Author: MIL-OSI Publisher

Source: Hong Kong Information Services

Financial Secretary Paul Chan today attended a joint session of the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) Finance Ministers’ Meeting and Structural Reform Ministerial Meeting, accompanied by Secretary for Justice Paul Lam, in Incheon, South Korea.

This year’s joint session focused on how APEC member economies can seize the opportunities and address the challenges brought about by artificial intelligence (AI) and digital transformation through policy co-ordination, regulatory reforms, capacity building and regional co-operation.

At the meeting, Mr Chan spoke of Hong Kong’s experience in developing AI and advancing digital transformation, and offered suggestions on APEC’s work in this regard.

He outlined that Hong Kong has adopted a dual strategy of developing AI as a core industry and empowering other industries through AI, through efforts focused on five key areas – computing power, algorithms, application scenarios, data and funding support.

Mr Chan said Hong Kong has invested more than $200 billion in innovation and technology, with AI development being a key focus. Major initiatives include the establishment of the Hong Kong AI Research & Development Institute, which promotes upstream innovation and cross-sectoral applications of AI, and the launch last year of the AI Supercomputing Centre, which provides computing resources to universities, research institutions and enterprises.

On regulation and governance, Mr Chan said that Hong Kong is committed to developing a framework for the responsible use of AI. Internally, the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region Government has set up an “AI Efficacy Enhancement Team” to streamline workflows through the application of AI technologies, and is also developing a Digital Corporate Identity platform to enhance delivery of public services.

Mr Chan stressed the importance of enhancing preparedness among the public to prepare for the future of AI. Hong Kong is incorporating AI into all levels of education and expanding professional training programmes to strengthen the readiness of the city’s workforce with regard to AI.

The finance chief added that Hong Kong is striving to attract top global talent in relevant fields and that it places strong emphasis on supporting the digital transformation of small and medium-sized enterprises, having put in place various funding schemes and support measures to help businesses adopt emerging technologies and enhance their competitiveness.

Mr Chan proposed that APEC should strengthen co-operation through capacity building, knowledge and experience sharing, and technical support, especially with a view to assisting emerging and developing economies in bridging the digital divide.

He also advocated enhancing policy dialogue on AI regulatory frameworks, cross-border data flows and digital trade, and bolstering the regional innovation and technology ecosystem to support startups and cross-border research and collaboration.

In his remarks, he emphasised Hong Kong’s readiness to strengthen collaboration with fellow member economies to harness emerging technologies for the benefit of people and the region’s economic development.

Mr Chan will depart Incheon for Beijing later today.

Source: Hong Kong Government special administrative region

     Following is a question by the Hon Holden Chow and a reply by the Acting Secretary for Financial Services and the Treasury, Mr Joseph Chan, in the Legislative Council today (October 22):
 
Question:
 
     It has been reported that complaints have been received continuously against the eMPF Platform since its launch last year, including cases in which calls to its hotline were frequently unanswered and users had no alternative but to leave voicemails or submit enquiries via email. In this connection, will the Government inform this Council:
 
(1) whether it knows the respective numbers of complaints received from employers and Mandatory Provident Fund scheme members against the eMPF Platform since it has been launched, with a tabulated breakdown of the numbers of complaints and their average processing time by type of complaints (including difficulties in registration, failure to access enrolment status and contribution records, failure to show contribution records in user accounts, complicated procedures for handling contributions, difficulties in changing or updating information, and inefficient customer services, etc.);
 
(2) whether it knows the current staffing establishment of the eMPF Platform for handling complaints, and whether there are plans to increase manpower or take alternative measures to handle complaints more effectively; if there are plans, of the details; if not, the reasons for that; and
 
(3) as there are views pointing out that it takes excessively long time for the eMPF Platform to handle complaints, of the number of complaint cases which have not been resolved within the stipulated timeframe under its service delivery standards (i.e. within 12 working days) so far and the respective reasons for failing to meet the standards?
 
Reply:
 
President,
 
     The eMPF Platform (the Platform) seeks to standardise, streamline, and automate Mandatory Provident Fund (MPF) scheme administration work, thereby enhancing operational efficiency, reducing administrative costs, driving fee reduction, and providing greater convenience in managing MPF accounts. In consultation with the Mandatory Provident Fund Schemes Authority (MPFA), our consolidated reply to the various parts of the question is as follows.
 
