Month: May 2025

Source: Hong Kong Government special administrative region

Following is a question by the Hon Joephy Chan and a written reply by the Acting Secretary for Health, Dr Libby Lee, in the Legislative Council today (May 21):

Question:

In recent years, I have received from time to time requests for assistance regarding the failure of effective interface and co-ordination among different dental support services for the elderly, including cases where some elderly persons, after participating in the Outreach Dental Care Programme for the Elderly (Outreach Programme) under the Department of Health (DH) and receiving free oral check-up, were not being treated on site and only referred to other services due to the nature of their dental problems; but when they subsequently applied for the Elderly Dental Assistance Programme of the Community Care Fund (CCF Programme) for treatments such as the fitting of dentures, they were rejected due to a restriction in the eligibility criteria (i.e. applicants should not have benefited from the Outreach Programme), thus leaving them in the predicament of “no treatment after check-ups”. In this connection, will the Government inform this Council:

(1) as there are views that the current situation where elderly persons who have participated in the Outreach Programme but not being treated on site were unable to apply for the CCF Programme has prejudiced their rights and interests, and the gradual enhancement of services provided under the CCF Programme last year has yet to deal with the aforesaid situation, whether the Government will introduce further enhancement measures to put in place a relevant waiver mechanism and approve applications of special cases in the light of the actual situation; if so, of the details; if not, the reasons for that;

(2) of the existing monitoring mechanism for the Outreach Programme, including how the Government ensures that the service quality and follow-up workflow can effectively respond to the actual needs of elderly persons, and whether it has inspected the service records of the outreach teams on a regular basis (e.g. the interface and follow-up of referrals after door-to-door inspection, the level of satisfaction and rate of complaint);

(3) whether at present, elderly persons will be clearly informed by the relevant government departments that they will not be able to apply for CCF when they participate in the Outreach Programme and be required to sign a written statement to confirm their acknowledgement; if not, whether additional measures will be put in place to ensure that elderly persons participating in the Outreach Programme are well-informed, so as to avoid misunderstanding;

(4) whether, in the long run, the Government will promote cross-departmental collaboration among the DH, Social Welfare Department and CCF, so as to consolidate resources for outreach check-ups and subsidised treatments, e.g. establishing one-stop services from check-up, referral to treatment, so as to achieve seamless interface and avoid repetitive examination, thereby enhancing policy efficiency and users’ experience; and

(5) as some elderly persons have relayed that while the Government had emphasised the wider scope of treatments under the Outreach Programme than the CCF Programme, the treatment resources under the Outreach Programme might not be able to meet the demand for on-site treatment in a timely manner, whether the Government will allocate resources to expand the scope of treatment services provided by the outreach teams and provide additional on-site treatment items?

Reply:

President,

In response to the Hon Joephy Chan’s question, the Bureau’s consolidated reply is as follows:

Elderly persons residing in residential care homes for the elderly (RCHEs) or receiving services at day care centres for the elderly (DEs) are generally frail or have cognitive deficiencies and therefore have difficulties in accessing conventional dental care services. The Government implemented a three-year pilot project in 2011 to provide free outreach dental services to these elderly persons. The pilot project was regularised in 2014 and named the Outreach Dental Care Programme for the Elderly (ODCP). The ODCP provides free annual oral care services for elderly persons of RCHEs, DEs and similar facilities in the 18 districts of Hong Kong through outreach dental teams set up by non-governmental organisations (NGOs) engaged by the Department of Health (DH). It must be pointed out that these services are not limited to oral check-ups but its scope includes the following examinations and treatment services:

(1) oral check-ups;

(2) scaling, personalised oral care plans for the elderly persons and provision of medication for dental pain relief (if necessary);

(3) free and comprehensive dental treatments will be provided to the elderly persons on-site at RCHEs/DEs if further curative treatments are necessary. The treatments include tooth fillings, tooth extractions, X-ray examinations, denture, removal of dental bridges or crowns, root canal treatment, and the provision of dental bridges or crowns;

(4) if further curative treatments cannot be provided on-site at the RCHEs/DEs due to practical constraints (such as limitations in venue space of the RCHEs or DEs, or unable to meet infection control requirements), the outreach dental team will arrange the elderly persons to receive the required treatment at NGOs’ dental clinics; and

(5) provision of oral care training to caregivers of RCHEs/DEs, and promotion of the oral hygiene information to the elderly persons, their family members and caregivers.

Besides, for treatments that could not be carried out on-site, the Government will subsidise the NGOs to provide transport and escort services to facilitate the elderly persons to receive treatments at NGOs’ dental clinics. In case the oral health conditions of an elderly person change and require further dental treatments after oral check-up, arrangements can be made with the respective NGO through liaison by RCHE/DE.

Regarding the monitoring of the ODCP, the DH reviews the implementation and effectiveness of the ODCP through surveys, which include verification of eligibility of service users, satisfaction level of services provided by the NGOs, and suggestions on improvements of the ODCP services. The results of the past interview surveys indicated that the RCHEs/DEs interviewed are satisfied with the ODCP. In addition, the DH also arranges on-site inspections by professionals (including dentists) and examines the oral conditions of elderly persons randomly selected to ensure that the services provided by the NGOs meet the standard.

