****************************************************
Following is a speech (translated from Chinese) by the Chief Secretary for Administration, Mr Henry Tang, in response to Report No. 55 of the Public Accounts Committee in the Legislative Council today (May 18):
President,
Laid on the table today is the Government Minute (GM) responding to Report No. 55 of the Public Accounts Committee (PAC).
When presenting Report No. 55 on February 16, the Chairman of PAC set out comments on three chapters in the Director of Audit's Reports, viz. Administration of the Direct Subsidy Scheme and Governance and administration of Direct Subsidy Scheme schools, Residential treatment and rehabilitation services for drugs abusers, and The Community Investment and Inclusion Fund. We are grateful for the time and efforts that PAC has devoted. We accept PAC's various recommendations and Government's specific response is set out in GM. Today, I would like to highlight key measures we have taken in the relevant areas.
Administration of the Direct Subsidy Scheme and Governance and administration of Direct Subsidy Scheme schools
--------------------------------------------------------
The Administration agrees that the recommendations made by PAC on the administration of the Direct Subsidy Scheme (DSS) and the governance and administration of DSS schools are conducive to the sustained improvements to the implementation of the scheme. We also consider that the recommendations can help DSS schools attain good governance.
In response to PAC's concerns and recommendations, the Education Bureau (EDB) has been taking follow-up actions at two levels. First, EDB has followed up on the malpractices and irregularities identified in individual DSS schools and as of now most of the cases have been settled. Second, the focus is being placed on improving the mechanisms at both the operational and system levels.
Regarding the improvement measures at the operational level, EDB has put in place a systematic risk analysis mechanism whereby different aspects of schools will be taken into account for selecting schools for audit purpose in order to improve the existing monitoring mechanism. EDB has also stepped up measures to closely monitor and follow up with schools to ensure that they have promptly and properly rectified the malpractices identified in audit inspections. These measures include conveying the findings to the school management committees/incorporated management committees and conducting follow-up audit inspections. In addition, EDB will further strengthen its internal coordination and communication mechanism. In future, an annual report summarising the findings of the annual audited accounts submitted by DSS schools and the audit inspections conducted by EDB officers will be tabled for discussion by a standing task force chaired by a Deputy Secretary for Education. This will enable EDB to have a holistic view of the financial arrangement of DSS schools and ensure that schools will follow up various improvement measures effectively and comply with the relevant provisions in a timely manner. At the same time, EDB will improve the mechanism for reporting key issues relating to DSS schools to the Secretary and the Permanent Secretary, and will carry out the improvement measures progressively.
Regarding the improvement measures at the system level, EDB is guided by the need to enhance transparency, governance and communication of DSS schools. A Working Group on Direct Subsidy Scheme, chaired by the Permanent Secretary for Education, has been set up for this purpose. The Working Group comprises six members from the private sector with expertise in corporate governance, financial and human resource management as well as other relevant experience, and four subject officers from EDB. The Working Group’s major responsibilities are to review the administration of the DSS as well as the governance and administration systems of DSS schools, and to recommend measures for their continuous improvement. The Working Group has already started its work and its priority is to explore feasible measures to improve the existing mechanism for monitoring DSS schools' implementation of their school fee remission/scholarship schemes, with a view to ensuring that no students, including those receiving the Comprehensive Social Security Assistance, will be deprived of the opportunity to attend DSS schools because of financial difficulties. Other issues to be reviewed by the Working Group include the governance structure, internal control, financial management, the school fee remission/scholarship schemes of DSS schools, etc. The Working Group will also seek views from DSS schools and other stakeholders, and will submit its report to the Secretary for Education by the end of 2011. In the meantime, EDB will report progress to the Panel on Education of the Legislative Council.
Residential treatment and rehabilitation services for drugs abusers
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Administration accepts the comments of PAC in respect of the residential treatment and rehabilitation services for drug abusers.
As always, the Administration strives to deal with anti-drug policies and coordination effectively at an appropriate level. The Narcotics Division, under the leadership of the Secretary for Security, is responsible for policy formulation and coordination across bureaux/departments and with the non-governmental organisation (NGO) sector.
As and when necessary, leadership would be taken up at even more senior levels, as in the case of the Task Force chaired by the Secretary for Justice in 2007-08, and the escalated community-wide anti-drug campaign led personally by the Chief Executive in 2009.
An inter-departmental working group led by the Security Bureau and involving key government parties has been in place and strengthened.
To tackle the gradual shift from heroin to psychotropic substances in the drug abuse trend especially among youngsters, the Government has since 2008-09 substantially enhanced treatment and rehabilitation services. From 2011-12, the additional recurrent provision amounts to some $140 million per annum.
