MIL Asia Pacific Publishing Engine

Source: Hong Kong Government special administrative region – 4

Following is a question by the Hon Chong Ho-fung and a written reply by the Secretary for Transport and Logistics, Ms Mable Chan, in the Legislative Council today (October 14):

Question:

It has been reported that in recent years, some uncivic-minded passengers have frequently engaged in discourteous behaviour on public transport. This includes playing videos or music loudly on mobile phones inside the carriage, making phone calls, and even placing their feet on seats, causing hygiene issues and nuisance. Numerous cities in the Mainland, as well as Japan, Singapore and London in the United Kingdom, have effectively curbed malpractices such as noise in passenger compartments and placing feet on seats through legal regulation, clear penalties, technological assistance or long-term publicity campaigns. In this connection, will the Government inform this Council:

(1) of the respective numbers of complaints received in each of the past three years by the Transport Department, the Environmental Protection Department and public transport operators concerning “noise nuisance” on public transport (such as the use of electronic devices with audio played through loudspeakers) and “improper or unhygienic behaviour” (including placing feet or shoes on seats and other discourteous conduct); whether the authorities have conducted any studies to assess the impact of such behaviour on the quality of public transport services and passengers’ travelling experience;

(2) whether the authorities will make reference to overseas experience and amend the relevant legislation in Hong Kong to expressly designate “playing audio from electronic devices through loudspeakers” and “placing feet or shoes on seats” as acts of contravention, and introduce streamlined enforcement procedures as well as review and increase the existing penalties for causing nuisance on public transport; and

(3) whether the authorities will study, in collaboration with the MTR Corporation Limited and various bus operators, the introduction of pilot “quiet zones/compartments”, and draw on overseas publicity strategies by installing additional warning signs in train compartments and at platforms, as well as making regular reminder announcements, with a view to promoting a culture of courteous travel?

Reply:

President,

The Government has been closely monitoring the service of public transport and working closely with the public transport operators (operators) to promote the message, through measures such as publicity and education, that passengers should be considerate and maintain mutual respect towards other passengers when using public transport services. In consultation with the Environmental Protection Department (EPD), our reply to the questions raised by the Hon Chong is as follows:

(1) The number of complaints received annually in the past three years by the Transport Department (TD) and the EPD regarding “noise nuisance” (e.g. excessive volume of electronic devices) and “improper or unhygienic behaviour” (e.g. stepping on seats) on public transport is set out in the Annex. The operators do not maintain statistics on complaints categorised by individual types of behaviour.

(2) At present, the legislation of various public transport services (e.g. the Mass Transit Railway By-laws (Cap. 556B), the Public Bus Services Regulations (Cap. 230A) and the Road Traffic (Public Service Vehicles) Regulations (Cap. 374D)) contains provisions regulating improper passenger conduct with corresponding penalties. Each franchised bus operator has drawn up Passenger Notices stipulating that passengers are refrained from playing mobile devices loudly or placing their feet on seats. The operators also remind passengers of the regulations through on-board announcements and signage. 

The operators have also put in place guidelines to assist frontline staff members in handling situations relating to passenger conduct in an appropriate manner based on the actual circumstances, such as offering verbal advice and taking follow-up actions, as well as referring to law enforcement authorities when necessary. As for the MTR Corporation Limited (MTRCL), its staff, in the course of their routine inspections, will give reminders and take appropriate follow-up actions if passengers were found to have breached the rules. 

In addition, the TD has been collaborating with and encouraging operators to promote through publicity and educational activities the importance of passenger safety, consideration for others and respect for other passengers when using public transport services. The MTRCL also organises annual courtesy campaign to remind passengers not to affect or cause nuisance to others.