The Government has increased the resources and been promoting and encouraging RCHEs/DEs to participate in the ODCP. In 2024-25 service year, nearly 90 per cent of RCHEs/DEs participated in the ODCP. From 2024-25, the number of NGOs participating in the ODCP has increased to 11 and a total of 25 outreach dental teams have been set up, and over 50 000 elderly persons residing in RCHEs or receiving services at DEs received the aforementioned dental care services within the year.

The ODCP and the Elderly Dental Assistance Programme (EDAP) funded by the Community Care Fund (CCF) are two completely different programmes designed for different target groups. The ODCP is a programme designed to provide comprehensive examination and treatment services to frail elderly persons residing in RCHEs or receiving services at DEs who have difficulty in accessing conventional dental care services. The EDAP with funding from the CCF, mainly provided free removable dentures and related dental treatments to low-income elderly persons when launched in 2012. It was subsequently enhanced in the third quarter of 2024 to allow eligible elderly persons to receive dental services stipulated under the EDAP, i.e. dental examinations, scaling and polishing, tooth extractions, tooth fillings, etc, even they are unfit for denture fitting.

The objective of establishing the CCF is to provide assistance in a more focused manner to people facing financial difficulties, in particular those who fall outside the social safety net or those who are unable to benefit from other assistance programmes. In view of the objective of establishing the CCF and along with the principle of effective use of public resources, since the EDAP was launched in 2012, the beneficiaries have all along excluded the elderly persons who have benefited from the ODCP or those currently receiving Comprehensive Social Security Assistance (CSSA) under the Social Welfare Department. These requirements have been clearly stated in the EDAP promotional pamphlets and the application forms.

It must be pointed out that aside from targeting different groups, the EDAP limits on the number of subsidised services and the services provided are not continuous in nature. Under the EDAP, eligible elderly persons can receive services at a maximum of two times. To receive the service for the second time, the elderly persons must have reached the age of 75 and have not received the dental service under the EDAP within the past five years. In contrast, the ODCP is a regularised programme with a broader treatment scope, which includes all service items under the EDAP, and eligible elderly persons can receive ODCP services annually. As such, elderly persons who received ODCP services will not be referred to the EDAP and the issue of “no treatment after check-up” as raised in the question does not exist.

To safeguard the oral health of the public, the Chief Executive announced in the 2022 Policy Address to conduct a comprehensive review of the dental services provided or subsidised by the Government. The Working Group on Oral Health and Dental Care (Working Group) was set up in end-2022. In response to the final report of the Working Group published in end-2024, the Government has adopted the oral health policies that:

(1) Oral health is an integral component of general health. The Government’s oral health policies aim to enable all Hong Kong citizens to improve their oral hygiene and lifestyles conducive to both oral and overall health levels;

(2) Through publicity, education, promotion and development of primary oral health and dental care, the Government facilitates all Hong Kong citizens to manage their oral health, and put prevention, early identification and timely intervention of dental diseases into action with the objective of tooth retention; and

(3) The Government provides appropriate oral health and dental care services targeting underprivileged groups with financial difficulties and special needs, ensuring these groups have access to essential dental care services.

Under the Government’s Oral Health Action Plan, the ODCP, the EDAP together with the dental grants under the current CSSA Scheme all play a role in focusing the provision of dental care services to underprivileged groups who have difficulties in accessing dental services. To further strengthen the relevant services, in addition to the continuation of the provision of the free emergency dental treatment to the general public through allocation of a fraction of the existing service capacity of the DH’s government dental clinics (generally referred to as General Public sessions), the DH will implement the Community Dental Support Programme on May 26 this year to enhance dental services to the underprivileged groups including the elderly persons with financial hardship, and it will supplant the EDAP within 2026. With the major premise of optimising the use of public resources, the Government will consider various factors in providing dental services to different underprivileged groups as appropriate and to tie in with the oral health policies.

Source: Hong Kong Government special administrative region

Source: Hong Kong Government special administrative region

     The Secretary for Housing, Ms Winnie Ho, continued her visit to Paris, France, yesterday (May 20, Paris time). She visited the headquarters of a local social housing association, L’Union sociale pour l’habitat (USH), in the morning and met with the Director of Economic and Financial Studies at the USH, Mr Christophe Bellégo, to learn about the organisation’s work, including conducting research and analysis on local housing issues, and contributing to their government’s policy formulation.
 
     Ms Ho shared in the meeting the work of the Housing Bureau (HB) and the Hong Kong Housing Authority (HKHA). She said that housing is the greatest concern among all key issues of the current-term Hong Kong Special Administrative Region Government, and that the HB strives to formulate suitable housing policies and deliberate on different measures to address housing issues to cater for the housing needs of different social strata. The policy initiatives include building expeditiously Light Public Housing (LPH) and transitional housing to improve the living conditions of people living in inadequate housing at the soonest.
 
     She said that the HKHA, established over 50 years ago, has long been providing affordable rental housing to low-income families with housing needs. It continuously enhances the housing ladder to help low- to middle-income families gain access to subsidised home ownership, encouraging them to move up the housing ladder and thus enhance people’s sense of contentment and happiness. Ms Ho presented to the participants of the meeting the “Well-being design” guide launched by the HB and the HKHA last year, which covers eight well-being concepts, namely “Health & Vitality”, “Green Living and Sustainability”, “Age-Friendliness”, “Intergenerational & Inclusive Living”, “Family & Community Connection”, “Urban Integration”, “Upward Mobility” and “Perception & Image”. It serves as a reference for the future design of new public housing estates and the improvement works of existing estates to create a more comfortable and vibrant living environment for its residents. Apart from housing construction, to continuously enhance the management efficiency and service quality of its nearly 200 public housing estates, the Housing Department has been actively promoting smart estate management and bringing in new technologies to help optimise estate management and building maintenance services so that residents can enjoy a better living environment.
 
