were dealt with; and
 
(3) whether it will consider emulating the practice of some primary schools in our country and set up canteens at subsidised schools to provide students with nutritious and delicious lunches prepared on site?
 
Reply:
 
President,
 
     The Government attaches great importance to healthy eating among children and has been encouraging schools to formulate a policy on healthy eating conducive to promoting students’ good eating habits and healthy lifestyle. Schools generally take into account factors like scales of suppliers, food quality and hygiene, prices, views of parents holistically when choosing school lunch suppliers.
 
     In consultation with the Health Bureau, the Department of Health (DH), and the Environment and Ecology Bureau, our consolidated reply to the question raised by Dr the Hon So Cheung-wing is as follows:
 
(1) The current Nutritional Guidelines on Lunch for Students was published by the DH in 2006 and has been updated ever since. The main objectives of the Guidelines are to ensure that primary and secondary school students can have nutritionally balanced school lunches that meet the needs of their growth and development, and serve as a reference for the quantity and quality of food as stipulated in the contracts signed between schools and lunch suppliers. The Guidelines also recommend the use of ingredients low in oil, salt, and sugar, and more natural ingredients, herbs, and spices to enhance the flavour of dishes, making lunches more appetising. The Education Bureau (EDB) has also issued circulars to call on schools to refer to relevant guidelines when arranging lunch for students and observe the principles of healthy eating such as the suggested ratio of grains, vegetables and meat in a lunch box, and reducing intake of fat, salt and sugar by students. Moreover, it was announced in the Chief Executive’s 2024 Policy Address that the Whole School Health Programme launched by the DH will be strengthened. Health reports will be compiled for each participating school to recommend targeted school-based health promotion measures, which will include diet arrangements focusing on nutrition, growth and development needs.
 
(2) The EDB has been promoting home-school co-operation to encourage schools to explain to parents the schools’ policy on healthy eating and encourage parents to echo with schools’ efforts by guiding their children to consume food with high nutritional value and having the meals with them in order to help children develop healthy eating habits. Schools are also encouraged to engage parents in the discussion of lunch arrangements such as inviting them to join the lunch supplier selection team to formulate lunch requirements, selection criteria and marking scheme. Schools should also maintain communication with parents on the nutritional value and quality of the lunch provided, collect views from parents and students regularly and provide timely feedback to the lunch suppliers so as to jointly monitor and improve the quality of school lunch. If necessary, parents may prepare healthy lunchboxes for their children. From the 2022/23 school year up to January of the current school year, the EDB received a total of two complaints about the food quality of school lunch boxes from parents. The cases were found unsubstantiated after investigation. 
 
(3) Given the different conditions and needs of schools, schools may opt for lunchboxes prepacked by lunch suppliers, or adopt on-site meal portioning as encouraged by the EDB. In on-site meal portioning, school lunch suppliers may cook rice and vegetables on-site and reheat other food (e.g. meat) at the school campuses. Schools built according to the EDB’s Schedule of Accommodation updated in 2009/10 are provided with a tuck shop-cum-central portioning area as part of the standard provision of school facilities for implementation of on-site meal portioning.
Issued at HKT 11:40

NNNN

LCQ10: Sampled results of Pre-Secondary One Hong Kong Attainment Test 
Question:
 
     At present, the Government collects sampled results of the Pre-Secondary One Hong Kong Attainment Test (Pre-S1 HKAT) biennially in even-numbered years as the scaling tool in the Secondary School Places Allocation (SSPA) System to scale the internal assessment results of the coming cohorts of Primary Six students proceeding to Secondary One (S1). However, in light of the impact of the COVID-19 epidemic, the Government cancelled the sampling arrangements for the Pre-‍S1 HKAT 2020 and 2022, which were not resumed until 2024. As a result, the SSPA System 2023/2025 Cycle (SSPA 2023/2025) can only use the average of the sampled results collected in 2018 and 2024 as the scaling tool. There are views that the aforesaid two sets of sampled results, collected six years apart, cannot objectively and effectively reflect the actual performance of primary schools whose students are proceeding to S1 under SSPA 2023/2025, thus affecting the proportions of the students’ allocation bands. In this connection, will the Government inform this Council:
 
(1) whether it will consider adjusting the arrangements for the use of sampled results under SSPA 2023/2025 as appropriate, including adjusting upwards the weighting of the sampled results collected in 2024; if so, of the details; if not, the reasons for that; and
 
(2) whether it will consider reviewing in the long run the arrangements for the use of sampled results under the SSPA System, and adjusting the calculation of sampled results based on the principle of giving more weight to recent results than to more distant results; if so, of the details; if not, the reasons for that?
 
Reply:
 
President,
 
     In order to compare the academic performance of students from different primary schools more objectively and fairly, a scaling mechanism is set up under the Secondary School Places Allocation (SSPA) System to measure and adjust students’ internal assessments of all primary schools participating in the SSPA for the purpose of determining students’ allocation bands. The Government has adopted the Pre-Secondary One Hong Kong Attainment Test (Pre-S1 HKAT) as the scaling tool with effect from SSPA 2005/2007 cycle, so as to reduce the incentive for drilling and alleviate students’ pressure.
 
     Our reply to the question raised by the Hon Chu Kwok-keung is as follows:
 
     The past data on the Pre-S1 HKAT demonstrate that test results between two adjacent cohorts of the same school are generally stable and could effectively and reliably reflect the overall performance of a school without the need to collect samples every year. Therefore, under the prevailing SSPA mechanism, samples of the Pre-S1 HKAT are collected by the Education Bureau (EDB) biennially and the average of the two recently sampled results is used as the scaling tool.
 
     Owing to the COVID-19 epidemic, the EDB cancelled the sampling arrangements for the Pre-S1 HKAT 2020 and 2022 after consultation with the school sector and announced the details to schools. After the epidemic, the sampling arrangement for the Pre-S1 HKAT 2024 has resumed, hence the sampled results of the Pre-S1 HKAT in the two most recent sampling years (i.e. 2018 and 2024) will be used as the scaling tool for SSPA 2025 and 2026. As for SSPA 2027 and 2028, reinstating the pre-epidemic scaling arrangements, the sampled results in 2024 and 2026 will be used as the scaling tool. It is evident that the time gap in sampling before the Pre-S1 HKAT 2024 is only transient due to the epidemic. The existing arrangements are objective, fair, proven effective, and in line with the aim of minimising the examination pressure of students. The school sector is well aware of the transient situation, and schools’ overall performance between two adjacent cohorts was generally stable. Having considered the above factors, the EDB currently has no plan to change the arrangements.
Issued at HKT 11:05

NNNN