     Since the launch of the eMPF Platform last June, 17 MPF schemes administered by 10 trustees have onboarded the Platform, altogether accounting for roughly 43 per cent of the total MPF assets-under-management. Since its launch, the eMPF Platform’s operation has been largely smooth. As at end-September this year, the Platform has processed over 1.6 million administrative instructions of various types, including making MPF contributions and withdrawals.
 
     During the initial launch phase of the Platform, some employers and scheme members encountered difficulties in using the Platform, including issues with account registration through facial recognition technology, unclear payment instructions, and delays in tagging payments and identifying voluntary contributions resulting in contributions not being timely reflected in members’ accounts, etc.
 
     The Government is highly concerned about these situations, and has already instructed that the MPFA and the eMPF Platform Company Limited (eMPF Company) must promptly address the relevant enquiries and complaints and proactively offer appropriate and timely support to employers and scheme members, so as to ensure the full protection of scheme members’ MPF assets and their positive user experience. Measures already implemented include assigning dedicated officers to help the employers concerned to familiarise with the Platform’s specific operation as soon as possible; setting up a contribution inquiry hotline in addition to the existing enquiry hotline to facilitate employers or employees in checking contribution information; strengthening the contractor’s staff training and enhancing the reporting mechanism for exceptional cases; providing clearer guidelines on contributions on the Platform; and refining the facial recognition software to simplify the eMPF Platform registration process under the premise of ensuring the safety of users’ personal data.
 
     The eMPF Company has set service pledges in respect of services provided by the Platform. In handling hotline enquiries and messages, the Platform staff will in general answer hotline enquiries within two minutes and return hotline voicemail messages within the next working day. As regards the handling of complaints and written enquiries, under general circumstances, the Platform staff will acknowledge receipt of complaints or written enquiries within three working days and issue replies within 12 working days. The relevant details have also been uploaded onto eMPF Company’s official website for public reference.
 
     From its launch last June to end-September this year, the eMPF Platform received a total of about 2 400 complaint cases. The relevant case categories are set out at Annex. Over 90 per cent of the cases were issued with replies within the timeframe stipulated in the service pledges, taking an average processing time of about 10 to 12 working days. The remaining few cases could not be addressed within 12 working days mainly due to their complexity, such as those involving administrative instructions submitted to trustees by the complainants prior to the onboarding of their schemes, hence requiring more time to process. The Government has already requested the MPFA and eMPF Company to closely monitor the contractor’s service standard in handling complaints to ensure proper handling of all complaints. To this end, the eMPF Company has recently implemented a performance tracking system to continuously monitor the Platform’s operation statistics and to introduce alerts on critical processes, reminding the contractor’s staff to complete the processing of instructions made by employers and scheme members within the specified timeframe.
 
     On manpower, the contractor has already increased its headcounts dedicated to handling eMPF-related enquiries and complaints by over 60 per cent in the past three months (from about 500 staff as at end-June to over 800 staff as at end-September), and will further increase its headcounts to over 1 100 by end of this year, representing a substantial increase in headcounts by more than a double within half a year which seeks to continuously enhance user experience and prepare for the imminent onboarding of larger-sized trustees to the eMPF Platform. Meanwhile, the MPFA and the eMPF Company have already urged that the contractor must continuously refine the complaint handling mechanism. Measures already implemented include arranging dedicated customer service staff to follow up on cases and maintain close communication with complainants, enhancing the system interface used by frontline staff, and providing appropriate staff training, etc, so as to expedite the processing of complaint cases. The Government, the MPFA and eMPF Company will continue to closely monitor the complaint handling mechanism of the eMPF Platform, with a view to providing employers and scheme members with customer services of higher quality.

     Thank you President.

Source: Hong Kong Government special administrative region

Following is a question by Prof Hon Chow Man-kong and a written reply by the Secretary for Innovation, Technology and Industry, Professor Sun Dong, in the Legislative Council today (October 22):

Question:

Source: Hong Kong Information Services

The newly built Ma Chai Hang Sports Centre, managed by the Leisure & Cultural Services Department (LCSD), will open for public use on October 31.

The new sports centre is located at 30 Ma Chai Hang Road. It has a total area of about 6,570 sq m, and features a multipurpose arena that can serve as a basketball court, a volleyball court or four badminton courts.

Other facilities include two multipurpose activity rooms, a fitness room and a children’s play room.

In addition, two rooftop tennis courts and a single-storey multipurpose activity room are scheduled to open for public use before the end of the year.

The centre will open from 7am to 11pm daily, closing from 9am to 3pm on the first and third Mondays of each month for regular maintenance.