     Guided by the USH, Ms Ho visited two eco-neighbourhoods in Paris, Clichy-Batignolles and Ecoquartier Nanterre Université. Clichy-Batignolles is a sustainable urban development project transforming a former rail yard into a mixed-use area with social and private housing, commerce and retail, restaurants, community facilities and a park. Ecoquartier Nanterre Université preserves green spaces while redeveloping the old district. The project has provided various types of social and private housing as well as relevant ancillary facilities, creating a more vibrant neighbourhood and promoting inclusivity. Ms Ho said that the HKHA also attached importance to promoting low carbon and energy-saving buildings, green spaces and connectivity with the nearby community when planning and developing new public housing projects.
 
     In the afternoon, Ms Ho called on the Chinese Ambassador to France, Mr Deng Li, to share Hong Kong’s latest housing policies and initiatives, which included promoting the development of housing construction technologies by leveraging the power of the Greater Bay Area. She also learned about Hong Kong’s strengths as a “super connector” and a highly international city during the conversation with the Ambassador.
 
     Ms Ho will continue her visit today (May 21, Paris time) and meet with the local trade to promote Hong Kong’s innovative construction technologies.

Source: Hong Kong Government special administrative region

     Following is a question by the Hon Jimmy Ng and a written reply by the Secretary for Commerce and Economic Development, Mr Algernon Yau, in the Legislative Council today (May 21):

Question:

     The 2024 Policy Address announced the reduction of the duty rate for liquor. There are views pointing out that reduction of liquor duty will help promote liquor trading, and at the same time benefit industries such as catering, hotel, logistics, warehousing, auctioning, financial and professional services, arousing public concern about whether the Government will further reduce liquor duty. In this connection, will the Government inform this Council:

(1) whether it has compiled statistics on the respective numbers of additional companies engaging in the liquor-related businesses and new jobs in the liquor-related industries after the reduction of liquor duty;

(2) as it has been reported that the Government will review in a timely manner whether liquor duty will be further reduced, of the details of the relevant work (including the estimated time required for the work and the staff establishment involved); and

(3) whether it will make reference to the successful experience of abolishing the duty on wine and study the complete abolition of liquor duty as early as possible; if so, of the details; if not, the reasons for that?

Reply:

President,

     Having consulted the Census and Statistics Department (C&SD), the consolidated reply to the question raised by the Hon Jimmy Ng is as follows:

     According to the results of the Quarterly Survey of Employment and Vacancies conducted by the C&SD, as of the end of 2024, the number of establishments in alcoholic beverage-related industries (Note), covering liquor, wine, beer, etc., was around 2 130 with approximately 6 720 persons engaged, representing an increase of 110 establishments and a decrease of 270 persons respectively compared to the end of 2023. Nonetheless, the C&SD does not compile statistics broken down by type of alcoholic beverage. In fact, most companies selling alcoholic beverages also sell liquor and other alcoholic beverages at the same time, making it difficult to distinguish businesses specifically related to liquor.

     Since the reduction of duty rate on high-end liquor until late April this year (i.e. a 6.5 month period), we note that the volume of duty-paid liquor imported (in litre) rose by more than 15 per cent as compared with the 6.5-month period before the reduction of duty rate, while its value went up significantly by nearly 60 per cent, reflecting that the two-tier system introduced by the Government is effective in boosting high-end liquor trading. Moreover, the trade grasped the opportunity brought about by the reduction of liquor duty and organised various kinds of wine and spirits fairs, in which the proportion of liquor on sale has evidently risen. Some liquor traders have also lowered the prices of liquors. The response of the market has been positive.

     We understand that the trade welcomes the measure and considers it conducive to increasing business opportunities. Regarding the suggestion from some members of the trade that the Government should further reduce or even abolish the duty for liquor, we would like to reiterate that the purpose of lowering liquor duty is to encourage the trade and auctions of high-end liquor in Hong Kong, thereby giving impetus to the development of other high value-added sectors such as logistics and storage, tourism as well as high-end food and beverage consumption. At the same time, we are also mindful of the need to avoid increasing liquor consumption among the public as a result of reducing liquor duty, thereby leading to other problems.

     When introducing the relevant measures, the Government has fully balanced different policy considerations such as promoting economic development, maintaining stable public finances and protecting public health. We will closely monitor the development of the liquor trade and review the effectiveness of the measures in a timely manner. Any further adjustments will require careful consideration of the impact on different aspects with prudent planning.

Note: Alcoholic beverage-related industries refer to manufacture of beer, manufacture of alcoholic beverage other than beer, export trading of alcoholic drinks, import for wholesale of alcoholic drinks, wholesale of alcoholic drinks, and retail sale of alcoholic beverages in specialised stores.

