Source: Hong Kong Government special administrative region
LCQ11: Cases involving nuisance caused to neighbours by residents of public housing estates Question:
It is learnt that although the Housing Department (HD) has implemented a series of measures to handle cases where residents of public rental housing (PRH) estates cause nuisance to neighbours, the number of related complaints has not decreased significantly. In this connection, will the Government inform this Council:
(1) of the names of the 10 PRH estates with the highest number of complaints received by the HD over the past year involving nuisance caused to neighbours, and the number of complaints received for each of these estates;
(2) of the number of complaints received by the HD in the past three years involving nuisance caused to neighbours by PRH residents, with a breakdown by nature of complaints (e.g. noise nuisance, hygienic nuisance created by accumulating a large quantity of refuse or waste inside the premises, and water dripping from air conditioners);
(3) of the average time taken by the HD to handle complaints mentioned in (2) and the number of residents with their tenancies terminated due to nuisance caused to neighbours in such cases; and
(4) given that residents who have purchased flats in Tenants Purchase Scheme estates are no longer PRH tenants and are therefore not subject to the Marking Scheme for Estate Management Enforcement, how the HD will co-ordinate with owners’ corporations and property management companies to handle nuisance complaints involving residents of such flats?
Reply:
President,
The Hong Kong Housing Authority (HKHA) is committed to fostering a harmonious and hygienic living environment for public rental housing (PRH) residents. To effectively address tenants’ certain inappropriate behaviour and promote care for their surroundings, we have implemented the Marking Scheme for Estate Management Enforcement (the Scheme) which is applicable to both PRH and interim housing tenants. The Scheme covers 30 categories of misdeeds, each of which carries 3, 5, 7 or 15 penalty points depending on the severity of the misdeeds. Details of the misdeeds are set out in Annex 1. The purpose of the Scheme is to raise tenants’ awareness for making improvements, rather than forcing them out of PRHs. Therefore, taking into account “law, reason and compassion” and with a view to offering tenants an opportunity to rectify undesirable habits, the Scheme incorporates a warning mechanism. We will first issue a written warning to tenants who commit certain relevant misdeeds. Should a tenant repeat the same misdeed again within two years of receiving the written warning, penalty points will be allotted. When a PRH household accrues 16 points within two years, its tenancy will be terminated. During the five years following the tenancy termination, the former tenant and their adult household members will be barred from applying for PRH. After the period, even if they successfully apply for PRH, they will not be allocated a better unit in terms of location, age or floor levels compared to their previous PRH unit.
Upon receipt of complaints from PRH tenants regarding nuisance caused by neighbours, the Housing Department (HD) will immediately arrange staff to conduct an investigation and gather evidence through on-site inspections, interviews with relevant parties and/or taking photographs. Where the nuisance is confirmed as a misdeed under the Scheme, subject to the nature of the misdeed, the tenant will get warnings or have penalty points allotted by the HD under the Scheme. On serious misdeeds, the tenancy agreement will be terminated and the unit will be repossessed.
In response to the question raised by the Hon Kenneth Lau, our reply is as follows:
(1) Among the 197 PRH estates under the HKHA, the 10 PRH estates which received the highest number of nuisance enquiries and complaints in 2025 as well as the respective case numbers, are listed in Annex 2.
(2) and (3) Over the past three years (2023 to 2025), the HD received around 19 000 complaints concerning PRH tenants causing nuisance to neighbours. On average, there were around 6 300 cases per year, accounting for only 0.3 per cent of the total PRH population of approximately 2.1 million. Upon receipt of enquiries and complaints to the completion of handling, over one-third of the cases were resolved within 10 days, with the average processing time amounting to around 13 days. During the same period, 11 tenancy agreements were terminated due to breaches of nuisance-related misdeeds and tenancy agreement. The breakdown of cases by category of misdeeds is provided in Annex 3.
(4) As for estates where units are available for purchase including estates under the Tenants Purchase Scheme (TPS), the management of these estates is no different from that of general private properties as governed by the Building Management Ordinance (Cap. 344) and the government leases as well as the Deed of Mutual Covenant. If property owners cause nuisance within their flats or in common areas, such as noise nuisance, accumulation of refuse within units, or water dripping from air conditioners, the owners’ corporation and its property management company may take follow-up actions by exercising its power conferred by relevant regulations/clauses. Where necessary, cases may be referred to other government departments (such as the Police and the Food and Environmental Hygiene Department) for enforcement. Should the HKHA or the HD receives public complaints regarding nuisances in common areas, the cases will be relayed to the owners’ corporation and its property management company for follow-up.
