Minutes of the 7th Meeting of Yau Tsim Mong District Council (2016-2019)

Date : 24 November 2016 (Thursday) Time : 2:30 p.m. Venue : Yau Tsim Mong District Council Conference Room 4/F., Mong Kok Government Offices 30 Luen Wan Street Mong Kok, Kowloon Present: Chairman

Mr IP Ngo-tung, Chris Vice-chairman

Ms WONG Shu-ming, MH District Council Members

Mr CHAN Siu-tong, MH, JP Mr CHOI Siu-fung, Benjamin Mr CHONG Wing-charn,

Francis, MH Mr CHOW Chun-fai, BBS, JP Mr CHUNG Chak-fai Mr CHUNG Kong-mo, BBS, JP

Mr HUI Tak-leung Mr HUNG Chiu-wah, Derek Mr JO Chun-wah, Craig Ms KWAN Sau-ling Mr LAM Kin-man Mr LAU Pak-kei

Ms TANG Ming-sum, Michelle The Honourable TO Kun-sun,

James Mr WONG Kin-san Mr YEUNG Tsz-hei, Benny, MH Mr YU Tak-po, Andy

Representatives of the Government

Mrs ARON Laura Liang, JP District Officer (Yau Tsim Mong) Home Affairs Department Mr HO Chung-yin, Terrence Assistant District Officer (1)

(Yau Tsim Mong) Home Affairs Department

Miss CHUNG Ka-wing, Rainy

Assistant District Officer (2) (Yau Tsim Mong)

Home Affairs Department

Mr CHEUNG Kwok-leung, Eric

District Environmental Hygiene Superintendent (Mong Kok)

Food and Environmental Hygiene Department

Mr CHEUNG Wai-man Chief Health Inspector 1 (Yau Tsim) Food and Environmental Hygiene Department

Mr Mark FOSTER District Commander (Mong Kok) Hong Kong Police Force Mr KWOK Pak-chung District Commander (Yau Tsim) Hong Kong Police Force Mr CHOY Chik-sang, Mario Chief Transport Officer

(Kowloon) Transport Department

Mr HSU Ka-man District Leisure Manager (Yau Tsim Mong)

Leisure and Cultural Services Department

Mr POON Hiu-tung, Felix Senior Engineer/3 (Kowloon) Civil Engineering and Development Department

Mrs CHENG IP Sau-fong, Susanna

Senior Housing Manager (Kowloon West and Sai Kung 1)

Housing Department

In Attendance: Mr HUI Siu-wai, JP Director of Buildings Buildings Department Mr TANG Kwok-kuen Chief Structural Engineer/F Buildings Department Ms CHU Yuen-man, Lisa Senior Building Surveyor/Mandatory

Building Inspection 2-B Buildings Department

Ms WONG Fung-sang Administrative Assistant to the Director of Buildings

Buildings Department

Mr CHENG Woon-kit Divisional Commander, South Kowloon

Fire Services Deprtment

Mr CHEUNG Yiu-cho Station Commander, Yau Ma Tei Fire Station

Fire Services Deprtment

Dr PAO Lap-yan Senior Environmental Protection Officer (Asbestos Management & Control Section)

Environmental Protection Department

Mr SUEN Pak-hang, Bryan Assistant Environmental Protection Officer (Asbestos Management & Control Section)

Environmental Protection Department

Dr Albert C Y LO Cluster Chief Executive, Kowloon Central Cluster/Hospital Chief Executive, Queen Elizabeth Hospital

Hospital Authority

Dr K S YEUNG Senior Manager (Hospital Services Planning), Kowloon Central Cluster

Hospital Authority

Mr Donald LI Yuk-pun Chief Manager (Capital Planning) Hospital Authority Ms WONG Ping-ping Chief Inspector of Police (Kowloon

West Regional Headquarters) Hong Kong Police Force

Mr Tony HO Chief Geotechnical Engineer/Planning, Geotechnical Engineering Office

Civil Engineering and Development Department

Mr Jeffrey WONG Senior Geotechnical Engineer/Underground Space Development, Geotechnical Engineering Office

Civil Engineering and Development Department

Ms April KUN Chief Town Planner/Studies and Research

Planning Department

Mr Mann CHOW Senior Town Planner/Studies and Research 3

Planning Department

Mr Fred NG Senior Project Manager AECOM Asia Company Ltd. Dr Johnny CHEUK Deputy Project Manager AECOM Asia Company Ltd. Dr Eunice MAK Planning Team Leader AECOM Asia Company Ltd.

- 2 -

Mr MA Siu-cheong, Eric, JP Under Secretary for Development Development Bureau Mr FUNG Ying-lun, Allan Political Assistant to Secretary for

Development Development Bureau

Miss LAU Bo-yee, Winnie Chief Town Planner/Strategic Planning

Planning Department

Ms CHAN Hau-yin, Margaret

Senior Town Planner/Strategic Planning 5

Planning Department

Mr LAI Yiu-kei, Samson Assistant Director (Waste Management Policy)

Environmental Protection Department

Mr MAK Shui-wing Marine Officer/Licensing & Port Formalities (2)

Marine Department

Mr CHAN Ping-fai, Rico Marine Officer/Ferry Terminals Marine Department Mr LEE Yue-wah, Ellis Senior Engineer/ Municipal/

Centralised Services Electrical & Mechanical

Services Department Mr WU Shun Tak, Steve Senior Mechanical Inspector/

Municipal/Centralised Services/1 Electrical & Mechanical

Services Department Miss WONG Shuk-han,

Diane Principle Assistant Secretary for

Food & Health (Food) 2 Food and Health Bureau

Mr CHAN Yiu-keung, Edward

Senior Superintendent (Hawker & Market)

Food and Environmental Hygiene Department

Mr WAN Chi-shun, Stephen Chief Health Inspector (Mongkok) 2 Food and Environmental Hygiene Department

Secretary

Ms CHUNG Siu-lan, Joanne

Senior Executive Officer (District Council), Yau Tsim Mong District Office

Home Affairs Department

Opening Remarks The Chairman welcomed representatives of government departments and participants to the meeting. He said that Mr KWOK Pak-chung, District Commander (Yau Tsim) and Mr Mark FOSTER, District Commander (Mong Kok) of the Hong Kong Police Force (“HKPF”) would not be available for the meeting before 4:30 p.m. due to duty commitments. He reported that Mr WONG Kam-wah, District Environmental Hygiene Superintendent (Yau Tsim) of the Food and Environmental Hygiene Department (“FEHD”) had retired, and his successor Mr CHEUNG Wai-man, Chief Health Inspector 1 (Yau Tsim) would attend the meeting. Besides, Mr MOK Wing-cheong, Ringo, Chief Engineer / Kowloon 5 (Kowloon) of the Civil Engineering and Development Department (“CEDD”), Mr TSE Chick-lam, Chief Manager / Management (Kowloon West and Hong Kong) of the Housing Department (“HD”), and Mr CHAIONG David, Stanley, Chief Leisure Manager (Hong Kong West) of the Leisure and Cultural Services Department (“LCSD”) were absent due to duty commitments. Mr Felix POON, Senior Engineer/3 (Kowloon), Mrs Susanna CHENG, Senior Housing Manager (Kowloon West and Sai Kung 1), and Mr HSU Ka-man, District Leisure Manager (Yau Tsim Mong) were attending the meeting in their places respectively.

- 3 -

Item 1: Visit of Director of Buildings to Yau Tsim Mong District Council 2. The Chairman welcomed Mr HUI Siu-wai, Director of Buildings, Mr TANG Kwok-kuen, Chief Structural Engineer/F, Ms Lisa CHU, Senior Building Surveyor/Mandatory Building Inspection 2-B, and Ms WONG Fung-sang, Administrative Assistant to the Director of Buildings of the Buildings Department (“BD”) to the Yau Tsim Mong District Council (“YTMDC”). (Mr CHOW Chun-fai joined the meeting at 2:33 p.m.) 3. Mr HUI Siu-wai gave a Powerpoint presentation on the work of the BD in respect of unauthorised building works (“UBWs”), water seepage in buildings, signboards, as well as sub-divided flats. 4. Mr Francis CHONG suggested the establishment of a tribunal to adjudicate seepage cases and to look into the question of responsibility. 5. Mr Benny YEUNG raised his views and questions as follows: (i) a case showed that officers of the BD, on receiving complaints about illegal erection of signboards, told the complainant that they would contact the owners’ corporation (“OC”). But ridiculously, the complainant was already a member of the OC; (ii) how the BD would handle illegal signboards under construction; and (iii) how the BD could determine whether a flat undergoing major renovation works would be subdivided into small units. 6. Mr LAM Kin-man raised his views and enquiries as follows: (i) whether only those subdivided flats which affected structural integrity of the building would be regarded as illegal; (ii) he would like to know the prosecution figure of the BD against subdivision of flats; and (iii) the BD should help handle UBWs in common areas of a building undergoing maintenance, so as to prevent hindrance to the maintenance works due to disputes between the OC and flat owners. 7. Ms KWAN Sau-ling raised her views and enquiries as follows: (i) during the last term of District Council, hundreds of illegal / dangerous / abandoned signboards in the district had been removed in a few years under the supervision of Mr POON Yui-chau, representative of the BD in the former Housing and Building Management Committee. She showed appreciation for his efforts; (ii) the progress of the BD in handling water seepage complaints was very slow; and (iii) she hoped that the BD would strengthen education and publicity in building maintenance. 8. Mr Benjamin CHOI raised his views and enquiries as follows: (i) it would be far from being satisfactory if a tenant could not meet the fire safety direction issued by the BD due to various constraints and finally got prosecuted; and (ii) he hoped that the Director would explain, with examples, what buildings only needed to finish the necessary and basic improvement works. 9. Ms Michelle TANG suggested the government set up an organisation or a department to adjudicate seepage cases and to look into the question of responsibility, so as to minimise

- 4 -

disputes among tenants. 10. Mr CHUNG Kong-mo raised his views as follows: (i) when a building underwent maintenance works, the BD should first remove UBWs in the common areas of the building; and (ii) when an OC tried to take out insurance to cover public liability, the insurance company might not accept the application due to the existence of UBWs in the building. He hoped that the BD would first remove UBWs in these buildings. 11. Mr WONG Kin-san raised his views as follows: (i) he appreciated that the BD regularly reported to the YTMDC the work progress in handling illegal / dangerous / abandoned signboards in the district; (ii) he would like to know whether “capsule”, a new type of room emerged recently, was lawful; and (iii) if “capsule” was against the law, what action the government would take to follow-up on the issue. 12. Mr Craig JO raised his views and enquiries as follows: (i) the BD had commissioned a consultant to study the issue of water seepage in buildings. He would like to know when the study result would be released; and (ii) subdivision of flat might affect structural integrity of the building. However, the BD seemed to be at wit’s end about the problem of subdivision of flat. 13. Mr LAU Pak-kei raised his views and enquiries as follows: (i) some “three nil” buildings and old tenement buildings got leaking or cracked sewage pipes, which led to public environmental hygiene problems. He would like to know whether the BD had formulated any handling guidelines; (ii) the joint office (“JO”) of the BD and the FEHD received about 30 000 water seepage complaints annually. How many of these cases ended up with the source of seepage successfully identified; and (iii) whether there were more effective ways to trace the source of seepage. 14. The Vice-chairman raised her views and enquiries as follows: (i) she would like to know the number of orders issued and the number of inspections conducted by the BD under the Fire Safety (Buildings) Ordinance and the Fire Safety (Commercial Premises) Ordinance, as well as the number of cases in which the subject persons acted in compliance to the orders; (ii) whether the JO had ever released any interim report; and (iii) the colour water test adopted by the JO often failed to trace the source of seepage, but the infrared camera test adopted by loss adjustors could successfully do so. She would like to know whether it implied that the technical method adopted by the JO was outdated. 15. Mr HUI Tak-leung raised his views and enquiries as follows: (i) he hoped that the Director would brief Councillors on the progress of all their work next time he visited the YTMDC; (ii) a flat owner only needed to apply for the BD’s permission for minor works if he wanted to erect a signboard, but the signboard might not be accepted by the OC. Such practice of the BD could lead to other community problems; (iii) officers of the BD could neither trace the source of water seepage nor enter the premises to collect evidence, let alone adjudicating cases; (iv) an officer of the BD told him that no prosecution action could be taken unless the staff of the BD had witnessed that the cracked sewage pipe had caused environmental hygiene problems; (v) the BD not only failed to remove UBWs in the platform when a building underwent maintenance, but prosecute the OC for occupying common area instead. He hoped that the department would amend the existing ordinance; and (vi) he hoped that the Director would brief his subordinates that Councillors did not mean to report

- 5 -

against any OC when they provided the names of target buildings. 16. Mr Andy YU would like to know: (i) whether the “capsule” was against the law. If “capsule” was against the law, what follow-up action the BD and the Fire Services Department (“FSD”) would take; and (ii) whether the fire safety equipment, as well as lighting and ventilation facilities in a capsule were adequate. 17. Mr CHUNG Chak-fai raised his views as follows: (i) he hoped that the BD would increase manpower and adopt up-to-date technology, so as to handle the problems of subdivided flats and water seepage in the district effectively; (ii) Although the signboard erected by a flat owner might be approved by the BD, it might not be recognised by the OC or other stakeholders; (iii) many ground level shops undergoing renovation would occupy the pavement off their shops. The BD might receive complaints about such occupation, but the department was very slow in handling these complaints; (iv) it had been five years since the BD launched the Mandatory Building Inspection Scheme and the Mandatory Window Inspection Scheme, but few buildings have benefitted from these schemes. He asked whether it was due to manpower shortage of the BD; and (v) some old tenement building had submitted their plans to the BD many years before, and the existing structure might be different from the plans. The BD should handle harmless UBWs flexibly. 18. Mr CHOW Chun-fai raised his views and enquiries as follows: (i) the building plan approving procedures of the BD lasted too long, making a lot of flat owners in the district unable to apply for subsidies under the Operation Building Bright and the Integrated Building Maintenance Assistance Scheme; and (ii) the BD used to adopt a tolerant attitude or only “imposed an encumbrance” when handling UBWs. But now, the department would issue a letter or even initiate prosecution against UBW owners. He would like to know whether there was any change in the department’s policy towards UBWs. 19. Mr HUI Siu-wai responded as follows:

(i) He would provide Councillors with prosecution figures of the BD after the meeting.