(3) At present, there are quiet cars designated on all MTR heavy rail trains equipped with in-train televisions, where televisions are muted so as to provide passengers with a relatively quiet travelling environment. As for High Speed Rail, the Vibrant Express trains operated by the MTRCL have designated Quiet Cars where in-train announcements are broadcast at a lower volume and the in-train televisions are muted. Furthermore, passengers in Quiet Cars of the High Speed Rail are required to set their mobile phones to silent and wear headphones when using electronic devices. Passengers on the phone are required to move to either end of the compartment. When considering the introduction of “quiet zones/compartments”, operators need to prudently consider their mode of operation, operational arrangements such as space and design of compartment as well as the impact on overall carrying capacity in order to strike a proper balance. The Government will continue to keep in view passenger behaviour on public transport and collaborate with operators to promote travelling etiquette through various means, with a view to fostering a comfortable and harmonious travelling environment.

Source: Hong Kong Government special administrative region

Source: Hong Kong Government special administrative region – 4

Attention TV/radio announcers:

Please broadcast the following as soon as possible:

Here is an item of interest to swimmers.

The Leisure and Cultural Services Department announced today (October 14) that due to big waves, red flags have been hoisted at Shek O Beach in Southern District, Hong Kong Island, and Silverstrand Beach in Sai Kung District. Beachgoers are advised not to swim at these beaches.

Source: Hong Kong Government special administrative region

Source: Hong Kong Government special administrative region – 4

Following is a question by the Hon Leung Man-kwong and a written reply by the Secretary for Security, Mr Tang Ping-keung, in the Legislative Council today (October 14):
 
Question:
 
     It is reported that massage services advertised with terms such as “foot fetish” and “face-stepping” have proliferated in the community in recent months. There are views that the promotional content and business models of such services cause nuisance to the nearby communities and have aroused public concerns about the possible involvement of such premises in illegal sex trade. However, as these premises only provide localised massage services on body parts such as feet and face, they are currently not regulated under the licensing regime of the Massage Establishments Ordinance. In this connection, will the Government inform this Council:
 
(1) of the respective number of inspections of and law enforcement actions against massage establishments conducted by the Government in each of the past three years; among such cases, the number of those involving premises providing localised massage services on body parts such as feet and face; and the number of prosecutions brought against and convictions of the owners or operators of such premises for alleged offences under the Crimes Ordinance;
 
(2) whether the Government will consider amending the Massage Establishments Ordinance, including changing the licensing threshold for massage establishments from being defined by “body parts” to taking into account the nature and context of services, so as to comprehensively regulate all massage premises suspected of providing pornographic services; and
 
(3) as it is reported that the aforesaid premises carry out promotional and solicitation activities through online social media platforms and discussion forums using terms such as “unusual fetishes” and “sexual innuendo”, whether the Government will strengthen interdepartmental intelligence gathering and law enforcement in the future to combat such promotional activities; if so, of the details; if not, the reasons for that?

Reply:
 
President,
 
The Massage Establishments Ordinance (Cap. 266) aims to regulate massage establishments through a licensing regime in order to prevent and combat vice or illegal prostitution activities committed by criminals in these establishments. The Ordinance was amended in 2001 to narrow the regulatory scope so that only massage premises offering full-body massage (i.e. covering that part of the body below the shoulders and above the knees) to customers of the opposite sex are required to obtain a licence, with a view to striking a proper balance between controlling vice activities and not hindering legitimate massage businesses.
 
Under the Ordinance, any person who operates, keeps, manages, assists in any capacity in the operation of, or assists in the management of, a massage establishment for the operation of which a licence is not in force commits an offence and is liable to a fine of $50,000 and imprisonment for six months on first conviction, and a fine of $100,000 and imprisonment for two years on subsequent conviction.
 
My reply to the questions raised by the Member is as follows:

(1) The Hong Kong Police Force (HKPF) conducts regular surprise inspections of licensed massage establishments under section 11(1) of the Ordinance to combat vice activities or premises in breach of relevant licensing conditions. If a licensee breaches any licensing condition, or ceases to satisfy any condition relating to the operation of a massage establishment as prescribed in the Ordinance, the HKPF may, depending on the circumstances, issue a warning or consider revoking, suspending or refusing to renew the licence. 