To enhance the living environment in estates for sale, the HKHA’s Subsidised Housing Committee approved extending all misdeeds covered under the Scheme to tenants of estates under the TPS and the Buy-or-Rent Option. This measure came into effect on December 1, 2024. Should PRH tenants commit misdeeds covered by the Scheme in the common areas of the said estates, the owners’ corporation and its property management company may forward the relevant information and evidence to the HD for follow-up. Upon investigation and verification, the HD will take action according to the Scheme against the tenant, who will receive warnings or have penalty points allotted. In the event of serious cases, tenancy may be terminated with the unit repossessed.
As the owner of unsold flats in TPS estates, the HKHA will appoint representatives to serve as the management committee members of the owners’ corporations. HKHA’s representatives will provide professional advice on property management and share experience in the management of environmental hygiene and public safety. On environmental hygiene and management of public areas in the said estates, the HD will also disseminate relevant information from other government departments, such as the Food and Environmental Hygiene Department and the Fire Services Department, to the owners’ corporations and property management companies. Where necessary, joint operations will be conducted with the owners’ corporations and property management companies to take enforcement actions against tenants’ misdeeds, thereby safeguarding the overall environment of the estates in joint hands. Issued at HKT 15:03
Source: Hong Kong Government special administrative region
LCQ18: Construction safety for building maintenance works Having consulted the HB, the Home and Youth Affairs Bureau, and the Labour and Welfare Bureau, our consolidated reply to various parts of the question is as follows: In the past three years, the number of paper audits and site inspections conducted by the departments responsible for carrying out regulatory actions under the BO (namely the BD and ICU of the HB) in respect of the aforementioned building repair works are set out in tables 1 to 3 by repair works under MBIS and other minor works respectively. Due to time limitation, statistics on follow-up action related to the stated paper audits and site inspections have not yet been compiled.
Table 1: Relevant figures concerning cases that have completed the phase of building inspection under MBIS
YearTable 2: Relevant figures concerning cases that have completed building repair works under MBIS
YearTable 3: Other relevant figures on minor works that involve repair of external wall
Year Furthermore, in the past year, the relevant regulatory departments (namely the BD and ICU of the HB) conducted a total of about 370 on-site inspections on buildings undergoing repair works in response to public reports received.
The statistics on the prosecution and disciplinary actions taken under the relevant provisions of the BO against registered building professionals and registered contractors over the past three years that involved building repair works are tabulated below:
Year(2) From 2023 to 2025 (as of June), the Home Affairs Department (HAD) received 265, 408 and 102 complaints respectively concerning building management, totalling 775 cases. The HAD, BD and ICU of the HB do not maintain a breakdown of statistics on complaints involving works consultants of major building repair projects.
If contravention of the BO by registered building professionals and registered contractors is identified, the BD will initiate prosecution against the parties concerned based on the evidence and circumstances of individual cases. Registered building professionals or registered contractors involved in misconduct or negligence may also be subject to disciplinary action.
In early 2025, the Development Bureau proposed legislative amendments to the BO, amongst which it was proposed to enhance regulation of registered building professionals and registered contractors, including increasing maximum penalties against contraventions and enhancing the registration and disciplinary systems. Subsequent to the fire incident at Wang Fuk Court in Tai Po, we will introduce further legislative proposals, including upgrading major building repair works from mostly Class II minor works at present to Class I minor works, such that third-party professionals will be required to submit prescribed plans and supervision plans. Furthermore, the BD will step up audit checks and enforcement actions on a risk basis.
The HAD and its District Offices have been assisting owners of private buildings in handling issues related to building management and maintenance. When enquiries or complaints regarding building management or maintenance are received, the HAD will provide appropriate advice and assistance in the accordance with the relevant provisions of the Building Management Ordinance (Cap. 344). If the subject matter involves professional aspect, such as supervision of works consultants, the HAD will refer the case to relevant professional department or institute for follow-up.
