Author Archives: hksar gov

     Following is a question by the Hon Paul Tse and a written reply by the Secretary for Development, Mr Michael Wong, in the Legislative Council today (April 3):

Question:

     Some studies have pointed out that reclamation at the Kwun Tong Typhoon Shelter (KTTS) can produce a sizable piece of land in a short period of time, and is a more cost-effective option than the Lantau Tomorrow Vision. Besides, some members of the public have relayed that there are not many economic activities at KTTS, with only some yachts and oil barges berthing at it for most of the time. It has been reported by the media that some people use pontoons to occupy berthing spaces at KTTS for berthing of yachts and they make profits by extorting “security fees” and “berthing fees” from the relevant parties. In its Direct Investigation Report published last month, the Office of The Ombudsman expressed concern about whether the right of other vessels to the fair use of KTTS had been deprived of. Some members of the public have criticised the Protection of the Harbour Ordinance (Cap 531) for its overcorrection, which has become an ordinance offering protection to all sorts of illegal activities at typhoon shelters. Besides, there are views that at present, KTTS is unable to provide ancillary transport facilities for the Kai Tak Cruise Terminal (KTCT) which has remained idle for a long period of time, not to mention creating synergy with it. In this connection, will the Government inform this Council:

(1) whether it has studied if the aforesaid occupation of berthing spaces by pontoons and extortion of fees for the berthing of yachts is an organised crime; if it has studied and the outcome is in the affirmative, of the follow-up actions taken by the Government and the number of successful prosecutions against the persons concerned, in the past three years;

(2) given that while the Government intends to submit to this Council a funding application of $500 million-odd for undertaking studies relating to the artificial islands in the Central Waters under the Lantau Tomorrow Vision, some members of the public consider such an amount too high, whether the Government will consider sparing, by reducing the relevant expenditure, an amount of money for conducting studies on the feasibility and benefits of reclamation at KTTS, including the value of the newly formed land, the number of units that can be built, the population that can be accommodated, as well as the ancillary transport facilities that can be provided for KTCT and the synergy that can be achieved with it;

(3) whether the Government assessed, in the past three years, (i) the economic benefits that could have been generated by arranging vessels to berth at KTTS (including the aforesaid activity of occupying berthing spaces for berthing of yachts) and (ii) the economic contributions brought about by the various commercial activities at KTTS;

(4) whether it will expeditiously conduct the studies and assessments mentioned in (2) and (3) respectively, so as to assess whether the KTTS reclamation plan should be taken forward;

(5) given that the Development Bureau mentioned earlier, in reply to my suggestions made in respect of the 2019-2020 Budget, that if reclamation was to be conducted at KTTS, site(s) had to be identified in advance for planning of new typhoon shelters or sheltered anchorages, whether the Government has proposals on the sites for the provision of typhoon shelters; if so, of the details; if not, whether it will immediately commence the site identification work;

(6) given that a few days ago, the Secretary for Development indicated, in reply to a question on the Environmentally Friendly Linkage System for Kowloon East (EFLS) raised by a Member of this Council, that the proposed viaduct, which had originally been planned to run from the tip of KTCT and cross KTTS to connect with the MTR Kwun Tong Station via Hoi Yuen Road, was faced with a lot of technical difficulties as it failed to meet a number of fire safety requirements stipulated under the Fire Safety (Buildings) Ordinance (Cap 572), whether the Government will continue to study EFLS on the one hand, and examine the road transport network that can be provided through reclamation at KTTS on the other, as a contingency plan in the event that EFLS is not pursued; and

(7) whether it will immediately amend the Protection of the Harbour Ordinance to facilitate the implementation of EFLS and reclamation of KTTS, so as to provide a large piece of residential land for the Energizing Kowloon East vision, thereby solving the traffic problems in the district and at KTCT?

Reply:

President,

     The Government has been adopting a multi-pronged approach to increase land supply by means of optimising the use of existing developed land on one hand, and developing new land resources on the other including taking forward New Development Area projects and proposing the Lantau Tomorrow Vision (LTV).