Source: Hong Kong Government special administrative region

Source: Hong Kong Government special administrative region

     â€‹Following is a question by the Hon Doreen Kong and a written reply by the Secretary for Transport and Logistics, Ms Mable Chan, in the Legislative Council today (May 21):

Question:

Since the 1960s, with the growth of Hong Kong’s population and economy, the Government has employed footbridges to grade separate vehicular and pedestrian traffic, so as to improve road safety and traffic flow capacity. In this connection, will the Government inform this Council:

(1) of the current number of public footbridges (footbridges) in Hong Kong and, among them, the number of those equipped with lifts; whether the authorities have plans to install lifts at footbridges not yet equipped with lifts to facilitate public use in the future;

(2) of the current criteria for the construction of footbridges; whether the authorities have established a regular monitoring mechanism to track the utilisation rate of footbridges (e.g. by installing monitoring and counting devices), and incorporated such usage data into the standards for future footbridge construction; if so, of the details; if not, the reasons for that; and

(3) as it is learnt that many experts and academics have conducted studies in recent years on the social impact of footbridges, such as the benefits of opening up public spaces on the Mong Kok Footbridge, and that Dubai’s Dubai Walk Master Plan has reportedly incorporated various elements into walkway design to transform them into meeting places and spaces for social interaction, whether the authorities have now obtained relevant data and empirical evidence to further optimise the use of public spaces on footbridges; if so, how the authorities plan to enhance existing footbridges; if not, of the reasons for that?

Reply:

President,

​In consultation with the Development Bureau, Highways Department (HyD) and Transport Department (TD), the consolidated reply to the question raised by the Hon Kong is as follows:

(1) At present, there are 731 footbridges maintained by the HyD, of which 280 are equipped with lifts. Among the remaining footbridges without lifts, about 70 per cent of them have already met the standards for barrier-free access (e.g. equipped with ramps, at-grade alternative crossings, or connected to buildings with barrier-free access), while about 15 per cent have been confirmed to be unsuitable for retrofitting barrier-free access facilities due to various factors (such as insufficient space). 

The Government has all along been committed to retrofitting barrier-free access facilities at public walkways. Since the launch of the Universal Accessibility (UA) Programme in August 2012, the Government has been actively providing more barrier-free access facilities (i.e. lifts and ramps) at public walkways (i.e. public footbridges, elevated walkways and pedestrian subways) to facilitate access by the public. In order to benefit more members of the public, the scope of the UA Programme, initially covering only public walkways maintained by the HyD which were not equipped with any barrier-free access facilities, has been expanded to cover existing walkways that are equipped with standard ramps, provided that certain criteria are met. In 2019, the Government introduced a special scheme to retrofit lifts at footbridges, pedestrian subways, and elevated walkways in estates under the Tenants Purchase Scheme, Buy or Rent Option Scheme and public rental housing estates with properties divested under the Housing Authority, provided that certain criteria are met.

The HyD has been pressing ahead with the implementation of a total of 382 items under various phases of the UA Programme. As at end March 2025, 239 items under the UA Programme were completed, including retrofitting of lifts at 151 public footbridges maintained by the HyD. The HyD is pressing ahead with the remaining items of the UA Programme to ensure that they will be completed in phases as planned for the benefit and convenience of the public. In the next four years, the HyD will progressively complete the installation of lifts at 64 public footbridges. By then, the number of footbridges equipped with lifts will increase to 344.

(2) In considering the need for public footbridges, the TD will take into account, on a project-by-project basis, factors such as the anticipated pedestrian utilisation rate, the characteristics and layout of the road concerned (including traffic flow and speed), road safety and traffic capacity, the desired pedestrian path (in terms of convenience, comfort and safety, etc), the availability of other nearby crossings, the connectivity of the footbridge with the nearby developments and walkway systems as well as the relevant public views.

The TD closely monitors the utilisation of public footbridges, including deploying staff to conduct site surveys in a timely manner to collect data on pedestrian flow and reviewing the views provided by residents and stakeholders in the vicinity as well as considering appropriate enhancement measures, such as suitably adjusting directional signs and providing barrier-free facilities in light of the site environment and traffic conditions as necessary, in order to attract the public to make good use of the footbridges. As the TD has already been effectively monitoring the utilisation of public footbridges, it has no plan to install statistical monitoring devices at existing footbridges.

(3) From the perspective of town planning and design, existing planning guidelines encourage the consideration of landscape design when planning the construction of footbridges. If there is sufficient space, the design of landscaped decks can be considered to be adopted for pedestrian links while landscaping, installation of seats and public art elements can be added to the links to enhance the experience of pedestrians.

     The TD also welcomes the opportunity to collaborate with relevant departments/project proponents, including the adoption of the Pedestrian Planning Framework in the pedestrian planning for new development areas to formulate and implement suitable pedestrian facility measures, with a view to widening the walking space and providing a comprehensive pedestrian network. In formulating the framework, the TD has studied the local walkability and planning needs and took reference from economies outside Hong Kong, including those in the Mainland, Asia, Europe and North America. The newly developed Pedestrian Planning Framework has been in use since 2022 to assist in creating a pedestrian-friendly walking environment and promoting walking as a sustainable mode of mobility.