(3) Under the existing legislation, owners are required to appoint a RI to carry out mandatory building inspection and supervise prescribed repair works conducted by a registered contractor. The appointed RI assumes certain statutory duties, including submission of certificate of building inspection and certificate of building repair. In respect of the properties regulated by the ICU of the HB under the BO based on the authorisation by the Director of Buildings, its Mandatory Building Inspection Scheme Team will carry out paper audits and site inspections on a random basis, and conduct follow-up investigation in light of complaints and reports received. The LD will from time to time review and revise, if necessary, the existing codes of practice and guidance notes on a risk-based approach. The LD administers occupational safety and health legislation to safeguard the occupational safety and health of employees at work. The aforesaid requirements on protective materials such as scaffolding nets can also help safeguard the safety of employees. Besides, the LD is reviewing codes of practice related to scaffolding, setting out the material requirements for toe boards to ensure the materials used are of sufficient strength to prevent workers and objects from falling from scaffolds, as well as being able to reduce the fire risk. Issued at HKT 15:12
Source: Hong Kong Government special administrative region
LCQ14: Handling scaffolding on external walls of buildings left unremoved for prolonged periods Question:
The fire at Wang Fuk Court in Tai Po has aroused public concern regarding the safety hazards posed by some scaffolding on the external walls of residential buildings which has been left unremoved for prolonged periods. Furthermore, it has been reported that the owners’ corporation (OC) of a tenement building had a dispute with the building maintenance works consultant and contractor, resulting in the external wall scaffolding remaining erected for as long as two years. The Buildings Department (BD) has noted the potential risks posed by the scaffolding, and issued orders requiring its removal. In this connection, will the Government inform this Council:
(1) given that the Government earlier on issued orders requiring relevant contractors to remove scaffold nets on the external walls of buildings undergoing maintenance across Hong Kong, of the number of buildings involved in such orders, with a breakdown by the 18 districts across the territory; whether it has compiled statistics on how long the scaffolding of such buildings has been erected; if so, of the number of those which have been erected for more than two years;
(2) whether the relevant government departments currently require OCs or management companies of buildings which need to erect scaffolding for maintenance to declare information such as the duration for which the external wall scaffolding remains erected and the expected removal date; if so, of the number of external wall scaffoldings which have remained erected for more than two years without being removed, with a breakdown by the 18 districts across the territory; if not, whether the authorities will consider requiring relevant persons to submit such information;
(3) given that according to the information provided in the authorities’ reply to a question raised by a Member of this Council on the Estimates of Expenditure for the financial year 2025-2026, as of 2024, among the Category 1 and Category 2 buildings covered by “Operation Building Bright 2.0”, the percentages of those having completed the prescribed repair works were only 12.6 per cent and 35.6 per cent respectively, whether the Government has examined how many of the buildings which have not yet completed the repair works currently still have external wall scaffolding erected, with a breakdown by Category 1 and Category 2 buildings;
(4) whether it has ascertained the reasons for the delayed removal of scaffolding that has been erected on the external walls of buildings for prolonged periods; if so, of the details; regarding those buildings with scaffolding that cannot be removed due to delay in maintenance works, whether the Government will provide appropriate assistance to OCs and property owners that have difficulties, so that they can expedite the completion of the works and the removal of scaffolding;
(5) of the circumstances where the BD will serve orders on OCs or property owners requiring the removal of scaffolding on the external walls of buildings; of the number of the relevant orders issued by the BD over the past five years and the number of instances in compliance with such orders; how the Government will deal with parties that fail to comply with such orders (including those OCs and property owners that cannot afford the removal costs); and
(6) of the number of cases where the BD removed the scaffolding on the external walls of buildings on behalf of property owners or OCs over the past five years; among such cases, of the number of cases where the Government successfully recovered the removal costs from the relevant property owners or OCs?
Reply:
President,
Our reply to various parts of the question is as follows:
(1) and (2) The Government announced on December 3, 2025 that for all buildings undergoing major repair works with scaffolding nets installed on their external walls, such nets must be removed and works on the external walls be ceased. After the Buildings Department (BD) required net removal and issued the relevant orders to cease works, scaffolding nets of a total of 230 private buildings were removed. The breakdown by District Council (DC) district is tabulated below:
DC districts Currently, temporary scaffolding erected for carrying out works does not require approval from the BD. Therefore, the BD does not maintain statistics on the duration of scaffoldings erected. Generally speaking, scaffolding should be removed upon completion of works involving external walls. According to the records received by the BD on commencement of works, it is believed that among the aforementioned 230 buildings, only six buildings had scaffoldings erected for more than two years, which were located in Central and Western, Eastern, Sham Shui Po, Tuen Mun and Wan Chai districts.