Visitors can walk to the centre, or take a bus or minibus, from Exit B1 of Wong Tai Sin MTR Station.

Bookings for use of the centre’s fee-charging facilities can be made from October 25 via the SmartPLAY online booking service.

Call 2321 0126 or visit the LCSD website for enquiries.

Source: Hong Kong Government special administrative region

     Following is a question by the Hon Lillian Kwok and a written reply by the Secretary for Environment and Ecology, Mr Tse Chin-wan, in the Legislative Council today (October 22):

Question:

     There are views that while the Government has introduced various pet-friendly measures in recent years, including the establishment of more Inclusive Parks for Pets and a licensing arrangement proposed in the 2025 Policy Address for allowing dogs to enter food premises, the Government can still further explore measures to safeguard the rights and interests of animals and regulate animal hospice services. In this connection, will the Government inform this Council:

(1) of the number of inspections conducted by the relevant Government departments to crack down on illegal animal breeding facilities, as well as the numbers of related complaints received and prosecutions instituted, in each of the past five years (set out in a table); the types and numbers of animals rescued in the aforesaid inspections;

(2) as it has been reported that there are illegal animal breeding facilities treating animals inhumanely and profiteering through the sale of animals, whether the Government will comprehensively review the legislation relating to the protection of the rights and interests of animals, so as to step up efforts in combating such illegal acts; if so, of the details;

(3) as the Rabies Ordinance (Cap. 421) provides that a keeper of any animal who, without reasonable excuse, abandons that animal commits an offence, whether the Government has instituted any prosecutions under the aforesaid relevant provision of Cap. 421 over the past five years; if so, of the number of successful prosecutions and the relevant penalties imposed in each of the years; if not, the reasons for that; and

(4) as the Government indicated in its reply to my written question on November 22, 2023 that it had no plan to introduce a licensing regime for animal hospice service operators back then, but it is learnt that currently the provision of animal cremation services in industrial buildings still involves issues such as breaches of land leases and public health concerns, whether the Government will study the enactment of dedicated legislation to regulate such operators, and reconsider introducing a relevant licensing mechanism; if so, of the details; if not, the reasons for that, and whether consideration will be given to providing animal cremation services directly by the Government or its designated contractors?

Reply:

President,

     Having consulted the Development Bureau and the relevant Government departments, the reply to the question from the Hon Lillian Kwok is as follows:
 
(1) Currently, any person who operates a dog breeding premises and sells those dogs or their offspring must possess a valid Dog Breeder Licence in accordance with the Public Health (Animals and Birds) (Trading and Breeding) Regulations (Cap. 139B), and must comply with the relevant licence conditions and the code of practice. Operating the above premises without a valid licence is subject to a maximum fine of $100,000, while non-compliance with the licence conditions or permit conditions is subject to a maximum fine of $50,000.

     The Agriculture, Fisheries and Conservation Department (AFCD) conducts regular inspections to licensed dog breeding premises. Prosecutions will be instigated against any violation identified. The inspection figures in the past five years are set out in Annex. Furthermore, based on complaints and risk assessments, the AFCD conducts investigation on premises suspected of illegal dog breeding activities for sale purpose. In the past five years (2020 to 2024), the department respectively received 22, 11, 18, 26, and 22 complaints. After investigation, no illegal activity was detected, nor was it necessary to seize the animals from detection of animal cruelty.

(2) According to the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Ordinance (Cap. 169) (the Ordinance), anyone who does or omits to do any act and causes any unnecessary suffering to any animal may constitute an offence of animal cruelty. Upon conviction, the maximum penalty is a fine of $200,000 and imprisonment for three years. The Government will not tolerate any act of animal cruelty and takes stringent enforcement actions against illegal act to safeguard animal welfare.

     We have been studying amendments to the Ordinance. In preparing the bill to amend the Ordinance, it is necessary to consult the relevant stakeholders again on some of the proposals. There are divergent views among stakeholders on the introduction of “Duty of Care” at this stage and the penalty level for animal cruelty. We will continue to collect and consider the opinions from all parties. Once the work is completed, we will present the way forward of the relevant work to the Legislative Council.

