Category: MIL-OSI

Source: Hong Kong Government special administrative region

Source: Hong Kong Government special administrative region – 4

     Following is a question by Professor the Hon Lau Chi-pang and a written reply by the Secretary for Innovation, Technology and Industry, Professor Sun Dong, in the Legislative Council today (June 3):

Question:

     There are views pointing out that a number of government departments and public organisations have set up facilities known as “resource centres” or “information centres” in various districts across the territory, but the public awareness and usage rates of some of the facilities are relatively low, resulting in public services not being used to their full functionality. In this connection, will the Government inform this Council:

(1) apart from the Parent/Relative Resource Centres subvented by the Social Welfare Department, the Patient Resource Centres under the Hospital Authority and the Computer and Information Centres set up in public libraries, of the current total number of facilities known as “resource centres” or “information centres” set up by various government departments and public organisations; among such facilities, the number of those requiring users to make prior appointments before entering the centres or using the services provided there, together with a list of the names of such centres and the specific reasons why prior appointments are required;

(2) of the annual user counts for the “resource centres” or “information centres” referred to in (1); whether the Government has regularly compiled and published the entry or usage statistics for these centres with a view to assessing their service effectiveness and cost-effectiveness; if so, of the entry or usage statistics for the centres in the past three years; if not, whether the Government will consider putting in place a unified mechanism for statistics compilation and publication;

(3) given that the areas of some information centres mainly used for publicity and exhibition are relatively large, whether the Government will consider opening up part of the space in these centres and providing basic furnishings, such as tables and chairs, to be used by the public for brief rest or self-learning, so as to enhance the practical usefulness of the facilities and their usage rates; if so, of the details and the timetable; if not, the reasons for that; and

(4) with the increasing prevalence of AI and digital information, whether the Government has assessed the need for the continued operation of physical “resource centres” or “information centres”, and the possibility of their services or functions being replaced by online platforms or AI technologies; if so, of the timetable for a review and the consolidation plan; if not, whether the Government will undertake such a review?

Reply:

President,

     In consultation with the relevant policy bureaux and departments (B/Ds), the consolidated reply to the question raised by Professor the Hon Lau Chi-pang is as follows:

     According to information provided by B/Ds, apart from the Parent/Relative Resource Centres subvented by the Social Welfare Department, the Patient Resource Centres under the Hospital Authority and the Computer and Information Centres set up in public libraries, there are currently 26 facilities operated by B/Ds and public organisations under their purview in the name of “resource centre” or “information centre”. Some of these facilities offer appointment services to facilitate arrangement of visits, participation in guided tours or use of specific services, and to ensure proper and safe venue and crowd management, etc. Details are set out at Annex.

     B/Ds should make good use of their properties and facilities, and will regularly evaluate the service efficacy and cost-effectiveness of their resources. As the policy objectives, target service groups, and facility configurations of various “resource centres” or “information centres” vary, B/Ds/public organisations will determine the most effective and cost-efficient operational and spatial utilisation modes based on their service scope, core functions, and actual circumstances for the provision of public services and activity spaces for the citizens. B/Ds/public organisations may also publish relevant information or data on the Open Data Portal.

     Meanwhile, the Digital Policy Office (DPO) has been promoting the development of digital government by providing various digital support services and centralised platforms to B/Ds, such as the iAM Smart platform, Chatbot-as-a-Service, GovHK portal, and digitisation of public service applications. These initiatives facilitate B/Ds in supplementing, optimising, or substituting the existing services of their “resource centres” or “information centres” with digital or online options. That said, some facilities may still require offline or physical operations, for example to display large exhibits, offer interactive experiences and facilitate community access to services. B/Ds will continue to implement various measures to optimise the management and operation of their “resource centres” or “information centres,” while the DPO will continue to assist B/Ds in developing and making good use of various digital government services.