(3) As at the end of 2025, the ratio of Category 1 buildings and Category 2 buildings under the “Operation Building Bright 2.0” as mentioned in the question with repair works completed (Note 1) rose to 13.2 per cent (277 buildings) and 40 per cent (892 buildings) respectively. The remaining 1 822 Category 1 buildings and 1 354 Category 2 buildings are at different stages of building inspection or building works. According to the information available to the BD in November last year, only 46 Category 1 buildings and 236 Category 2 buildings among those buildings had scaffolding erected on their external walls.
(4) Scaffolding should be removed upon completion of works involving external walls and generally should not remain erected for years. The actual timing for scaffolding removal is subject to various factors, such as changes in the scale and scope of works, or other unforeseen circumstances (such as inclement weather), which may lead to delay in scaffolding removal. Moreover, contractual issues related to the works, such as disputes over works progress or costs, may also lead to delay in scaffolding removal.
The Development Bureau, in collaboration with the Home and Youth Affairs Bureau, is partnering with relevant statutory bodies and professional organisations to provide professional advice to Owners’ Corporations and owners in need on building maintenance matters, such as issues related to works contracts and tendering, as well as property and facility management, through preparation of information packages, district seminars and more.
(5) and (6) If scaffolding erected on the exterior of a private building is found to be dangerous or likely to become dangerous, the BD may issue an order under section 26 of the Buildings Ordinance (BO) (Cap. 123) requiring owner to remove the scaffolding. Based on experience, this mostly involves weather conditions that render scaffolding unsafe.
If the owner fails to remove scaffolding within the specified time frame, the BD may consider applying the provisions of the BO to carry out works specified in the order. Upon completion of works, the BD will recover relevant costs of the works, supervision charges, and surcharges from the owner. If the owner fails to make payment within the specified period after the BD issues an invoice, the BD will issue a certificate of arrears and register it at the Land Registry, constituting a first charge on the premises. Interests of the outstanding amount will be calculated at 10 per cent per annum to protect the Government’s right to recover the costs. For owners who fail to comply with order without reasonable excuse, the BD will consider taking prosecution action.
The numbers of orders issued by the BD concerning scaffolding, orders complied with, and default works completed in the past five years are tabulated below:
YearNote 1: There are two categories of buildings under the “Operation Building Bright 2.0” (OBB 2.0). Category 1 buildings are those with owners who are prepared to take up the organisation of inspection and repair works for their buildings under the Mandatory Building Inspection Scheme (MBIS). Owners of eligible buildings may apply to the Urban Renewal Authority within the specified time frame. Category 2 buildings are those with outstanding MBIS notices and the owners concerned have difficulties in co-ordinating the requisite inspection and repair works. The BD proactively selects Category 2 buildings on a risk basis (i.e. not upon application by owners) and exercises its statutory power to carry out the requisite inspection and repair works in default of owners, and seeks to recover the cost from owners concerned afterwards. Eligible owners of Category 2 buildings may claim subsidies under the OBB 2.0 to cover all or part of such cost.
Note 2: The number of orders complied with or the number of completed default works does not necessarily correspond to the orders issued in the same year.
For cases with default works completed, the BD is currently following up on the recovery of the relevant costs. Issued at HKT 19:11
Source: Hong Kong Government special administrative region
Major Sports Events Committee awards “M” Mark status to “World Grand Prix 2026” The Major Sports Events Committee (MSEC) has awarded “M” Mark status to the “World Grand Prix 2026” to be held from February 3 to 8 at the Kai Tak Arena.