(ii) The BD and the FSD were enforcement departments of the Fire Safety (Buildings) Ordinance. The former was mainly responsible for supervision over planning, design and construction of buildings (e.g. means of escape, fire resisting structure, etc), while the latter was responsible for supervision over fire service installation or equipment in a building (e.g. automatic sprinkler system, fire hydrant and hose reel system, etc). The FSD and the Water Supplies Department (“WSD”) were conducting a pilot scheme on buildings with not more than three storeys, in which the WSD would provide fresh water to the building directly in case of fire-fighting. The scheme would later extend to cover buildings with six storeys. In respect of the comment raised by a Councillor that the building plan approving procedures of the department lasted too long, he would discuss with the relevant section and review the situation.

(iii) Erection of a signboard without prior approval or consent of the BD under the Buildings Ordinance, or not in compliance with the simplified requirements

- 6 -

under the Minor Works Control System would render the signboard an UBW. In view of the large number of unauthorised signboards, the BD would first conduct risk assessment to decide whether the subject signboard constituted an imminent danger, was erected with a view to sale or letting, was seriously detrimental to the amenities of the neighbourhood, or constituted a public nuisance, as a signboard for priority demolition described in Section 24B of the Buildings Ordinance. As regards abandoned signboards, Councillors or any members of the public could inform the BD so that the BD might take follow-up action if they were aware that a shop had ceased operation or had moved, but its signboard was still hanging there.

(iv) Apart from the problem of building safety, subdivision of flat also involved other social issues and housing problems. According to a survey conducted earlier, over 86 000 people were living in sub-divided flats. If the Administration eradicated all subdivided flats across the board, this population would have to find another abode. Therefore, the BD would first serve removal orders to subdivided flats which seriously affected building safety (including flats affecting fire safety or building structure, or flats with leaking pipes which incurred serious environmental hygiene nuisances). The BD would also regularly inspect reported subdivided flats and subdivided flats in target buildings.

(v) Residential flats with 12 or more bedspaces were subject to Bedspace Apartments Ordinance. However, setting up “capsules” in a room might not contravene the Buildings Ordinance. Nevertheless, the BD would closely monitor the situation.

(vi) The JO was set up in 2006 on a trial basis, and non-civil service contract staff helped trace seepage source. The JO was regularised in 2014, and all the posts were taken up by civil servants by phase. The JO had to stick to the requirements under the law in tracing seepage source, and then issue a “Nuisance Notice” to the relevant person. Apart from colour water, the JO also used infrared camera and microwave tomography scanning device to trace the seepage source. Since the JO must provide sufficient evidence to the court in case it instituted criminal prosecution, it enforced the requirements on evidence collection strictly. Seepage investigation by a private consultant was only meant for civil proceedings, and therefore, the evidence submitted by a private consultant would be accepted as long as it could prove that seepage did exist. Besides, even though the Public Health and Municipal Services Ordinance stipulated that the JO could step in and handle cases involving building hygiene nuisance, and the party causing such nuisance had to abate the nuisance, the JO often faced uncooperative tenants or flat owners. The JO might apply to the court for a warrant, but it must prove that efforts to contact the tenants were in vain. Therefore, the investigation might take longer time.

(vii) The BD expected that the consultant would finish the study in the first half of 2017. The scope of study included latest technology in tracing seepage source in buildings, technology development local and abroad, as well as field trial in selected cases. The consultant would make assessments and suggestions on

- 7 -

testing methods most suitable for private buildings.

(viii) The BD would study the feasibility of setting up the seepage tribunal.

(ix) As regards the Mandatory Building Inspection Scheme and the Mandatory Window Inspection Scheme, the BD would adjust the number of target buildings, depending on its workload and public views on the two schemes. In recent years, the BD had reduced the number of buildings chosen each year in order to handle backlog of cases, as well as to redeploy resources to strengthen support to flat owners and supervision on the trade.

(x) Some Councillors were of the view that the BD should first remove UBWs in common areas of buildings undergoing maintenance. He asked Councillors to provide information of such buildings, so that the BD could take follow-up action.

20. Mr CHOW Chun-fai asked why some buildings in the district only needed to inspect their windows, but not the whole building at the same time. 21. Mr CHUNG Kong-mo was of the view that while assessing whether a sub-divided flat would affect building safety, the BD should also take into consideration the total number of sub-divided flats in the same building. 22. Mr HUI Siu-wai responded as follows:

(i) When the Mandatory Building Inspection Scheme and the Mandatory Window Inspection Scheme were first launched, some buildings were chosen for window inspection only. Over the last two years, the BD had tried to merge the two schemes as far as possible. The BD had also liaised with the FSD, so that these buildings could carry out building maintenance and fire safety upgrading works at the same time.

(ii) When inspecting whether there was any sub-divided flat, the BD would also check the surrounding common areas and storeys near the suspected unit to see whether there was any irregularity in the building structure.

23. The Chairman thanked the Director of Buildings and his colleagues for joining the discussion on this item. Item 2: Confirmation of Minutes of 6th YTMDC Meeting 24. The minutes of the last meeting were confirmed without amendments. Item 3: Matter Arising:

— Great Concern over the Fire at Yau Ma Tei Fruit Market and Request for Inspection cum Improvement of Fire Service Equipment (YTMDC Paper No. 109/2016)

- 8 -

25. The Chairman said that the written responses from the Development Bureau (“DEVB”), Food and Health Bureau (“FHB”) and Agriculture, Fisheries and Conservation Department (“AFCD”) (Annex 1) had been e-mailed to Councillors on 21 & 23 November 2016 for their perusal. He then welcomed:

(a) Mr CHENG Woon-kit, Divisional Commander, South Kowloon, and Mr CHEUNG Yiu-cho, Station Commander, Yau Ma Tei Fire Station of the FSD; and

(b) Dr PAO Lap-yan, Senior Environmental Protection Officer (Asbestos Management & Control Section), and Mr Bryan SUEN, Assistant Environmental Protection Officer (Asbestos Management & Control Section) of the Environmental Protection Department (“EPD”).

26. Mr LAM Kin-man supplemented the content of the paper. He then said as follows: (i) he was highly discontented that the DEVB and the FHB had so far failed to send their representatives to the meeting; (ii) he was dissatisfied that the government had not yet formulated a time schedule for the removal of the Yau Ma Tei Fruit Market (“fruit market”); (iii) he was greatly discontented with the FSD’s written response that the department had no requirement on the fire service installation or equipment in the fruit market; and (iv) he would like to know what follow-up action the FSD would take after the fire in the fruit market. 27. Mr Andy YU raised his views as follows: (i) notwithstanding that the relevant departments had had a meeting with Mr LAM Kin-man and him after the previous meeting, Mr LAM Kin-man and he requested that the issue be discussed further at this meeting in order to protect the other Councillors and the public’s right to know; (ii) Mr LAM Kin-man and he would join the Working Group on Concern for Yau Ma Tei Fruit Market (“WGYMTFM”) to follow-up on the case; and (iii) the three schools near the fruit market worried that the asbestos dust generated by the fire would impose danger to the teachers and students. 28. Mr CHENG Woon-kit responded as follows:

(i) He had not been able to attend the last meeting due to other duty commitment. Believing that a written reply would be enough, he had not arranged for a representative to the meeting. He extended his apology for that.

(ii) Under the requirements in the Buildings Ordinance, the BD would transfer building plans to the FSD according to the category and purpose of the building for assessment on fire service installation and equipment of the building. Since the fruit market was built before the war, when the said ordinance was not yet in place, the requirements on fire service installation and equipment under the ordinance were not applicable to the fruit market.

(iii) The FSD was very concerned about the fire safety of the fruit market. The FSD had held a meeting with the trade representatives of the fruit market immediately after the fire, in order to get a clear picture of the operation and surrounding environment of the fruit market, as well as to strengthen communication and co-operation with the trade association. The FSD had

- 9 -

explained to the representatives the importance of fire safety, and suggested installation of additional fire extinguishers in the premises of the fruit market. Representatives of the trade association had also followed the suggestion and appealed to the traders to install fire extinguishers in their shops.

(iv) Apart from conducting routine inspection, personnel of the sub-divisional fire station would strengthen fire safety education on fruit traders in the fruit market, maintain communication with the traders, and explain to the traders the importance of fire safety.

29. Dr PAO Lap-yan responded as follows:

(i) On 5 September 2016, the EPD sent their officers to assess the asbestos pollution in the fruit market. They also contacted the headmasters of the three nearby schools in the afternoon, and subsequently collected air samples in the schools for chemical examination.

(ii) From September 5 to the meeting day, the EPD had been collecting air sample in the schools on every school day. The examination results showed no sign of asbestos pollution, and the air was up to the safety level.

(iii) The EPD maintained close communication with the Education Bureau (“EDB”), the three schools, as well as nearby nursery schools. On 24 September, the EPD had a meeting with representatives of the EDB, and headmasters and parent-teacher associations of the said schools. On the request of the parent-teacher associations, the EPD had a meeting with the parents on 5 October to explain to the parents the work in removal of asbestos tiles, to answer their enquiries and to receive their views.

(iv) The District Lands Office, Kowloon West of the Lands Department (“LandsD”) had commissioned a registered asbestos contractor and a registered asbestos consultant to clear up the asbestos tile waste in the site in the fruit market according to the requirements under the law and the work plan approved by the EPD. All asbestos tiles within the site in the fruit market would have been removed after the works, which was anticipated to last for 60 days.

(v) The registered asbestos contractor had finished the first stage of the removal work by the second half of October this year, in that plastic fluid had been sprayed in the site of the fire to stabilise asbestos fibres to prevent release of asbestos dust, which would cause air pollution in the surrounding area.

(The Hon James TO joined the meeting at 3:46 p.m.) 30. Mr Benny YEUNG raised his views and enquiries as follows: (i) government departments should send their representatives to answer questions raised by Councillors at the meeting, even though they had provided a written response; (ii) he would like to know the time schedule formulated by the FSD for the fruit market traders to upgrade their fire service installation and equipment; (iii) he hoped that the EPD would finish removing all the asbestos

- 10 -

tiles as soon as possible; and (iv) the removal work might generate asbestos dust. He asked whether it would be harmful to the health of the nearby students, teachers and residents, as well as people working in the fruit market. He would also like to know whether the EPD would monitor the removal works. 31. Mr LAM Kin-man raised his enquiries as follows: (i) whether the Secretariat had ever indicated to the representatives of the FSD that a written response would suffice; (ii) whether the government would consider amending the existing ordinances to plug the loopholes, since the follow-up work mentioned by the representatives of the FSD was not legally binding; and (iii) whether the government had taken any follow-up action on the UBWs in the fruit market. 32. Mr CHUNG Kong-mo raised his views as follows: (i) the relevant government departments should report at the DC meeting on their follow-up actions after the fire; (ii) the government should actively follow-up on the removal plan of the fruit market; (iii) he suggested the item be transferred to the WGYMTFM for in-depth discussion. He also encouraged Councillors to join the working group. 33. The Hon James TO raised his views as follows: (i) the fruit market was situated on a government site. The government could set out conditions of use requiring users to make ready additional fire service installation and equipment, in order to protect personal safety of the public and those working in the fruit market; (ii) in regard to private wholesale markets, the FHB and the AFCD should take up the advisory role, even if not the managerial role. 34. Mr Andy YU raised his views and enquiries as follows: (i) if the FSD had appealed to the traders to install additional fire extinguishers, he would like to know the number of additional fire extinguishers and their distribution, as well as whether the FSD had set down any deadline; (ii) The FSD’s appeal was not legally binding and would have little effect; (iii) many fruit market traders considered that the FSD’s inspection and educational activities would hamper their business. He asked whether the FSD would cut down inspection frequency; and (iv) the written responses from government departments were too brief, and failed to settle worries of Councillors. To those government departments which had failed to attend the last meeting on invitation, the YTMDC should express condemnation. 35. Mr HUI Tak-leung raised his views and enquiries as follows: (i) he understood that the FSD might not be able to send a representative to the meeting at times, as the FSD had to provide fire-fighting service as well to institute prosecution. However, he suggested the department send a staff member to the meeting as far as possible in order to answer questions raised by Councillors; and (ii) he asked whether the law had imposed a total ban on the use of asbestos and required that removal of asbestos tiles had to be performed by a contractor. 36. Mrs Laura ARON responded that she understood that Councillors were concerned about the attendance of department representatives. The YTM District Office (“YTMDO”) often liaised with government departments, and there was still room for improvement in such work. 37. Mr CHENG Woon-kit responded that in relation to strengthening of fire service installation and equipment in the fruit market, the FSD needed to tie in with the BD. Before any regulatory requirement was in place, the FSD would strengthen communication with fruit

- 11 -

market trade associations, and the trade associations would help appeal to all traders to install fire extinguishers in their units. As for fire safety education, the FSD would try to enhance traders’ safety awareness without affecting their business as far as possible. 38. Dr PAO Lap-yan responded as follows:

(i) The EPD was willing to send its representatives to the YTMDC meetings to answer Councillors’ questions. It was only after liaison of the YTMDO that the department had not sent its representatives to the previous meeting.

