****************************************

Following is the speech by the Secretary for the Environment and Food, Mrs Lily Yam, in moving the second reading of the Noise Control (Amendment) Bill 2000 in the Legislative Council today (Wednesday) :

I move the Second Reading of the Noise Control (Amendment) Bill 2000.

Noise problems have become an increasing concern in the community. Despite vigorous enforcement action, the doubling of the maximum fine levels under the Noise Control Ordinance (NCO) in 1994, and efforts to promote good practices, there are still many noise complaints and cases.

In particular, violations of the NCO by bodies corporate have become an increasing concern. Close to 85% of noise convictions in 1998 related to construction and commercial/industrial activities involving corporate entities. In the past few years, 44 companies were convicted five times or more. Twelve of these companies have more than ten convictions. They include two construction companies which have been convicted 33 times and 24 times for construction noise offences.

The Bill seeks to amend NCO to state explicitly that when a noise offence is committed by a body corporate, the management of that body corporate commits a like offence. The proposed amendments do not seek to increase the existing maximum fine levels or impose heavier penalties on either the body corporate or the management of that body. The objective is to ensure that the management discharge their duty to take all practical measures to avoid noise offences.

Under the Bill, directors who are holding honorary or non-executive posts and are not concerned in the management of the body corporate will not be held responsible. A due diligence defence is provided for the management if they can demonstrate that a proper system has been established and was in effective operation to prevent the offence. This will not apply to offences related to the carrying out of noisy construction activities during restricted hours without a construction noise permit. The construction noise permit system has been in operation for nearly 10 years and there is no reason for the management of any body corporate to ignore this basic requirement. In addition, owners corporations registered under the Building Management Ordinance are not regarded as bodies corporate in the Bill due to their voluntary nature.

To enable the management to discharge their statutory responsibility, a Code of Practice will be issued by the Environmental Protection Department to provide practical guidance on good management practices to prevent noise offences. Compliance with the Code of Practice will constitute valid grounds for accepting a due diligence defence. The proposed amendments will be brought into operation on a date to be appointed by notice in the Gazette. We will bring the amended provisions into operation after we have completed our on-going consultation with the trades and professional organisations concerned on the Code of Practice, and given a reasonable period for the management to put in place a proper system within the body corporate.

In enforcing the amended provisions, EPD will warn the directors and officers concerned of the violation first. The Department will prosecute the parties concerned if the body corporate continues to violate the Ordinance despite the warning.

I urge Members to support the Bill because it seeks to create a quieter living environment for the community.

Thank you, Madam President.

End/Wednesday, February 16, 2000

NNNN