The HKPF will take resolute law enforcement actions against any premises involved in illegal activities, including those suspected of operating unlicensed massage establishments. For instance, in July this year, the Sham Shui Po District of the HKPF, acting on intelligence, conducted a surprise inspection and cracked down an unlicensed massage establishment in Cheung Sha Wan which advertised so-called “barefoot facial” massage. Two persons were arrested on suspicion of “operating an unlicensed massage establishment” and “assisting in the management of an unlicensed massage establishment”. The case is currently under investigation.
 
The relevant statistics of the HKPF’s efforts against unlicensed massage premises over the past three years are tabulated below:
 

The above figures include arrests made in respect of offences including “prohibition on operating etc. massage establishment without a licence” under section 4 of the Ordinance, “keeping a vice establishment” under section 139 of the Crimes Ordinance (Cap. 200), “breach of condition of stay” and “offence to be employer of a person who is not lawfully employable” under section 41 and section 17I respectively of the Immigration Ordinance (Cap. 115). The HKPF does not maintain information on the types of services provided by the premises involved.

(2) The HKPF has all along been committed to combating all forms of illegal prostitution activities. In respect of premises suspected of providing pornographic services, regardless of whether they hold a licence issued under the Ordinance, section 139 of the Crimes Ordinance (Cap. 200) (“keeping a vice establishment”) provides that any person who keeps any premises, vessel or place as a vice establishment; or manages or assists in the management, or is otherwise in charge or control, of any premises, vessel or place kept as a vice establishment, shall be guilty of an offence and shall be liable on conviction to a maximum penalty of imprisonment for ten years. 

As mentioned above, the Government amended the Ordinance in 2001 to narrow the regulatory scope, including specifically stipulating that only massage establishments offering full-body massage to customers of the opposite sex are required to obtain a licence, and defining “full-body massage” as covering that part of the body below the shoulders and above the knees. The Government currently has no plan to amend the licensing threshold under the Ordinance. The HKPF will continue to closely monitor the modes of operation of massage premises using different descriptions to attract customers, and take resolute law enforcement actions against any premises involved in illegal activities, including those providing pornographic services.

(3) On intelligence gathering and law enforcement against illegal activities involving prostitution, the HKPF, apart from patrolling black spots, conducts intelligence-led operations, including deploying officers to disguise as customers to collect evidence and strengthening inspection of suspicious premises. The HKPF also adopts an interdepartmental collaboration strategy by conducting joint enforcement actions with relevant departments (including the Labour Department and the Immigration Department) to combat the offences concerned. At the same time, the HKPF will continue to closely monitor the trend of using websites and online social media platforms to conduct illegal prostitution activities, and gather intelligence via online channels to facilitate the deployment of targeted enforcement actions. 

The Government will continue to monitor market developments, including the modes of operation of massage establishments, and review the effectiveness of the implementation of the Ordinance on an ongoing basis. The Government will remain committed to preventing and combating the use of massage premises by criminals for vice and illegal prostitution activities, while not hindering the operation of legitimate massage businesses.

Source: Hong Kong Government special administrative region

     Following is a question by the Hon Chris Ip and a reply by the Secretary for Transport and Logistics, Ms Mable Chan, in the Legislative Council today (October 14):

Question: 
(1) of the number of complaints received by the authorities and the number of drivers with points incurred since the implementation of the Taxi-Driver-Offence Points system, with a breakdown by the nature of the offences; the number of drivers who have been disqualified from driving a taxi due to accumulated points;
 
(2) as there are views pointing out that drivers of red taxis plying for hire at public transport interchanges provided with both New Territories and urban taxi stands generally expect to pick up passengers travelling to urban areas, whether the authorities will, by drawing on the operational model of cross-harbour taxi stands, set up dedicated taxi stands at some interchanges for passengers bound for urban areas; if so, of the details; if not, the reasons for that; and
 
(3) as there are views that point-to-point transport demand in the New Territories will continue to increase in the future, whether the Government will, apart from adjusting the number of ride-hailing vehicle licences, review the number of taxi licences in a timely manner or enhance the existing service arrangements for urban and New Territories taxis; if so, of the details; if not, the reasons for that?
 