The Chairman of the MSEC, Mr Wilfred Ng, said today (January 28), “The ‘World Grand Prix’ is only open to the top 32 ranked professional players in the world, of which its level of play and excitement are beyond doubt. Hence, it has once again been awarded with ‘M’ Mark status. The event not only provides snooker enthusiasts with the opportunity to appreciate the performances of world-class players closely, but also further promotes the development of snooker in Hong Kong.” For details of “M” Mark events, please visit www.mevents.org.hkIssued at HKT 16:00
Source: Hong Kong Government special administrative region
LCQ8: Water seepage problems in public housing
Year Among the cases being processed as of 2025, 419 were received after November 2025 and are still being processed mainly because the property owners could not cater inspection arrangements or repair schedules. There are no cases remained unsolved for an extended period of time. Over 60 per cent of the cases were found in estates built over thirty years ago, with the source of leakage most commonly found on bathroom floor surfaces or walls. The primary causes include ageing of waterproofing layers, natural deterioration of building materials, or damage to waterproofing layers or pipes during renovations arranged by tenants. The HKHA will generally re-lay waterproofing layers to affected areas to resolve the issue. The HD will continue to actively co-ordinate inspection and repair arrangements and facilitate successful completion of cases by enforcement measures.
Furthermore, to facilitate the smooth handling of water seepage or leakage issues, the HD will enforce the Marking Scheme for Estate Management Enforcement against PRH tenants who refuse to co-operate with inspections or repairs. Under this Scheme, refusal to allow the HKHA or its authorised representatives to conduct leakage inspections or carry out works within their units will incur a deduction of seven points. Over the past three years, the HD has deducted points from 21 PRH tenants for the aforesaid reason.
Year The majority of the aforementioned cases about SSF involved minor issues, such as debris left in window frames during construction or adjustments to window hinges affecting the seal, leading to slight water seepage in winds and rains, etc. No serious problem was found, and all cases were resolved. Given the minor nature of the required repairs, over 90 per cent of the cases were completed within seven days after the arrangement of repairs was confirmed. The remaining individual cases were basically completed within 14 days.
(3) and (4) The HKHA has always placed great emphasis on the construction quality of public housing and maintains a rigorous system for monitoring contractors’ workmanship. The Specification Library issued by the HD stipulates the building materials and workmanship specifications; testing methods; and acceptance standards under new development works contracts. The HKHA requires contractors to complete works in accordance with approved quality standards and contractual provisions regarding workmanship and building materials prior to handover. For all newly completed public housing units, the HD conducts watertightness tests on windows by nozzles with pressure from the outside, as well as simulated shower spray tests on waterproof areas in bathrooms. In response to recent concerns about water seepage through pipe sleeves penetrating walls, we have enhanced the existing acceptance procedures by adding watertightness tests by nozzles with pressure for pipe sleeves and random inspections prior to project completion and handover. Furthermore, additional random inspections are conducted on pipe sleeves for each project to thoroughly inspect whether the packing around the sleeves is fully filled, thereby strengthening quality control and eradicating instances of water seepage.Issued at HKT 16:54
Source: Hong Kong Government special administrative region
Exchange Fund Position at end-December 2025 The Exchange Fund recorded an investment income of HK$331.0 billion in 2025. The main components were: Fees on placements by the Fiscal Reserves and placements by the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region (HKSAR) Government funds and statutory bodies were HK$16.5 billion (Note 3) and HK$14.7 billion respectively in 2025, with the rate of fee payment at 4.4 per cent for 2025.
The Abridged Balance Sheet shows that the total assets of the Exchange Fund increased by HK$70.4 billion, from HK$4,081.0 billion at the end of 2024 to HK$4,151.4 billion at the end of 2025. Accumulated surplus stood at HK$936.1 billion at end-December 2025.
The Exchange Fund recorded an investment return of 8.0 per cent in 2025 (Note 4). Specifically, the Investment Portfolio achieved a rate of return of 12.4 per cent and the Backing Portfolio gained 5.2 per cent. The Long-Term Growth Portfolio (LTGP) recorded an annualised internal rate of return of 11.2 per cent since its inception in 2009 up to the end of September 2025.
Commenting on the performance of the Exchange Fund in 2025, the Chief Executive of the HKMA, Mr Eddie Yue, said, “The global financial markets experienced significant volatility in the first half of 2025 due to factors such as trade conflicts and geopolitical tensions. In particular, following the announcement of a series of tariff measures by the US Government in early April, global equity and bond markets fell sharply. As we entered the second half of the year, the investment environment improved notably, bolstered by the smaller-than-expected impact from trade conflicts as well as the swift advancement of artificial intelligence technology which attracted investment flows. Policy rate cuts by major central banks during the year also helped boost market sentiment.