Source: Hong Kong Government special administrative region

     Following is a question by Dr the Hon Dennis Lam and a written reply by the Secretary for Labour and Welfare, Mr Chris Sun, in the Legislative Council today (May 21):
 
Question:

     It is learnt that moving north for retirement has become a growing trend in recent years, and the Government has been proactively promoting cross-border elderly care measures to facilitate retirement of Hong Kong elderly residents in cities of the Guangdong-Hong Kong-Macao Greater Bay Area (GBA). In this connection, will the Government inform this Council:

(1) of the respective latest numbers of participants in the Residential Care Services Scheme in Guangdong and the Pilot Scheme for Elderly Comprehensive Social Security Assistance Recipients to Reside in Residential Care Homes in Guangdong;

(2) of the respective numbers of Hong Kong elderly residents currently living in GBA Mainland cities who are receiving (i) Comprehensive Social Security Assistance, (ii) Old Age Allowance, and (iii) Old Age Living Allowance;

(3) whether it has considered establishing an integrated cross-border elderly care information platform to facilitate elderly residents who wish to retire in GBA Mainland cities and their families in accessing more comprehensive and up-to-date policy information and service guidelines; if so, of the details; if not, the reasons for that; and

(4) whether it has conducted any survey on the needs of Hong Kong middle-class elderly residents seeking to retire in the Mainland (including healthcare and everyday needs), and explored how to provide such elderly residents with high-quality elderly care services (such as smart elderly care); if so, of the details; if not, the reasons for that?

Reply:

President,

     The Government continues to implement a number of measures, including providing subsidised residential care services and portable cash assistance, to facilitate Hong Kong elderly people’s retirement in the Greater Bay Area (GBA) Mainland municipalities and offer more choices for them. I reply to the question raised by Dr the Hon Dennis Lam as follows:

(1) As at end-April 2025, there were around 460 elderly persons joining the Residential Care Services Scheme in Guangdong (GDRCS Scheme) and staying in the 15 designated residential care homes for the elderly (RCHEs) in the GBA Mainland cities.

     The three-year Pilot Scheme for Elderly Recipients of Comprehensive Social Security Assistance (CSSA) to Reside in Residential Care Homes in Guangdong (Pilot Scheme) will be launched in the second half of 2025 to subsidise elderly CSSA recipients who opt to retire in Guangdong and reside in designated RCHEs in the province, so as to improve their living environment and quality of life. Each eligible elderly person will receive a monthly subsidy of HK$5,000 with a quota of 1 000. 

(2) As at end-April 2025, the numbers of elderly persons living in GBA Mainland cities and receiving Portable Comprehensive Social Security Assistance (PCSSA), Old Age Allowance (OAA) or Old Age Living Allowance (OALA) are set out in the table below:
 

(3) Apart from promoting the GDRCS Scheme to the general public through various means (e.g. District Elderly Community Centres/Neighbourhood Elderly Centres, radio and TV promotion clips), information on the GDRCS Scheme and the portable cash assistance is available on the Social Welfare Department’s (SWD) website. The SWD updates relevant information in a timely manner and will consider optimising the website to facilitate access to relevant information by the public. Besides, the application procedures of the OAA and the OALA under the Guangdong Scheme are available on the “Cross-boundary Public Services” website. The SWD will consider including the information on the GDRCS Scheme in the relevant website.

(4) As the various needs of Hong Kong’s middle-class elderly people living on the Mainland are not under the policy purview of the Labour and Welfare Bureau, we have not conducted any relevant surveys. Upon our enquiry, other bureaux or departments (e.g. the Constitutional and Mainland Affairs Bureau, the Commerce and Economic Development Bureau and the Census and Statistics Department) have advised that they have not conducted such surveys either.

Source: Hong Kong Government special administrative region

     Following is a question by the Hon Gary Zhang and a written reply by the Secretary for Education, Dr Choi Yuk-lin, in the Legislative Council today (May 21):
 
Question:
 
     It is learnt that applicants who wish to apply for admission to the programmes under the Joint University Programmes Admissions System (JUPAS) should submit their applications by the deadline in December of the year preceding the intended school year of admission. Applicants who have missed the deadline may typically submit late applications from December of the same year to May of the following year. In this connection, will the Government inform this Council whether it knows the number of applications processed under JUPAS in each of the past five years and this year to date, and the number of late applications among them (with a tabulated breakdown by the type of documents held by the applicants (i.e. LS1 to LS9))?
 
Reply:
 
President,
 
     The Joint University Programmes Admission System (JUPAS) is the main application route to assist local students with Hong Kong Diploma of Secondary Education Examination results (past and/or current) in applying for admission to post-secondary programmes. These programmes include the University Grants Committee (UGC)-funded full-time bachelor’s degree programmes, Hong Kong Metropolitan University’s self-financing full-time bachelor’s degree programmes, and The Education University of Hong Kong’s UGC-funded full-time higher diploma programme.
 
     After consultation with the JUPAS Office, our reply to the Hon Gary Zhang’s question is as follows –
 
     The JUPAS Office has published historical application statistics, including the total number of applicants, on the JUPAS statistics webpage. Over the past five JUPAS admissions exercises (2020-2024), the numbers of applicants (as at the Day of Announcement of Main Round Offer Results) were 41 664, 40 658, 39 523, 39 948 and 39 634 respectively. Details are on the relevant website at www.jupas.edu.hk/en/statistics/main-round-offer.
 