Reply: 
(1) The TDOP system has officially come into effect on September 22, 2024, covering 11 relatively serious taxi-driver-related offences under the legislation. A taxi driver who is convicted of any of these offences or is liable to pay a fixed penalty will incur the corresponding points. In accordance with the law, a taxi driver must not, without reasonable excuse, willfully refuse or neglect to accept a hire, nor refuse or neglect to drive the taxi to any place indicated by the hirer (refusing hire). The Police has all along been handling cases involving refusing hire seriously, and will seek advice from the Department of Justice and initiate prosecution if there is sufficient evidence. Any person who commits refusing hire will incur with the maximum of 10 points under the TDOP system.
 
     As of October 2, 2026, a total of 229 taxi drivers had incurred points, of which 125 cases were for refusing hire. Out of all the 229 drivers with points incurred, three drivers have been disqualified from driving a taxi (for a period of three months) owing to an incurrence of 15 points or more. Breakdown is set out at Annex I.
 
     In addition, from the implementation of the TDOP system to August 2026, the Transport Department (TD) had received a total of 5 944 taxi-driver-related complaints, of which 605 cases involved refusing hire. Breakdown is set out at Annex II. Upon receipt of complaints, TD will conduct investigations and refer them to the law enforcement agency for follow-up depending on the nature of the cases. TD will also issue letters to the taxi owners or drivers concerned to request explanations, reminding them to comply with the legislation and pay attention to their service attitude, with a view to keeping up service quality.
 
(2) In accordance with the law, New Territories (NT) taxis have designated operating areas, which mainly cover the north-eastern NT (i.e. north of Sha Tin) and the north-western NT (i.e. north of Tsuen Wan), and their fares are lower than those of urban taxis. On the other hand, urban taxis can pick up passengers and take them anywhere (except Tung Chung Road and roads in South Lantau). 
(3) The Government has been upholding the public transport-oriented policy with railway as the backbone, complemented by well-networked mass transport modes (such as franchised buses and the Light Rail) to provide efficient services for the public. On the other hand, public light buses and taxis play a supplementary role, with the latter providing personalised point-to-point services, currently accounting for about 6 per cent of the overall public transport patronage.

Source: Hong Kong Government special administrative region – 4

Following is a question by the Hon Tommy Chung and a reply by the Secretary for Labour and Welfare, Mr Chris Sun, in the Legislative Council today (October 14):

Question:

There are views relaying that given the lack of flexibility in the existing Standard Employment Contract and supporting policies, employers of foreign domestic helpers (FDHs) are facing a number of problems. In this connection, will the Government inform this Council:

(1) whether it will study introducing a statutory probation period (e.g. two to three months) in the employment contracts of FDHs, reviewing the arrangement under which employers are required to provide free passage so that FDHs have to pay for their airfares in proportion to their length of service, and limiting the agency fees charged for re-hiring to a specific percentage of the amount paid for initial hiring so as to protect the rights and interests of employers; if so, of the details; if not, the reasons for that;

(2) whether it will formulate in collaboration with the Equal Opportunities Commission the practical guidelines on compliant departure and contract termination targeting FDHs to provide objective medical assessment standards and standard mediation procedures for situations where FDHs are unable to perform duties due to serious illness or other reasons; if so, of the details; if not, the reasons for that; and

(3) whether it will amend the legislation to stipulate that FDHs who are dismissed upon conviction for criminal offences will immediately forfeit their eligibility to any statutory compensation, payment in lieu of notice and passage allowance, while the Immigration Department will also prohibit them from coming to Hong Kong to work again; if so, of the details; if not, the reasons for that?

Reply:

President,

The Government attaches great importance to the reasonable rights and interests of both foreign domestic helpers (FDHs) and employers, and is committed to balancing the concerns and interests of both parties, while maintaining Hong Kong as an attractive work destination for a sufficient number of FDHs, so as to meet the community’s increasing domestic care needs. Having consulted the Immigration Department (ImmD) and the Equal Opportunities Commission (EOC), my reply to the question is as follows:

(1) Under the Standard Employment Contract (SEC) for employing FDHs, either party may terminate the employment contract by giving the other party not less than one month’s notice in writing, or paying one month’s wages in lieu of notice. If an FDH wilfully disobeys a lawful and reasonable order, misconducts himself/herself, is guilty of fraud or dishonesty, or is habitually neglectful in his/her duties, the employer may also summarily dismiss the FDH under the Employment Ordinance (Cap. 57) (EO) without notice or payment in lieu of notice. Therefore, under the existing arrangements, employers may already terminate employment contracts in accordance with the EO and the terms of the SEC where necessary. The Government considers that there is no need to introduce into the SEC an additional provision prescribing a probationary period.

