MR YIU SI-WING (in Cantonese): President, I have to explain the reasons for my support for the motion moved by Secretary Dr LAW, and the current situation of HC is a major one.

 

Scrutiny of the bill mentioned above began with discussions by the Panel and was followed by the establishment of a BC. Relevant scrutiny work has been successfully completed without dispute after consultation with industry players and people of local districts was conducted and numerous meetings between BC members and government officials were held for discussions in detail, now pending tabling for deliberation by the Council through HC. If HC fails to elect its Chairman, the bill may probably not be tabled for deliberation by the Council within the current legislative session, and everything will have to start from scratch again in the next session then, which will mean not only a waste of the time of members of the public, government officials and Members having attended relevant meetings, but also a waste of taxpayers' money.

 

What is more, this will prevent the problem of proliferation of unlicensed guesthouses from being resolved and there is no telling when the bill will be dealt with. In fact, those residents already affected or likely to be affected have been looking forward to a speedy completion of the scrutiny of the Hotel and Guesthouse Accommodation (Amendment) Bill 2018. Not proceeding with this bill will be unfair to both the residents as well as those industry players operating under licence. This serves to prove that the opposition camp has ignored the public interest in order to achieve their own purposes.

 

President, the Bill, which was suggested to be referred to the Panel on Manpower by Secretary Dr LAW in his motion, proposes to extend the existing statutory maternity leave from 10 weeks to 14 weeks. His motion has something to do with people's livelihood. The Government just found that the existing RoP has put in place a mechanism for making attempts to circumvent proceedings of HC and BC in dealing with bills. Presumably, it is because the Legislative Council had initially anticipated that there might be exceptional circumstances when drafting the RoP and thus allowed for special treatment of certain bills. The Secretary's current proposal has balanced public interest and taken into account the current situation in the Council, so he moved the motion as a last resort. I trust that neither the Government nor the Secretary would not have acted so rashly as to deviate from the usual practice were it not for the interests of society as a whole.

 

As we all know, various local issues involving the rights and interests of both employers and employees are quite difficult to deal with as it is no easy task to reach a consensus. All such issues, ranging from standard working hours, abolition of the mandatory provident fund offsetting arrangements to standard wages, must go through lengthy struggles and consultations between employers and employees before relevant policies can be launched. The extension of statutory maternity leave is also a thorny issue. At present, working women in Hong Kong are entitled to only 10 weeks of paid maternity leave. To protect reproductive rights of women and promote social and family harmony, extending the length of paid maternity leave has become a major international trend. Yet increasing the number of paid maternity leave days will certainly increase the burden on employers. In Hong Kong, micro, small and medium-sized enterprises which account for 98% of enterprises are under heavier operating pressure with rather tight capital flow, and so any policy aiming to increase labour welfare will impose further burden on them. Under such circumstances, the Government will have to propose a supplement option in order to gain support from all parties.

 

According to the Government's timetable, it is expected that the new maternity leave arrangements will be implemented in 2021 the earliest if the Bill is passed within the current legislative session. However, if the current standstill of HC continues until the summer recess and the Government does not make any special arrangements for tabling of the Bill for handling and passage by the Council, the proposals concerned will, as told by Ms Alice MAK, have to be tabled afresh in the next legislative session. And no one can tell whether things will have changed by then. In the worst-case scenario, the proposal of extending the statutory maternity leave to 14 weeks may never be implemented.

 

After more than 10 years of discussion on the extension of statutory maternity leave by this city, the Bill can now be tabled for deliberation by the Council at long last. It can be said that everything is ready except for an opportunity. If the Bill is "aborted" due to internal attrition of the Council, the general public must be very disappointed, and perhaps the opposition Members should be held primarily responsible for this.

 

President, the Secretary invoked the RoP to move a motion suggesting that the Bill be referred to the Panel on Manpower instead of HC, and if passed, there will be an opportunity to provide a way out for the proposed extension of statutory maternity leave. Nevertheless, as a stop-gap measure, his suggestion still fails to resolve the current standstill of HC's normal operation. Here, I call upon the opposition Members to immediately stop filibustering at HC meetings so that both HC and the Council can resume normal operation. With the Spring Festival approaching, I hope that in the new year, my Honourable colleagues will, while putting aside their personal bias and focusing more attention on people's livelihood issues, work hand in hand to help take forward the SAR Government's policy implementation in accordance with the law so as to bring our society back on track.

 

President, with these remarks, I support dealing with the Bill by invoking RoP 54(4).