     Regarding the topic of reclaiming the Kwun Tong Typhoon Shelter (KTTS), the Government proposed in 2001 under the completed Comprehensive Feasibility Study for the Revised Scheme of South East Kowloon Development a total development area of 460 hectares (ha) with about 133 ha from reclamation including the northern part of the KTTS. In light of the judgment handed down by the Court of Final Appeal regarding the interpretation of the Protection of the Harbour Ordinance (Cap 531) in January 2004, the Government launched the Kai Tak Planning Review in mid-2004 with a view to examining the planning and engineering works of the former Kai Tak Airport site and preparing a new development proposal based on the “zero reclamation” principle. Three stages of public engagement were conducted between 2004 and 2006. Subsequently, recommendations of the Kai Tak Planning Review were incorporated into the Kai Tak Outline Zoning Plan (OZP) in November 2006, which were approved by the Chief Executive in Council in November 2007. The approved Kai Tak OZP No. S/K22/6 currently in force is mainly based on the OZP exhibited in 2006 which does not involve any reclamation proposal and has gone through several rounds of public participation.

     In fact, the KTTS is the second largest typhoon shelter in Victoria Harbour. If the KTTS was reclaimed, the overall supply of sheltered berthing spaces in Hong Kong would decrease. As such, the Government has no plan to study whether reclamation works can be carried out at the KTTS.

     Our responses to the various parts of the question raised by the Hon Tse, having taken into account the inputs of relevant bureaux and departments, are as follows:

(1) and (3) According to the information provided by the Transport and Housing Bureau, typhoon shelters are established to provide suitable sheltered spaces for local vessels to take refuge during typhoons and inclement weather. The permitted lengths of vessels to use typhoon shelters are 30.4 metres, 50m or 75m, depending on the respective typhoon shelters. The KTTS, as one of the 14 typhoon shelters in Hong Kong, has an area of about 33 ha. Since the KTTS can provide shelter for around 350 vessels during the passage of typhoons and in inclement weather, if reclamation is to be conducted at the KTTS, site(s) must be identified in advance for planning of new typhoon shelters or sheltered anchorages, so as to ensure that there will be sufficient safe berthing spaces in Hong Kong waters for local vessels to take refuge during typhoons or inclement weather.

     Moreover, in accordance with the current legislation, with a few exceptions (for example, if a vessel carries dangerous goods or has exceeded the aforesaid permitted length of typhoon shelters), all vessels (including Class II vessels to which pontoons belong) may enter and remain in any typhoon shelters at any time. Furthermore, it is not a contravention of the current legislation for a vessel (such as a pontoon) to provide services to another vessel within a typhoon shelter (including the provision of water, electricity, berthing, security and maintenance services). As regards the economic benefits brought about by the commercial activities within typhoon shelters including the aforesaid activities, they are matters between the shipowners and the service providers concerned. The Marine Department (MD) does not possess the relevant information.

     Regarding whether the right to fair use of vessels of typhoon shelters has been affected by the commercial activities therein, according to the MD’s on-site observation, there are still adequate berthing spaces available for vessels within the KTTS. The aforesaid pontoon have neither obstructed the free access of other vessels to the typhoon shelter, nor the passageway, they have therefore not contravened any marine legislation. The Ombudsman has also agreed in its report that this has not affected the vessels’ right to fair use of the KTTS.

     With regard to the management of the KTTS, since November 2018, the Hong Kong Police Force (HKPF) together with the MD have stepped up efforts in patrolling the KTTS and conducted a total of five joint operations to curb any illegal activities within the typhoon shelter. The MD will continue to maintain close liaison with the HKPF as well as undertake patrols and operations as appropriate, so as to ensure the safe and orderly berthing of vessels within typhoon shelters.

(2) There is an acute shortage of land supply in Hong Kong. The Government endorses the views of the Task Force on Land Supply that there is no single option to solve the land shortage problem. The Government will continue to adopt a multi-pronged approach in order to increase land supply. The LTV has proposed various land supply initiatives in the medium-to-long term. One of the key initiatives of the LTV is to commence studies on the phased reclamation for the formation of artificial islands in the Central Waters. There are multiple strategic advantages of this initiative. The Government estimates that the artificial islands near Kau Yi Chau (the KYC Artificial Islands), with a total reclaimed area of about 1 000 ha, under the first phase development of the LTV are capable of providing 150 000 to 260 000 housing units, 70 per cent of which are public housing. The KYC Artificial Islands will also support the development of the third Core Business District (note: the first two Core Business Districts of Hong Kong are Central and Kowloon East), which fosters economic development and provides some 200 000 diversified employment opportunities. The artificial islands will be supported by a comprehensive network of strategic roads and rails that connects the Hong Kong Island, Lantau and the coastal areas of Tuen Mun, benefiting not only the artificial islands but also the Northwest New Territories as well as the territory as a whole.

