Members present the president the honourable andrew wong wang-fat, O. B. E., J. P
Download 0.94 Mb.
|
- Navigate this page:
- PRESIDENT
- Parking spaces for hearse fleet 2. MRS ELIZABETH WONG
- Control of psychotropic drugs 3. MR ERIC LI
- SECRETARY FOR SECURITY
SECRETARY FOR SECURITY (in Cantonese): I have not heard of this before. Hong Kong is a society where the rule of law prevails. Everyone is equal before the law. MR SIN CHUNG-KAI (in Cantonese): Mr President, the statistics provided by the Secretary for Security dismayed me because, from the figures presented to us by districts, one of the districts ─ a district to which the Honourable Albert HO belongs ─ has more than 300 young drug abusers, which is the highest number among all the districts in the territory. I believe that this district also has the highest ratio of drug abusers to population. May I ask the Secretary if any additional work has been carried out to deal with that district in particular? SECRETARY FOR SECURITY (in Cantonese): As regards our effort to beat drugs, it is, of course, the police and other law enforcement agencies which are responsible for enforcing the law and preventing the circulation of drugs in society. I am very confident that they will step up law enforcement actions in districts where more drug trafficking activities are found. As for the strengthening of publicity, we have called on the social organizations concerned both in the community and at the district level to make a concerted effort to carry out more publicity work in the district with a view to providing guidance to youngsters, thus sparing them from the evils of drugs. DR LEONG CHE-HUNG: I would like to ask the question posed by my honourable colleague in another manner. Perhaps we can get more answers from the Secretary. In paragraph (c) of the Secretary's reply, it is mentioned that a few treatment programmes are being used for people who are dependent on opiates. I wonder if the Secretary can inform this Council how many of these programmes are actually detoxification programmes and not substitute or maintenance programmes like methadone? And how effective are these programmes? SECRETARY FOR SECURITY: Mr President, on the whole, we are talking about detoxification programmes, for example, the drug addiction treatment programme run by the Correctional Services Department. Methadone is primarily a maintenance programme, although there are a small number of patients at methadone clinics who enroll in the detoxification part of the methadone programme. PRESIDENT: I have two more names on my list, I propose to draw a line there. MR MICHAEL HO (in Cantonese): Mr President, under paragraph (d) in the reply it is mentioned that the Medical Council and the Pharmacy and Poisons Board are discussing possible new measures to control and curb unlawful activities and the illegal sale of drugs. The English version of the reply also made a reference to "malpractice", which, perhaps, refers to medical misdemeanour or misconduct. May I ask the Government this: When will the Medical Council and the Pharmacy and Poisons Board make clear progress in the discussion and when will the Medical Council, in particular, have made progress in their work and tell us that medical misdemeanour or misconduct, which may mean doctors engaging in the illegal sale of drugs, is brought under control? SECRETARY FOR SECURITY: Mr President, I will be happy to provide an answer to that question provided you rule that this does not stray into the third question of today's session, which is to be asked by the Honourable Eric LI. PRESIDENT: You are quite right, Secretary. I think that is straying away from the scope of the original question. MR JAMES TO (in Cantonese): The main cause of a drastic surge in the number of drug addicts lies in young drug abusers. As the Governor considered it necessary to convene a summit meeting in this regard, the gravity of the problem has been amply manifested. In view of the number of young drug addicts, has the Administration assessed how many additional in-patient treatment centres for opiate drug addiction are required? As we can learn from the reply that there are only two additional treatment centres of this sort, is this too inadequate to bring about improvement? Given the seriousness of the problem, will the Government be more determined to provide financial support to these treatment programmes, which are regarded even by the community as costly, so that improvements in this respect can be made? SECRETARY FOR SECURITY (in Cantonese): Mr President, the drug addiction treatment centres that I mentioned in the main reply are not just one or two in number and there are in fact many such centres. At this stage, our in-patient drug addiction treatment centres are mainly targeted on opiate drug addicts, providing 1 400 places exclusively for males, 235 places exclusively for females, 266 places for youngsters and 32 places for female youngsters particularly. In citing these figures, all I want to prove is that we are not providing just a small number of places. Meanwhile, under our plan for the future, we are not going to build just one or two drug addiction treatment centres. As I mentioned in my main reply, we have started the planning work for the building of a new drug addiction treatment centre in Yuen Long and converting the Chimawan Detention Centre (Lower) into a drug addiction treatment centre for female abusers. In addition, we also plan to set up two additional treatment centres for youngsters who are subject to the evils of opiate drugs. Parking spaces for hearse fleet 2. MRS ELIZABETH WONG: Will the Government inform this Council of the following: (a) what is the policy on the provision of parking spaces for the fleet of hearses for funeral parlours; (b) does the Government intend to designate parking spaces outside funeral parlours specifically for the parking