(3) According to Section 22 of the Rabies Ordinance (Cap. 421), a keeper of any animal who, without reasonable excuse, abandons that animal, is subject to a maximum fine of $10,000 and imprisonment for six months. When there is sufficient evidence (such as eye-witness accounts or CCTV footage), the AFCD will instigate prosecution against the suspect. Otherwise, the AFCD generally, depending on the circumstances, regards the keeper as failing to keep that animal under control and causing that animal to wander into a public place, and will instigate prosecution in accordance to Section 23 of the Rabies Ordinance. In the past five years, no prosecution was instigated in accordance with Section 22, while the number of successful prosecutions under Section 23 are tabulated below:
 

Year	Number of Successful Prosecutions
2020	103
2021	130
2022	121
2023	90
2024	85

(4) Upon receipt of complaints about animal cremation operating premises causing sanitary nuisance, environmental pollution or fire hazard, the Food and Environmental Hygiene Department (FEHD), Environmental Protection Department and Fire Services Department will respectively conduct inspection and take enforcement action as necessary in accordance with existing legislations. 

     Furthermore, animal cremation providers must ensure their operating premises comply with the terms of the land lease. In general, lots of industrial buildings (IBs) are specified for industrial and/or godown uses. Animal cremation within IBs is in breach of lease restrictions. Also, the flow of people arising from animal cremation and relevant services may pose risks to public safety. The Lands Department will conduct follow-up inspections on complaints received involving breach of lease conditions, and if verified, the department will take lease enforcement actions as appropriate. In general, if the relevant persons make an application to the Lands Department for lease modification or waiver so as to accommodate animal cremation purposes, Lands Department would consult relevant departments.

     Considering that animal cremation providers are regulated by existing legislations, and members of the public may properly wrap, label and pass the body of their deceased pets to FEHD’s staff at public refuse collection points for handling, the Government has no plans to provide pet cremation services or to introduce specific legislation to regulate such services.

Source: Hong Kong Government special administrative region

Following is a question by the Hon Dominic Lee and a written reply by the Secretary for Culture, Sports and Tourism, Miss Rosanna Law, in the Legislative Council today (October 22):
 
Question:
 
The Government announced in the 2025 Policy Address its plan to introduce market-based business models into designated facilities of the Leisure and Cultural Services Department (LCSD) to enhance visitor experience and operational efficacy. In this connection, will the Government inform this Council:
 
(1) how the Government will specifically implement the aforementioned plan to introduce market-based business models, and whether it will, for example, provide clear information on available dates and time slots for venue bookings, and offer short-term or long-term (such as annual) rental options;
 
(2) of the annual attendance, utilisation rates of various facilities, and income sources of each museum under the LCSD over the past five years; whether the Government has plans to draw upon practices at overseas tourist attractions and experience in shopping mall management to introduce cultural and creative projects, design mascots, put in place photo spots and immersive interactive exhibits at the LCSD museums and other indoor exhibition venues, and open such venues to commercial organisations for hosting guided tours, games, augmented reality (AR) experiences, festive events or themed exhibitions; if so, of the details; if not, the reasons for that;
 
(3) as it is learnt that some private fitness centres have utilised facial recognition technology and intelligent systems for 24-hour operation, whether the Government will consider introducing similar technology or upgrading the existing intelligent sports and recreation services booking information system named SmartPLAY, so that all the LCSD sports centres and related facilities (such as pitches/courts and fitness rooms) can operate 24 hours a day, thereby maximising venue utilisation and achieving intelligent management; if so, of the details; if not, the reasons for that;
 
(4) whether the Government has plans to combine market-based business models with the concept of smart outdoor parks, incorporating technological elements into outdoor recreation and sports facilities (such as utilising big data and the Internet of Things to enable members of the public to connect fitness equipment with their mobile phones to record their exercise data and physical condition, with the system then recommending personalised fitness programmes), thereby enhancing the public’s experience and utilisation rates; if so, of the details; if not, the reasons for that; and
 
(5) whether it has further studied the feasibility of implementing market-based business models at all the LCSD facilities (including the impact on fees, service quality and public participation); if so, of the study results; if not, whether it will consider conducting relevant studies?
 
Reply:
 
President,
 
It is announced in the 2025 Policy Address that the Government will introduce market-based business models into designated facilities of the Leisure and Cultural Services Department (LCSD) to provide more diverse value-added activities, and explore the feasibility of engaging the market to enhance the operations of the Lei Yue Mun Park holiday camp and selected beaches with a view to developing recreational, leisure and aquatic hotspots.
 