     The proposed studies related to Artificial Islands in the Central Waters comprise a detailed planning and engineering study for the KYC Artificial Islands to establish the reclamation extent, land uses and technical feasibility, including the formulation of detailed land use proposals, preparation of preliminary design of the associated engineering works, and conducting statutory environmental impact assessment as well as public engagement exercise in relation to the formulation of development proposals; a strategic transport infrastructure study; and collection of information on waters within and in the vicinity of the possible artificial islands near Hei Ling Chau and Cheung Chau South for future reference in long-term planning. Besides, the studies also include associated site investigation including supervision.

     The Government estimates the capital cost of the above-mentioned studies to be $550.4 million in money-of-the-day prices, which is considered reasonable. As mentioned above, the Government has currently no plan to study whether reclamation works can be carried out at the KTTS.

(4) to (7) The detailed feasibility study for the Environmentally Friendly Linkage System for Kowloon East is underway, which includes exploring the feasibility of provisioning a link bridge across the KTTS. Besides, as mentioned above, if the KTTS was reclaimed, the overall supply of sheltered berthing spaces in Hong Kong would decrease. Furthermore, the KTTS is part of our busy working harbour and a good place for water recreation. The Government is promoting the development of water sports and recreational activities in accordance with the direction laid down in the approved Kai Tak OZP. The concerned reclamation idea will affect the direction of promoting water body co-use in the KTTS. The Government has currently no plan to study whether reclamation works can be carried out at the KTTS. There is also no intention to make amendment to the Protection of the Harbour Ordinance (Cap 531). read more

     Following is a question by the Hon Jimmy Ng and a written reply by the Secretary for Security, Mr John Lee, in the Legislative Council today (April 3):
 
Question:
 
     It is learnt that in recent years, a large number of illegal entrants lodged, immediately upon entry into Hong Kong, torture claims or non-refoulement claims (collectively referred to as “claims”) under the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment. In this connection, will the Government inform this Council:
 
(1) in the past five years, of (i) the number of rejected claimants removed from Hong Kong each year and (ii) the five major countries from where such persons came, together with the number of such persons from each of those countries and its percentage in the total number of claimants (set out in a table);
 
(2) given that a vast majority of claimants are currently released on recognisance in lieu of detention, and the number of person-times of non-ethnic Chinese persons on recognisance (mostly non-refoulement claimants) arrested for committing criminal offences increased by about 40 per cent from 1 113 in 2015 to 1 542 in 2017, whether the Government took any targeted measures last year to combat such offences; if so, of the details; if not, the reasons for that;
 
(3) as the Government has proposed to amend the Immigration Ordinance (Cap. 115) by tightening the statutory timeframe for a claimant’s submission of a claim form from 28 days to 14 days and cancelling the period of 21 additional days currently given to all claimants by administrative measures, whether it has studied the processing time that can be shortened for each claim on average after the amendments concerned have come into force; and
 
(4) whether it will consider afresh setting up holding centres or closed camps for the claimants; if so, of the details; if not, the reasons for that?
 
Reply:
 
President,
 
     The Government has all along been very concerned for issues arising from non-refoulement claimants. In this regard, we commenced a comprehensive review of the strategy of handling non-refoulement claims in 2016. Various measures implemented so far include preventing claimants from entering Hong Kong as far as possible, expediting the screening of pending claims, shortening the time for screening each claim, increasing the number of members and secretariat staff in the Torture Claims Appeal Board (TCAB), expediting the removal of rejected claimants from Hong Kong, as well as stepping up enforcement against crimes such as unlawful employment.
 