of hearses; if not, why not; and (c) what is the position regarding the designation of car parking spaces for funeral parlours; and with specific reference to the funeral parlours at Hung Hom, what measures has the Government adopted to resolve the parking problem there and when were such measures taken? SECRETARY FOR TRANSPORT: Mr President, hearses are registered as light goods vehicles under the Road Traffic Ordinance (Cap. 374). There are about 100 such vehicles owned by the operators of funeral parlours, and other business concerns connected with this trade or individuals. Funeral parlours either have on-site parking spaces for their fleet of hearses or have made other alternative arrangements for parking them at night, for example, in nearby carparks. As for the other hearses, they can be parked on street in parking spaces designated "P" under Schedule One of the Road Traffic (Parking) Regulations, that is, spaces earmarked for private cars and light goods vehicles. It is not practical to designate specific parking spaces for hearses even outside funeral parlours. To do so would result in an uneconomical use of road space. However, where space is available, lay-bys are provided immediately outside or in the vicinity of funeral parlours and these can be used by hearses. My understanding is that the present problem has resulted from the carpark above Kowloon Station's no longer being available for the parking of hearses. This is because the access ramps are not designed for vehicles weighing more than 2.5 tonnes. Some 30 owners or drivers of hearses have been affected but half of them have already made their own arrangements for parking on a STT site in Tai Kok Tsui. To try to alleviate the overnight parking problem, the Transport Department has designated a few additional parking spaces along On Ching Road which is very close to the funeral parlours in Hung Hom and, in addition, are pursuing the provision of more parking spaces in To Kwa Wan. Separately, the operators of carparks on new short-term tenancy sites will also be required to provide access to all types of vehicles. MRS ELIZABETH WONG: Mr President, I am grateful for the Secretary's reply. In paragraph (4) of the Secretary's reply, he is dead right in explaining that the fault does not lie with the vehicle or the hearses, but with the access ramp. Now in normal circumstances when it comes to living human beings, if a structure of a building is unsound and cannot hold the weight of the living people in it, then the structure is declared as a dangerous building and is demolished. First of all, may I ask whether there is discrimination between the living and the dead? If so, why? And secondly, will the Secretary also inform us whether he intends to instruct KCRC to tear the ramp down, rebuild it, so that it can accommodate heavy load vehicles, including hearses and Rolls Royces? SECRETARY FOR TRANSPORT: Mr President, with due respect, I think the question regarding the difference between treatment for the living and the dead is totally irrelevant. Insofar as parking is concerned, our policy is to provide parking on a broad classification basis. Perhaps I can elaborate on this. Under Regulation 5(2) of the Road Traffic (Parking) Regulations, the Commissioner for Transport, of course, has the authority to designate parking spaces for specific vehicles. But given the lack of space in urban districts, one has to be realistic. Therefore, in fact, parking is provided under six broad categories; the first, as I have said, is for cars, minibuses and light goods vehicles, second for motorcycles, third for cycles, fourth for goods vehicles, fifth for buses and coaches and finally, the sixth category is for emergency vehicles such as refuse collection vehicles and police cars. Insofar as the carpark above the Kowloon Railway Station is concerned, the KCRC is attempting, and indeed is in the process of upgrading that station, and as a result they have applied for permission to renovate and extend the works. As part of this exercise, when their Authorized Person submitted the plans, he was advised by the Building Authority that the access ramps in the carpark were designed for vehicles weighing less than 2.5 tones and this is in accordance with the Building Construction Regulations for carpark structures. I do not think it is fair to require the KCRC to reconstruct the ramps simply to cater for a specific class of vehicles. As I have said, hearses are designated as light goods vehicles, there are only about 100 in total numbers in Hong Kong and in fact the trade has managed to find alternative parking spaces quite readily. MR JAMES TO (in Cantonese): Mr President, I do not quite agree with the Secretary's reply. Although the number of such kind of vehicles is small, the problem will arise again if the Government does not renew the short-term tenancy of the carpark at Tai Kok Tsui where the hearses are now parking. I think people will feel even more disgusted if the hearses park at places which are far away from Hung Hom where the funeral parlours are located. Therefore, will the Secretary inform this Council whether the Administration will try to work out some practical measures which can allow the hearses to have a permanent parking area in the vicinity of the funeral parlours? I agree with what the Honourable Mrs Elizabeth WONG has said. The access ramps should be strengthened. In fact, the hearses have been parking there. I believe that the public will consider this arrangement acceptable. If the hearses are parked everywhere, there may be a lot of social repercussions. Will the Secretary inform us whether long-term solutions will be considered? SECRETARY FOR TRANSPORT: Mr President, it has to be recognized that the larger funeral parlours in Hung Hom and indeed in North Point on Hong Kong Island have been established for over 20 years and at that time the conditions of