Source: Hong Kong Government special administrative region

Source: Hong Kong Government special administrative region – 4

     Following is a question by Dr the Hon Johnny Ng and a written reply by the Acting Secretary for Commerce and Economic Development, Dr Bernard Chan, in the Legislative Council today (June 3):

Question:

     It has been reported that online media are currently prevalent, with a large volume of advertisements interspersed therein. Many people, when playing games or watching videos online, frequently receive pop-up advertisements that attract attention by means of menaces (e.g. misleading messages containing words such as “warning” or “caution”, or claiming that mobile phone applications have expired or that storage space is full), causing people to unknowingly click on the advertisements to check and view them. Some members of the industry have pointed out that the contents of some online advertisements are only vetted by online platforms and AI on their own, and that anyone who possesses an email address and a credit card can place programmatic advertisements on online platforms, and can even choose to deliver such advertisements according to the age of the target audience and user preferences. Furthermore, deceptive advertisements involving scams continue to emerge in an endless stream, including those using AI deepfake technology to impersonate celebrities or experts to commit fraud. In this connection, will the Government inform this Council:

(1) apart from the Trade Descriptions Ordinance (Cap. 362) which prohibits traders from engaging in commercial practices that constitute bait advertising, whether there is currently any legislation regulating menace-type advertisements on the Internet, such as requiring online platforms to screen out such advertisements;

(2) given the views that many online scams originate from undesirable online advertisements, and that online platforms and social media networks should have a shared responsibility to perform their gatekeeping role well by taking down undesirable advertisements at source or disallowing the placement of such advertisements, so as to reduce the chances of members of the public being misled or deceived, of the specific measures put in place by the Government to strengthen the regulation of the dissemination of advertisements by online platforms; and

(3) whether the authorities will study the enactment of dedicated legislation for regulating online advertisements, so as to combat undesirable online advertisements and online advertisements suspected of involving scams?

Reply:

President,

     In response to the question raised by Dr the Hon Johnny Ng, the consolidated reply, in consultation with the Security Bureau and the relevant bureaux, is as follows:

     Currently, Hong Kong has various ordinances in place to combat unfair trade practices and deception. In addition, depending on the types of products advertised and the industries in which the services advertised are provided, there are at present applicable ordinances regulating the contents of advertisements.

     The Trade Descriptions Ordinance (Cap. 362) prohibits traders from applying false trade descriptions to any goods or services in the course of any trade or business. A trade description means an indication, direct or indirect, and by whatever means given, with respect to the goods/services or any part of the goods/services. In this regard, it is unlawful for traders to make false or misleading descriptions regarding the goods they supply or the services they provide, regardless of the form (including advertisements) or the means of communication (such as online platforms) used. Furthermore, any trader who engages in bait advertising by claiming to supply products at a specified price but failing to offer those products for supply at that price for a reasonable period and in reasonable quantities, commits an offence. The Trade Descriptions Ordinance covers goods and services, and is applicable to the trade practices of both physical and online traders. Traders who contravene the relevant provisions of the Ordinance are liable to a maximum penalty of imprisonment for five years and a fine of $500,000.

     As the principal enforcement agency for the Trade Descriptions Ordinance, the Customs and Excise Department (C&ED) adopts a three-pronged approach, covering enforcement actions, compliance promotion and publicity and public education, to combat unfair trade practices. The C&ED is given the authority to conduct criminal investigations into and prosecutions on unfair trade practices, with a view to combatting non-compliant conducts at source. These, coupled with the sentences imposed by the court, cause deterrent effects on unscrupulous traders. In addition, the C&ED also carries out compliance promotion and conducts publicity and public education, so as to promote regulatory compliance among traders and the concept of “smart consumption” among consumers.

     With regard to online advertisements involving deception elements, deception is a serious offence. Any person who commits the offence of fraud under section 16A of the Theft Ordinance (Cap. 210) is liable to imprisonment for up to 14 years, while any person who is charged with obtaining property by deception under section 17 of the same ordinance is liable to imprisonment for up to 10 years.

     To heighten the alertness of the public against online scams and pitfalls, the Police have been maintaining close communication and collaboration with online platform operators, and are conducting online patrols on a regular basis. Should suspected fraudulent content be found, the Police will request the online platforms concerned to immediately remove the content and take appropriate follow-up actions. In 2025, the Police requested various social media platforms to remove or review over 116 000 pages or accounts involving scams.

     To help members of the public identify suspicious online platform accounts, payment accounts, telephone numbers, email addresses, website links, etc, the Police have launched a one-stop scam and pitfall search engine, Scameter, and its mobile application version, “Scameter+”, to provide members of the public with anti-deception tips. In October 2025, new features were introduced to the application. These include the use of AI technology to analyse suspicious website links and webpage screenshots reported by the public, as well as a function to proactively detect potential scam domain names that resemble fraudulent webpages, and instantly add the webpages to the database to block access for all users. Within five months since their introduction, the new features have proactively identified over 900 fraudulent webpages. On average, the suspicious websites added to the database daily are 50 per cent more than those in the period before the new features were launched. Consequently, the number of alerts issued by “Scameter+” has increased significantly. In the first quarter of this year, over 320 000 alerts were issued, which almost doubled the number issued in the same period last year.