     The Government will also amend the Immigration Ordinance, with a view to improving the screening procedures and plugging existing loopholes, so as to avoid a rebound in the number of claims and processing time, and strengthening the powers of the Immigration Department (ImmD) in respect of enforcement, removal and detention. The Government consulted the Legislative Council (LegCo) Panel on Security on the amendment proposals in July 2018 and January 2019, and aims to introduce the amendment bill to LegCo in the first half of 2019.
 
     At present, the number of new claims and illegal immigrants has dropped significantly by 80 per cent as compared with the peak; the ImmD has largely completed the screening of the once over 10 000 pending claims; and the number of appeals pending handling by the TCAB has started to decrease gradually, with the backlog expected to be cleared in two years at the earliest.
 
     My reply to the various parts of the Hon Ng’s question is as follows:
 
(1) From 2014 to 2018, a total of 9 137 non-refoulement claimants were removed by ImmD (including those with their torture claims rejected, withdrawn or for which no further action could be taken before the implementation of the unified screening mechanism (USM) in March 2014). Among them, 4 593 were rejected claimants.
 
     Among those removed after their claims had been rejected, in terms of the total number of claimants removed over the years, top source countries are Vietnam, India, Pakistan, Indonesia, Bangladesh, the Philippines and Nepal. The breakdown by year is as follows:
 
 

Nationality / Year	2014	2015	2016	2017	2018	Total
Vietnamese	3	21	42	305	780	1 151
Indian	52	133	181	255	226	847
Pakistani	56	131	126	261	242	816
Indonesian	32	65	83	145	225	550
Bangladeshi	17	40	61	123	100	341
Filipino	20	23	33	70	81	227
Nepalese	14	51	34	63	59	221
Others	36	61	79	118	146	440
TOTAL	230	525	639	1 340	1 859	4 593

   
     As at the end of 2018, among the some 22 000 claimants whose claims required processing by the ImmD under USM, about 40 per cent had been removed.
 
(2) The Government has been monitoring the situation of crimes committed by non-ethnic Chinese (NEC) persons (including non-refoulement claimants) and their taking part in triad activities in Hong Kong. In this regard, the Police have been deploying manpower to step up control according to the crime trends in various districts for prevention and detection of crimes.
     
     To address the related issues in a focused manner, formulate strategies and coordinate enforcement operations, the Police have set up the Crime Wing Working Group on NEC Involvement in Organised Crime and Triad Activities. Its duties cover monitoring the trend of NEC persons taking part in organised crimes and triad activities; developing strategies for the Police Force; co-ordinating enforcement operations; and strengthening the Police’s system and process for enhancing the capability in gathering intelligence.
      
     On combatting crimes at the district level, the Organised Crime and Triad Bureau launched new strategies in 2017 to tackle the problem of NEC persons committing crimes, with emphasis placed on four aspects, including training, intelligence gathering and sharing, multi-agency co-operation and enhanced enforcement actions.
      
     Besides, the Police have also maintained liaison with local and overseas law enforcement agencies, consulates in Hong Kong and NEC communities, and will take timely actions against any crimes involving the persons concerned.
      
     In 2018, 1 150 NEC persons on recognisance (mostly non-refoulement claimants) were arrested for crimes, down by 25.4 per cent as compared to 2017. The Police will continue to monitor the relevant crime trends and operational needs, and formulate effective measures and take targeted actions accordingly.
 
(3) It is imperative and important to address the issues relating to non-refoulement claimants at root in the long run by expediting screening and plugging loopholes prone to procedural abuse through legislative amendments. The Security Bureau earlier consulted the Panel on Security on the amendment proposals, which include tightening the statutory timeframe for submission of claim form from 28 days to 14 days, and ceasing the current administrative arrangement to give claimants another 21 days for doing so. If the proposals are implemented, the time required by ImmD for screening each claim will be further shortened from the current average of 10 weeks to about five weeks.
 
     Separately, we are considering whether there is room to suitably tighten the statutory timeframe for certain appeal procedures, with a view to handling appeals more efficiently while upholding the high standards of fairness.
      
     With the improvement of the overall screening procedures and plugging of the loopholes to avoid deliberate stalling by certain persons after the legislative amendments, it is expected that decisions on the claims will be made more expeditiously. This will be in the interest of all stakeholders (including the claimants) and the community at large.
 