grant did not require specifically the operators to provide sufficient on-site parking spaces for their fleet of hearses. The current policy is that commercial concerns must do this. So, in the future, this problem should not arise. Having said that and reverting to the problem in Hung Hom, I can, of course, understand the request from some of the drivers and owners of these hearses. I shall be happy to ask the KCRC to consider this, but I think it is beyond my remit to instruct them to strengthen the ramps for this purpose. (Annex II) Another factor that has to be borne in mind, as advised by the district offices, is that in fact some of the drivers of these hearses prefer in fact to park these vehicles nearer to places where they live and it is not simply a question of providing spaces in the vicinity of the funeral parlours themselves. Control of psychotropic drugs 3. MR ERIC LI asked (in Cantonese): Some medical practitioners abuse their authority by storing large quantities of psychotropic drugs and selling them to young persons illegally to make profits. The penalty imposed on such offenders is often merely a brief suspension of their registration, after which they can continue with their practice and sell psychotropic drugs illegally as before. In view of this, will the Government inform this Council whether: (a) restriction will be imposed on the quantities of various types of psychotropic drugs which medical practitioners are allowed to store; (b) it will require suppliers of these drugs to provide to the Government, on a periodic basis, information on the quantities of psychotropic drugs purchased by medical practitioners, so as to facilitate investigation in doubtful cases; and (c) consideration will be given to raising the level of penalty as a deterrent? SECRETARY FOR SECURITY (in Cantonese): Mr President, (a) Restricting the quantities of various types of psychotropic drugs which medical practitioners are allowed to store is one of the proposals being considered by a Working Group under the Hong Kong Medical Council. The Working Group was convened to consider amendments to the Professional Code and Conduct to tighten the control on the use of psychotropic drugs by medical practitioners. It is expected to put forward its recommendations to the Medical Council by early 1996. (b) At present, drug suppliers are already bound to provide information on controlled drugs to the Department of Health. The information required includes the quantities of psychotropic drugs purchased by medical practitioners. Those medical practitioners with high utilization are asked to submit statistics and information on their use of psychotropic drugs. Based on such information, the Department of Health can initiate investigation into cases suspected of inappropriate use. (c) We have increased, with effect from 1 September 1995, the maximum penalty levels stipulated in the Pharmacy and Poisons Ordinance for offences including the illegal sale of drugs, from a fine of $30,000 and imprisonment of one year to a fine of $100,000 and imprisonment of two years. We are now considering proposing an increase, possibly of a larger magnitude, in the level of penalty for contravention of the requirements to keep proper records on the acquisition and supply of dangerous drugs, as stipulated in the Dangerous Drugs Regulations. This will increase the deterrent effect and combat possible abuses in the supply and prescription of psychotropic drugs by medical practitioners. MR ERIC LI (in Cantonese): In paragraph (b) of the Government's reply, the Secretary said that the Department of Health can, based on information on the supply of drugs, initiate investigation into cases suspected of inappropriate use. I would like to ask the Government: how many investigations of this nature have ever been initiated and how many full-time staff are now employed by the Department of Health to undertake the specific duty of conducting that sort of self-initiated investigations? Furthermore, is the manpower level adequate in view of our grave concern over the drug problem? SECRETARY FOR SECURITY (in Cantonese): Regarding the staffing level in the Department of Health, I believe that the Director of Health will continue to review whether the existing staffing level is adequate to carry out the required investigation work. Based on this information, the Department of Health has conducted various types of investigations, including inspections and test purchases at doctors' clinics. Take 1994 for instance, 6 000 test purchases were conducted at doctors' clinics, based on information about cases suspected of inappropriate sale of drugs. MR FRED LI (in Cantonese): Mr President, I still feel quite dissatisfied with the reply because we learn from news reports that, throughout the past few years, a famous "doctor of the pills" in our Kwun Tong District had been arrested a number of times, but was released soon after every arrest. The most severe punishment ever imposed upon him was suspension of registration for a mere three-month or six-month period. After release, he can then collaborate with others to engage in drug peddling once again. Will the punishment of mere suspension of registration continue? Is it a legislative loophole or is it an instance of neglect in the course of law enforcement? Or is it because the judges do not regard the problem as serious and therefore tend to give only lenient punishment? SECRETARY FOR SECURITY (in Cantonese): Mr President, I believe that the Honourable Fred LI may have confused the suspension of registration with the punishment imposed by the court. Suspension of registration is a decision made by the Hong Kong Medical Council after taking disciplinary proceedings against registered doctors in certain cases. Of course, there were one or two cases in which the convicted doctors appealed to the court and the court ruled that the period