Urging the Government to amend the Fire Safety (Buildings) Ordinance (2016/11/17)

President, since the Fire Safety (Buildings)Ordinance ("the Ordinance") came into operation in 2007, enforcement actions have been taken jointly by the Fire Services Department ("FSD") and the Buildings Department ("BD") to inspect composite and domestic buildings built before 1987, and to issue fire safety directions ("directions") to the owners of buildings found not conform to modern fire safety standards, so that additional fire service installations and equipment can be installed. Up to the middle of this year, FSD have inspected about 8 000 buildings and issued about 132 000 directions. Of those, only about 43 000 directions, or less than one third, have been complied with or discharged. Many outstanding cases are awaiting follow-up. In my opinion, the situation is unsatisfactory as the statistics clearly show that even after the directions have been issued, most problems are still unresolved.

President, while the legislation is aimed at enhancing fire safety protection for residents of old buildings, it has backfired because the authorities only concentrate on conducting inspections. Whenever they find a building not up to fire safety standards, they will immediately label it as not conforming to the necessary fire safety requirements. When residents receive the warning letters, they are greatly anxious and frightened about being prosecuted anytime.Seemingly, there is no other alternative but to comply with the requirements laid down by the authorities, but they can hardly obtain any support or assistance from the authorities. As a matter of fact, old buildings become dilapidated due to many objective factors which are beyond the control of the persons concerned. For instance, dilapidated buildings are invariably those which do not have owners' corporations ("OCs") or residents' associations or are not managed by property management companies (commonly known as "three-nil buildings"). Owners of "three-nil buildings" often have different views about the repair and maintenance of their buildings. While some are willing to maintain their buildings, many elderly persons have neither the money nor the professional knowledge to undertake maintenance works. Some old buildings even have practical difficulties in terms of installing the required fire service equipment. I have personally handled such complaint cases. Although I can sympathize with the pressures on the complainants, I am powerless to do anything. For the sake of resolving the problems, the authorities must, in addition to conducting inspections and issuing warning letters, allocate the necessary resources to help the owners of old buildings overcome various difficulties.

Dr LEUNG suggested that the Government should make reference to theOperation Building Bright and launch an "operation for fire safety improvement". As I understand it, her suggestion is about providing assistance to property owners along the approach of Operation Building Bright, so as to help elderly owners with financial difficulties install the required fire service equipment and provide them with advice. A subsidy should be provided to elderly owner-occupiers aged 60 or above who have financial difficulties. Apart from encouraging owners to take the initiative to apply for subsidies, the Hong Kong Housing Society and the Urban Renewal Authority ("URA") should proactively liaise with owners of "three-nil buildings" and provide them with professional advice, help them organize maintenance works and resolve difficulties in tender preparation and tendering. In my opinion, Dr LEUNG's suggestion is feasible, and it all depends on whether the Government is committed to resolving the problem, and whether it is willing to shoulder the responsibility.

President, I note that the Building Management Professional AdvisoryService Scheme ("Scheme") has been mentioned in the motion. As far as I know, two property management companies have been engaged under theScheme for the purpose of, inter alia, helping the residents of "three-nilbuildings" resolve issues of fire safety. The scope of services provided under the Scheme includes conducting household visits, facilitating the formation of OCs, attending the OC meetings to provide secretarial support, assisting owners to apply for various loan and funding schemes for building maintenance works, following up on building maintenance works, and providing training to owners for participating in building management work. According to the relevant statistics, so far, the Scheme has only assisted the formation and re-activation of 260 and 52 OCs respectively, as well as helped close to 160 OCs in applying for subsidies or loans for building maintenance. Five years have passed, and the Scheme has achieved some success. I think it is worthwhile to keep promoting such work. Nonetheless, I think the scale of the Scheme is still too restrictive.To resolve the problem at root, the Government should refine its policies and increase funding provision, so that statutory organizations with experience in urban renewal, such as URA, can take over the Scheme and extend its scope of service.

President, I support that discretion should be exercised by the Government in handling old buildings which have great difficulties in installing fire service installations and equipment. Moreover, interim measures should be formulated, for example, requiring owners to at least put fire extinguishers in conspicuous locations in the buildings or make use of street hydrants. To put it simply, it is always better to have fire service equipment than not. After fire service equipment of a lower standard has been installed, owners can upgrade the same later, taking into account technological advancements. In reply to a Member's question in 2014, the Secretary for Home Affairs stated that, "As far as the FireSafety (Buildings) Ordinance is concerned, the requirement to carry out such works is to enhance the fire safety of target buildings to modern standards, but it does not mean that those buildings have imminent or obvious fire hazards." In that case, I hope that the authorities will, when handling the non-compliance cases in old buildings, adopt an encouraging and guiding approach in addressing the problem of insufficient fire service equipment, so as to avoid creating unnecessary fear to residents of old buildings, especially elderly residents, and find ways to help these residents carry out the improvement works. I believe that this approach will be more effective than forcing or waiting passively for owners to comply. I also agree that amendments should be made to the existing legislation in due course.

With these remarks, I support the original motion and the amendments.