****************************************
Following is a speech by the Secretary for Security, Mrs Regina Ip, in moving the Second Reading of the Fire Services (Amendment) Bill 2001 in the Legislative Council today (July 4):
President,
I move that the Fire Services (Amendment) Bill 2001 (the Bill) be read the second time. The Bill seeks to update some obsolete provisions in the Fire Services Ordinance (FSO) to meet the needs of present-day circumstances. It also aims at improving the regulatory framework under the FSO to cope with new types of fire hazards more effectively and to protect public safety.
Enacted in 1954, the FSO provides for the constitution, duties and powers of the Fire Services Department (FSD), the regulation of the discipline of its members, the establishment and control of its welfare fund as well as the abatement of fire hazards. Revision to the principal Ordinance and its subsidiary legislation has been made from time to time to cope with the changing needs.
In 1999, FSD embarked on an overall review of the FSO with a view to examining the adequacy of the existing provisions and the means to enhance the effectiveness of the current regulatory framework for fire hazard prevention and abatement. The review has been completed and a package of measures are proposed -
(i) The first proposal is to streamline the provisions in the FSO in relation to the abatement of fire hazards and prevention of their recurrence. The relevant provisions (sections 9 and 9A to 9D) have been revised and added following a series of amendments to the FSO between 1964 and 1986. We consider it appropriate to streamline these provisions in order to facilitate ease of reference in enforcement action. Given this, and the further consideration of facilitating amendments to be made from time to time to cope with changing needs, we propose to repeal these provisions in the principal Ordinance and to re-enact them in a neat and tidy manner in a new piece of subsidiary legislation dedicated to fire hazards abatement. As suggested in the following second and third proposals, the opportunity will also be taken to update a few provisions and add new ones to enhance enforcement against fire hazards.
(ii) The second proposal is to strengthen the power of law enforcement officers. Currently, for the purpose of issuing a fire hazard abatement notice, FSD officers are empowered to serve a notice on a person requiring such person to give his or her correct personal particulars within a timeframe of not less than 24 hours. To expedite the enforcement work, we propose to empower FSD officers to demand instant production of a person's proof of identity in taking enforcement action against fire hazards.
(iii) The third proposal is to improve the regulatory framework to cope with new types of fire hazards, including the conveyance of motor vehicles (including motorcycles) and motor vehicles' spare parts as well as illegal operation of vehicle refuelling stations.
Between 1997 and 1999, three explosion incidents involving freight containers carrying used motorcycles and parts took place and caused casualties. To prevent the recurrence of similar incidents, we propose that improper stowage or conveyance of motor vehicles and motor vehicles' spare parts containing fuel in an enclosed freight container or goods compartment shall be an offence. We also propose that officers of FSD, the Police and Customs & Excise Department should be empowered to stop, board, search and detain the vehicles if they have reasonable ground for suspecting that such an offence has been committed.
Another fire hazard that causes serious fire safety concern in recent years is illegal vehicle refuelling stations, notably those set up in residential areas. Illegal storage or mishandling of fuel may cause fire and explosion; there were 11 reports of fire so caused in the year 2000. Such illegal activities are already treated as fire hazards but enforcement action has proved not satisfactory. This is because the frequent change of operators has made it difficult to pin down any one operator for prosecution or issue of a fire hazard order or closing order. To tackle this problem, we propose that the storage of any liquid fuel for the purpose of the business of supplying the fuel for transfer to a motor vehicle's fuel tank in any premises other than a place so licensed or approved by the FSD under the Dangerous Goods Ordinance shall be an offence.
To tackle the problem of frequent change of illicit operators and to make property owners more vigilant about the use of their premises, we propose to prohibit any person from letting or sub-letting any premises with the knowledge that such premises are to be used for illegal vehicle refuelling activities. And we propose to empower the court to notify the owner of the premises of the conviction against anyone using the premises for illegal vehicle refuelling activities. On application by the owner, the court may order the termination of the tenancy of such premises. If illegal refuelling activities recur on such premises within 12 months, the court may make a closure order effective for six months to effect complete closure of such premises. To protect the interests of bona fide owners, purchasers and mortgagees of such premises, we also propose to provide for the registration at the Land Registry of closure orders and notices of the relevant charges and convictions concerning the premises, and to allow such parties to apply for the closure orders to be suspended or rescinded.
(iv) The fourth proposal is to revise the penalties in the FSO and its subsidiary legislation. The penalty provisions of the FSO and its subsidiary legislation were enacted in or before 1986. The deterrent effect may not be sufficient in today's circumstances and may have been eroded by inflation over time. To preserve and enhance the deterrent effect and to facilitate future revision, we propose an increase in the levels of fines and a direct link with the generic levels of fines prescribed under Schedule 8 of the Criminal Procedure Ordinance.
(v) The fifth proposal is to empower the Director of Fire Services to investigate into the cause of fire. Currently, there is no specific provision in the FSO for the conduct of an investigation into an incident of fire. To facilitate the discharge of his public duties, we propose to formally empower the Director of Fire Services to take necessary measures to investigate into the cause of a fire. These include entering the premises within a reasonable period after a fire to collect evidence for forensic analysis and to require the persons concerned to give information or produce any document or article.
(vi) The sixth proposal is to extend the scope of protection of a fire insurance policy under the FSO. At present, the damage done by FSD officers on an occasion that may pose an immediate danger of fire, e.g. gas leakage where FSD officers may have to break into domestic units to carry out rescue and fire fighting work, falls outside the scope of the protection of an ordinary fire insurance policy. We understand that an insurance policy is a mutual agreement between the insured and the insurer and they are always free to agree on the type and extent of protection to be provided. However, to protect the safety of the public, we consider a legislative amendment appropriate and propose to extend the scope of protection of the fire insurance policy under the FSO to cover any damage done by FSD on an occasion that may pose an immediate danger of fire.
(vii) Finally, we propose to revise and update various provisions in the FSO with a view to, among other things, expanding the definition of "fire service installation or equipment" to cover new forms of installations required to be provided in buildings nowadays, refining the procedures for disciplinary proceedings and reflecting the changes in the rank structure of FSD over time.
The proposals mentioned above are set out in the Fire Services (Amendment) Bill 2001 and the proposed new Fire Service (Fire Hazard Abatement) Regulation.
FSD has consulted the District Councils and District Fire Safety Committees on the various legislative proposals. Other interested parties have also been consulted, including the insurance industry, the registered fire service installation contractors, the container tractor owners and the container transportation industry, and they are generally in support of the proposals. We also briefed the Legislative Council Panel on Security in April 2001. I hope Members will support the Bill and pass it at an early date.
Madam President, with these remarks, I beg to move.
End/Wednesday, July 4, 2001
NNNN
