****************************
Following is a transcript of remarks by the Secretary for Transport and Housing, Professor Anthony Cheung Bing-leung, at a media session after the third reading of the Stamp Duty (Amendment) Bill 2012 at the Legislative Council today (February 22):
Secretary for Transport and Housing: I feel a bit relieved now that the 2012 Stamp Duty (Amendment) Bill has been passed. Over the last 14 months, the LegCo Bills Committee has spent 20 odd meetings in scrutinising the Bill and over the last few days after we have resumed the second reading, we have spent up to 35 hours in second reading, the Committee Stage detailed scrutiny of the various provisions and amendments and then the final stage which is the third reading. Now all along we have not under-estimated the difficulty of this Bill because it affects a broad range of diverse interest. We have not under-estimated the challenge before the Government in pushing this Bill. We have spent a lot of time debating within the Bills Committee, and of course in the second reading stage. What we have not expected was the controversy regarding the future adjustment mechanism as contained in the Bill.
All along the Government has advocated a negative vetting arrangement by proposing a subsidiary legislation which will take effect immediately upon gazettal and then the LegCo will still have the opportunity to scrutinise the legislation and make any amendment. The only thing being that once gazettal was made, the legislation had legal effect and that effect would only be changed after LegCo had vetoed or amended the legislation. So that is the standard arrangement for negative vetting which is not entirely uncommon in Hong Kong's legislative system. Now of course there are members within the LegCo who do not like a negative vetting approach and instead advocate a positive vetting approach and that is, the legislation will not become law even after announcement and there has to be a period of vetting by LegCo and LegCo can veto or amend the legislation. Now the problem with that approach is if the Government announces to let say revise the rates but the rates will remain uncertain until the time LegCo has scrutinised and approved the rates, then there will be a time of uncertainty in the market which is not desirable for such a market-sensitive and time-critical segment which is the property market.
Now there are also other suggestions such as the amendment by Mr Martin Liao but again the Government has pointed out why his amendment is less desirable than a negative vetting approach. Now we disagree on the merits of various approaches but the unfortunate thing was that there was a misunderstanding that the Government was trying to get around the LegCo. But this is entirely not the case because the Government has committed that in future even though the law has provided for adjustment of the rates by negative vetting, should the Government decide to revise the rates upwards, then the Government will instead use an ordinary amendment bill which can enable the LegCo to scrutinise the bill in detail and to approve the bill through a three reading approach as any legislation. So the Government has no intention at all to get around LegCo or to challenge the LegCo's proper legislative authority. I want to make that point very clear. I know some of those LegCo members who have left the Chamber during the voting time. They expressed within the Chamber that they actually supported the measures that this legislation intended to implement. So I can say that in broad terms, the legislation has got wide support within the LegCo and I am sure this legislation has also got very firm overwhelming support within the community. Now what the Government has to do is to monitor the property market very carefully and if necessary to make any response to the market.
(Please also refer to the Chinese portion of the transcript.)
Ends/Saturday, February 22, 2014
Issued at HKT 22:30
NNNN