     Furthermore, advertisements relating to specific products or services are subject to regulations of various ordinances, such as the Estate Agents Ordinance (Cap. 511), the Non-local Higher and Professional Education (Regulation) Ordinance (Cap. 493), the Education Ordinance (Cap. 279), the Securities and Futures Ordinance (Cap. 571) and the Banking Ordinance (Cap. 155). Such ordinances prohibit false or misleading claims in relevant advertisements.

     Law enforcement agencies will continue to combat unfair trade practices and deception along the above approach. The Government will also continue to regulate advertisements for various products and services in accordance with existing legislation.

Source: Hong Kong Government special administrative region – 4

A spokesman for the Environment and Ecology Bureau (EEB) today (June 3) appealed to the public to stay vigilant against fraudulent WhatsApp messages purported to be sent by the Secretary for Environment and Ecology (SEE).
 
The spokesman reiterated that the EEB and the SEE have no connection with the fraudulent messages, and that the EEB has reported the case to the Police. The EEB reminded the public to stay vigilant towards suspicious messages, not to disclose any personal information, and to make a report to the Police if in doubt.

Source: Hong Kong Government special administrative region

Source: Hong Kong Government special administrative region

Source: Hong Kong Government special administrative region

     Following is a question by Dr the Hon Webster Ng and a written reply by the Acting Secretary for Financial Services and the Treasury, Mr Joseph Chan, in the Legislative Council today (June 3):
 
Question:
 
     Since its establishment in Paris in 2006, the International Forum of Independent Audit Regulators (IFIAR) has grown to comprise 56 member jurisdictions worldwide. Membership of IFIAR is widely regarded by international capital markets as a key indicator of whether a jurisdiction’s audit oversight system is independent and recognised internationally. Leading financial and commercial centres in the Asia-Pacific region, such as Singapore, Japan, Malaysia, Korea, Taiwan and Indonesia, have long been IFIAR members. However, Hong Kong’s Accounting and Financial Reporting Council (AFRC), which has been transformed into a fully independent regulator of the accounting profession since October 1, 2022, has yet to join IFIAR despite the passage of more than three years. To consolidate Hong Kong’s status as an international financial centre and align with the requirements set out in the National 15th Five-Year Plan for the high-quality development of professional services, will the Government inform this Council:
 
(1) whether AFRC currently fully complies with the core requirements of IFIAR for an “independent audit regulator” (including an independent regulatory framework, inspection powers, investigation and disciplinary powers, stable resource allocation and a high degree of transparency), so as to meet the eligibility for applying to join IFIAR; if not, (i) of the areas in which those core requirements are not met; (ii) whether the authorities have allocated additional resources (including staffing establishment and financial provisions) to assist AFRC in this regard; and (iii) of the specific figures on changes to AFRC’s budget and staffing over the past three years in order to meet the aforesaid core requirements and advance its membership application;
 
(2) whether, since the transformation of AFRC in October 2022, the Government or AFRC has formally initiated the procedure for applying to join IFIAR; if so, of the steps that have been completed and the expected timetable for attaining membership; if not, the specific reasons for not having initiated the procedure and the definite timetable for doing so;
 
(3) whether the authorities will concurrently pursue equivalence recognition from the European Commission (EC) for Hong Kong’s audit oversight system, and whether priorities and specific coordinated strategies have been established for pursuing these two international recognitions from IFIAR and EC, with a view to maximally enhancing the international standing of Hong Kong’s audit regulatory framework; whether an assessment has been made of the quantifiable benefits of IFIAR membership in facilitating collaboration on cross-boundary audits (particularly the alignment of rules for projects in the Guangdong-Hong Kong-Macao Greater Bay Area and under the Belt and Road Initiative, and in attracting Mainland and overseas enterprises to list in Hong Kong;
 
(4) whether the authorities will incorporate achieving IFIAR membership for AFRC into the medium- to long-term strategy for developing Hong Kong’s financial professional services, and establish quantifiable indicators (such as the proportion of complex international projects undertaken by Hong Kong accounting firms, and the number of overseas auditing professionals attracted to Hong Kong); what specific measures the authorities and other departments (in particular the Education Bureau) have in place to cultivate auditing talent capable of meeting international regulatory standards; and
 
(5) whether, in the process of moving towards IFIAR’s international standards, the authorities have assessed the impact on local accounting firms, particularly small and medium-sized practices, in terms of compliance costs and capacity to adapt; whether the authorities will provide the sector with complementary support measures, such as transitional arrangements, capacity-building funding and training in digital accounting and ESG (environmental, social and governance) assurance, so as to ensure that the sector can turn regulatory upgrades into an opportunity to enhance its professional competitiveness?
 