(ii) The EPD had been collecting air samples in the area of the fruit market and the schools for chemical examination after the fire. The examination results showed that there was no asbestos pollution, and the air met the safety standard.

(iii) Apart from Mr Andy YU, the EPD also sent the air monitoring data to the schools and the parents.

(iv) Asbestos and asbestos containing materials were subject to the Air Pollution Control Ordinance (“the Ordinance”). After the amendment of the Ordinance, the import, transhipment, supply or use of asbestos and asbestos containing materials had been prohibited since 2014. However, use of asbestos containing materials already existed before the amendment of the Ordinance was still allowed. Buildings in the area of fruit market were pre-war constructions, and the tiles of these buildings probably contained asbestos, which would generate health hazards if a fire broke out. The EPD had liaised with fruit market trade associations and encouraged traders to hire registered asbestos contractors to remove the asbestos tiles, and to replace these tiles with another material as soon as possible to minimise potential health hazards.

39. Mr WONG Kin-san raised his views and enquiries as follows: (i) he would like to know whether it was due to duty commitment or some other reasons that the FSD representatives had been unable to attend the previous meeting; (ii) department representatives had expressed that they had been told by the YTMDO that they did not need to attend the previous meeting. He requested the Chairman to follow-up on the case at the Annual In-house Meeting seriously; and (iii) he believed that the WGYMTFM might not be able to follow-up on the item effectively. 40. Mr Derek HUNG raised his views and enquiries as follows: (i) he asked whether the FSD had specified requirements on the specification (e.g. foam or powder) and amount of the additional fire extinguishers; and (ii) for non-complicated items which did not involve many government departments, he might accept it if a government department provided a written response, and called the paper submitting Councillor(s) to explain it in case it could not send its representative to the meeting. 41. Mr CHAN Siu-tong raised his views as follows: (i) a lot of buildings aged 60 to 70 in the district were subject to the Fire Safety (Buildings) Ordinance. He asked why the buildings in the fruit market were exempted; (ii) the asbestos tile removal works would last for five months. Up till now, the contractors had only sprayed certain liquid to stabilise the

- 12 -

asbestos dust. He asked whether such measure could ensure safety of those people working in the fruit market; (iii) he would like to know whether the government or the traders who caused the fire would shoulder the expenditures for the asbestos tile removal works; (iv) whether the government would offer urgent financial assistance to the traders affected by the fire; and (v) whether the government would follow-up on the UBWs in the fruit market. 42. Mr LAM Kin-man would like to know the progress of installation of additional fire extinguishers by the traders. 43. Mr Andy YU would like to know the timetable under the removal plan of the fruit market, and how the government would handle the fire hazard and potential risks brought by the asbestos tiles before removal of the fruit market. 44. Dr PAO Lap-yan responded that the EPD had approved the work programme for the removal of asbestos tile waste in the fruit market in the second half of September. It was expected that the asbestos tile waste removal works would last for 60 working days. The co-ordination work of the whole programme would be performed by the LandsD, and therefore, the EPD was unable to provide programme details and information on the expenditures. 45. Mr CHENG Woon-kit responded as follows:

(i) The fruit market was not subject to the Buildings Ordinance because it was built before the war, and there was no construction plan of the fruit market. Therefore, the FSD was unable to assess the fire service installation and equipment in the fruit market.

(ii) The FSD had strengthened communication with fruit market trader associations, and had encouraged the traders to install fire extinguishers at specified locations, as well as to install additional fire extinguishers at existing locations.

(iii) Installation of fire extinguishers by traders was on a voluntary basis. But the FSD would keep liaising with the traders, and would advise on the types and quantity of fire extinguishers to be purchased.

(iv) The FSD personnel were often deployed to communicate with traders to remind them of points to note and to provide advice to them in respect of fire prevention in order to enhance their fire safety awareness.

46. The Chairman consulted Councillors whether they agreed to transfer the item to the WGYTMFM. No objection was raised. He asked the Secretariat to write to the relevant government departments to invite their representatives to attend the meeting of the working group on 15 December 2016. As regards the non-attendance of department representatives at the YTMDC Meeting, he suggested the issue be included in the agenda of the coming year’s Annual In-house Meeting. Councillors raised no comments. 47. Mr CHAN Siu-tong asked further whether any urgent financial assistance had been offered to affected traders by the YTMDO or any other charity groups.

- 13 -

48. Mrs Laura ARON responded that the YTMDO maintained close liaison with the Councilor of the constituency and fruit market traders. She was aware that the traders and people working in the fruit market had sought assistance from other sources in order to keep their shops in operation, but the YTMDO had not yet received any explicit requests for assistance. The YTMDO would, through the WGYTMFM, follow-up on the issues arising from the fire of the fruit market. 49. The Chairman thanked the representatives from the relevant departments for joining the discussion on this item. Item 4: Financial Position of YTMDC as at 14 November 2016

(YTMDC Paper No. 97/2016) Item 5: Funding Application from Organising Committee on YTM Four Areas

Committees Activity for Organisation of “Youth Talent Move@YTM” (YTMDC Paper No. 120/2016)

Item 6: Funding Application from Festival Celebration Organising Committee,

YTMDC for Organisation of 2017 YTM District Spring Reception (YTMDC Paper No. 121/2016)

Item 7: Funding Application from 2016-2017 YTM Environmental Improvement

Campaign Organising Committee for Organisation of “YTM Green Community Carnival” (YTMDC Paper No. 122/2016)

Item 8: Funding Application from 2016-2019 Working Group on Ethnic Affairs,

YTMDC for Organisation of “YTM District Ethnic Cultural Show 2017” (YTMDC Paper No. 123/2016)

Item 9: Funding Application from 2016-2017 YTM Organising Committee on

Cultural Arts Events for Organisation of Community Arts and Beautification Projects (YTMDC Paper No. 124/2016)

50. The Chairman proposed discussing the funding applications in items four to nine together. He reminded Councillors to fill in the Declaration of Interests form if necessary. The form could be obtained from the Secretariat. 51. Mr WONG Kin-san objected to discussing the funding applications in items four to nine together. Moreover, he expressed that he had comments on the funding applications in items five and nine, and requested that these two items be discussed separately. 52. The Chairman consulted Councillors whether they agreed that the funding applications in items six to eight be discussed together. 53. Mr WONG Kin-san was of the view that the Chairman’s suggestion to discuss the

- 14 -

said funding application papers was inappropriate. It was because under the Guidelines on YTMDC Funds (“the Guidelines”), all applications for YTMDC funds should be forwarded to the Community Building Committee (“CBC”) for endorsement after being vetted by the Working Group on Community Funds (“WGCF”). If the funding amount exceeded $100,000, the application should even be submitted to the YTMDC for endorsement. He expressed that the funding amount for items five to nine was $930,000, but these funding applications had not gone through the WGCF and the CBC in compliance with the Guidelines. Besides, funding for activities held by the YTMDO was not considered by the WGCF and the CBC as required by the Guidelines. He had no comment on the funding applications in items six to eight. As regards the funding papers in relation to items five to nine, he requested that these items be discussed separately. 54. Councillors noted the financial position of the YTMDC Funds as at 14 November 2016, and endorsed the funding applications in items six to eight (YTMDC Paper Nos. 121/2016 to 123/2016). 55. The Chairman asked Councillors whether they would raise comments on item five (YTMDC Paper No. 120/2016). 56. Mr WONG Kin-san indicated that the YTMDC had earmarked $600,000 in early 2016 for three organisations in the district to each hold an activity with district characteristics. The relevant applications had been considered by a special meeting of the WGCF in July this year, and subsequently submitted to the YTMDC meeting held on 28 July 2016 for endorsement. At that YTMDC meeting, Councillors agreed that the remaining $200,000 should be allocated to the four Area Committees to hold activities. He questioned why the funding applications from the four Area Committees had failed to follow the Guidelines, but bypassed the WGCF and the CBC and gone to the YTMDC directly. He hoped that the Chairman and the YTMDO would face up to the situation. 57. Mr HUI Tak-leung shared the view of Mr WONG Kin-san. He said that the YTMDC had discussed the same issue years ago. On that occasion, the YTMDC indicated that since the dates of such activities might not meet the dates of WGCF meetings, the YTMDO might need to submit the funding applications to the CBC or the YTMDC directly. YTMDC had suggested the YTMDO follow the vetting procedures set out in the Guidelines as far as possible. Therefore, he was of the view that Mr WONG Kin-san got a point in raising the question. 58. The Secretary responded that the Secretariat would forward the funding application to different meetings, depending on the funding amount. Applications for funding less than $100,000 would be forwarded to the CBC, while applications for funding over $100,000 would be forwarded to the YTMDC for consideration. 59. Mr WONG Kin-san indicated that the rule was set down in paragraph 4.1 of the Guidelines, and the application in item five had not followed the requirement. He urged the YTMDO and the Secretariat to review the vetting procedures on funding application. He said that he did not mind having additional WGCF meetings to consider funding applications. 60. Mr Andy YU hoped that the Chairman would follow-up on the above procedural issue.

- 15 -

61. Ms Glorious WONG, Secretary to the WGCF responded that the records showed that all the funding applications from the four Area Committees over the past four years had been submitted to the YTMDC for consideration, as all the amounts had been over $100,000. 62. Mr CHAN Siu-tong recalled that the YTMDC had discussed how to use the remaining amount from the earmarked fund for activities with district characteristics in 2014 On that occasion, the YTMDC agreed to transfer the remaining fund to the four Area Committees to hold activities. Owing to time constraint, the YTMDC also agreed that the application paper should be forwarded to the YTMDC for consideration. He would like to know whether the funding application in item five was under the same circumstances. Moreover, the incumbent CBC Chairman, as well as the former one, had pointed out that currently not all the funding applications strictly followed the vetting procedures set out in the Guidelines. He was of the view that all funding applications from now on should follow the rules under the Guidelines. 63. The Chairman said in response to Mr CHAN Siu-tong’s enquiry that the funding application in item five was under similar situation. The YTMDC had agreed in a previous meeting that the remaining fund from the allocation to activities with district characteristics should be transferred to the four Area Committees for organisation of activities. Details could be found in the minutes of that meeting. 64. The Chairman expressed that he suggested the issue involving the Guidelines be discussed at the coming year’s Annual In-house Meeting. He further said that before the Annual In-house Meeting was convened, all funding applications should follow the vetting procedures set out in the Guidelines. 65. Mr WONG Kin-san indicated that he would abstain from voting on the funding application in item five, as it had failed to follow the vetting procedures set out in the Guidelines. 66. Mr CHOW Chun-fai enquired about the vetting procedures for activities with district characteristics. 67. Ms Glorious WONG responded that the CBC or the YTMDC would first lay down the vetting conditions, application procedures and vetting mechanism on activities with district characteristics in that phase. The Secretariat would then upload the invitation letter onto the YTMDC webpage for the public and local organisations’ perusal. The WGCF would convene a special meeting afterwards to vet the applications and recommend applications to the YTMDC for its consideration and decision. 68. Councillors took a vote on item five. Voting result: eight Councillors voted for the funding application, namely Mr Benjamin CHOI, Mr CHOW Chun-fai, Mr CHUNG Chak-fai, Mr Derek HUNG, Mr Craig JO, Ms KWAN Sau-ling, Mr LAU Pak-kei and Mr Benny YEUNG. No Councillor voted against the application. Five Councillors abstained from voting. They were Ms WONG Shu-ming, Mr CHAN Siu-tong, Mr HUI Tak-leung, Mr WONG Kin-san and Mr Andy YU. 69. The Chairman asked Councillors whether they would speak on item nine (YTMDC

- 16 -

Paper No. 124/2016). 70. Mr WONG Kin-san raised his views as follows: (i) he supported organisation of cultural arts events in the community, but objected to the funding application in item nine; (ii) the funding application in item nine fell under “community arts and beautification projects”. As part of the expenditure items were under district minor works (“DMWs”), the application would be considered by the District Facilities Management Committee (“DFMC”); (iii) according to Annex A of the Manual on the Use of District Council Funds (“the Manual”), “employment of project staff (including hire of temporary or casual workers) should not exceed 25% of the approved project fund”. However, the expenditure items “payment for coach(es) for street painting, wall painting and stair painting” in this funding application was up to $141,000, accounting for 40% of the approved fund; (iv) “maintenance service of street painting, wall painting or stair painting” was not an approved expenditure item under Community Involvement Projects. It should not be included in a Community Involvement Project for Councillors’ consideration; (v) even though the applicant included the expenditure for “maintenance service of street painting, wall painting or stair painting” in “Central Administrative Overheads of non-government organisations” mentioned in Annex A of the Manual, the item and “miscellaneous expenses” added up to $65,000, accounting for 18.3% of the approved fund. It was against the rule that “Central Administrative Overheads should not exceed 10% of the approved project fund”. 71. The Chairman indicated that the event was not of works nature. 72. Mr WONG Kin-san expressed that this funding application involved maintenance service. However, maintenance service was not included in the approved expenditure items under Community Involvement Projects. Therefore, the YTMDC in principal should not consider these expenditure items. 73. Mr Benny YEUNG would like to know which expenditure item maintenance service should go to. Moreover, he did not think that the funding application was for any DMWs. 74. The Secretary responded that the Guidelines were not applicable to the funding applications submitted by the YTM Organising Committee on Cultural Arts Events (“the Organising Committee”). Funding applications submitted by the Organising Committee should be under the ambit of the Manual. Annex A of the Manual required that “employment of project staff (including hire of temporary or casual workers) should not exceed 25% of the approved project fund”, but “payment for coach(es) for street painting, wall painting and stair painting” in the application paper did not fall under this item. 75. Mr WONG Kin-san did not agree that maintenance service in this event was not a work item. He believed that this funding application should be re-titled and the maintenance service expenses should be deleted before the application could meet the requirements of the Community Involvement Projects. 76. The Secretary responded that usually “payment for coach(es) for street painting, wall painting and stair painting” was treated as payment for coach(es), and should not be regarded as expenditure for “employment of project staff”. 77. The Chairman asked Councillors whether they agreed to take a vote on the funding