     In the aforementioned admissions exercises, late applications on average accounted for about 2 per cent of the overall applications, which has maintained at a relatively stable level. The majority of these late applications were from the LS1 category (i.e. Hong Kong Permanent Identity Card holders), representing an average of about 96 per cent of the late applications. The percentage also remained consistently stable. There were only few late applicants in other categories.

Source: Hong Kong Government special administrative region

     Following is a question by the Hon Tang Ka-piu and a written reply by the Secretary for Development, Ms Bernadette Linn, in the Legislative Council today (May 21):
 
Question:
 
According to the Approved Ngau Chi Wan Outline Zoning Plan No. ‍S/K12/18, the site of the former St. Joseph’s Home for the Aged is zoned for use as Comprehensive Development Area. It has been reported that in July last year, the Buildings Department (BD) granted the building plan for the site (the building plan), approving the construction of five 54-storey buildings (the project), which involves about 137 000 square metres of residential gross floor area (GFA) and about 63 000 square metres of non-‍residential GFA. In this connection, will the Government inform this Council:
 
(1) of the number of residential units, the population capacity, the number of parking spaces (set out by vehicle type), the number of loading and unloading spaces (set out by vehicle type), the commercial floor area, the floor area of community facilities (set out by proposed uses) and the open space area of the project, as well as the respective anticipated dates of intake/commissioning of such residential units, parking spaces and various facilities;
 
(2) as it has been reported that the proposed numbers of podium floors and building floors as well as the proposed non-residential GFA in the building plan are different from the information stated in the developer’s application for planning permission A/K12/42 submitted to the Town Planning Board (TPB) in 2021, and that according to the information on TPB Statutory Planning Portal 3, the applicant of the planning permission had withdrawn the application, of which application for planning permission or other documents the BD had based in granting the building plan;
 
(3) given that there are three Grade 2 historic buildings within the area of the project, whether it knows the plans put in place by the developer of the project to conserve and revitalise such buildings;
 
(4) given that according to the application for planning permission A/K12/42 submitted by the developer of the project, a 24-hour barrier-free pedestrian link connecting Choi Hung MTR Station and Choi Wan Estate is proposed to be provided in the project, whether it is still planned to construct such a pedestrian link under the building plan; if so, of the details; if not, the reasons for that;
 
(5) as there are views that the additional population to be generated by the project will add to the burden on Clear Water Bay Road, Choi Hung Interchange and Choi Hung MTR Station, and taking into account the developments of the public housing at Ngau Chi Wan Village and the Choi Hung Estate redevelopment project, whether the authorities have assessed the impact of the project on the traffic in the vicinity when vetting and approving the project; if so, of the plans in place to avoid the traffic in the vicinity of the project and the congestion at Choi Hung Station from worsening, in particular, how to avoid bringing additional traffic flow to Clear Water Bay Road, and whether it will consider making good use of the land vacated after the demolition of Choi Hung Estate to improve the traffic congestion at Choi Hung Interchange; and
 
(6) whether, in vetting and approving the project, the authorities have considered the land space that may be required for the Smart and Green Mass Transit System in East Kowloon to be set up with a station in the vicinity of the project and even have to be extended to the west, and requested the developer to reserve the relevant land; if so, of the details; if not, the reasons for that?
 
Reply:
 
President:
 
Replies to the Hon Tang Ka-piu’s questions are as follows:
 
(1) and (2) The site of the former St. Joseph’s Home for the Aged is zoned “Comprehensive Development Area” in the relevant outline zoning plan. According to the Town Planning Ordinance, developers must submit a Master Layout Plan (MLP) to the Town Planning Board (TPB) for approval through a planning application. The plan should set out the floor space for different uses, the layout and height of buildings, and information about the public facilities, etc. Only after the planning application is approved may developers proceed with the development, including the construction works.
 
     As pointed out by the questions, the developer has withdrawn its planning application submitted in 2021. In fact, the developer has submitted, and obtained approval for, a number of planning applications in the past, and the MLP currently in effect is planning application A/K12/34-2 approved by the TPB in February 2010. The building plan approved by the Buildings Department (BD) in July 2024 was based on this approved planning application.
 
     According to the MLP under planning application A/K12/34-2, the proposed development includes five residential towers of 54 stories, involving 2 058 flats and an estimated population of around 5 800 residents, a seven-storey podium for shops, restaurants, residential care home for the elderly, kindergarten, recreational facilities, and carparking facilities, as well as a four-level basement with shops and carpark. The proposed development will provide around 530 private car parking spaces, around 60 motorcycle parking spaces, around 80 light goods vehicles parking spaces, and one light bus parking space. It will also provide around 50 loading/unloading bays, among which five are for the residential portion while more than 40 are for the shops and restaurants. In terms of floor area, the gross floor area (GFA) of the proposed development is around 201 000 metre square, among which domestic and non-domestic GFA are around 137 000 and 63 800 metre square respectively. The non-domestic GFA includes around 53 500 metre square of commercial GFA and around 4 600 metre square of community facility GFA. The public open space will be no less than 2 200 metre square.
 
We have no information on the latest intake date of the development (e.g. residential flats). According to the land lease, before the end of the building covenant period set out in the land lease (i.e. September 30, 2028), the developer has to complete the construction of the minimum GFA stipulated (i.e. 60 per cent of the maximum GFA allowed) and secured the occupation permit from the BD. The land lease also stipulates that certain facilities need to be completed by a certain date, such as the public light goods vehicles parking spaces, as well as the footbridge to Choi Wan Estate, etc.
 