My reply to the various parts of the question is as follows:
 
(1) and (5) The LCSD plans to make available not less than eight of its facilities, such as museums and parks (including the Hong Kong Museum of Art (HKMoA) and Kai Tak Station Square) within 2026 to introduce commercial elements and to flexibly provide more diverse value-added activities, such as leasing out museum venues on their closing days for commercial or private activities, introducing paid guided tours for visitor groups, and developing more cultural and creative products.
 
The LCSD plans to engage a professional operator (such as an event planning company) to leverage its market knowledge and professional expertise for marketing suitable venues to target clients, providing technical and logistical support for events, arranging exclusive guided tours of large-scale exhibitions at the LCSD museums for target groups, and providing client management services. We are now formulating the relevant details.
 
Regarding the operations of the Lei Yue Mun Park holiday camp and selected beaches, the LCSD will invite interested commercial entities or non-profit organisations to submit proposals for operating the Lei Yue Mun Park holiday camp on a commercial basis, and developing selected beaches into new recreational, leisure and aquatic venues. Interested operators are encouraged to put forward feasible proposals. The LCSD is now exploring the concrete market-based business models. Detailed arrangements as well as the fees to be charged will be subject to the nature and content of the activities, venue conditions, etc. The above initiatives are in the exploration phase, and the LCSD will assess their effectiveness in due course, including their impact on service quality, public participation and revenue.
 
(2) Attendance of the LCSD museums and average utilisation of museum facilities in the past five years are tabulated below:
 

Year	Attendance	Average utilisation of museum facilities (Note 2)
2020-21	850 000 (Note 1)	76.2 per cent
2021-22	3 270 000 (Note 1)	78.6 per cent
2022-23	4 370 000 (Note 1)	76.2 per cent
2023-24	7 000 000	77.3 per cent
2024-25	7 660 000	69.5 per cent

Note 1: Due to the impact of the COVID-19 epidemic, museums and venues under the LCSD were temporarily and intermittently closed from 2020 to 2022.
Note 2: Other than exhibition galleries and exhibition halls, museum facilities include lecture halls, activity rooms and theatres.
 
The LCSD museums provide broad access to cultural education and public services for the community and do not aim solely for commercial profits. Currently, apart from a low admission fee (from $10 to $20) being charged by the permanent exhibitions of the Hong Kong Science Museum and the Hong Kong Space Museum, all permanent exhibitions of other museums are open to the public for free. Major revenue sources of the LCSD museums include admission fees and rental charges for hiring facilities, sale of cultural and creative and artistic products, tickets of public programmes (such as film screenings), as well as permit/licence fees for operating shops and cafes.
 
The LCSD museums promote the development of the arts and cultural industries on an ongoing basis through collaborations with local brands in the cultural and creative industries. For example, we launch cross-over products with different brands this year, including the collaboration with a stationery brand during the Hong Kong ICH Month 2025 in June, where an artist with disability was invited to design stickers of 10 intangible cultural heritage items of Hong Kong, allowing customers to create personalised notebooks; releasing three limited-edition gift boxes in collaboration with a local bakery in July, with artworks from the collections of the Hong Kong Heritage Museum (HKHM) and the HKMoA for showcasing the century-old craftsmanship of the bakery and the aesthetics of our museums. Moreover, we will be partnering with two local brands to launch museum-themed brick sets and food products respectively to promote Muse Fest HK 2025 in November.
 
The LCSD continues to incorporate new technological elements when staging exhibitions in its museums and to set up photo-taking spots and immersive exhibits to enhance the visitor experience. For example, the “Comic Fun for All: The Magic of Hong Kong Comedy Comics” exhibition currently at the HKHM presents an innovative, inspiring and educational museum experience to visitors by featuring immersive projection programmes, comics viewing interactive installations, experiences with AI-generated images, as well as interactive installations for photo-taking with comic characters. The exhibition “Legacy of Lingnan School of Painting: In Commemoration of the 120th Anniversary of the Birth of Chao Shao-an” just opened this September at the HKHM, on the other hand, creates an immersive digital sea of flowers using Professor Chao’s paintings of Lingnan scenery and bird-and-flower, guiding visitors into the vibrant world depicted in the master’s works and immersing them in a wonderland of Lingnan blossoms. Furthermore, the “Engaging Past Wisdom: Min Chiu Society at Sixty-five” exhibition currently at the HKMoA employs holographic imaging technology to reinterpret the artefacts in three dimensions, allowing visitors to interact with the exhibits and enhancing their interest in and understanding of the artefacts.
 