     The SEC also provides that the employer shall be responsible for the FDH’s passage for returning to his/her place of origin upon termination or expiry of the contract. This arrangement is one of the necessary conditions for allowing employers to recruit domestic helpers from overseas to work in Hong Kong. Its purpose is to ensure that FDHs who come to Hong Kong will not be left stranded in Hong Kong due to a lack of means for travel, thereby avoiding potential public order and other social problems. Other labour importation schemes also require employers to bear the same responsibility. The Government has no plan to amend this requirement.

     At present, employers may hire FDHs through employment agencies (EAs) or on their own. The fees charged by EAs depend on their scope of services and their agreements with employers. These are a matter of market practice, and it is not appropriate for the Government to prescribe the mode and level of relevant fees. To strengthen the protection of the rights and interests of FDH employers as consumers, the Labour Department (LD) revised the Code of Practice for Employment Agencies in May 2024, requiring EAs to clearly state whether, if an FDH prematurely terminates the contract, they will provide a refund, a replacement FDH or other arrangements, and whether additional fees will be charged, with a view to enhancing the transparency of charging and service arrangements and enabling employers to make informed decisions when choosing EAs. EAs breaching the Code of Practice for Employment Agencies may be subject to disciplinary actions by the LD.

(2) The EOC has formulated the Code of Practice on Employment under the Disability Discrimination Ordinance, which provides practical guidance for employers and employees in all types of occupations (including FDHs and their employers), explaining how to prevent disability discrimination in the workplace and how to effectively implement the Disability Discrimination Ordinance (Cap. 487) (DDO) in the workplace. Upon receipt of a complaint of disability discrimination, the EOC will handle it in accordance with the established procedures, which include, with the consent of the parties concerned and having regard to all relevant information, assisting FDHs and their employers to clarify the issues in dispute and reach a settlement through conciliation.

     Under the DDO, it is unlawful for an employer to discriminate against or dismiss an employee on the ground of the employee’s disability. Nevertheless, the law does not stipulate that employers are prohibited from dismissing the employees concerned under all circumstances. An exception may apply if the employer can present objective evidence to prove that the employee concerned is unable to perform the inherent requirements of the job due to the employee’s disability. If an employee is still able to perform the inherent requirements of the job, but requires adjustments to the working arrangements, the employer may consider providing appropriate accommodation having regard to the specific circumstances of the case. Such accommodation may include flexible working arrangements to allow the sick employee to attend medical appointments, take rest, etc. An exception under the DDO may also apply if the accommodation required would impose an unjustifiable hardship on the employer.

     The Government encourages employers and FDHs to make reference to the Code of Practice on Employment under the Disability Discrimination Ordinance and work together to foster a mutually beneficial work environment for both parties.

(3) As there are many types of criminal offences and their severity varies, they cannot be generalised. However, as I have just mentioned, if an FDH, in relation to his/her employment, is guilty of fraud or dishonesty, for example, where he/she is convicted by the court of stealing property from the employer’s home, the EO currently already provides that the employer may summarily dismiss the FDH without notice or payment in lieu of notice. However, the employer is still required to provide the FDH with return passage to his/her place of origin. This arrangement is one of the necessary conditions for allowing employers to recruit domestic helpers from overseas to work in Hong Kong, and is intended to ensure that FDHs who come to Hong Kong will not be left stranded in Hong Kong due to a lack of means for travel.