- 17 -

application in item nine. No objection was raised. 78. Voting result: eight Councillors voted for the application, namely, Mr Benjamin CHOI, Mr CHUNG Chak-fai, Mr CHUNG Kong-mo, Mr Derek HUNG, Mr Craig JO, Ms KWAN Sau-ling, Mr LAU Pak-kei and Mr Benny YEUNG. Three Councillors voted against it, namely Ms WONG Shu-ming, Mr CHAN Siu-tong and Mr WONG Kin-san. Two Councillors abstained from voting, namely, the Hon James TO and Mr Andy YU. 79. Mr CHAN Siu-tong indicated that although the application was endorsed, he requested that details of the discussion be recorded clearly in the minutes, including a record showing that the Guidelines did not apply to this funding application, and why it was regarded as a Community Involvement Project even though it involved maintenance service expenses. Item 10: Latest Development of the New Acute Hospital at Kai Tak Development Area

(YTMDC Paper No. 125/2016) 80. The Chairman welcomed Dr Albert LO, Cluster Chief Executive, Kowloon Central Cluster/Hospital Chief Executive, Queen Elizabeth Hospital, Dr K S YEUNG, Senior Manager (Hospital Services Planning), Kowloon Central Cluster, and Mr Donald LI, Chief Manager (Capital Planning) of the Hospital Authority (“HA”) 81. Dr Albert LO and Dr K S YEUNG gave a Powerpoint presentation on the latest development of the new Acute Hospital at Kai Tak Development Area, including service development of the Kowloon Central Cluster, background of the development plan, the three land lots involved in the hospital development project, number of beds, services under the new hospital plan, moving of services, cluster development project, service improvement, as well as the tentative completion date of the whole project. 82. Ms KWAN Sau-ling was glad to learn about the progress. However, she worried that the existing medical staff manpower might not be able to cope with the development, and she hoped that the government would recruit medical staff for the hospitals under the HA in order to cope with the development of the hospitals, as well as to ease the work pressure on the medical staff. 83. Mr CHOW Chun-fai indicated that the whole project was expected to be completed in 2024. Upon completion of the project, most of the existing services of the Queen Elizabeth Hospital and the Kwong Wah Hospital would be provided by the new hospital. He would like to know which medical services would remain in the said two hospitals. 84. Dr Albert LO responded as follows:

(i) Upon completion of the new hospital, most of the services provided by the Queen Elizabeth Hospital now would move to the new hospital. Therefore, the existing medical staff, over 6 000 in total, would continue their service in the new hospital.

(ii) From 2018, the number of medical graduates from the two local universities would be increased to 420 annually. The number of medical student places

- 18 -

had been increased in 2016. Therefore, the number of medical staff was expected to rise in the coming years.

(iii) The FHB was making long-term manpower planning for the medical staff.

(iv) The new hospital would introduce automatic systems to handle part of the manual work. The new systems would help ease the pressure on manpower.

(v) Upon completion of the redevelopment plan of the Kwong Wah Hospital in 2025, equipment and services of the hospital would be upgraded.

85. Mr Donald LI responded that upon completion of the new hospital, most of the services of the Queen Elizabeth Hospital would move to the new hospital. The Secretary for Food and Health (“SFH”) had made it clear at the Legislative Council Meeting that the site of the existing hospital would still be deployed for medical purposes. The HA would re-plan the services of the Queen Elizabeth Hospital, and would consult the YTMDC in due course. 86. The Chairman thanked the representatives of the HA for joining the discussion on this item. Item 11: Project Translink 87. The Chairman welcomed Ms WONG Ping-ping, Chief Inspector of Police (Kowloon West Regional Headquarters) of the HKPF. 88. Ms WONG Ping-ping gave a Powerpoint presentation on “Project Translink”, including the project’s background, purpose, details, workflow and trial scheme. 89. The Hon James TO asked whether the project provided for sound recording to facilitate follow-up action by the Police to verify the information given and the accuracy of interpretation in the future. 90. Mr Benny YEUNG was glad to hear about the service. He hoped that the Police would review the project and gauge the feedbacks from the ethnic minorities (“EMs”) in due course to enhance the plan. 91. Ms KWAN Sau-ling was of the view that the project not only benefited EMs, but also provided support to frontline police officers. As regards serious crimes, she hoped that the Police would deploy at least two interpreters to ensure accuracy when recording the statement. 92. Ms WONG Shu-ming showed support to the project. She hoped that the Police would share their experience with other government departments so that the latter might follow suit. 93. Mr Andy YU was supportive of the project. He hoped that EM informants would get the interpretation service as well if they reported to a police officer on the street. He asked whether the Police would arrange other support services for the EMs after 10 p.m. when

- 19 -

the interpretation service hours had ended. 94. Mr Derek HUNG indicated that several EM police officers and he had taken part in the trial scheme launched by the Kowloon West Regional Headquarters two years earlier. He was glad to hear that the project had extended to 67 report rooms/ report centres. He would like to know: (i) the qualifications and requirements on the interpreters taking part in the project; (ii) whether the qualification of the interpreters varied with category of the crime case; and (iii) whether the Police would consider provision of “all-weather” interpretation service. 95. Mr CHAN Siu-tong asked: (i) whether graduates from “Project Gemstone” could serve as interpreters of this project; and (ii) whether a statement taken under interpretation had the same legal effect as those taken without any interpretation. Moreover, he expressed that it would be even more effective if the interpretation was between EM languages and Chinese. 96. The Hon James TO added that he was just asking, not requesting for any sound recording under the project. 97. Ms WONG Ping-ping responded as follows:

(i) The interpretation service under “Project Translink” was supporting in nature. For criminal cases or cases of a serious nature, the Police would follow the standard procedures, and interpretation would be provided by professional interpreters recognised by the Judiciary.

(ii) “Project Translink” provided for sound recording for every case.

(iii) “Project Translink” also provided for a complaint handling mechanism.

(iv) The Home Affairs Department (“HAD”) had engaged the Centre for Harmony and Enhancement of Ethnic Minority Residents (“CHEER”) through tendering. The CHEER was responsible for recruitment of interpreters, and the interpreters must meet the qualification requirements set out in the tender conditions.

(v) The Operation Division of the Kowloon West Regional Headquarters would seriously consider inviting graduates from “Project Gemstone” to provide unofficial language and cultural information on their respective EM groups for the Police for reference.

98. Mr WONG Kin-san enquired whether “Project Translink” leaflets would be prepared in Chinese and English only. He pointed out that the service hours were not indicated in the leaflet. 99. Ms WONG Ping-ping responded that the Police would consider preparing the leaflet in some other commonly used EM languages. 100. The Chairman thanked the representative of the Police for joining the discussion on this item.

- 20 -

Item 12: Pilot Study on Underground Space Development in Selected Strategic Urban

Areas – Stage 1 Public Engagement (YTMDC Paper No. 126/2016)

101. The Chairman welcomed:

(a) Mr Tony HO, Chief Geotechnical Engineer/Planning, Geotechnical Engineering Office, and Mr Jeffrey WONG, Senior Geotechnical Engineer/Underground Space Development, Geotechnical Engineering Office of the CEDD;

(b) Ms April KUN, Chief Town Planner/Studies and Research, and Mr Mann CHOW, Senior Town Planner/Studies and Research 3 of the Planning Department (“PlanD”); and

(c) Mr Fred NG, Senior Project Manager, Dr Johnny CHEUK, Deputy Project Manager, and Dr Eunice MAK, Planning Team Leader of AECOM Asia Company Ltd (“AECOM”).

102. Mr Tony HO and Dr Johnny CHEUK briefed Councillors on the plan, including the purpose; vision and opportunities; local and overseas experiences; scope of study; major topics, potential underground development spaces and pedestrian linkage areas in the Tsim Sha Tsui West Strategic Urban Area; and major considerations in underground space development. 103. Ms KWAN Sau-ling raised enquiries and views as follows: (i) whether the underground space would be managed by a private company. If so, she was afraid that the rent would not be low; and (ii) she hoped that the government would reserve underground space for provision of facilities in short supply in the district, e.g. community halls, carparks, parking spaces for motor cycles and conference rooms, so as to meet the needs of the community. (Mr HUI Tak-leung left the meeting at 5:45 p.m.) 104. Mr Craig JO raised his views as follows: (i) considering that the district lacked carpark parking spaces, and illegal parking on the road was serious, he supported the construction of carparks in the underground space; and (ii) the government should provide recreational space for the public and tourists in the underground space. 105. Ms WONG Shu-ming raised enquiries and views as follows: (i) she asked whether the underground space would adopt a “public-private” management approach, or solely owned by the government; and (ii) streets managed by the government often encountered illegal hawking and street-sleeping problems. If the underground space was to be solely owned by the government, what the government would do to ensure properly management over the space. 106. Mr Derek HUNG raised his views as follows: (i) he adopted a positive view towards

- 21 -

underground space development; (ii) the Kowloon Park was a suitable place for underground space development. The concept of connecting pedestrian facilities by using the underground space to link up nearby MTR stations would benefit the public; (iii) after the ground investigation, the CEDD should conduct detailed planning for the usable area in the underground space; (iv) introduction of commercial facilities would bring vitality to the underground space and share the ongoing maintenance costs; and (v) he suggested community facilities, recreational space, carparks and shops be provided in the underground space.

107. Mr WONG Kin-san raised his views as follows: (i) provision of shopping facilities in the underground space was not necessary as there were already a lot of shops in the district; (ii) he suggested the government provide facilities which were in short supply in the district, e.g. sports amenities, swimming pools, community halls, conference rooms, performance venues for the public, bars, as well as all-purpose resting spots with free wi-fi facilities. 108. Mr CHUNG Kong-mo raised his enquiries and views as follows: (i) he agreed that the underground space would bring benefits to the community as it could link up pedestrian facilities and improve congestions in Jordan and Tsim Sha Tsui; (ii) he agreed that the underground space should include commercial facilities. He suggested provision of small shops, adjustable multi-purpose rooms, small exhibition halls, as well as areas for street performance and display of cultural and arts in the underground space; (iii) the Government could draw reference from Taipei underground malls in land use planning; and (iv) he would like to know how the government would send away the excavated rock and soil. 109. Mr Andy YU raised enquiries and views as follows: (i) apart from shops, there should be community amenities, e.g. basketball courts and swimming pools; and (ii) whether there would be enough space to evacuate the public and tourists in case of fire. 110. Mr CHAN Siu-tong agreed to the direction of development of underground space. He suggested: (i) the underground space be separated into zones for various public uses, including a zone for young entrepreneurs, a zone for local culture, a zone for EM cultures, and a zone for innovation and technology; and (ii) since commercial activities would contribute to space management, he suggested that the underground space be managed in a public-private manner to avoid pro-long occupation in public places, as well as disturbances brought to the residents by street sleepers and street performers. 111. The Hon James TO was of the view that the underground space should be spacious and well-illuminated. It should also attach importance to vitality for development, and provide diversified experiences in order to maintain attractiveness. 112. Mr Tony HO responded as follows:

(i) It was hoped that the study on underground space development would address the needs of the relevant areas, solve street congestion problems, improve connection between pedestrian facilities, and seize the opportunity for space creation.

(ii) As regards uses of the space, the study team would consider Councillors’ views. Feasibility of diversified development would be explored during use

- 22 -

planning of the underground spaces, so as to cater for different aspirations of the community.

(iii) The study team would draw reference from successful cases in other cities. Moreover, sufficient public spaces would be provided, and natural light and cultural elements would be introduced for the public.

(iv) The study team understood the importance of a massive space and diversified design when it came to attracting visitors.

(v) The study team kept an open mind towards the management and operation of the underground spaces, and it would consider different options in the coming phase.

113. Dr Johnny CHEUK responded as follows:

(i) They would study the feasibility of integrated development of the underground spaces in order to cater for different purposes, including provision of commercial and community facilities to meet the needs of the public, easing pedestrian flow on the streets and linking up landmarks in the respective districts.

(ii) As for the design, the underground spaces would integrate with the surrounding areas as far as possible, and it would take in natural light.

(iii) Owing to fire safety concerns, the underground spaces would not be engaged for congregation of large crowds as far as possible. The study team would conduct detailed technical assessments on the proposed purposes in the next phase.

(iv) The study team would consider the possibility of removing construction waste arising from the work by means of marine transport, so as to avoid causing any impact on the road traffic.

(v) Technically speaking, construction of underground carparks was possible, but the number of parking spaces was subject to further study in order to avoid imposing further burden on the nearby street traffic.