(4) Suggestions of setting up reception centres or closed camps involve various issues concerning the law, land, infrastructure, manpower, resources, management and security, etc. The Government has been considering all lawful, practicable and effective measures. Given the complexity of the issues involved, the suggestions must be carefully and thoroughly examined.
 
     Separately, as explained when we earlier consulted the Panel on Security on the legislative proposals, in considering the detention strategies, we are also considering legislative amendments to ensure that ImmD is able to detain claimants lawfully and reasonably at different stages of the screening and removal procedures. read more

     Police today (April 3) appealed to the public for information on a woman who went missing in Sau Mau Ping.        Wong Hoi-ling, aged 23, went missing after she was last seen in Upper Ngau … read more

     Following is a question by the Hon Shiu Ka-chun and a written reply by the Secretary for Security, Mr John Lee, in the Legislative Council today (April 3):
 
Question:
 
     Currently, persons in custody (PICs) may make applications for early release under the “Release under Supervision Scheme” and the “Pre-release Employment Scheme” provided for in the Prisoners (Release under Supervision) Ordinance (Cap 325).  The recommendations made by the Release under Supervision Board (the Board) after consideration of such applications are submitted to the Secretary for Security for his decision by exercising the powers delegated to him by the Chief Executive under Cap 325.  In this connection, will the Government inform this Council:
 
(1) of the respective numbers of applications for early release made under the two aforesaid schemes by PICs which were rejected in each of the past five years, together with the reasons;
 
(2) as some PICs alleged that staff members of the Correctional Services Department had, on various grounds, withheld their applications for early release which were intended to be submitted to the Chief Executive through the Board, whether the various correctional institutions have currently kept written records of the early-release applications submitted by PICs, so as to safeguard PICs’ rights and interests; and
 
(3) as PICs must have secured employment before they may apply for early release under the Pre-release Employment Scheme, of the policies and measures currently put in place to encourage employers to offer jobs for PICs?
 
Reply:
 
President,
 
     Persons in custody (PICs) may apply for release from prison under supervision under the Release under Supervision Scheme and the Pre-release Employment Scheme provided for in the Prisoners (Release under Supervision) Ordinance (Cap 325) (the Ordinance). Any PIC who is serving a determinate sentence of imprisonment of three years or more and has served not less than half or 20 months of that sentence (whichever is longer) may apply for early release under the Release under Supervision Scheme.  Any PIC who is serving a determinate sentence of imprisonment of two years or more and is within six months prior to the earliest date of discharge may apply for early release under the Pre-release Employment Scheme.  Both schemes aim at facilitating PICs’ early reintegration into society as law-abiding citizens.
 
     The Release under Supervision Board (the Board), established pursuant to the Ordinance, considers applications made by PICs under the two schemes and makes recommendations.  Recommendations made by the Board are submitted to the Secretary for Security, who may make decisions by exercising the powers delegated to him by the Chief Executive under the Ordinance. 
 
     My reply to the various parts of the Hon Shiu’s question is as follows:
 
(1)  The numbers of applications considered and rejected under the two schemes between 2014 and 2018 are detailed at Annex.
 
     The Board must consider every application in accordance with the procedures and criteria stipulated by the relevant legal provisions.  For instance, the Board shall, pursuant to Schedule 1 of the Prisoners (Release under Supervision) Regulations (Cap 325A) (the Regulations), examine the reports of the Correctional Services Department (CSD) and the Police Force, the reports prepared for the court of trial to assist the judge in determining sentence, as well as the medical reports on the applicant. Furthermore, before it considers an applicant’s case, the Board shall, pursuant to the Regulations, inform the applicant in writing of the right to make written representations to the Board for consideration. The Board shall also consider factors listed in Schedule 1 of the Regulations, such as the applicant’s criminal record, his conduct in prison, his ability and readiness to assume obligations and to undertake responsibilities, etc.
 
     The main reasons for rejection of applications include – it is unlikely that the applicant will comply with the conditions of his supervision order; early release and making of a supervision order in respect of the applicant would be inappropriate having regard to the gravity of the offence he committed; and continuing training in a correctional institution would substantially enhance the capacity of the applicant to lead a law-abiding life if he were released at a later time.
 