(3) The Villa, Gate House, and Dormitory A of the former St. Joseph’s Home for the Aged were confirmed by the Antiquities Advisory Board as Grade 2 historic buildings in February 2010. When the TPB approved planning application A/K12/34-2 in 2010, one of the approval conditions requires the owner(s) to submit and implement a conservation management plan (CMP) for the three historic buildings. According to the CMP submitted by the owner(s) in 2013, the three historic buildings will be preserved in-situ and revitalised for adaptive reuse. A heritage exhibition area will be set out to display relevant artifacts and public visit arrangements will be formulated. The Antiquities and Monuments Office will continue to provide professional technical advice from the heritage conservation perspective to the owner(s) and relevant government departments to ensure proper conservation of the three historic buildings.
 
(4) As aforementioned, the MLP currently in effect is planning application A/K12/34-2 approved in 2010. The land lease, which is based on the said MLP, has stipulated that the developer is responsible for the design, construction, and maintenance of the footbridge linking the development to Choi Wan Estate, and the footbridge should be barrier-free and accessible round the clock. According to the land lease, the developer only has to reserve space for and construct the connection of the pedestrian link to Choi Hung MTR Station.
 
(5) The Transport and Logistics Bureau (TLB) advised that the developer has already conducted traffic impact assessment for the development concerned when making planning applications in the past, and supplemented information/updated the assessment subsequently in view of developments in the district, so as to ensure that the development concerned will not have significant impacts on local traffic. The last update of the assessment was in March 2024. When updating traffic impact assessment, the developer took into consideration planned and due-for-completion development projects nearby. For example, the updated assessment has taken into account the Ngau Chi Wan Village public housing project. According to the traffic impact assessment updated in March 2024, the development concerned will not cause insurmountable traffic impacts upon implementation of related traffic improvement measures.
 
     To facilitate the implementation of the development, the developer will carry out a series of traffic improvement measures, which mainly include:
 
(i) Provision of new bus laybys on Clear Water Bay Road (on the kerbside outside the development) to facilitate relocation of the existing bus and minibus stops outside Ngau Chi Wan Market to the new bus laybys and the nearby public transport terminus, so as to alleviate the traffic congestion outside Ngau Chi Wan Market caused by boarding/alighting of bus and minibus passengers;
 
(ii) Construction of a covered footbridge across Clear Water Bay Road for connection to New Clear Water Bay Road (near Sau Man House, Choi Wan (1) Estate) and the existing covered footbridge across Clear Water Bay Road, removal of the existing at-grade pedestrian crossing at the junction of Clear Water Bay Road and New Clear Water Bay Road, and adjustment of the traffic signal control at the junction to meet the future traffic demand and to increase the traffic capacity of the junction; and
 
(iii) Extension of the existing Ping Ting Road East by constructing an elevated carriageway to connect to the vehicular access of the development, and implementation of traffic management plan at the internal carpark in order to effectively divert some of the traffic away from the vehicular access at Clear Water Bay Road.
 
     In response to the Government’s request, the developer will allocate sufficient space for accommodating vehicles heading to the retail facilities to wait within the boundary of the development for access to the carpark, so as not to affect nearby traffic.
 
Furthermore, the traffic impact assessment for the redevelopment of Choi Hung Estate conducted by the Government will take into account the traffic impact arising from the aforementioned private development, and will also take the opportunity of redeveloping Choi Hung Estate to explore feasible options to improve road traffic at Choi Hung Interchange and surrounding areas.
 
(6) The TLB advised that the proposed Choi Hung East Station of the Smart and Green Mass Transit System in East Kowloon will be located on the east side of the development concerned, and space will be reserved in the design to retain the feasibility of extending the system to the northwest in the future. Following the principle of minimising impact on private land, the Government will maintain close communication and collaboration with the developer of the development concerned to facilitate the construction works of the system.

Source: Hong Kong Government special administrative region

     Following is a question by Dr the Hon Lo Wai-kwok and a reply by the Secretary for Environment and Ecology, Mr Tse Chin-wan, in the Legislative Council today (May 21):

Question:

     In 2023, the fixed penalty for the offence of shopfront extension was increased to $6,000. However, some members of the public have reflected that law enforcement officers have not issued fixed penalty notices (FPNs) in accordance with the Fixed Penalty (Public Cleanliness and Obstruction) Ordinance when enforcing the law, but have instead instituted prosecution by way of summons under the Summary Offences Ordinance. If a defendant pleads guilty by letter and the court accepts the plea, the fine imposed under the Magistrates Ordinance will not exceed $2,000. In this connection, will the Government inform this Council:

(1) of the respective numbers of FPNs and summonses issued by the Government for the aforesaid offence since the increase in the fixed penalty, along with the respective amounts of fines involved; the respective numbers of first-time and repeated offenders among these cases, how many times each repeated offender has committed the offence, and the amount of fines imposed on each occasion; the number of convicted persons sentenced to a fine of $6,000 or more, or to imprisonment, and the fines and terms of imprisonment imposed;

(2) whether it has regularly reviewed the criteria for issuing FPNs and summonses by law enforcement officers, including how discretionary powers are exercised; if so, of the details; if not, the reasons for that; and

(3) whether it has studied ways to ensure proportionality between penalties and offences, as well as consistency in sentencing in the course of the enforcement and adjudication of the aforesaid offence, and further explored the possibility of increasing the penalty to enhance its deterrent effect, including the introduction of progressive fixed penalty; if so, of the details; if not, the reasons for that?

