MR YIU SI-WING (in Cantonese): I would like to give views on Mr LUK Chung-hung's amendments.

Regarding the employment issue of part-time tour escorts and tourist guides, I understand that Mr LUK Chung-hung is fighting for the rights and interests of our part-time tour escorts and tourist guides out of good intentions, hoping that they can be protected under an employment relationship even if they work for several travel agents at the same time. Mr LUK, however, does not seem to understand how the trade operates. Maybe that is because he has to deal with a wide range of labour issues every day. To me, the proposals made by Mr LUK in his amendments are unfeasible.

Presently, there are more than 17 000 tour escorts and 6 000 tourist guides in Hong Kong, most of them are part-timers. For those who work full time, especially full-time tour escorts, most of them are employees of large travel agents which will, on festive days and holidays, engage part-timers to complement their full-time staff. Yet, only a small portion of part-time tour escorts and tourist guides will work for large travel agents; a majority of them will instead collaborate with micro, small and medium travel agents ("small travel agents"). As these small travel agents only organize a handful of tours, probably 10-odd tours per year, they cannot afford to engage tour escorts and tourist guides under an employer-employee relationship but can only hire part-timers when necessary to reduce cost pressure.

If all travel agents are mandated statutorily to establish an employment relationship with part-time tour escorts and tourist guides, it is tantamount to forcing them to employ full-time staff. In this case, large travel agents will no longer engage part-time tour escorts and tourist guides because they will prefer full-timers to part-timers if they have the necessary financial resources.

The challenges brought to small travel agents will even be more daunting. In today's highly competitive business environment, small travel agents are plagued by operational difficulties and unstable income. If they are now required to employ full-time tour escorts or tourist guides, how can they afford the costs incurred in times of accident? They will then be forced to take risks, which, in the view of Mr LUK, is tantamount to breaking the law. If small travel agents dare not take risk, they have to engage part-time tour escorts and tourist guides under an employment relationship. In case of accidents, they will be required, as employers, to pay an injured tour escort/tourist guide 80% of his monthly earnings as compensation―as stated by Mr LUK just said―on top of his medical expenses. Worse still, these employers may have to face consequent litigation. How can small travel agents afford such expenses? Yet, if they dare not take the risk of breaking the law, they may end up in debts or closure. This proposal will put huge pressure on small travel agents, accounting for 90% of travel agents in the trade, and is unfavourable to the overall ecology of the travel industry as it will reduce the flexibility of the operations of travel agents.

From the perspective of part-time tour escorts and tourist guides, they are well aware that the proposal to establish an employment relationship by legislation will greatly reduce their opportunities to work part-time for large travel agents and limit their choices subsequently. They will then have to rely solely on small travel agents for job opportunities. However, as I just said, small travel agents are already under great operational pressure. In case this proposal is implemented, how can small travel agents survive? If these travel agents have difficulties, refuse to shoulder employer responsibilities, incur debts or close down, an employment relationship will not serve the intended purpose of securing compensation for part-time tour escorts and tourist guides. I do not think that is something that we wish to see.

There are different reasons for people to work as part-time tour escort or tourist guide. For some people, tour-escorting is their major source of income; some merely lead a few tours a year to stay in touch with the industry; some lead tours for interest's sake to enrich their personal experience; some work part-time in their spare time to make ends meet despite having another major source of income; some are teachers leading study tours for school, and leading tours is never their major duty. As people have different reasons to work as part-time tour escort or tourist guide, they will certainly love to have work flexibility. In fact, they are not willing to be bound by an employment contract signed with a particular travel agent, and that is why a number of major trade unions, as pointed out by the Secretary just now, support providing protection by way of work insurance.

Part-time tour escorts and tourist guides prefer to have a more flexible employment relationship or a "collaboration" relationship for a better term. As a flexible collaboration relationship is in the interest of both travel agents and part-time tourist guides/tour escorts to meet their actual needs, I consider the arrangement now under the Travel Industry Bill ("the Bill") appropriate. It is unfeasible, in my view, to establish a mandatory employment relationship as proposed by Mr LUK Chung-hung; this proposal is also against the wish of most practitioners (particularly part-time tour escorts and tourist guides) in the trade.