(2) The head of a correctional institution will refer PICs’ application documents in relation to the Release under Supervision Scheme or the Pre-release Employment Scheme to the Board through CSD’s Post-Release Supervision Office. All relevant documents will be recorded in writing. Upon receipt of an application, the Secretariat of the Board will inform the applicant in writing through CSD of his application number and his right to make written representations to the Board.  
 
(3) Post-release employment is conducive to PICs’ positive change and reintegration into society. Therefore, CSD proactively encourages employers in the business sector to register as “Caring Employers” and offer jobs to rehabilitated persons. At the request of employers, CSD will endeavour to make arrangements for employers or their representatives to conduct job interviews with PICs in correctional institutions or in the form of video-conference or tele-conference. Job vacancies in various trades are displayed in correctional institutions regularly through different means. As at end of 2018, over 700 organisations have registered as “Caring Employers” and offered 2 319 jobs to rehabilitated persons, whereas 1 450 job applications have been received and referred by CSD, amongst which 635 rehabilitated persons have been promised a job by the employers.
 
     Besides, CSD organises the “Employment Symposium for Rehabilitated Offenders” in collaboration with a tertiary education institution in Hong Kong biennially, appealing to employers to provide fair employment opportunities for rehabilitated persons and commending “Caring Employers” who have offered job opportunities to rehabilitated persons. 
 
     Apart from encouraging employers to employ rehabilitated persons, CSD has also provided market-oriented vocational training and education to PICs. In recent years, CSD has collaborated with various training bodies (such as the Employees Retraining Board, the Construction Industry Council and the Vocational Training Council), having regard to local market situation, to provide over 40 full-time and part-time vocational training courses every year. CSD will also, taking into account the overall employment market situation and labour demand, review the content of the vocational training courses from time to time, as well as make adjustments in the light of the employment rate of individual trade and the response of PICs. Besides, CSD will regularly join hands with the trades to conduct reviews and introduce various new courses, and make use of the employment follow-up service provided by the training bodies to keep abreast of market changes and the post-release employment situation of the trainees, so as to continue to enhance the vocational training programme. read more

     Following is a question by the Hon Lau Kwok-fan and a reply by the Secretary for Financial Services and the Treasury, Mr James Lau, in the Legislative Council today (April 3):

Question:

     It has been reported that there are currently quite a number of government properties located in the urban areas which have, for years, been left vacant or put to temporary uses only, which appears to be a waste of precious land resources. For instance, the former Mong Kok Market has all along been used for temporary storage only since it was closed nine years ago. On the other hand, non-government organizations currently may apply for lease of certain vacant government sites under short-term tenancies (STTs) for community, institutional or other non-profit-making uses. In this connection, will the Government inform this Council:

(1) of the address and gross floor area of each government property in the urban area which is currently vacant or used for temporary storage and has a gross floor area of over 1 000 square feet, as well as the duration for which the property has been left in such a state (set out such information in a table); given that the Government has proposed in the Budget of this financial year an allocation of $20 billion for the purchase of 60 properties for the provision of additional welfare facilities, whether the Government had considered using the government properties just mentioned for welfare facilities before it made such a proposal; if so, of the details; if not, the reasons for that;

(2) whether, in the long run, the Government has plans to convert the government properties mentioned in (1) to welfare, transitional housing or other public uses, so as to put them to optimal uses; if so, of the details; if not, the reasons for that; and

(3) of the respective numbers of applications for lease of vacant government sites under STTs received and approved by the Government so far; the average processing time for each approved application, and whether it has reviewed the effectiveness of the relevant measures; if so, of the details?

Reply:

Acting President,

     Government properties are primarily used as offices for government departments and for the provision of public services. Departments responsible for the management of the properties should ensure that the properties are put to optimal use. When the properties become surplus to their operational needs, the managing departments should release the properties for use by other government departments, lease out the properties through commercialisation or open the properties for use by non-government organisations (NGOs) in accordance with the established mechanism.