(3) The LCSD is committed to promoting the culture of “Sport for All” and provides a diverse range of sports and recreational facilities to encourage the public to build a healthy lifestyle. While the fee-charging recreational facilities of the LCSD (such as fitness rooms, sports grounds and turf soccer pitches) generally open from 7am to 11pm, most non-fee charging facilities (such as some 900 sets of outdoor fitness equipment in parks and playgrounds across the territory) open 24 hours a day. The existing arrangements regarding the opening hours of sports and recreational facilities cater to the needs of most people. As adjusting the opening hours (including opening fitness rooms 24-hour a day) requires additional public resources, the LCSD has no such plans at the moment.
 
Regarding facility management and operation, the LCSD has been enhancing efficiency and service quality through the application of technology, such as launching the intelligent sports and recreational services booking and information system, SmartPLAY, with a dedicated website and a mobile app, in 2023, to enable members of the public in logging into personal accounts, searching and booking sports and recreational facilities, or enrolling in sports and recreational programmes anytime and anywhere. The LCSD will continue to keep an open mind to explore actively on the use of technology in assisting the management of sports and recreational facilities, thereby providing better leisure services to the public.
 
(4) The LCSD is introducing technology elements to park facilities to enhance the experience of the public. For instance, to provide additional novel outdoor fitness facilities suitable for use by different age groups, the LCSD is installing, on a trial basis, outdoor fitness stations with smart elements at four outdoor leisure venues, allowing users to store and retrieve data of their physical activities and access health information after using these smart fitness facilities. This will facilitate their management of personal health and monitoring of physical fitness, as well as enhance the pleasure of exercising, thereby encouraging members of the public to exercise on a regular basis. The first smart fitness station at Victoria Park has been opened for public use since March 2025. It is expected that the smart fitness stations at Hoi Fai Road Promenade in Tai Kok Tsui, Kowloon Tsai Park and Hoi Chu Road Playground in Tuen Mun will commence service within this year.

Source: Hong Kong Government special administrative region

     Following is the speech by the Acting Secretary for Justice, Dr Cheung Kwok-kwan, at the Annual Conference of In-House Lawyers 2025 today (October 22):

President Tong, (President of the Law Society of Hong Kong, Mr Roden Tong), distinguished guests, ladies and gentlemen,  

     Good morning. I am honoured to be here at the Annual Conference of In-House Lawyers 2025. I would like to extend my heartfelt gratitude to the In-House Lawyers Committee of the Law Society of Hong Kong for the invitation and for hosting this important event. With participants from diverse industries and jurisdictions, we bring together the brightest minds of the legal profession here today, which will surely enrich our discussions throughout the Conference.

     This year’s theme, “The Future of Lawyers: Innovation, Strategy, and Resilience”, captures a moment of profound significance. It reflects the evolving nature of the legal field, driven by technological advancements, shifting client expectations, and a dynamic global marketplace. These changes present both challenges and opportunities.

     As in-house lawyers, you stand at the forefront of this exciting transformation. Your role extends beyond traditional legal advisors; you are also strategic innovators within your organisations.

     In January, the Department of Justice made a significant move to advance lawtech by establishing the Consultation Group on LawTech Development. Building on their recommendations, we will progressively promote technology in the legal industry through a three-stage approach, with the aim of enhancing the efficiency and quality of professional services and strengthening Hong Kong’s position as an international legal services and dispute resolution centre in the Asia-Pacific region.

     Phase one, which has already begun, focuses on raising awareness and education of lawtech within the legal profession by organising roundtables and events, to be accompanied by a roadmap, ethical and security guidelines. To prepare law students for the digital age, we work with stakeholders in legal education to enhance training on lawtech.

     Phase two will engage the legal profession with lawtech products through exhibitions and market surveys. This will help firms find solutions that support their business growth.

Finally, phase three will encourage local and international lawtech enterprises to establish a presence in Hong Kong, fostering a vibrant lawtech ecosystem. We will also periodically review the legal framework to ensure it supports and regulates new legal technologies effectively.

     Turning to the theme of the Conference, let’s first talk about innovation in legal practice. Technology is now a vital part of legal work. From AI assisting in contract analysis to blockchain enhancing transaction security, the tools at our disposal are transforming how we manage cases. By using these innovations, we can work more efficiently, cut costs, and provide better services. 

     Next, innovation must be strategic. In-house lawyers are not only legal advisors but also key contributors to their organisations’ strategic direction. This means understanding the broader issues and context in which they operate, aligning legal strategies with organisational objectives, and proactively identifying and mitigating legal risks. 