Reply:

President,

     Shopfront extension not only affects road access and environmental hygiene, it also causes nuisance to pedestrians and traffic. It is one of the environmental hygiene and street management issues of major concern to the public. At present, if the Food and Environmental Hygiene Department (FEHD) found shopfront extension situation during inspections, the offenders would be issued with fixed penalty notices in accordance to the Fixed Penalty (Public Cleanliness and Obstruction) Ordinance (Cap. 570), or prosecuted for “obstruction of public places” under the Summary Offences Ordinance (Cap. 228).

     To more effectively sustain environment cleanliness, we have conducted a comprehensive review on environmental hygiene-related legislations and put forward relevant amendments. At the end of 2023, the fixed penalty level for shopfront extension, among other offences, was increased from $1,500 to $6,000; and the maximum fines which may be imposed by the Court was raised from Level 2 ($5,000) to Level 4 ($25,000). If shops made repeated violation within a short period, the FEHD can issue multiple fixed penalty notices to further increase the cost of non-compliance. After the new penalty has taken effect for a year, the number of fixed penalty notices issued against shopfront extensions was 90 per cent less than that in the previous year. At the end of 2024, we further introduced the second-stage legislative amendments to enhance enforcement effectiveness and efficiency, including to introduce new clauses on shopfront extension under the Public Health and Municipal Services Ordinance (Cap. 132), allowing the FEHD to require shops to remove obstructing articles without requiring police presence, and in cases where no owners of the articles have come forward, the department to remove the articles. The second-stage legislative amendments were passed by the Legislative Council after its third reading on May 8 this year and will take effect on August 17.

     My responses to the question raised by Dr the Hon Lo Wai-kwok are as follows:

(1) We increased the fixed penalty levels and maximum penalty that the Court may imposed for “obstruction of public places” in 2023. Since the new penalty level took effect until March 31 this year, the FEHD issued 1 593 fixed penalty notices of $6,000 each against retail shops causing “obstruction of public places”. The FEHD does not maintain a record of individuals receiving multiple fixed penalty notices. During the same period, the FEHD issued summonses to 29 offenders involving 36 prosecutions, of which 32 cases have been concluded with convictions. The fines range from $300 to $6,500, with five cases of $6,000 fine or above. Among the 29 offenders, four had committed violations for two to five times, with fines ranging from $500 to $6,500.

(2) In general, enforcement by fixed penalty notices is targeted at cases which are simple, straightforward, clear-cut and capable of being easily established, such as when shop operators were caught red-handed and admit to illegal shopfront extension. Where a case is contentious, more serious or complicated, they would be prosecuted by issuing summonses, such as when shops causing obstruction are also suspected of deploying staff to conduct illegal hawking activities on the street outside the shop, thus involving also illegal hawking offences; or involving repeated offenders. Sometimes enforcement officers cannot easily identify the offenders of shopfront extension on-site and need further investigation and some cases also require police assistance, such as when offenders refuse to show identification documents or assault enforcement officers. Some people also obstruct and impede officers in the discharge of their duties in a deliberately abusive manner. In these situations, enforcement officers will issue summonses or even make arrests, and refer the cases to the Court for judgment according to evidence.

     The FEHD has extensive experience in handling shopfront extension cases and has established guidelines and provided training for frontline staff. Frontline staff will, according to the guidelines, make prosecution decisions based on the actual circumstances and specific evidence of each case, and report to supervisors according to guidelines. Currently, 98 per cent of shopfront extension by retail shops are handled by issuing fixed penalty notices.

     I have personally reviewed all the 36 summon cases. Among them, 31 cases involved more than one offences requiring handling by summonses, three cases involved disputes requiring police assistance, one involved a repeat offender who had previously received 18 fixed penalty notices and another involved serious large-scale obstruction. All these cases complied with the enforcement guidelines.

(3) During the first-stage legislative review, considering that the number of fixed penalty notices issues for “obstruction of public places” nearly doubled from 2019 to 2021, from about 7 600 to nearly 14 900, and the number of complaints increased from about 15 000 to over 23 500 during the same period, we increased the penalty levels to strengthen deterrent effect. As mentioned earlier, since the new penalty levels took effect at the end of 2023, there has been notable improvement in shopfront extension situations with visible results.

     In light of this, when taking forward the second-stage legislative amendments, we considered that there is, at this stage, no need to introduce a progressive penalty system. We can first observe the overall effect of the legislative amendments in deterring shopfront extension. If necessary, we can further review whether to introduce progressive penalty system or further increase the maximum penalties that courts can impose in the future.

     As regards the penalties imposed for cases prosecuted by summons, the Court makes judgment according to circumstances of individual cases. Prosecution officers will provide necessary information to the Court, including case details, conviction records of offenders and relevant case statistics. To better assist the Court in making judgments, the FEHD will explore with the Department of Justice whether there is room for improvement in how the prosecution presents cases and provides information. In addition, if the penalty of an individual case is clearly too lenient, the Government will seek Court’s review through the Department of Justice.

     Thank you, President.