(vi) Regarding management of the underground spaces, there was no final decision yet. The study team would consider different options. Having considered the design and the ratio of different uses etc, it would make recommendations on the management and operation mode.

114. Mr Fred NG responded as follows:

(i) The study team would consider the uses of the underground spaces from different aspects.

(ii) To avoid affecting the interior design of the Kowloon Park, suggestions of

- 23 -

areas for potential underground development did not include existing built heritage and valuable trees.

(iii) The study team understood that in order to attract visitors, the underground spaces must be spacious and did not feel like a confined place.

(iv) Since part of the Kowloon Park was located at high level, the design concept provided for a passage connecting the hill and the underground space to introduce natural light.

(v) It was hoped that people heading for the underground space would take the public transport. The study team would fully consider the suggested construction of carparks.

(vi) Work details would be adjusted during the preparation works in the light of the street traffic conditions and situations in the relevant districts, on condition that the impact on trunk roads would be minimised.

115. Mr CHOW Chun-fai said, considering the limited land resources in the Yau Tsim Mong (“YTM”) District, underground space development was worth supporting as it was forward-looking. He asked when the government would commence the work project. 116. Mr CHUNG Kong-mo suggested the government make use of the air raid precaution tunnel under the Kowloon Park for education on local history. 117. Mr Tony HO responded as follows:

(i) The air raid precaution tunnel under the Kowloon Park was very small, with a height of less than two metres and a width of merely 2.5 metres. The government would have to arrange for regular maintenance to monitor its stability, hence, usability of the tunnel was limited. Moreover, the cost to renovate the air raid precaution tunnel would be very high. However, the study team would examine the feasibility of linking the underground space to a small part of the air raid precaution tunnel, and to explore measures to do so in the next phase in order to effectively utilise the tunnel to introduce to the public the history of Hong Kong.

(ii) The time needed for underground space development depended on various factors, and therefore the government could not provide any commencement date of the project at this moment. In the present stage, they would first find out the needs of the relevant areas, as well as the possible use of the underground spaces for further consideration.

118. The Chairman thanked the representatives for joining the discussion on this item. Item 13: Concern over “Trousers Cutting Gang” on Buses Travelling via YTM District

(YTMDC Paper No. 127/2016)

- 24 -

119. The Chairman welcomed Mr KWOK Pak-chung, District Commander (Yau Tsim) and Mr Mark FOSTER, District Commander (Mong Kok) of the HKPF. 120. Mr Andy YU supplemented the content of the paper. He indicated that there had been “trousers cutting gangs” on buses travelling via the “YTM” District over the past months. He asked: (i) what counter-measure the Police would take; (ii) the detection rate of such crime; and (iii) what publicity and education strategy the Police would take to combat such a modus operandi. 121. Mr KWOK Pak-chung responded as follows:

(i) Since January 2016, the Kowloon West Region (comprising the Mong Kok Police District, the Yau Tsim Police District, the Kowloon City Police District and the Sham Shui Po Police District) had recorded 12 cases of the said crime, including two cases in the Yau Tsim Police Disrict and one case in the Mong Kok Police District.

(ii) It was noted that all the cases involved more than one culprit. The culprits slashed the victims’ trouser pockets with a cutter. All the victims remained oblivious until they found later that their money and belongings were gone.

(iii) The two cases in the Yau Tsim Police District happened on 16 October and 10 November 2016 on two buses of different routes. The culprits would usually find a target at the bus stop first, then follow him/her onto a bus and wait for their chance.

(iv) Since September 2016, the Police Crime Prevention Bureau, joining hands with the Kowloon Motor Bus Company, made publicity through the “RoadShow” announcement system to remind the passengers to stay vigilant. Leaflets were also distributed to passengers at bus stops.

(v) An Announcement of Public Interest (“API”) would be screened on the television programme “Police Magazine” later.

(vi) Uniformed and plainclothes police officers of the Yau Tsim Police District would particularly pay attention to suspicious characters at bus stops when they performed routine patrol.

122. Mr Mark FOSTER responded in English as follows:

(i) The modus operandi of the case happened in the Mong Kok Police District was the same as that in the cases happened in Yau Tsim Police District. A male was subsequently arrested. The Police found that he was connected to a similar case in Cheung Sha Wan. He was charged with two counts of theft. The case had been heard in the Magistrates’ Court.

(ii) The Police would strengthen publicity against such modus operandi. The Police were going to produce an API on the modus operandi in order to enhance the awareness of the public.

- 25 -

123. Mr Andy YU asked how the Police tracked down and arrested the culprit. 124. Mr KWOK Pak-chung responded that all culprits of “trousers cutting gang”, “ketchup gang” and “taxi gang” were practically “pickpockets”. In the Yau Tsim Police District, not only routine patrol police officers but also a task force dedicated to combat “quick cash crime” would pay attention to the trend of such crimes, aiming at stamping them out. 125. The Chairman thanked the representatives of the HKPF for joining the discussion on this item. Item 14: Hong Kong 2030 + : Towards a Planning Vision and Strategy

(YTMDC Paper No. 128/2016) 126. The Chairman welcomed:

(a) Mr Eric MA, Under Secretary for Development, and Mr Allan FUNG, Political Assistant to Secretary for Development of the DEVB; and

(b) Miss Winnie LAU, Chief Town Planner/Strategic Planning, and Ms Margaret CHAN, Senior Town Planner/Strategic Planning 5 of the Planning Department.

127. Mr Eric MA briefed the Meeting on the purpose of Hong Kong 2030+: Towards a Planning Vision and Strategy (“the Hong Kong 2030+”). Miss Winnie LAU gave a Powerpoint presentation on the Hong Kong 2030+. 128. The Vice-chairman hoped that when planning the community facilities, the government would take into account the accessibility of such community facilities, including the distance and travelling time from residential settlements. She also expressed that the Hong Kong 2030+ had little coverage of the YTM District. 129. Mr WONG Kin-san raised his enquiries and views as follows: (i) Hong Kong was already a highly developed city. Improvement of living space and quality was far more important than economic development; (ii) he would like to know what the government would do to enhance the livability of Hong Kong; and (iii) developers were now selling subdivided flats blatantly. Property price was far too high but the living area was shrinking. The Government could not turn a blind eye to the situation. 130. Mr Benjamin CHOI raised his views as follows: (i) apart from giving coverage to economic development and housing supply, the Hong Kong 2030+ also talked about uses of green-blue assets; (ii) upgrading traffic and infrastructural capacities, as mentioned by the Hong Kong 2030+, was heading for the right direction; and (iii) residents of Tai Kok Tsui depended on minibus and bus services. However, the waiting time was very long, and lost trips were nothing uncommon. The government should enhance public transport ancillary facilities, so as to improve minibus and bus service level. 131. Ms KWAN Sau-ling said there were extensive land resources in the New Territories.

- 26 -

It was nothing wrong for the government to vigorously develop the East Lantau Metropolis and the New Territories North. However, when developing these areas, the Government should also provide transport ancillary and community facilities. 132. Ms Michelle TANG raised her views as follows: (i) as the buildings in the YTM District were ageing, the government should launch schemes to help flat owners renovate and inspect their buildings; (ii) owing to the lack of urban green belts, greening works in the district should be stepped up; and (iii) buses with lower capacities should be used, but frequencies should be increased. 133. Mr Eric MA responded as follows:

(i) Hong Kong had scarce land resource and no land reserve. In addition to ageing population, the popularity of “small family” and “one-person family” had kept the number of household soaring. Under such circumstances, there was an urgent need for the government to increase land or housing supply. Besides, the scarce land resources had brought the problem of high rent upon entrepreneurs. The Government hoped to meet the needs arising from economic development through supply of more commercial sites.

(ii) Apart from the DEVB, the Transport and Housing Bureau and the Transport Department (“TD”) also took part in traffic and transport planning.

(iii) Currently, the New Territories got a population of over 3 million, causing unbalanced spatial distribution of homes and jobs. The government wished to create enough jobs in the New Territories, in order to alleviate the pressure on public transport caused by working across districts.

134. Miss Winnie LAU responded as follows:

(i) The Hong Kong 2030+ also raised the conceptual framework of accessibility, including the suggestion to provide neighbourhood community facilities within 500 metres from railway stations. The government understood that apart from the geographical distance between the residential settlements and community facilities, time distance was very important too. Therefore, further study on the issue would be conducted.

(ii) The government indicated in the Hong Kong 2030+ that the livability of Hong Kong had the top priority for upgrading. The government suggested upgrading the public space per capita as well as providing more public facility sites, so as to achieve the purpose.

(iii) We should make good use of our rich green-blue assets to optimise their functions in the areas of recreation, leisure, environment enhancement and ecological conservation, as well as to upgrade the living quality of the public.

(iv) As regards the ageing of buildings, the government would study ways to launch schemes to expedite redevelopment of these buildings as well as to strengthen building preservation and maintenance in order to prolong their useful life.

- 27 -

(v) Currently, the New Territories (Tsuen Wan and Kwai Tsing not included)

provided about 24% of jobs. However around 40% of our population lived in the New Territories. It was anticipated that the development of the East Lantau Metropolis and the two strategic growth areas in New Territories North would pull up the job ratio of the New Territories to 38%, and hence improve our spatial distribution of homes and jobs and reverse the direction of traffic.

135. Mr Benjamin CHOI hoped that the government would draw reference from the past experience in place-making. 136. Mr Eric MA responded that the Hong Kong 2030+ suggested reinventing public space, and the government would further study the issue, so as to improve the accessibility of public space. The government would also facilitate place-making by means of both the “hardware” and the “software”. 137. The Chairman thanked the Under Secretary for Development, his colleague, as well as the representatives of the Planning Department for joining the discussion on this item. Item 15: Community Green Station in YTM

(YTMDC Paper No. 129/2016) 138. The Chairman indicated that the written reply from the EPD (Annex 2) had been e-mailed to Councillors on 21 November 2016 for their perusal. He subsequently welcomed Mr Samson LAI, Assistant Director (Waste Management Policy) of the EPD. 139. The Hon James TO supplemented the content of the paper. He expressed that the Sham Shui Po District and the Kwun Tong District were similar to the YTM District. The EPD might consider launching the project in those two districts, and consult the YTMDC on Community Green Station in YTM later when experience had been accumulated. He further said that site location was very important as the recycling centre could not be too close to residential settlements, while the public education centre could not be too far away. 140. Mr Samson LAI responded as follows:

(i) The “Community Green Station in Sha Tin” and the “Community Green Station in Eastern District” had been in operation over a year. The “Community Green Station in Kwun Tong”, “Community Green Station in Yuen Long” and “Community Green Station in Sham Shui Po” would start providing services in the coming months.

(ii) Every district had its own demographics and situations. The EPD would enhance planning of new projects in the light of actual operation experience and the views collected, in order to meet the needs of the communities.

(iii) The EPD would carry on with the project. They would sum up experiences, and raise recommendations to the YTMDC regarding the direction of the Community Green Station in YTM in due course.

- 28 -

141. The Hon James TO indicated that he kept an open mind towards the Community Green Station in YTM, but the estates and schools near the proposed site were very concerned about it. He stressed that situations varied from district to district. Moreover, old districts and new districts had different acceptance degree towards the project. 142. Mr LAU Pak-kei said that the selected location of the “Community Green Station in YTM” was close to residential settlements. Nearby residents were afraid that the project might impose extra burden on the traffic and cause environmental hygiene problems. Besides, vehicles travelling to and from the recycling centre in the future might go via Tai Kok Tsui, and hence bring an impact on the traffic of the whole area. He therefore hoped that the EPD would find a more suitable location, and fully consult the locality on the details of the project. 143. Mr Samson LAI responded that the EPD understood that the local community was concerned about the “Community Green Station in YTM”. The “Community Green Station in Sha Tin” and the “Community Green Station in Eastern District” had different surrounding environment and demographics. The EPD would sum up its experience in these projects, and review the planning of the “Community Green Station in YTM”. He welcomed suggestions from Councillors on the location of the project. 144. The Hon James TO was of the view that the site for the “Community Green Station in YTM” was subject to a number of considerations. It was because the management companies of the large estates nearby had already been taking care of the recyclables from the residents. A green station far away from residential settlements might ease the community’s worries towards the project, but the residents of old districts might find it inconvenient to take the recyclables to the recycling centre. 145. Mr Samson LAI responded that the EPD would balance views from all parties. 146. The Chairman thanked the Assistant Director of the EPD for taking part in the discussion on this item. Item 16: Concern over Maintenance and Repair of Facilities of China Ferry Terminal,

Tsim Sha Tsui (YTMDC Paper No. 131/2016)

147. The Chairman indicated that the written response from the Architectural Services Department (“ASD”) (Annex 3) had been e-mailed to Councillors on 22 November 2016 for their perusal. He subsequently welcomed:

(a) Mr MAK Shui-wing, Marine Officer/Licensing & Port Formalities (2), and Mr Rico CHAN, Marine Officer/Ferry Terminals of the Marine Department (“MD”);

(b) Mr Ellis LEE, Senior Engineer/Municipal/Centralised Services, and Mr Steve WU, Senior Mechanical Inspector/Municipal/Centralised Services/1 of the Electrical & Mechanical Services Department (“EMSD”); and

- 29 -

(c) Mr Mario CHOY, Chief Transport Officer (Kowloon) of the TD.