“Overall, the global financial markets showed strong resilience in 2025. Major stock markets saw broad-based gains, with many of them setting record highs. The S&P 500 finished the year up 16 per cent. Benefitting from capital inflows into the Hong Kong stock market, the Hang Seng Index rose by 28 per cent in 2025. The US Treasuries also performed decently on the back of the US Federal Reserve’s rate cuts. On foreign exchange, the US dollar depreciated by approximately 9 per cent against other major currencies.
“Against this backdrop, the Exchange Fund’s investment income in 2025 was a record high. Its bond and equity holdings, and the LTGP all achieved positive returns. The Exchange Fund also registered a positive currency translation effect on its non-Hong Kong dollar assets due to the weakening of the US dollar.
“It is exceptional for all main components of the Exchange Fund to record positive returns in a single year. This has occurred only two times over the past 15 years in 2017 and 2020. In addition, the investment of the Exchange Fund entails costs and expenses, such as fees on placements by the Fiscal Reserves and by the HKSAR Government funds and statutory bodies, as well as interest payment on Exchange Fund Bills and Notes and other expenses.”
Mr Yue said, “The exceptional confluence of multiple favourable factors in the global financial markets in 2025 may not last for a long time. Looking ahead to 2026, factors such as global economic conditions, monetary policies of major central banks, developments in artificial intelligence, and geopolitical conflicts could affect the performance of financial markets. Should market conditions deteriorate, the financial markets could fluctuate significantly.
“In the face of the complex and volatile investment environment, the HKMA will continue to adhere to the principle of capital preservation first while maintaining long-term growth. We will continue to manage the Exchange Fund with prudence and flexibility, implement appropriate defensive measures, and maintain a high degree of liquidity. We will also continue our investment diversification to strive for higher long-term returns, and ensure that the Exchange Fund remains effective in achieving its purpose of maintaining monetary and financial stability of Hong Kong.”
Note 1: This is primarily the effect of translating foreign currency assets into Hong Kong dollar after deducting the portion for currency hedging. Note 2: This is the valuation change of investments held by investment holding subsidiaries of the Exchange Fund. This figure reflects the valuations at the end of September 2025. Valuation changes of these investments from October to December are not yet available. Note 3: This does not include the 2025 fee payment to the Future Fund because such amount will only be published when the composite rate for 2025 is available. Note 4: This return excludes the performance of the Strategic Portfolio and only includes the performance of LTGP up to the end of September 2025. The audited full year return will be published in the 2025 annual report. Issued at HKT 17:00
Source: Hong Kong Government special administrative region
LCQ7: Implementation of fees and charges reform for public healthcare
Triage category The latest statistics of A&Es indicate that the fees and charges reform for public healthcare can effectively help the “acute” patients among the “poor, acute, serious, critical” patients who are most in need. Resources of A&Es are now better directed towards critical and emergency patients. Directing some non-urgent patients or patients with other medical needs to seek more appropriate healthcare services other than A&Es can also help reduce the overall waiting time and alleviate overcrowding at A&Es, thereby achieving the original intent of the fees and charges reform for public healthcare to concentrate resources and treat patients with urgent medical needs more effectively, as well as improving the clinical environment at A&Es.