As for the insurance issue, to my understanding, none of the travel agents in Hong Kong has the practice of taking out work insurance for part-time tour escorts and tourist guides. Instead, travel agents will take out travel insurance policies for their part-timers. I know that The Hong Kong Federation of Trade Unions has taken out insurance for its members at an annual premium of some $1,000 per person to provide coverage similar to that of travel insurance. However, insurance of this type is different from work insurance and cannot provide sufficient protection. As I said earlier, most of the part-time tour escorts and tourist guides will take out travel insurance policies by themselves or purchase life insurance or accident insurance for their own interests. For most part-time tour escorts and tourist guides, their prime concern is the availability of work insurance rather than the establishment of an employment relationship.

On the issue of work insurance, we have discussed with trade unions, insurance companies and the Travel Industry Council ("TIC"), hoping to provide work insurance before the enactment of the Bill, so as to convey a message that the trade really cares about the problems facing part-time tour escorts and tourist guides. We then came up with a relatively practicable insurance proposal. However, among the seven insurance companies invited to make quotations, only one provided us with a plan which could practicably meet the actual needs. According to the quotation of that insurance company, assuming that the 20 000-plus tour escorts and tourist guides in Hong Kong would all take out this insurance, the annual premium for each tour escort/tourist guide will be $690/$550. The overseas medical coverage under this insurance plan is not, as stated by Mr HO Kai-ming, limited to $100 or $200 per day, or some $1,000 for five days; instead, the medical coverage is as much as $500,000. As for emergency repatriation after accident, expenses on repatriating mortal remains or ashes to Hong Kong may be claimed on reimbursement basis, and a maximum of $39,000 of hospital deposit guarantee is also available. Regarding the cash benefit mentioned just now, it is a cash allowance that the insured is entitled to during the period of incapacity after returning to Hong Kong. The coverage of this insurance plan is different from that of labour insurance.

It is, however, impossible to provide labour insurance as requested by Mr LUK Chung-hung. As I said just now, his proposal will make employers undertaking a compensation equivalent to 80% of the total monthly earnings of a part-time tour escort/tourist guide. If an employer refuses to pay the compensation, the insurance company will have to shoulder the amount. During our previous discussion, there were views that a compensation of several hundred dollars failed to offer sufficient protection, and it was too mean for travel agents to offer a meagre amount of allowance to cover only part of the insurance premium. Yet, we should not overlook the coverage of the insurance plan in judging whether it meets the needs of part-time tour escorts and tourist guides. Why is the provision of work insurance supported by all five trade unions? That is because the trade unions think that work insurance can offer good protection to part-time tour escorts and tourist guides and address the problems that they encounter when working abroad. Why don't you people listen to the views of these trade unions but insist on forcing travel agents to take out labour insurance?

We had eventually asked insurance companies to comment on Mr LUK Chung-hung's proposal. The insurance companies, in response, said that they were unable to underwrite his proposed insurance. But how come insurance companies can underwrite labour insurance? That is because there are millions of local workers but only some 20 000 tour escorts and tourist guides in Hong Kong. How will insurance companies be willing to underwrite labour insurance of this kind? That is simply impracticable. I do not think the people making this proposal have a good understanding of the trade or the concerns of insurance companies. The insurance companies subsequently told us that they would rather forgo this business if we insisted on adopting this labour insurance proposal. The plan to provide work insurance was then dropped with much regret. At first, we put our heads together to discuss the provision of work insurance, but why was this plan dropped in the end, leaving part-time tour escorts and tourist guides unprotected? Will the representatives of labour unions take this responsibility? On this point, labour representatives, including Mr LUK, should reflect on whether they are genuine helping workers or doing a disservice out of good intentions.

Now that there are problems with the existing mechanism, I hope that we will promote the provision of work insurance to fix the problems. Upon the passage of the Bill, I hope the labour sector, the travel trade and TIC will continue to examine the ways to provide appropriate work insurance to part-time tour escorts and tourist guides to safeguard their interests. This should be the right direction. I hope our negotiation will go on after the passage of the Bill rather than wasting time on unfeasible proposals. This is my response to Mr LUK Chung-hung.

I will later speak on the Government's amendments. Thank you, Chairman.