148. Mr Derek HUNG supplemented the content of the paper. He indicated that the China Ferry Terminal (“CFT”) in Tsim Sha Tsui had been in operation for 28 years. The existing floating bridges, gangways and ceiling piping were dilapidated. Moreover, the information shown in the digital panels in the waiting rooms and the alighting points was incomplete. He asked whether the government had any plan to examine and improve the condition of the CFT. 149. Mr Rico CHAN responded as follows:

(i) Operation of the CFT was under the responsibility of the MD. The Architectural Services Department (“ASD”) was responsible for the repair and maintenance of the terminal building, while the EMSD was responsible for the repair and maintenance of the electrical and mechanical facilities. The last major interior and exterior renovation was completed in 2013.

(ii) The MD would deploy more manpower to relieve congestion during the Christmas, Lunar New Year, Easter and “National Day Golden Week”. The MD would seek assistance from the Civil Aid Services (“CAS”), which would send their members to help maintain order. The department would also inform the ferry companies to deploy additional staff to direct passengers.

(iii) The MD had set up more signage in the CFT to avoid chaos.

(iv) The EMSD would replace the fuel pipelines of the CFT in 2017. The ASD was responsible for the replacement of the water pipelines, as well as the replacement of the fire hoses in 2017 to 2018. The Sino Estates Management Limited (“Sino”) was responsible for the repair and maintenance of the major cooling pipes. The MD would contact the Sino later and request them to conduct the work.

(v) As regards the landing pontoons (i.e. the floating bridges) in the CFT, under the Merchant Shipping (Local Vessels) Ordinance, Cap 548, all landing pontoons were required to obtain a valid licence issued by the MD before they were allowed to operate at the CFT. The MD would closely monitor the condition of the landing pontoons. If any defect was found, they would instruct the contractor to repair it.

150. Ms Michelle TANG raised her views and enquiries as follows: (i) she asked whether the cooling pipes were owned by the Government or Sino; (ii) whether Sino had promised to repair these pipes; and (iii) although the representatives of the MD said that the landing pontoons were safe, she hoped that the MD would strengthen supervision over the refurbishment of the landing pontoons. 151. Mr Derek HUNG raised his views and enquiries as follows: (i) The CFT had been in operation for almost 30 years. The representatives of the MD said that the overall renovation

- 30 -

works of the CFT had been completed in 2013. However, the fuel pipelines, fire hoses and cooling pipes were replaced one after another in 2017. Therefore, the renovation works completed in 2013 was only of a partial nature; (ii) the existing waiting arrangements were chaotic. He hoped that the MD would draw reference from the operation mode of Berths 11 and 12, and formulate new waiting arrangements for the other berths; and (iii) it was not a satisfactory measure to rely on the assistance of the CAS to maintain order. The MD and the ferry companies should deploy extra staff during holidays and peak hours, in order to ensure order among embarking and disembarking passengers. 152. Mr Francis CHONG raised his views and enquiries as follows: (i) he asked how much the beautification and refurbishment of the CFT would be as estimated by the government; (ii) whether the MD expected a decrease in the usage rate of the CFT after the commissioning of the Hong Kong-Zhuhai-Macao Bridge (“HZMB”); and (iii) if there was a drop of the usage rate of the CFT, whether the government would reduce the maintenance and repair expenses of the CFT. 153. Mr Rico CHAN responded as follows:

(i) The cooling pipes in the CFT were owned by Sino. He would contact Sino and reflect the views of Councillors. He would also demand Sino to repair or replace aged pipes.

(ii) All the landing pontoons had their operation licences renewed annually and were allowed to operate in the CFT only if they underwent regular check and repair every year. He would contact the contractors and demand them to have the landing pontoons refurbished.

(iii) Service provided by the CAS was on a temporary basis only.

(iv) To avoid chaos in the CFT during peak hours, the MD required that the ferry companies should not allow passengers into the waiting room until 30 minutes before the departure time.

(v) The ASD was responsible for the repair and maintenance of the CFT building. Over the past two years, the ASD had replaced the fresh water pipes, and the EMSD would start replacing the fuel pipelines in 2017. The ASD would prepare for the replacement of the fire hoses in the coming year. Replacement of all the pipes in the CFT was expected to be completed in 2020.

(vi) The ground floor of the CFT had all along been subject to erosion of the seawater. The ASD was now refurbishing it.

(vii) During off-peak hours, the usage rate of the berths in the CFT ranged from 50% to 60%. During peak hours, it was up to 100%.

(viii) The MD expected that there might be a drop of passengers in the CFT after the commissioning of the HZMB. However, the MD was unable to estimate precisely the passenger figure after the commissioning of the HZMB as the

- 31 -

transport ancillary facility plan of the HZMB had not been finailised. Since the passenger figure of the CFT was expected to drop, the MD might take the chance to conduct major renovation works.

154. Mr Derek HUNG suggested electronic panels be installed in the waiting rooms of the other berths in CFT, just like berths 11 and 12, so that inbound passengers might get the information they needed. 155. Mr Rico CHAN responded that the EMSD would upgrade the electronic panel systems in the waiting rooms in 2017, in order to indicate to passengers the locations of each boarding place and the other facilities in the CFT clearly. 156. The Chairman thanked the representatives of the relevant government departments for joining the discussion on this item. Item 17: Proposal of Cooked Food Bazaar for Lunar New Year 2017

(YTMDC Paper No. 132/2016) 157. The Chairman welcomed:

(a) Miss Diane WONG, Principle Assistant Secretary for Food & Health (Food) 2 of the FHB; and

(b) Mr Edward CHAN, Senior Superintendent (Hawker & Market), Mr Eric CHEUNG, District Environmental Hygiene Superintendent (Mong Kok), and Mr Stephen WAN, Chief Health Inspector (Mongkok) 2 of the FEHD.

158. Miss Diane WONG said that many eateries and restaurants would close during the Lunar New Year, however, the demand for cooked food would remain acute. Therefore, on the premise that food safety and environmental hygiene would not be compromised, the proposal to set up a cooked food bazaar on a trial basis was worth considering. The bazaar could be set up in an outdoor site in Mongkok which the YTMDC considered suitable, e.g. the MacPherson Playground or another suitable outdoor venue. She also indicated that the government considered the district-based policy and the support from the YTMDC the major elements for the organisation of the bazaar. The FHB would gather views from the YTMDC. Suggestions from Councillors were welcome if they thought that the MacPherson Playground was not a suitable venue. 159. Mr Eric CHEUNG briefed Councillors on the content of YTMDC Paper No. 132/2016. 160. Mr Andy YU raised his views and enquiries as follows: (i) the consultation period was not long enough, as the proposed period of the bazaar fell between 28 January and 30 January 2017, but the first consultation commenced only that day; (ii) most of the cooked food hawkers cooked with liquefied petroleum gas, but only electricity would be allowed in the bazaar. The hawkers might not be interested in the plan as applicants would need to invest in electrical cooking equipment; (iii) the FEHD planned to set up 40 stalls, but figure was far from being sufficient; (iv) as regards those cooked food hawkers operating in locations other

- 32 -

than the MacPherson Playground, he asked whether the FEHD would strictly enforce the law; (v) whether the government would formulate any territory-wide long-term bazaar policy; and (vi) whether the government’s plan to set up a cooked food bazaar in Mongkok was triggered by the riot in Mongkok on the first day of the Lunar New Year at the beginning of the year. 161. Mr LAM Kin-man raised his views as follows: (i) he shared the views of Mr Andy YU, and he supported the concept of the bazaar raised by the FEHD; (ii) although the SFH had claimed publicly that the plan of the cooked food bazaar had nothing to do with the riot at the beginning of the year, he doubted whether it was true; (iii) the people living near the MacPherson Playground objected to the proposal because the government raised the proposal without any consultation; (iv) the cooked food bazaar would bring up memories of the street snack culture of the past, and the government had indicated that guidelines on prevention of noise nuisance would be made, he hoped that the nearby residents would support the plan. 162. Mr CHOW Chun-fai raised his views as follows: (i) he had consulted the residents of 11 buildings near the MacPherson Playground, users of the playground and nearby snack shop operators. They were all of the view that the bazaar would bring noise nuisances, large crowds and traffic congestion; (ii) shop rents of the area were high, and snack shops relied on the “golden period” of the Lunar New Year to increase revenue. Therefore, they objected to the proposal; (iii) his office had received phone calls and a lot of e-mails from 25 citizens over the past five days. They all showed strong objection to the proposal; (iv) the relevant government departments should enhance communication and formulate a policy on bazaars, so as to promote the local snack culture and attract tourists without compromising the business of small shops. 163. Mr CHUNG Kong-mo raised his views as follows: (i) he expressed reservation on the proposal; (ii) as the SFH had indicated publicly that the proposal had nothing to do with the riot happened in Mongkok in the beginning of the year, it was not necessary for the government to launch the plan in a hurry; (iii) it was a hasty consultation. Even if the YTMDC came to any decision at the meeting, the relevant government departments might not have enough time for local consultation; (iv) only electricity would be allowed for cooking in the bazaar, but hawkers generally cooked with naked flame. They might not be interested in applying for a stall, and they did not have enough time to install the equipment; and (v) the proposed bazaar would operate till 2 a.m. of the following day. A lot of noise, pedestrian flow and traffic flow would be generated during the period. Therefore the nearby residents showed strong objection to the proposal. 164. The Hon James TO raised his views as follows: (i) the proposal had nothing to do with the case which had happened in the beginning of the year. Moreover, the conflict was not caused by the FEHD’s stern measures on the hawkers during the Lunar New Year; (ii) hawkers operating the rented stalls would not be allowed to use naked flame. That would make operating a cooked food stall beyond the bazaar more attractive. Therefore, even if the YTMDC showed its support, the proposal might not be successful; (iii) many promoting organisations of the bazaar were of the view that the proposed rental system was not appropriate; and (iv) the Government could consider organising the bazaar in a Lunar New Year Fair. 165. Ms KWAN Sau-ling showed support to the proposed bazaar. However, she believed that the consultation period was too short, and there were sites more suitable for the purpose in the district.

- 33 -

166. Mr Francis CHONG raised his views as follows: (i) the proposal could avoid clash between the police and hawkers triggered by obstruction to traffic around Langham Place brought by the latter during the Lunar New Year; (ii) the MacPherson Playground was not right beneath a building or in the carriageway. He did not understand why it was not a suitable location for the bazaar; (iii) the government could consider shortening the operation hours of the bazaar in order to minimise the inconvenience brought to the nearby residents; (iv) Councillors should solve the problem through discussion; and (v) the Lunar New Year was two months away. The duration was not insufficient for the consultation. 167. Mr WONG Kin-san responded to the views of the Hon James TO that there was no Lunar New Year Fair managed by the FEHD in the YTM District. The one closest to the district was the Fa Hui Park Lunar New Year Fair on Boundary Street, Mong Kok, which fell in Sham Shui Po District. He raised enquiries as follows: (i) he would like to know the number of illegal cooked food hawkers operating in the street during the recent Lunar New Year; (ii) the reason why only cooked food hawkers were allowed to rent a stall in the MacPherson Playground; (iii) the MacPherson Playground had been the venue for a number of poon choi feasts, which used naked flame for cooking. He wanted to know why the hawker stalls in the bazaar were not allowed to use naked flame; (iv) the positions of the government departments listed in paragraph three of the paper on the proposal; and (v) the reason why the YTMDO did not consult Councillors on the proposal. 168. Mr Craig JO raised his views as follows: (i) he was supportive of the government’s proposal for the cooked food bazaar policy; (ii) the District Council Member of the constituency concerned believed that it was not suitable to set up the cooked food bazaar at the MacPherson Playground. He respected the opinion of the District Council Member; and (iii) the Lunar New Year Fairs had profound experience in electricity supply and crowd control. The Government could first consider setting up the bazaar in a Lunar New Year Fair. 169. The Hon James TO responded to the view of Mr WONG Kin-san that the Fa Hui Park Lunar New Year Fair on Boundary Street, Mong Kok was close to the Prince Edward MTR Station. Even though the location of the Lunar New Year Fair was within Sham Shui Po District, residents in the vicinity of the Prince Edward MTR Station would be affected if the bazaar was set up there. 170. The Vice-chairman raised her views as follows: (i) it was necessary for the government to set up the bazaar, and formulate a long-term bazaar policy; (ii) some Councillors were of the view that the consultation was hasty and demanded for another consultation. She did not agree to the view. 171. Miss Diane WONG responded as follows:

(i) The SFH had said straight away that the proposal had nothing to do with the conflict which had taken place at the beginning of the year.

(ii) The FHB had expressed clearly the government’s position towards the setting up of the bazaar at the meetings of the Panel on Food Safety and Environmental Hygiene and the Panel on Manpower of the Legislative

- 34 -

Council in June 2011. Discussion of the sub-committee set up under the Panel on Food Safety and Environmental Hygiene in 2013-2015 involved the relevant policy (including development of bazaars) as well.

(iii) The government had an open mind on the proposal (including the location and the operation mode of the bazaar), and it respected the views of the YTMDC, residents and shop operators.

(iv) The government admitted that it should have consulted the YTMDC sooner. However, this was the first bazaar of its kind, and there were issues to be taken care of, e.g. the relevant government departments had to discuss detailed arrangements with the electricity supply company.

(v) Safety was of utmost importance. Hawkers in Lunar New Year Fairs were not allowed to use naked flame for cooking too. The FHB had consulted a number of government departments. They all expressed concerns over cooking with naked flame.

(vi) She thanked the District Council Member of the constituency concerned for reflecting the aspirations of the locality. She expressed that the government was willing to maintain communication with Councillors and the residents.