of suspension be reduced. However, in case a medical practitioner commits an offence under the relevant legislation on drugs, the maximum penalty thus imposed will be the same as the maximum penalty that an ordinary man may have to be subject to, in terms both of fines and imprisonment. DR HUANG CHEN-YA (in Cantonese): Mr President, one of the major problems is the difficulty of bringing the unethical doctors to book because the so-called soft drugs are in fact tranquilizers and sleeping pills. If a medical practitioner thinks it necessary to prescribe these drugs for the patients, he has the absolute right to do so. However, there is at present no regulatory control over the prescription of these drugs for patients by medical practitioners on a long-term basis and in large quantity. It is thus very difficult to substantiate the allegation that a medical practitioner is actually engaging in drug peddling. Will the Government, through the enactment of regulations by the Medical Council or by the Government, exercise control over the doctors so that, if they have to supply these drugs to a particular patient for a prolonged period and in large quantities, the doctors would have to obtain advice or approval from a specialist on the need for so doing? That can stop those unscrupulous doctors from peddling soft drugs. Will the Government consider this suggestion? SECRETARY FOR SECURITY (in Cantonese): Mr President, in my main reply, I have already said that a Working Group under the Hong Kong Medical Council was convened to study, inter alia, the means by which malpractice in the medical profession, as described by the Honourable Michael HO, can be more effectively stopped. They would look into the possibility of initiating disciplinary action against the medical practitioners who prescribe for their patients psychotropic drugs or other controlled drugs without going through bona fide medical consultation. I am not a medical practitioner and I have no idea which is the ideal way to go about it. I believe that if the Dr the Honourable HUANG Chen-ya has opinions on this issue, he may relay his opinions to the Working Group under the Medical Council. MR CHOY KAN-PUI (in Cantonese): Mr President, can the Government inform this Council whether the sale of psychotropic drugs to youth by pharmacies is more serious or the sale of psychotropic drugs to youth by medical practitioners constitutes a more serious case? And, which category records a higher prosecution figure? PRESIDENT: Secretary for Security, if you are prepared to stray into pharmacies. SECRETARY FOR SECURITY (in Cantonese): Based on the prosecution figures, it is quite obvious that prosecutions against pharmacies outnumber those against medical practitioners because there are a large number of pharmacies in operation. Of course, there are instances where medical practitioners abuse their rights but I believe that medical malpractice involves only a minority of medical practitioners. Most medical practitioners stick to the Professional Code and Conduct. MR ALBERT HO (in Cantonese): Mr President, the Secretary said in paragraph (a) of his reply that the review to be conducted by the Working Group under the Hong Kong Medical Council would only touch upon the amendments to be made to the Professional Code and Conduct. I believe that some of our colleagues are very concerned with the question of whether it would propose to amend legislation to the effect that the medical practitioners may keep in stock only a limited amount of controlled drugs and in such a way that the medical practitioners must go through certain formalities if he has to provide to the patients this category of drugs. The formalities may include recording information, giving grounds for so doing and substantiating the need by obtaining special advice from psychiatrists or specialists. My main question is: will the Government review or amend the relevant legislation? SECRETARY FOR SECURITY (in Cantonese): Mr President, as to whether it is necessary to review or amend the legislation if that problem is to be adequately addressed, I believe that we should wait for the proposals to be put forward by the Medical Council regarding this problem. It is because we will have to take a look at whether the Council's proposal is feasible and whether the proposal can have an adequate deterrent effect in plugging the loophole. We would consider the need to review or amend the legislation after that. PRESIDENT: I have three more names on my list and I will draw a line there. MR MOK YING-FAN (in Cantonese): Mr President, I would like to ask the Secretary whether the 6 000 test purchases conducted last year were only targeted at doctors' clinics or whether pharmacies were also included? SECRETARY FOR SECURITY (in Cantonese): The 6 000 test purchases that I have just mentioned only included purchases at doctors' clinics, excluding pharmacies. DR LEONG CHE-HUNG: Thank you, Mr President. I am grateful to the Secretary for his confidence in the medical profession. In any case, I wonder if the Secretary can inform this Council, in the last five years, how many black sheep of the medical profession have actually been convicted of drug peddling or drug trafficking by abusing the rights given to them to prescribe drugs for bona fide medical treatment? If there are actually convictions on that basis, as we all know, that doctors can prescribe drugs, what Ordinance was cited? If there were no convictions, whether the Government is going to do anything to make an ordinance or amend ordinances so that doctors can actually be convicted on those charges? SECRETARY FOR SECURITY: Mr President, I regret to say that I only have figures of cases of conviction involving the years 1992-1995, and in the case of 1995 up to October only. Between 1992 and up to October 1995, we had 12 cases of convictions. Download 0.94 Mb. Share with your friends:
|