As in-house lawyers, you must rigorously evaluate not only the technological solutions available but also the specific needs of your organisation. Tailoring these innovations to your unique context will ensure that they serve to maximise your professional capabilities.

     Finally, let us talk about resilience – the ability to adapt amid challenges. The legal landscape is filled with uncertainties, from regulatory changes, evolving market dynamics, to emerging competitors. We must cultivate resilience within our teams and organisations by fostering an environment that encourages creativity, and supporting colleagues in developing skills that complement technological advancements. 

     In the Greater China region and beyond, we are witnessing a significant transformation in the legal landscape. The convergence of industries and the rise of cross-border transactions require in-house lawyers to be well-versed in international laws and regulations. This Conference presents an excellent opportunity to connect with peers across different sectors and jurisdictions, exchanging best practices and insights that can enhance our collective capabilities.

     As we move through today’s panel discussions, we will be engaging in interesting discussions on the future of legal practice, the implications of AI, and the ever-evolving landscape of data governance. I encourage all of you to join in, share your thoughts, and challenge the status quo. Together, we can forge a path forward that not only meets today’s challenges but also prepares us for the future. 

     To conclude, ladies and gentlemen, as an in-house lawyer, I am excited to see how each of you will harness innovation, strategy and resilience to enhance your legal practice. Once again, I would like to express my sincere thanks to the Law Society of Hong Kong for organising this very special event to bring all these legal talents together. I wish you all a successful, enjoyable and fruitful discussion at the Conference. Thank you very much.  

Source: Hong Kong Government special administrative region

(2) as employers applying for importation of workers under the ESLS are required to undertake local public recruitment exercises and the Labour Department will identify local job-seekers for referrals to these employers for interviews, of the respective numbers of local job-seekers referred by the authorities in respect of the applications concerning the catering and hotel-related industries in each year since the implementation of the ESLS, and among them, the number of job-seekers who have successfully secured employment, and their respective percentages, with a breakdown by job category (e.g. ‍waiters/waitresses, junior cooks and cooks);

(3) as it is required under the ESLS that imported labour are only allowed to work in the positions and perform job duties as specified in a Standard Employment Contract, there are views relaying that some employers in the catering industry have failed to fulfil such requirement by hiring junior imported labour (e.g. junior cooks) at lower wages and requiring them to take up positions at higher levels (e.g. No. 1 Cooks) and perform advanced duties beyond their designated scope of duties, thus affecting employment opportunities for local workers, of the targeted measures put in place by the authorities to combat such non-compliant acts;
The reply to the Member’s question is as follows:
(2) As at September 2025, the LD made 1 257 and 441 job referrals under the ESLS for the food and beverage services industry, and the accommodation services industry respectively during the local recruitment exercises conducted by employers.107 and 33 job seekers respectively received employment offers from the employers. A breakdown of the number of job referrals by job title is at Annex 3. 
The LD has launched investigation into all complaints received, including conducting inspections and gathering evidence at workplaces of imported workers, meeting with employers and employees individually and verifying relevant employment records. As the staff responsible for investigating complaints also undertake other duties, the manpower involved in investigation work cannot be separately identified. 
The Labour and Welfare Bureau has just commenced the mid-term update of the Manpower Projection and will accord priority to data analysis for industries with a higher proportion of imported labour, with a view to providing the relevant part of analytical results in advance for reference in reviewing the ESLS and supporting the Government’s medium- to long-term planning. 

Source: Hong Kong Government special administrative region

     Following is a question by the Hon Lam Chun-sing and a written reply by the Secretary for Labour and Welfare, Mr Chris Sun, in the Legislative Council today (October 22):
 
Question:
 
     Regarding the prevention of employee overexertion at work, will the Government inform this Council:
 
(1) as there are views pointing out that at present, the Government has not drawn up any definition for “overexertion at work”, and when an employee is suspected to have died suddenly due to overexertion at work, such cases are often classified as “fatalities at work not caused by accidents or occupational diseases”, of the number of such cases recorded by the Labour Department (LD) in each of the past 10 ‍years and this year to date, with a breakdown by the deceased’s (a) sex, (b) age, (c) industry, (d) occupation, (e) average maximum working hours per month during any period of continuous employment (i.e. two or more consecutive months) in the six months prior to death (set out by (i) less than 256 hours, (ii) 256 to 279 hours, (iii) 280 to 299 hours, (iv) 300 to 319 hours, (v) 320 to 339 hours and (vi) 340 hours or more), (f) total working hours in the month prior to death (set out by (i) 276 hours or less, (ii) 277 to 299 hours, (iii) ‍300 ‍to 319 hours, (iv) 320 to 339 hours and (v) 340 hours or more), and (g) cause of death (e.g. heart disease and brain disease), together with their respective percentages;
 