As part of its contribution to collaborative efforts across the Administration, EDB has increased by 40% the level of subvention to education programmes for school-aged drug abusers receiving residential treatment.
In respect of voluntary residential services, 39 out of the 40 treatment centres have re-engineered their programmes to serve psychotropic substance abusers, who have become the major users of the centres. We are actively taking steps to assist the remaining one to re-engineer its services and improve its utilisation.
To address PAC's concerns about uneven workload among centres, the Social Welfare Department (SWD) updates probation officers on a quarterly basis the centres' occupancy rates and programmes, which may help them draw up recommendations of an appropriate centre for a probationer. SWD is also monitoring on a monthly basis the probationers' waiting time for the centres.
On information sharing, SWD has since April 2011 started to share with EDB every six months statistics collected during licensing inspections, which help provide a general overview on the distribution of school-aged drug abusers residing in treatment centres.
In respect of treatment centres on government land/premises, the Lands Department (Lands D) has completed inspection of all 11 centres which have land grants or tenancy agreements, and confirmed with relevant departments support for their continued use for drug treatment purposes. Among them, two have low utilisation rates, and SWD has followed up with the NGOs concerned.
Regarding new applications for land grant or tenancy for treatment centre purpose, in future, Lands D will consult the relevant bureaux or departments and include appropriate conditions in the land documents to ensure proper control and monitoring.
The Administration has continued to step up its efforts to assist the centre operators regarding licensing issues. We look forward to two treatment centres obtaining a full licence within the year, to be followed by another five in 2012.
To provide more adequate funding support to treatment centres in their redevelopment and reprovisioning projects, a new Special Funding Scheme under the Beat Drugs Fund will be launched shortly, raising the maximum amount of grant per project from $3 million to $50 million. The funding scope will also be expanded to help operators expedite the planning and construction processes.
The Community Investment and Inclusion Fund
-------------------------------------------
We thank PAC for its views and recommendations on improving the governance and administration of the Community Investment and Inclusion Fund (CIIF) as set out in its Report. The Labour and Welfare Bureau is taking follow-up actions together with the Community Investment and Inclusion Fund Committee (the Committee) and actively implementing the improvement measures to enhance the operation of the CIIF to ensure good governance.
We understand that PAC was concerned about the pace of fund disbursement and the number of applications approved under the CIIF. In approving projects, the Committee takes into account a number of factors, including the prudent use of public funds and encouragement of creativity and participation of organisations etc. When the CIIF was first set up in April 2002, the Committee had made it clear that the seed money would be used to support projects that could foster the development of social capital while one-off activities and projects lacking long-lasting impact would not be supported. When assessing applications, the CIIF Committee will accord priority to the effectiveness of the projects in terms of promotion of multi-partite collaboration and sustainable development of social capital rather than focusing on the number of projects approved.
That said, we agree that the CIIF should continue to actively encourage more applications from eligible organisations so as to promote social capital. The CIIF has further enhanced its publicity and promotion efforts. Apart from strengthening co-operation with stakeholders in the districts, the CIIF has commissioned a consultant to conduct a half-yearly brand building exercise with a view to enhancing public understanding and recognition of the CIIF and social capital and encouraging joint participation and implementation of the social capital concept.
The CIIF handles all applications in a fair and impartial manner. To enable applicants to have a better understanding of the CIIF's requirements, the CIIF Secretariat regularly organises briefing sessions, arranges grantees and prospective applicants to share their experience in the good modes of operation and implementation of successful projects, provides individual consultation service for applicants in need as well as reviews from time to time the possibility of streamlining administrative procedures. The CIIF Secretariat has also enhanced support services to grantees, including providing clear guidelines on reporting of project achievements, organising sharing sessions and training workshops, as well as inviting academics to explain the prerequisites for effective implementation of social capital projects and developing effective assessment tools and methods.
We note that PAC is concerned about the follow-up reviews upon expiry of the project funding period and the overall evaluation of the effectiveness and future directions of the CIIF. We will devise guidelines and framework for project assessment and put in place a mechanism for following up on completed projects so as to ensure their sustainable development. As regards the CIIF's effectiveness in social capital development, we have commissioned independent consultants to conduct the second evaluation study of the CIIF which is expected to be completed in early 2012. Taking into account the target, scale and timing of the evaluation study, we are of the view that the independent consultants should continue with their work instead of conducting a self-evaluation in parallel before the completion of the independent evaluation to avoid duplication of resources and ensure the independence of the study. We will actively follow up on the findings of the independent evaluation study and consider the future development of and injection into the CIIF in due course.
Finally, I would like to thank PAC once again for its constructive comments and recommendations. The Administration will, as always, respond positively and implement them earnestly. Thank you.
Ends/Wednesday, May 18, 2011
Issued at HKT 12:07
NNNN