(vii) The FEHD had its own established enforcement policy and strategy, and had all along been tolerant in handling illegal hawking activities. If the obstructing hawkers were only selling “dry goods”, FEHD staff would give verbal warnings and disperse the hawkers in normal circumstances. However, if cooked food, prohibited or restricted food was involved, for the reason of food safety and environmental hygiene concerns, FEHD staff would take enforcement action, depending on the situation at the scene. The public agreed that public safety should be the primary consideration.

(viii) If the YTMDC set up a task force working group to help the residents reach a concensus and discuss with the relevant government departments, the FEHD would be glad to take part in it.

172. Mr Edward CHAN indicated that suggestions from Councillors were welcome if they believed that the MacPherson Playground was not a suitable venue. The FEHD took a liberal view towards the location of the bazaar. 173. Mr WONG Kin-san enquired further: (i) why the FEHD intended to set up 40 cooked food stall only; (ii) why the FEHD allowed heating with naked flame when poon choi feasts were held at the MacPherson Playground, but did not allow bazaar hawkers to cook with naked flame; and (iii) whether the other government departments were supportive of the proposal. 174. Mr Edward CHAN responded that it was only the preliminary proposal to set up 40 cooked food stalls. Moreover, it was for safety reasons that the FEHD allowed Lunar New Year Fair stall operators to reheat food with electricity only.

- 35 -

175. Mr Benny YEUNG raised his views as follows: (i) he did not see any direct relation between the incident happened at the beginning of the year and the Government’s tough measures on illegal hawkers; (ii) the Lunar New Year was only two months away, and the hawkers assigned a stall might not have sufficient time to prepare; (iii) considering the objection raised by the residents living near the MacPherson Playground, the Government should set up the pilot venue at some other place where the bazaar was in demand. 176. Mr CHAN Siu-tong raised his views as follows: (i) he supported the proposal; (ii) cooked food stalls only needed simple food stuff, which did not take a long time to prepare; (iii) the MacPherson Playground had high pedestrian flow, and most of the YTMDC activities (e.g. poon choi feasts) were held there. It was not unsuitable to use it as a pilot venue. If Councillors believed that it was not a suitable place, they might recommend some other locations for the consideration of the FEHD. 177. Ms Michelle TANG raised her views as follows: (i) in choosing the pilot venue for the bazaar, the government should consider the views of the locality; (ii) poon choi feasts usually ended at 8 or 9 in the evening, while the bazaar would operate till 2 a.m. The operation hours might cause an impact on the nearby residents; and (iii) the government should set up the pilot venue in a location which both the District Council Member of the constituency and nearby residents accepted. 178. Mr LAM Kin-man raised his views as follows: (i) the MacPherson Playground had been the venue for a lot of activities, and Sai Yeung Choi Street South would turn into a pedestrian precinct on weekends and Sundays. Therefore, the residents of Mong Kok might be more tolerant of noises; (ii) the bazaar would last for three days only. Moreover, the government could consider shortening the operation hours of the bazaar to 12 midnight; and (iii) if the bazaar was found to be a failure after the trial operation, the government might consider shelving the plan. 179. Mr Andy YU asked whether the FEHD would consider setting up 20 electricity-cooking stalls and 20 naked flame-cooking stalls in order to attract more hawkers to rent the stalls. He also asked what one-way flow arrangement was. 180. Mr CHUNG Kong-mo raised his views as follows: (i) many plans launched by the government were based on good intentions, but implemented in a “hard landing” manner, and therefore attracted adverse comments; (ii) Mr CHOW Chun-fai was the District Council Member of the constituency concerned, and he was the most experienced YTMDC Member. The other Councillors should respect his views; and (iii) many activities held at the MacPherson Playground had received a lot of complaints even though they had ended at 7 or 8 in the evening, not to mention the bazaar, which would operate till 2 a.m. 181. Mr CHUNG Chak-fai raised his views as follows: (i) the idea of the proposal was quite good, but the consultation was too hasty. Moreover, the paper submitted by the FEHD lacked information on rental arrangements and assessment criteria, etc. Therefore, he had reservations about the proposal; and (ii) he hoped that the government would provide more information for the consideration of YTMDC. 182. Mr WONG Kin-san raised his views as follows: (i) he supported the proposal; (ii) he expressed regret that representatives of the other government departments did not show their

- 36 -

position on the proposal; (iii) the MacPherson Playground was the most suitable venue in the district. Moreover, no other place was recommended by Councillors; and (iv) the FEHD might shorten the operation hours of the bazaar, or prohibit the use of speakers in the venue, so as to minimise noise nuisance caused to the nearby residents. 183. Mr Benjamin CHOI indicated that if only electricity was allowed for cooking, not many types of snacks could be offered. It might affect the attractiveness of the bazaar. 184. Mr CHOW Chun-fai said in response to the views of Mr LAM Kin-man that the MacPherson Playground closed at 11 p.m. every day. The Sai Yeung Choi Street South Pedestrian Precinct ended at 10 p.m, and traffic would resume at 10:30 p.m. Therefore, it was unjustifiable to say that the locality was used to noises. In fact, the residents of the area had to bear the nuisance as there was nothing they could do. As the saying went “do not do to others what you do not wish done to you”, in order to show respect to the District Council Members of other constituencies, he refrained from naming any venue which were more suitable than the MacPherson Playground. 185. Miss Diane WONG responded as follows:

(i) The government took a liberal view towards the location of the bazaar. If any suggestion was raised by the YTMDC, the Government would further study it.

(ii) Hong Kong people were highly adaptable. Hawkers could start the preparation work right after their bids were accepted, and operate his cooked food stall with creativity. Therefore, there should not be any problems of insufficient preparation time or unattractive snack types even if only electricity cooking was allowed.

(iii) In order to minimise the nuisance brought to the nearby residents, the FEHD might consider shortening the operation hours of the bazaar and implementing a number of control measures, including prohibition of shows and performance in the venue. The FEHD would distribute leaflets to the hawkers to advise them to exert self-discipline and refrain from making too much noise. Cooking with electricity should not generate much fume and smoke. Moreover, successful bidders would have to sign a licence agreement. One of the terms was that no speakers should be used in the venue. They should also observe the noise control requirements in public places imposed by the EPD.

(iv) The FEHD attached importance to the views of the residents. She welcomed views reflected by the District Council Member of the constituency concerned.

(v) On the first day of the Lunar New Year, a team of FEHD staff conducting routine patrol were surrounded, scolded and pushed by a crowd of over 50 people, even though they had not given any warning or arrested any hawkers. Someone in the crowd even pushed a cooked food wooden cart against the FEHD team and caused injuries. The FEHD staff called for police assistance and left the scene. It was some time afterward (a period of time later) when the clash happened. Therefore, it was unfair to the FEHD to associate the incident with the FEHD’s enforcement action.

- 37 -

186. Mr Edward CHAN responded that the FEHD would rent out the stalls at reasonable rental levels, and would allocate the stalls in a fair, open and just manner. 187. Mr Eric CHEUNG responded as follows:

(i) The FEHD would implement one-way flow management measures, as advised by the Police, by providing two entrance/exit points at Yim Po Fong Street. The public could enter the MacPherson Playground via the basketball court. They might go along Sai Yee Street when they left.

(ii) The FEHD would liaise with the CLP Power Hong Kong Limited (“CLP”) to have the power capacity of the MacPherson Playground upgraded, to ensure that there would be enough electricity supply for the 40 snack stalls in the venue.

188. Ms KWAN Sau-ling suggested the FEHD consider setting up the bazaar at the Centenary Garden. 189. Ms Michelle TANG suggested the FEHD consider taking the King’s Park as the trial venue. 190. The Hon James TO raised his views as follows: (i) the electricity supply requirement for each stall was 60A; and (ii) Hawker Control Teams (“HCTs”) should have no enforcement power in the bazaar. 191. Mr Benny YEUNG reiterated that the MacPherson Playground was not a suitable place since there were a lot of residential settlements around the area, and the bazaar would operate till 2 a.m. The FEHD should find a place with heavy pedestrian flow but not too many residential settlements. 192. Mr Edward CHAN responded as follows:

(i) The FEHD had liaised with the works department of the CLP to ensure that there would be enough electricity supply for the 40 stalls in the MacPherson Playground. As for any other locations, it would depend on the actual situation of the venues.

(ii) The HCTs of the FEHD would take enforcement outside the venue. As regards the premises within the venue, the HCTs could invoke the charge of hawking without a licence against offending hawkers.

(iii) Successful bidders would have to sign a licence agreement with the FEHD and apply for a temporary food factory licence.

(iv) The FEHD kept an open mind towards any suggested venues. 193. The Chairman summed up that altogether 15 Councillors had spoken, and they all showed support to the concept of setting up a bazaar. Therefore, the relevant government

- 38 -

departments could conduct further study into the concept. As for the proposal to set up a cooked food bazaar at the MacPherson Playground during the Lunar New Year, nine Councillors were against the proposal, 4 Councillors were supportive of it, and the other two Councillors did not make any comments clearly. Under such circumstances, the YTMDC did not agree to set up the bazaar at the MacPherson Playground. 194. Mr WONG Kin-san requested the Chairman to order a vote. 195. The Chairman responded that no vote was needed, as the representative of the FHB had stated clearly that she had come to the meeting to collect views from Councillors. 196. Mr WONG Kin-san said that it was improper for the Chairman to jump to a conclusion after Councillors had spoken. He requested the YTMDC to hold a division. 197. Mr WONG Kin-san indicated that the YTMDO had earlier submitted a paper for the YTMDC’s discussion at its meeting on 29 September 2016 on how to use the surplus of $800,000 in the funding for the District-led Actions Scheme. On that occasion, the YTMDO did not ask for a vote. However, on the request of Mr Benny YEUNG, the other Councillors proceeded to a vote by a show of hands. He asked why the arrangements for this item were different from those of that item. 198. The Chairman answered that at the YTMDC meeting held on 29 September 2016, the Meeting did not show its aspiration to the YTMDO clearly, and therefore a vote was needed. 199. Mr WONG Kin-san indicated that if a Councillor claimed a vote, and the relevant government department believed that it was necessary, the Chairman should consider ordering a vote. 200. The Chairman responded that the FHB did not raise any request in the Paper No. l32/2016 that the YTMDC should take a vote. He was just making a concluding remark, based on what Councillors had said, that nine Councillors were against the proposal, 4 Councillors were supportive of it, and the other two Councillors did not make any comments clearly. 201. Mr CHAN Siu-tong said that even though Councillors had shown their positions when they spoke, but they might change their mind after hearing the views of the other Councillors. He hoped that the YTMDC would put it to vote, so that the FEHD might follow-up on it. 202. Mr Francis CHONG said that Councillors should show their position after exchange of views. For the two Councillors who had not shown their position clearly, they should be given the chance to do so. 203. Mr CHUNG Kong-mo said he would not rule out the possibility that some Councillors might change their mind. However, if the YTMDC had to take a vote on every paper submitted by a government department, process of the meeting would be procrastinated. He suggested the Chairman ask the Councillors who had spoken whether they had changed their mind.

- 39 -

204. Mr Andy YU said that he was supportive of the vote, as many residents, hawkers and the media were concerned about the item. 205. Mr LAM Kin-man was supportive of the vote. 206. The Chairman expressed that according to the Yau Tsim Mong District Standing Orders, if a Councillor claimed a vote, the Meeting should first ascertain whether it was necessary to take a vote. He asked Councillors whether they agreed that a vote should be taken on the proposal. 207. Mr WONG Kin-san was discontented with the arrangement of the Chairman. 208. Mr CHAN Siu-tong stressed that the FHB could not follow up on the item if Councillors did not take a vote. Moreover, he was discontented that Councillors should first vote on whether a vote was needed before taking a vote on the issue. 209. Mr LAU Pak-kei would like to know whether the government had consulted the residents and hawkers of the area before presenting the proposal, and what the consultation result was. He also hoped that the representative of the FHB would clearly indicate whether Councillors had to vote on whether the bazaar should be set up at the MacPherson Playground or another location. 210. Mr CHAN Siu-tong quoted the procedure of the District Facilities Management Committee in handling proposals of district minor works. He said that the YTMDC should first put the proposal to a vote, and then let the relevant government department conduct a consultation or further study. If the proposal was not feasible, the relevant government department should report to the YTMDC the study results. 211. Mr Derek HUNG raised his views as follows: (i) all the Councillors who had spoken agreed to the concept of the proposal raised by the government; (ii) Coucillors had raised different views, and the FHB might not know what action they should take. The YTMDC should clearly show its position to the FHB, so that the relevant government departments might know how to follow-up on the issue. 212 The Hon James TO said he did not mind taking a vote. He suggested the Meeting first put the venue of the MacPherson Playground to a vote, and then vote on the other suggested locations. 213. Mr Francis CHONG said that the YTMDC should put the proposal to a vote, so that the FHB could proceed to the next step. 214. The Chairman invited Councillors to vote on whether a cooked food bazaar should be set up at the MacPherson Playground, Mong Kok during the Lunar New Year in 2017. 215. Mr Derek HUNG said that apart from the MacPherson Playground, some other venues had been named by Councillors. He therefore hoped that Councillors would also vote on the other venues. 216. The Chairman said that the other venues were the Centenary Garden, King’s Park,