(2), (4) and (5) As an essential component of the fees and charges reform for public healthcare, the HA has concurrently expanded its medical fee waiver mechanism. In addition to the some 600 000 people who have been benefiting from medical fee waivers both before and after the reform (including Comprehensive Social Security Assistance recipients, Old Age Living Allowance recipients aged 75 or above and Level 0 Voucher Holders of the Residential Care Service Voucher Scheme for the Elderly), the number of other eligible low-income individuals is estimated to significantly increase from approximately 300 000 to about 1.4 million, i.e. an additional 1.1 million low-income individuals can potentially benefit. This enables limited healthcare resources to be more precisely directed to help the “poor” patients among the “poor, acute, serious, critical” patients who are most in need, while ensuring that no patient is denied medical care due to lack of means.Issued at HKT 17:13
Source: Hong Kong Government special administrative region
LCQ9: Promoting development of local agriculture (1) of the number of farms engaged in farming and their respective cultivated area in each of the past five years, with a breakdown by (i) accredited farms, (ii) farms with certifications issued by the aforesaid certification organisations, and (iii) other farms;
(2) of the local production of vegetables and fruit in each of the past five years, with a breakdown by (i) accredited farms, (ii) farms with certifications issued by the aforesaid certification organisations, and (iii) other farms;
(3) of the number of local and Mainland farms currently participating in the Scheme; among them, the number of farms which are “inactive” (i.e. their agricultural land has been abandoned and no commercial crop production is taking place); and the number of accredited farms delisted by the AFCD due to inactivity in each of the past five years;
(4) of the current eligibility criteria for becoming an accredited farm; whether it knows the conditions adopted by the aforesaid certification organisations for granting organic certification; and the support and facilitation measures provided by the AFCD to farms participating in the Scheme and to farms with organic certification;
(5) the number of investigations conducted by the authorities on local vegetables and fruits by way of sample testing in each of the past five years, and the number of cases where unsatisfactory samples were detected, with a breakdown by (i) accredited farms, (ii) farms with certifications issued by the aforesaid certification organisations, and (iii) other farms; and how the authorities follow up on unsatisfactory samples, including whether they will conduct investigations into the farms from which such samples originate;
(6) of the current requirements for becoming an “accredited retailer”; whether the AFCD has compiled statistics on the number of “accredited retailers” which sell only agricultural produce from accredited farms, and whether it requires retail outlets selling agricultural produce from non-accredited farms to distinguish such produce by labelling; and
(7) given that the Blueprint for the Sustainable Development of Agriculture and Fisheries published by the Government in 2023 proposes the building of local agricultural products brand, will the authorities consider integrating the Scheme and the organic certification services of the aforesaid certification organisations to introduce a centralised certification system for grading local agricultural products so as to enhance their attractiveness and recognition?
Year(hectares)(hectares)(hectares)(hectares) The AFCD conducts regular visits to “accredited farms” in both Hong Kong and the Mainland. If a farm was found left fallow for a long time or no longer engaged in commercial production, its “accredited farm” status would be lifted. The number of farms withdrew from the Accredited Farm Scheme over the past five years due to operational inactivity is tabulated as follows:
Year(2) According to the AFCD’s records, the total local crop production volumes from 2021 to 2025 were approximately 15 300 tonnes, 15 100 tonnes, 15 800 tonnes, 15 300 tonnes and 15 400 tonnes respectively. The AFCD does not maintain a breakdown of
Year”accredited vegetables” from “accredited farms” (Tonnes) (Note 2)(4) Participation in the Accredited Farm Scheme is voluntary in nature. Participating farms are required to adhere to the good agricultural practices drawn up by the AFCD, such as the proper use of pesticides and the keeping of cultivation records. The AFCD will carry out pre-harvest sampling of crops for pesticide residue analysis, and provide guidance to farmers on the proper use of pesticides, adoption of environmentally-friendly crop production methods and good horticultural practices, so as to enhance the quality of crops and create a premium and safe brand.
On the other hand, the HKORC has established a set of organic crop production standards with reference to the standards set out by the International Federation of Organic Agriculture Movements, and provides organic certification service to local farms. Farms being certified are required to comply with the operational rules specified in these production standards and maintain proper production records. The HKORC also conducts inspections of certified farms to ensure that their produce meets the standards. Moreover, the AFCD will visit “accredited farms” and “certified organic farms” to conduct pre-harvest sampling of crops for testing of pesticide residues and heavy metal. The number of samples collected by the AFCD for testing and that with unsatisfactory findings over the past five years are tabulated as follows:
Year(pre-harvest)(pre-harvest) When crop sample from an “accredited farm” is suspected of containing pesticide residues or heavy metal content exceeding the prescribed limits, the AFCD will immediately require the farm to delay the harvesting of the crops and step up inspections and collect follow-up samples to ensure pesticides have been used properly and that the crops meet the food safety standards before being sold. Farms with three violations within six months will have their “accredited farm” status lifted.
If crop sample from a “certified organic farm” is unsatisfactory, The AFCD and the HKORC will visit the farm for follow-up investigation and require the farm to stop the sale of the concerned batch of crops. If a non-compliance with the organic crop production standard is confirmed, the HKORC will suspend or revoke the organic certification of the farm. Note 2: Since some “accredited farms” choose to distribute vegetables through direct sales or other channels, the market throughput of “accredited vegetables” has gradually decreased year on year.