Reply:

President,
 
     Having consulted the Accounting and Financial Reporting Council (AFRC) and the Hong Kong Institute of Certified Public Accountants (HKICPA), the reply to the five parts of the question is as follows –
 
(1) and (2) The Government of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region has been committed to consolidating Hong Kong’s status as an international financial centre. A high-quality, credible, and internationally aligned system of accounting, auditing, and financial reporting is a vital foundation for the effective functioning of capital markets and the protection of investors’ interests. For this reason, in October 2022, we introduced a new regulatory regime for the accounting profession, under which the AFRC was reformed into a full-fledged independent regulator of the profession in Hong Kong, with its functions and powers comparable to those of audit regulators in other jurisdictions. These include the issuance of practising certificates to accountants, registration of practice units, registration and recognition of Public Interest Entities auditors, as well as the handling of inspection, investigation and disciplinary matters, and the provision of promotion and support for the development of the accounting profession.
 
     International and regional co-operation is part of the work of the AFRC, which maintains close liaison with regulatory counterparts on the Chinese Mainland and overseas in areas such as enhancing audit oversight and improving financial reporting quality. For example, in November 2025, the AFRC hosted the second edition of the Regional Regulatory Forum, drawing over 400 representatives of regulators and industry leaders from Hong Kong, the Chinese Mainland, the Asia-Pacific and other regions, to discuss topics such as corporate governance, audit quality, sustainability disclosure and assurance, and artificial intelligence transformation. Indeed, after more than three years of effort since its reform, the AFRC has aligned its work with international practices, gaining positive recognition among its peers. In 2025, the AFRC published a research report titled “Global Developments in Audit Regulation: Key Insights for Hong Kong”, which indicates that Hong Kong’s accounting and audit regulatory regime is consistent with prevailing international practices.
      
     Since the implementation of the reformed regulatory regime in 2022, the AFRC has focused on enhancing local audit quality, strengthening cross-boundary regulatory co-operation with the Supervision and Evaluation Bureau of the Ministry of Finance, as well as promoting and supporting the development of the accounting profession, among other initiatives. The AFRC has, since then, not submitted an application for membership of the International Forum of Independent Audit Regulators (IFIAR), or initiated any process for seeking equivalence recognition of Hong Kong’s audit regulatory regime by the European Commission. The AFRC will continue to pay close attention to developments in international audit and accounting regulation, and draw on experience from outside Hong Kong in upholding high standards of local audit quality, and establish appropriate modes of co-operation and liaison with other organisations and institutions.
      
     The expenditure and resources required for the work related to the promotion of international and regional co-operation are subsumed within the AFRC’s overall annual budget. The AFRC does not maintain a separate breakdown specifically for such initiatives.
 
(3) and (4) The work of the AFRC is recognised by financial markets. The independence and credibility of its regulatory regime should not depend on membership of any particular international or regional organisation. Cross-boundary audit regulatory co-operation and the listing of overseas enterprises in Hong Kong are influenced by a range of factors, including global market conditions, regulatory regimes, international economic outlook, and geopolitics. Meanwhile, the AFRC will continue to closely monitor the actual operation and effectiveness of the new regulatory regime, as well as developments in international audit and accounting regulations. Subject to Hong Kong’s market conditions, the need for cross-boundary regulatory co-operation, resource allocation, and industry circumstances, the AFRC will maintain communication and liaison with relevant international organisations and regulatory authorities to keep abreast of the latest developments and to facilitate exchange and co-operation. The Government has no plan to set any indicators concerning the participation of AFRC in any individual international or regional organisation.
 