- 40 -

and the Boundary Street Recreation Ground in Sham Shui Po. He suggested Councillors first vote on the MacPherson Playground. No objection was raised. 217. The Chairman invited Councillors to vote on the MacPherson Playground. 218. Voting result: eight Councillors voted for the proposal, namely, Ms WONG Shu-ming, Mr CHAN Siu-tong, Mr Francis CHONG, Mr Derek HUNG, Mr LAM Kin-man, the Hon James TO, Mr WONG Kin-san and Mr Andy YU. Nine Councillors voted against the proposal, namely, Mr Benjamin CHOI, Mr CHOW Chun-fai, Mr CHUNG Chak-fai, Mr CHUNG Kong-mo, Mr Craig JO, Ms KWAN Sau-ling, Mr LAU Pak-kei, Ms Michelle TANG and Mr Benny YEUNG. (There were 18 Councillors in the Conference Room during the voting. The Chairman did not cast his vote.) 219. The Chairman declared that the YTMDC was against the proposal of setting up a cooked food bazaar at the MacPherson Playground, Mong Kok during the Lunar New Year in 2017. He subsequently consulted Councillors whether they would recommend any other venues. 220. Mr LAU Pak-kei would like to know whether the FHB would propose any other venues to the YTMDC, so that Councillors might vote on such venues. 221. Miss Diane WONG responded that the FHB wished to implement the pilot scheme in an outdoor venue which the YTMDC considered suitable. She therefore hoped that the YTMDC would recommend a venue. 222. The Chairman consulted Councillors whether they would like to make any suggestion. No suggestion was made. He said that the FHB should consult the YTMDC again if it had any other location in mind. 223. The Chairman thanked the representatives of the FHB and the FEHD for taking part in the discussion on this item. (Mr Francis CHONG left the meeting at 9:01 p.m.) Item 18: Progress Reports

(1) District Management Committee (YTMDC Paper No. 133/2016)

(2) Community Building Committee (YTMDC Paper No. 134/2016)

(3) District Facilities Management Committee (YTMDC Paper No. 135/2016)

(4) Traffic, Transport and Housing Committee (YTMDC Paper No. 136/2016)

(5) Food, Environmental Hygiene and Public Works Committee (YTMDC Paper No. 137/2016)

- 41 -

(6) Working Group on Concern for YMT Fruit Market (YTMDC Paper No. 130/2016)

224. Councillors noted the content of the progress reports of all the committees and the working group. Item 19: Any Other Business

(1) Ocean Park’s Corporate Social Responsibility Programme for Low-income Families

225. The Chairman said that the Secretariat had received a letter from the Ocean Park. The letter (Annex 4) was placed on the table for Councillors’ perusal. 226. The Chairman said that in celebration of the 40th Anniversary, the Ocean Park was going to offer 10 000 persons from low-income families a visit to the Ocean Park free of charge from January to June 2017. The programme was sponsored by the Chinachem Group. The Ocean Park invited the 18 District Councils to be supporting organisations of the programme, and wished to contact non-profit-making organisations in the 18 districts through the District Councils in order to recruit participants from low-income families. 227. The Chairman consulted Councillors whether they agreed that the YTMDC should be a supporting organisation of the programme. No objection was raised. (Mr LAM Kin-man left the meeting at 9:04 p.m.) 228. The Chairman invited Members to discuss the issue and recommend non-profit-making organisations in the district to help recruit participants from low-income families. He then asked the Secretariat to request the Ocean Park to provide more information, and invite Councillors to take part in the programme by circulation after the meeting. 229. The Hon James TO suggested allocating the tickets to Councillors, so that Councillors might distribute the tickets to eligible low-income families. (Mr CHAN Siu-tong left the meeting at 9:05 p.m.) 230. The Chairman said that the YTMDC would discuss how to distribute the tickets when more information from the Ocean Park had been obtained. He would also consult Councillors later by circulation.

(2) Report by Yau Tsim Mong District Organising Committee on Hong Kong Games

231. Mr Derek HUNG reported on the work of the Yau Tsim Mong District Organising Committee on the 6th Hong Kong Games as follows:

- 42 -

(i) The Vitality Run would be held on 8 January 2017 in Shatin. Councillors who were interested in the run could approach the Secretariat for details and enrolment.

(ii) The Yau Tsim Mong District Organising Committee on Hong Kong Games had had its second meeting on 15 November this year. The sport advisors group suggested by the District Officer (Yau Tsim Mong) had been formed. The Chairman, Mr CHAN Siu-tong (the Chief Manager) and all Committee Members were trying hard to seek sponsorship and sparing no effort to help with the preparation work. Up till now, the value of sponsorship contribution, in cash or in kind, added up to $530,000.

(iii) With the assistance of the LCSD, the district athlete selection had been conducted in accordance with the requirements.

(3) Standard Chartered Hongkong Marathon 2017 – District Councils Challenge Cup

232. Mr CHUNG Chak-fai reported that after the endorsement at the last meeting that he should form a team to take part in the Standard Chartered Hongkong Marathon 2017 – District Councils Challenge Cup, a team had been formed. Members included Mr Craig JO, Mr Andy YU, a number of residents from the locality and him. 233. The Chairman asked Mr CHUNG Chak-fai to collect the enrolment fee from the other Councillors, totally $2,500. 234. There being no other business, the Chairman closed the meeting at 9:08 p.m. The next meeting would be held at 2:30 p.m. on 26 January 2017 (Thursday). Yau Tsim Mong District Council Secretariat December 2016

- 43 -

政府總部

發展局

規割地政科

Planning and Lands Branch Development Bureau

Government Secretariat

司E 治添馬直接笑道三號政府總部商獨＋七種

17/r'. West Wing, Central Gov肺、m個tOffices. i Tim Mei Avenue, Tlllllar‘Hong Kong

本局棉號Our Re£ DEVB(PL-P)S0/20/08

F扭曲檔號Your Ref.

電話Tel﹔

傳3年Fax:

3509 8843

2868 4530

Bv F血：2722 7696

Ms Joanne CHUNG Secretary Yau Tsim Mong District Council 4/F., Mong Kok Government Offices 30 Luen Wan Street Kowloon

Dear Ms CHUNG,

Invitation to Attend the Meeting

of Yau Tsim Mong District Council

18 November 2016

Thank you for your letter dated 10 November 2016 inviting o叮

attendance at也E Yau Tsim Mong District Council meeting to be held on

24 November 2016.

Our written response on the issue of relocation of Yau Ma Tei Fruit

Market is at主盟且﹒ Please note也at representative from Development

Bureau will not attend the meeting concerned.

18-NOV-2日 16 09:4自 +852 2868 4530 97月 P.001

Annex 1

-中華人民共和國香港特別，行政區政府總部食物及衛生局

Food and Health Bureau, Government Secretariat The Government of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region

The Peopl白話 Republic of China

Ms Joanne CHUNG Secretary, Yau Tsim Mong District Council 4/F, Mong Kok Government Offices 30 Luen Wan Street Kowloon ﹝Fax: 2722 7696﹞

Dear Ms CHUNG,

22 November 2016

Invitation to Attend the Meeting of Yau Tsim Mong District Council

Many thanks for your letter dated 10 November 2016 on the captioned SU旬的t. 甘1e bilingual written reply attached remains valid. As the written reply has clearly explained our position, FHB will not be sending a representative to由e meeting. Many thanks.

Yours sincerely,

�(4Q

(Miss Diane

香梅海闊插3且越2號政府組都JIU! 17-19縷 協商：（852) 3509 8765 傳真﹔（852) 2541 3352 17-19/F, East WinιCe叫ral Government Otri血s, 2 Tim M•i Avcn叩開 Tamar. Hong Kong Tel: (852) 3509 8765 Fι（R52) 2個I 3352

22-NOV-2016 17: 19 +852 2136 3281 P悶。01

Only Chinese version is available Annex 2

£ARCHITECTURAL SERVICES DEPARTMENT 建 築 害

物主監事務處)L沁紅嘲娥斗－街)1.%!l.l：說中.（.，－』慎

PROPERTY SERVICES BRANCH 7/F.』 APB CENTRE. 9 SUNG PING ST., HUNG HOM, KL阻，HONG KONG 棚，：（酬2765 7734

By Fax (2722 7696) Our Ref. Your Ref. Tel. No, Fax No.

: ASD.PB.PB-046-00071-000 : YTMDC/13-10/7/16 : 2773 2522 : 2765 0259

22 November 2016

The Secretary Yau Tsim Mong District Council 4/F, Mong Kok Government Offices 30 Luen Wan Street, Kowloon

(A社n: Ms. Joa1tne CHUNG)

Dear Ms CHUNG,

Invitation to Attend the Meeting of Yau Tsim Mong District Council

關注尖沙口同中取i客運碼茹苦哇怖保替罪日綜絡

I refer to your letter of the above subject dated 10 November 2016, please find below our response.

Architectural Services Department had provided inputs under our maintenanc串

戶rview to the management department, Marine Department, for consolidated response to the enquiry企om the District Councilors in the coming YTMDC meeting to be held on 24 November 2016.

迫害再忍已經向管理部門海$處提供本署負責保養維修範圈內的有關資料，以使海事處於2016年1 1月24日出席－區議會會議時統一回腔區諸葛民的查詢和建議。

Thank you for your attention.

c.cMD (Attn. Rico CHAN)

Yours faithfully,

／〈「＼(Ms. LP CHUK)

Propeny Services Manager/TST &YMT Architectural Services Dep紅tment

22 NOV-2016 12:3日 ＋自52 2765 0259 96% TOTAL P.001

F ”。。 1

Annex 3

低收入家庭關愛社群項目計劃書

1. 活動名稱

海洋公園 x 華懋集團動物保育學習及家庭遊樂日

2. 主辦機構

海洋公園

3. 冠名贊助

華懋集團

4. 全力支持

十八區區議會

5. 背景

作為香港人的公園，我們一如既往推行規模冠絕全球同類主題公園的關愛社群項目，回饋

本地社區。有見 2016 年初舉辦的「海洋公園 x 華懋集團動物保育學習及家庭遊樂日 」反

應熱烈，及慶祝海洋公園 40 周年，公園計劃與華懋集團及十八區區議會合作，推行一個

關愛社群項目：於 2017 年 1 月至 6 月期間，邀請 10,000 名低收入家庭人士到海洋公園渡

過愉快的一日。

6. 目的

讓低收入家庭人士在沒有經濟負擔下到海洋公園渡過愉快的一日

為退休人士提供當義工機會

向義工及參加者宣揚保育訊息，藉此引起他們對環境保護的興趣及關心

7. 活動時間

2017 年 1 月至 6 月

8. 對象

10,000 名低收入家庭人士 (請查看附件一查閱十八區入場門券分派數目)

Annex 4Only Chinese version is available

9. 申請資格

I. 參加者必須為本港低收入家庭成員，任何年齡均可。申請必須透過由各區區議會推介

的非牟利機構或慈善團體遞交。每人只可參加此計劃一次。

II. 低收入家庭定義為該人或家庭成員現正領取至少一項以下政府津助：

綜合社會保障援助(綜緩)

幼稚園及幼兒中心學費減免計劃

學校書簿津貼

低收入在職家庭津貼

為低收入家庭護老者提供生活津貼試驗計劃

10. 活動詳情

於 2017 年 1 月至 6 月期間，邀請 10,000 名低收入家庭人士到海洋公園參加遊樂日。

每區的非牟利機構將協助招募參加者及審核相關資格。一天的遊樂日包括免費交

通﹑午膳﹑標誌性展館導賞和工作坊（如北極之旅﹑海洋奇觀﹑亞洲動物天地等），

以及自由暢遊公園。

為鼓勵社會大眾服務有需要的社群，公園將招募退休人士擔任義工。有關義工將參

與一系列由海洋公園教育團隊舉辦的培訓及工作坊，學習解說技巧和有趣的動物知

識，以應付導賞的工作。培訓期間，義工將會參觀展館及附近地方，及於課堂學習

展館所宣揚的保育訊息。義工將為遊樂日的參加者提供展館導賞及工作坊。

海洋公園將於 2017 年 1 月 10 日舉行的「海洋公園 40 周年慶典揭幕禮」上，正式

宣佈活動開始。

11. 華懋集團所提供的支持及嗚謝

I. 贊助參加者膳食﹑交通及整個活動的行政費用

II. 華懋集團名稱或商標將在活動名稱及所有活動相關的傳媒及宣傳品

III. 華懋集團將獲邀成為「海洋公園 40 周年慶典揭幕禮」的主禮嘉賓，活動將於 2017

年 1 月 10 日舉行。

12. 海洋公園所提供的支持

I. 為所有參加者提供免費入場

II. 培訓義工導賞

III. 負責整個活動的行政及協調工作

IV. 透過十八區區議會及區內非牟利機構的協助下，為低收入家庭申請者登記活動

V. 為計劃進行多方面宣傳

VI. 為十八區區議會提供對是次活動的宣傳品設計

13. 十八區區議會所提供的支持及嗚謝

I. 聯絡區內非牟利機構招募低收入家庭人士參加活動

II. 十八區區議會於區內透過橫額及海報宣傳是次活動

III. 十八區區議員將獲邀出席「海洋公園 40 周年慶典揭幕禮」，活動將於 2017 年 1

月 10 日舉行。

附件一：十八區入場門券分派數目

地區 區議員數目 派發入場門券數目

南區 17 300

中西區 15 300

灣仔區 13 200

東區 35 300

深水埗區 23 1000

油尖旺區 19 500

九龍城區 24 500

黃大仙區 25 500

觀塘區 37 500

離島區 18 300

屯門區 30 1000

元朗區 41 1000

荃灣區 20 600

葵青區 30 500

北區 22 1,000

大埔區 21 500

沙田區 39 500

西貢區 29 500

總數 458 10,000