(2) in respect of the cases mentioned in (1), of the number of those in which the authorities have provided assistance to or conducted follow-up actions for claims lodged by the families of deceased employees against the relevant employers; the up-to-date number of cases in which the handling has been completed, with a breakdown by claim status (including deceased employees’ families who have (i) withdrawn their claims for compensation, (ii) reached settlement agreements with the employers, and (iii) filed their claims in court against the employers), together with their respective percentages; the average amount of compensation involved in these claims and the respective numbers of successful and unsuccessful claims; the average amount of compensation awarded in successful cases;

(3) given that in its reply to a question raised by a Member of this Council on November 30, 2016, the Government indicated that under the Occupational Safety and Health Ordinance (Cap. 509), employers must, so far as reasonably practicable, ensure the safety and health at work of their employees, which includes ensuring that their employees are given appropriate rest breaks, of the criteria on which the authorities base their determination as to whether an employee has been given appropriate rest breaks; whether any of the employers involved in the cases mentioned in (1) have been found to have contravened the relevant requirements under Cap. 509; if so, of the details, including the number of cases in which prosecutions were instituted and the number of convicted cases, and the average penalties imposed in convicted cases;
 
(4) given that some studies have shown a high incidence of fatalities during work relating to cerebro-cardiovascular diseases among security guards and construction workers, the Labour Department and the Occupational Safety and Health Council launched a three-year Heart Caring Campaign in June 2022 to provide on-site health risk assessments and related services to employees in the construction and property management industries, so as to enable frontline workers in these industries to identify risks associated with cerebro-cardiovascular diseases at an early stage, of the numbers of participating organisations and beneficiary workers under the Campaign, with a breakdown by industry (i.e. construction and property management industries);
 
(5) given that in 2018, the Government decided to draw up sector-specific working hours guidelines for 11 sectors through the industry-based tripartite committees of the LD, setting out suggested working hours arrangements and overtime compensation arrangements for employers’ reference and adoption, of the latest progress in the development of these guidelines; and
 
(6) whether it will consider, with reference to the practices of neighbouring regions, drawing up a definition for overexertion at work and requiring employers to fulfil relevant statutory compensation obligations where an employee is injured or dies under circumstances falling within such definition, so as to provide greater protection for workers or their family members; if so, of the details; if not, the reasons for that? 
President,
 
     The reply to the Hon Lam Chun-sing’s question is as follows:
 
(1) Over the past 10 years, the number of cases of fatalities at work received by the Labour Department (LD) each year that were not caused by work accidents or occupational diseases ranged from 98 to 182. According to the LD’s statistics on occupational fatalities, cases died of cardiovascular and cerebrovascular diseases (CCVDs) during work accounted for the vast majority of fatalities at work which are not caused by accidents. A breakdown of these cases by sex, age, industry, occupation or work nature, and cause of death, together with their respective percentages is provided in Annex I. The LD does not keep statistics of such cases by the total working hours of the cases in the month prior to their death, or the average maximum monthly working hours for two or more consecutive months prior to their death.
 
(2) As at September 2025, the LD had concluded the processing of 1 397 cases of the 1 439 cases mentioned in Part (1) and was following up on the remaining 42 cases. The average claim amount of each concluded case was around $890,000. Among the concluded cases, five received compensation from employers after LD’s processing, and 1 374 cases were not pursued by family members (FMs) or FMs had reached direct settlements with the employers, etc. FMs of the remaining 18 cases had lodged their claims at court. Among these 18 cases, the LD noted that 17 cases had been concluded, all with settlements reached at court. 
     In addition, the LD has issued the Guide on Rest Breaks to encourage stakeholders of different industries, through a risk-based and consultative approach and having regard to their own circumstances, to work out reasonable and practicable rest break arrangements that are mutually agreed by employees and employers. 
     The existing Employees’ Compensation Ordinance (ECO) of Hong Kong has stipulated that even if the disease suffered by an employee is not a specified occupational disease, the employee or his/her FMs may still claim compensation from the employer in respect of the disease in accordance with the ECO if the disease is substantiated to be a personal injury or death by accident arising out of and in the course of employment.

Source: Hong Kong Government special administrative region