     The ImmD has all along been assessing employment visa applications from FDHs in a rigorous manner, and will consider each application having regard to its individual circumstances. An FDH must meet the eligibility criteria set out in the Guidebook for the Employment of Domestic Helpers from Abroad, including having no known record to the detriment of him/her, and must also meet the normal immigration requirements, such as being of clear criminal record, before his/her application will be considered for approval. If an FDH has any adverse record or has committed any breach, the ImmD will normally refuse his/her application.

Source: Hong Kong Government special administrative region – 4

     Following is a question by the Hon Jimmy Ng and a written reply by the Secretary for Education, Dr Choi Yuk-lin, in the Legislative Council today (October 14):
 
Question:
 
     The Government has been promoting the development of vocational and professional education and training (VPET) for many years. With the Government’s support, the Vocational Training Council (VTC) has implemented the Pilot Incentive Scheme to Employers (PISE) under the Training and Support Scheme (the Support Scheme) to encourage employers to provide workplace learning and assessment for learners, thereby enhancing their work performance. It is learnt that there are public concerns as to whether the Government will further promote and support the development of VPET. In this connection, will the Government inform this Council:
 
(1) as far as the Support Scheme is concerned, (i) of the respective numbers of employers and learners participating in the Support Scheme in the past three school years, with a breakdown by industry; (ii) whether it will increase the training places and raise the ceiling on the monthly subsidy for learners under the Support Scheme; if so, of the details; if not, the reasons for that; (iii) whether it will provide more incentives for employers to encourage more industrial and commercial enterprises to participate in the Support Scheme; if so, of the details;
 
(2) as far as the PISE is concerned, (i) of the respective numbers of employers and learners participating in the PISE in the past three school years, with a breakdown by industry; (ii) whether it will study raising the ceiling on the subsidy for employers under the PISE; if so, of the details; (iii) whether it will consider extending the PISE to cover VPET courses organised by institutions other than the VTC; (iv) whether it will study formulating industry-recognised standards for skills tests; if so, of the details; (v) whether it will further extend or regularise the PISE; if so, of the details; if not, the reasons for that; and
 
(3) whether it will consider launching more new schemes to strengthen VPET and apprenticeship training; if so, of the details; if not, the reasons for that?
 
Reply:
 
President,
 
     In line with the strategic deployment of the National 15th Five-Year Plan to promote the integrated development of education, technology and talent, the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region Government’s First Five-Year Plan clearly states that the Government will advance the high-quality development of vocational and professional education and training (VPET). To this end, the Education Bureau (EDB) continues to adopt the strategy of “fostering industry-institution collaboration and diversified development” under a multi-pronged approach to promote VPET as a pathway parallel to conventional academic education, encouraging industry-education collaboration and the collaboration between schools and businesses, providing diversified learning and employment opportunities, thereby nurturing more high-quality talent equipped with applied skills.
 
     The reply to the Hon Jimmy Ng’s question is as follows:
 
(1) The Government has supported the Vocational Training Council (VTC) to launch the Training and Support Scheme (the Support Scheme) on a pilot basis since the 2014/15 academic year (AY), and has regularised it since the 2019/20 AY. The Support Scheme aims to provide structured classroom learning and on-the-job training, as well as a stable income for trainees undergoing on-the-job training, so as to attract and retain talent for industries with a keen manpower demand. The Support Scheme currently covers six professional fields, namely Engineering and Technology; Transportation; Design, Jewellery, Creative Industry; Healthcare Services; Testing and Certification; and Hospitality, and offers 1 200 training places each financial year.
 
The numbers of employers and trainees participating in the Support Scheme in the recent three AYs (i.e. 2024/25, 2025/26 and 2026/27 AYs) are as follows:

* Participating employers may employ trainees in more than one industry.
# The figures of 2026/27 AY are up to September 30, 2026.
^ No relevant programme is offered in that year.
 
     The Support Scheme has received positive responses since its launch. The training places and monthly allowance ceiling that are currently offered can generally meet the demand, and industry participation has been satisfactory. The VTC has also maintained close communication with the industries to ensure that the Support Scheme aligns with industry needs and the development of emerging industries while providing sufficient training places. The VTC will continue to closely monitor the implementation of the Support Scheme and feedbacks from the industries, and will review and make appropriate adjustments timely when needed.
 