     Having consulted the Development Bureau (DEVB), Education Bureau (EDB), Labour and Welfare Bureau (LWB), Government Property Agency (GPA) and Housing Department (HD), the consolidated reply of the Government to the three parts of the question is as follows:

(1) and (2) Vacant government properties can be broadly classified into school premises and non-school premises.

     According to the information from EDB, as at end-February 2019, there were five vacant school premises (VSP) under EDB’s purview which were government premises located in urban areas. These VSP are earmarked or retained for school or other educational uses. Information on the address, site area and the year of ceasing operation of these VSP is set out in Annex I. Under the prevailing central clearing house mechanism in handling VSP, once EDB confirms that the VSP are no longer required by EDB for reallocation for school use, EDB would inform the Planning Department (PlanD) and other relevant departments (such as the Lands Department (LandsD) and HD) for PlanD’s consideration of suitable alternative long-term uses.

     For non-school premises, according to the information provided by the relevant departments to GPA, the vacant government properties surplus to the Government’s operational needs, with a total floor area of over 100 square metres (m2) and located in urban areas are set out in Annex II. Information of the properties that provide a total floor area of over 100 m2, located in urban area and used for storage is at Annex III.

     Departments are required to review the government properties under their management from time to time, with a view to ensuring the optimal utilisation of the properties. If a government property is no longer required for its original use, the managing department would first review if the property could be deployed to meet other needs of itself. If in the negative, the department may seek GPA’s assistance in identifying other user departments. If it is confirmed that the property is surplus to the operational needs of the Government, the managing department may, with the assistance of GPA, lease out the property through commercialisation, or open the property for use by NGOs, or disposal of the properties by sale. In the course of switching the use of properties, the managing department should continue to manage and make good use of the properties (such as arranging temporary use (e.g. storage)) as far as possible.

     In addition to internal review by departments, GPA also initiates regular reviews on the properties and sites managed by departments. GPA also suggests ways for departments to enhance the utilisation of the properties (e.g. converting a resource room into a multi-purpose facility). Where circumstances permit, GPA will also study with the relevant departments including PlanD the possibility of releasing the sites for other suitable uses through reprovisioning the existing offices or facilities. Relevant departments will keep the use of the properties and sites in the annexes under review, including consideration of various public use such as welfare and housing.

     In future, the Government will adopt a more proactive attitude and co-ordinated approach through the multi-storey development under the “single site, multiple use” principle to consolidate and provide more “Government, Institution or Community” facilities on under-utilised government sites, in order to maximise the potential of these sites and provide more community facilities.

     Regarding the planning of social welfare facilities and services, the Government has all along been adopting a multi-pronged approach for the provision of welfare facilities. These include identifying suitable government premises and sites such as VSP by LWB / Social Welfare Department; imposing requirements of the construction of welfare facilities in land sale conditions where feasible; and acquiring premises for the provision of welfare facilities as a short-term strategy. 

     (3) The list of vacant government sites (including vacant school premises) managed by LandsD and available for application by NGOs or social enterprises for use by short-term tenancy (STT) is published on the Government’s GeoInfo Map web page (www.map.gov.hk/gm/map/search/faci/__VGS?lg=en). As far as vacant built premises are concerned, no VSP currently on the list are located in the urban area. In the past four financial years (up to the end of January 2019 for 2018-19), LandsD received around 90 applications for these sites in total. In the same period, LandsD approved 16 such STTs (Note 1). The processing time will depend on the nature and complexity of issues involved, while the processing of most applications can be completed within one to two years. LandsD will, where practicable and appropriate, continue to arrange suitable temporary uses for sites pending implementation of long-term development uses to optimise the utilisation of land resources, including uploading information of the vacant sites to the Internet for application by interested organisations. At the execution level, LandsD will continue to keep in view the processing of applications, and suitably review and improve as and when necessary.

     In order to assist NGOs in using vacant government sites, a $1 billion non-recurrent commitment was approved by the Finance Committee of the Legislative Council in January this year for setting up a funding scheme to support NGOs in using vacant government sites and restoring school premises for various short-term uses that are beneficial to the community. DEVB has started inviting funding applications.

     Thank you, Acting President.

Note 1: As the processing of applications received during a year may not be completed within the same year, the application cases approved during the year may not correspond with the application cases received during the year. read more