     Regarding the development of audit talent, the Government has been working proactively and closely with the HKICPA, tertiary institutions and industry organisations to strengthen the training of local accounting professionals. Specific initiatives include promoting articulation arrangements between accredited degree programmes and the Qualification Programme (QP) through collaboration with tertiary institutions, so that graduates can be exempted from Associate Level examinations. Moreover, through QP, which is recognised by the Global Accounting Alliance, those who complete the programme will acquire proficiency in accounting standards that are aligned with international benchmarks, and this will enhance cross-boundary professional recognition and mobility of certified public accountants in Hong Kong.
 
(5) Promoting and supporting the development of the accounting profession is one of the statutory functions of the AFRC. While striving to enhance the quality of financial reporting and audits, the AFRC understands that as accounting and audit regulatory regimes undergo continuous enhancement, there is a need for capacity building for local accounting firms, particularly small and medium-sized practices (SMPs). To this end, in carrying out its regulatory functions, the AFRC places great emphasis on maintaining communication with the industry while providing guidance and support, ensuring that the industry can turn regulatory upgrading into an opportunity to enhance professional competitiveness. For example, at the conference co-organised by the HKICPA and the International Federation of Accountants in November 2025, the Chairman of the AFRC highlighted agility as the strength of SMPs, and encouraged practitioners to leverage their professional skills to seize opportunities brought about by regulatory upgrading.
 
     On the other hand, the HKICPA provides professional training, conducts examinations, and handles registration for those who wish to become accountants, and sets requirements for continuing professional development (CPD) for the industry. The HKICPA has overhauled its CPD curriculum that now puts emphasis on practical and hot topics that align with future development trends, including data analytics, common digital tools, and cybersecurity governance. It delivered nearly 700 courses every year, attracting over 100 000 enrolments annually. In addition, in order to promote capacity building on green finance, the HKICPA introduced specialised professional training in ESG accounting, carbon asset management, and sustainability assurance. Moreover, the HKICPA Certificate on Sustainability Reporting was launched in 2025, facilitating practitioners’ transition from financial reporting to high-value sustainability reporting.
      
     Overall speaking, in promoting international and regional co-operation, the AFRC will continue to take into account regulatory requirements and the actual conditions of the industry, maintain close contact with the HKICPA on professional training, and provide appropriate support to the industry, particularly SMPs, so as to ensure the healthy and sustainable development of the accounting profession in Hong Kong.

Source: Hong Kong Government special administrative region

     Following is a question by the Hon Chan Yung and a written reply by the Secretary for Development, Ms Bernadette Linn, in the Legislative Council today (June 3):

Question:     
(1) of the Park Company’s specific ways to maintain regular interface with the Authority of Qianhai Shenzhen-Hong Kong Modern Service Industry Co-operation Zone of Shenzhen Municipality (the Qianhai Authority) and strengthen co-operation in areas such as industrial planning, attracting enterprises and investment, mutual recognition of standards, professional services;     
     In alignment with the overall strategy of the Northern Metropolis (NM) as “industry-driven”, the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region (HKSAR) Government, in the beginning of this year, established the wholly government-owned Hung Shui Kiu Industry Park Company Limited (the Park Company), which will be responsible for the development and operation of the around 23-hectare Industry Park located in the Hung Shui Kiu/Ha Tsuen New Development Area, with a view to capitalising on the locational advantage of Hung Shui Kiu for its good transport network and proximity to Qianhai and Nanshan in Shenzhen to drive the development of industries with a competitive edge and supported by the HKSAR Government, including high value-added or smart production (such as pharmaceutical manufacturing and food processing) and advanced construction.
     
     The Industry Park, in conjunction development with the Hung Shui Kiu University Town, will foster deep integration of the industry, academia and research sectors, and attract talent. The Park Company will proactively attract high-quality enterprises to establish a foothold in the Industry Park through tailored packages, and provide support services such as testing and certification, business matching and staff training, etc. The Park Company will support enterprises in expanding their businesses, help Chinese Mainland enterprises to “go global” and “bring in” overseas firms, fully utilising Hong Kong’s advantages as an international city and boosting the economic impetus.
     
     In respect of the various parts of the question, having consulted the Transport and Logistics Bureau (TLB), the reply is as follows:
     
(1) The Qianhai Co-operation Zone, with its high-standard opening up, promotes the innovative development of modern service industry, gathering the finance, technology, legal, and cultural and creative sectors, while the Nanshan District is a gathering place of high-tech innovation. Hung Shui Kiu is just a bay away from the Qianhai Co-operation Zone and the Nanshan District, offering great prospects for co-operation.

Source: Hong Kong Government special administrative region