Note 3: The production of crops from other farms includes crops grown by local “accredited farms” that are not “accredited vegetables” (i.e. crops not marketed through the VMO). The AFCD does not maintain the breakdown of the concerned items. Note 5: Samples containing pesticides mentioned in the Pesticide Residues in Food Regulation (Cap. 132CM) or other synthetic pesticides, or with a heavy metal content higher than the maximum level specified in the Food Adulteration (Metallic Contamination) Regulations (Cap. 132V), are regarded as unsatisfactory. Issued at HKT 17:30
Source: Hong Kong Government special administrative region
Caritas Medical Centre appeals to public for missing patient A 48-year-old male patient left the orthopaedic ward without notifying hospital staff at around 7.45pm yesterday (January 27).
CMC is very concerned about the incident. Hospital security guards were deployed to search for the patient at the hospital and the surrounding vicinity but were unsuccessful. The hospital reported the case to the Police immediately.
The patient is about 1.6 metres tall and has a normal build, black and grey shoulder-length hair, and a beard. He was wearing patient clothes when he left the hospital. The hospital appeals to the public to contact Cheung Sha Wan Police Station at 3661 1644 if they know the whereabouts of the patient.
The case has been reported to the Hospital Authority Head Office via the Advance Incident Reporting System. Issued at HKT 18:00
Source: Hong Kong Government special administrative region
LCQ1: Round-the-Island Trail Question:
The Chief Executive proposed in the 2022 Policy Address the development of a “Round-the-Island Trail” (Island Trail) on Hong Kong Island to connect a number of promenades and countryside walking trails between the northern part of Hong Kong Island and the Southern District. To date, 85 per cent of the Island Trail has been connected. Regarding further improvements to its connectivity and accessibility, will the Government inform this Council:
(1) as it is learnt that a number of waterfront sites in the Central and Western District have not been designated as land for the waterfront promenade due to operational needs or private ownership, etc, whether the Government has studied extending the waterfront promenade to these sites; if so, of the details; if not, the reasons for that, and whether it will conduct such studies;
(2) as there are views pointing out that the road section outside New Praya in Kennedy Town lacks a footpath for public use, and the entrance to Belcher Bay Promenade is separated by a bus terminus and obstructed by old trees, whether the Government will construct a boardwalk along the waterfront of the praya to connect the waterfront spaces on both sides, so as to enhance the accessibility of the Island Trail; if so, of the details and timetable; if not, the reasons for that; and
(3) of the works progress of the uncompleted road sections of the waterfront promenade in the southern part of Hong Kong Island, and the respective construction timetables?
Reply:
President,
The “Round-the-Island Trail” (the Trail) spans approximately 60 kilometres, connecting the harbourfront promenades on the northern shore of Hong Kong Island and a number of existing promenades and countryside walking trails in the Southern District. The project commenced in phases since 2023 to expedite the connection of the missing links of the Trail and improve some of the existing sections. So far, 85 per cent of the Trail has been connected , with the target of connecting 90 per cent of the Trail within next year and completing the remaining works by the end of 2031.
The reply to the various parts of the question is as follows:
(1) Following the opening of the Eastern Section of the East Coast Boardwalk last month, the approximately 13-kilometre long harbourfront from Kennedy Town to Shau Kei Wan has now been connected. Regarding the waterfront sites in the Central and Western District, most of them are connected in the form of promenades. While certain waterfront sites cannot offer promenades due to reasons such as operational needs or private ownership, pedestrian links are provided in the vicinity of the sites which connect to the adjacent waterfront areas. These sites in the Central and Western District are as follows:
(i) Shun Tak Centre: The lot is privately owned and primarily used for vehicular access at-grade. Pedestrian links are available in the vicinity which connect to other waterfront areas. However, these paths are rather circuitous involving several pedestrian walkways surrounding the Shun Tak Centre and crossing roads, or taking a nearby footbridge and through the Centre’s shopping mall. The Government will continue to liaise with the landowner to explore options for enhancing the at-grade pedestrian access at this location. In taking forward the Trail or enhancing the waterfront, we have adopted the approach of “tackling the simple issues first before the difficult ones” as well as the “incremental approach”, both of which are pragmatic and beneficial to the public. The Development Bureau will continue to follow this approach to provide more popular waterfront spaces and walking trails. Thank you, President. Issued at HKT 18:15