(2) The Government has supported the VTC to implement the Pilot Incentive Scheme to Employers (the Pilot Scheme) under the Support Scheme since the 2019/20 AY. The Pilot Scheme mainly encourages employers to conduct systematic assessment on workplace learning for trainees participating in the Support Scheme. Through assessing and observing directly trainees’ abilities and performance, employers could keep track of trainees’ learning progress and make timely adjustments to the training content based on the assessment results, thereby effectively enhancing the trainees’ overall performance. To encourage employers’ participation in the Pilot Scheme, the Government provides participating employers with a subsidy of up to $36,000 per trainee, with 1 000 places offered each AY.
 
     The numbers of employers and trainees participating in the Pilot Scheme in the past three AYs# (i.e. 2023/24, 2024/25 and 2025/26 AYs) are as follows:

# As the 2026/27 AY has just commenced and the Scheme has not yet been implemented, the relevant figures are not yet available.
* Participating employers may employ trainees in more than one industry.
^ No relevant programme is offered in that year.
 
     According to the survey conducted by the VTC, most participating employers were satisfied with the Pilot Scheme and indicated that it enabled them to better understand trainees’ abilities. Most trainees indicated that the Pilot Scheme allowed them to demonstrate their learned skills in the workplace, and agreed that the assessment results could enhance the effectiveness of on-the-job training. On the whole, the Pilot Scheme has received positive responses since its launch. The VTC will continue to closely monitor the implementation of the Pilot Scheme and feedbacks from the industries, and will review various arrangements timely, including whether to extend the Pilot Scheme to cover more industries and their relevant programmes.
 
     In addition, under the Qualifications Framework (QF), Industry Training Advisory Committees have been established for 23 industries. They have respectively developed “Specification of Competency Standards” (SCS) tailored to different job functions and roles, setting out the skills and knowledge practitioners must possess, as well as the competency standards they must attain to perform various job functions in the industries. These SCS serve as key reference for talent development, curriculum design and qualifications recognition. Among them, 19 industries have established Recognition of Prior Learning mechanisms based on their SCS, enabling practitioners to have their work-based knowledge, skills and experience formally recognised through relevant tests or assessments, thereby obtaining corresponding QF-recognised qualifications.
 
(3) In recent years, the VTC has strengthened VPET at the secondary school level to help students gain an earlier understanding of the industries and career pathways. With the support of the EDB, the VTC has launched the following two pilot schemes to enable students to gain earlier exposure to VPET, discover their interests and broaden their VPET articulation pathways:
 

1. The Pilot Diploma of Vocational Baccalaureate Programme was launched in the 2018/19 AY, offered by the Youth College under the VTC. It is a three-year vocationally-oriented programme with reference to international standards. Upon completion, students will be awarded an internationally recognised diploma, and may choose to directly articulate to local or overseas undergraduate programmes, to Higher Diploma programmes offered by the VTC, or pursue a career in their respective industries. The Programme has been regularised starting from the 2026/27 AY; and
2. The Pilot Project on Diploma of Vocational Education (Senior Secondary Curriculum) (DVE(SSC)) was launched in the 2023/24 AY, allowing senior secondary school students to pursue VPET-related programme embedded in the Hong Kong Diploma of Secondary Education (HKDSE) curriculum. Upon completion, students will be awarded, alongside their HKDSE qualification, a DVE(SSC) at QF Level 3, enabling them to apply for relevant higher diploma programmes offered by the VTC. The Project has been extended for three AYs starting from the 2026/27 AY.

 
     As regards apprenticeship training, in view of the persistent shortage of local technical professionals, the Government will continue to promote the Apprenticeship Scheme through the VTC, providing structured apprenticeship training and clear progression pathways. To encourage more young people to join the Scheme and enter the relevant trades, the 2026 Policy Address announced that the provision of an additional monthly training allowance of $1,000 to registered apprentices since 2024-25 will be extended for two years to 2028-29.

Source: Hong Kong Government special administrative region