************************************************************
Following is a question by the Hon Leung Kwok-hung and a written reply by the Secretary for Labour and Welfare, Mr Matthew Cheung Kin-chung, in the Legislative Council today (December 18):
Question:
I have learnt that the registered social workers of the integrated family service centre set up in Sham Shui Po (SSP Centre) by the International Social Service Hong Kong Branch (ISS-HK) have repeatedly refused to recommend to the authorities applications for compassionate rehousing, splitting of public rental housing tenancy and the Conditional Tenancy Scheme (housing assistance). The applicants concerned had applied to the High Court for leave for judicial review against the relevant decisions, but their applications had been rejected. In this connection, will the Government inform this Council:
(a) notwithstanding the Government's indication in its reply to my question on November 13 of this year that Hong Kong residents shall have the right to institute legal proceedings in the courts against the acts of the executive authorities and their personnel, as I have been advised by some members of the legal sector that the High Court Registry would not handle applications for leave for judicial review against the decisions made by non-governmental organisations (NGOs) submitted by members of the public, and it would neither file the applications nor list the applications for hearings, whether the authorities have studied if members of the public may, under Article 35 of the Basic Law, apply for judicial reviews against the decisions made by social workers of the integrated family service centres under NGOs; if they have studied, of the results; whether there are measures to protect the rights of members of the public to seek judicial reviews against such decisions; if so, of the details; if not, how the Government ensures that the Social Welfare Department will not deprive members of the public of the rights to seek judicial relief by outsourcing its services;
(b) whether it knows the number of registered social workers of SSP Centre; among them, the number of those who have received training relating to assessment of housing assistance applications; in the past five years, of the respective annual numbers of (i) cases of various housing assistance applications recommended to the authorities by SSP Centre, and (ii) such cases received by SSP Centre upon referral by Members of the Legislative Council or members of District Councils and, among such cases, the number of those that have been recommended to the authorities;
(c) whether it knows if, in the past five years, the Social Workers Registration Board, the Office of The Ombudsman or the Equal Opportunities Commission ruled or criticised that the decisions made by SSP Centre or its social workers on the assessment of housing assistance applications were inappropriate, or instructed SSP Centre or its social workers to apologise to the applicants for such blunders;
(d) whether the service area of SSP Centre covers the vicinity of Tung Chau Street Park; if so, whether it knows if the social workers of SSP Centre vetted, in the past five years, the eligibility of street sleepers near the Park regarding their applications for housing assistance; if they did, of the number of cases vetted; if not, the reasons for that; and
(e) when a member of the public applies for judicial review against the decision of an NGO, whether the Department of Justice will appoint a legal representative to assist the NGO to make defence; if so, of the legal basis; whether litigation fees payable by the NGO are to be borne by public money; if so, whether the litigation fees are included in the one-off lump sum funds granted to the NGO by the Government; if not, whether the litigation fees shall be borne by the NGO on its own; whether it has assessed if an NGO will violate its objectives should it draw on the funds raised from routine fundraising activities for litigations?
Reply:
President,
My reply to the Hon Leung Kwok-hung's question is as follows:
(a) Judicial review refers to the review by the Court of First Instance of the High Court of any exercise (or refusal to exercise) by a public body of a public decision-making power. The purpose of judicial review is to determine whether that decision is lawful and valid.
The Hong Kong Housing Authority (HA) is a statutory body established in April 1973 under the Housing Ordinance. HA develops and implements a public housing programme for Hong Kong which seeks to achieve Government's policy objective of meeting the housing needs of persons who cannot afford private rental housing. The Housing Department (HD) acts as HA's executive arm. There are various housing assistance programmes, including compassionate rehousing, providing housing assistance to individuals or families who have genuine and imminent housing problems which they cannot resolve by themselves. Those in need may submit applications for housing assistance to the Integrated Family Service Centres or Social Security Field Units of the Social Welfare Department (SWD), or may do so through the Medical Social Services Units under subsidised hospitals, non-governmental organisations (NGOs) approved by the SWD, or the Probation and Community Service Orders Offices. If it is confirmed that an applicant is eligible after SWD's investigation, SWD will recommend the case to HD. Subject to the availability of resources, HD will arrange for the allocation of public rental housing unit to the applicant as soon as practicable. In assessing the need of an individual or family for a particular welfare service and making a recommendation thereof, the social workers of both SWD and NGOs will abide by the established mechanism and follow the same set of procedural guidelines, as well as exercise judgment objectively and professionally in the light of the actual circumstances of the applicant.
Whether leave for judicial review would be granted in individual cases will be decided by the court having regard to the facts and arguments in each case.
(b) At present, there are 18 registered social workers in the International Social Service Hong Kong Branch Sham Shui Po (South) Integrated Family Service Centre (the Centre). All of them have received relevant training in assessing applications for housing assistance.
In the past five years, the Centre had recommended 63, 101, 66, 67 and 60 cases respectively for housing assistance, of which 18 cases were referred by Legislative Council Members or District Council Members.
(c) According to the information available to SWD, in the past five years, the Social Workers Registration Board, the Office of the Ombudsman or the Equal Opportunities Commission has not ruled against or criticised the Centre or any of its social workers for having made any improper recommendations when assessing applications for housing assistance.
(d) At present, the Centre and the Integrated Services Team for Street Sleepers of the Christian Concern for the Homeless Association (the Integrated Services Team) subvented by the SWD are providing supportive services to street sleepers around the Tung Chau Street Park area.
The social workers from the Centre and the Integrated Services Team visit the street sleepers regularly, providing one-stop services for them including emergency shelter and short-term hostel placement, counselling, employment guidance, personal care, short-term financial assistance, assistance in applying for Comprehensive Social Security Assistance, and other service referrals. Depending on the needs of the street sleepers, the Integrated Services Team may help them apply for public housing, or refer those with special medical and social grounds to the Centre for assessment for compassionate rehousing. In the past five years, the Centre has recommended seven cases involving street sleepers for compassionate rehousing.
(e) The Department of Justice (DoJ) is the legal representative and legal adviser of the Government. DoJ will not provide legal services to the relevant NGOs. In case the NGOs encounter litigation in the course of providing services and as the nature of each case differs, SWD stands ready to discuss the follow-up action with the NGOs concerned.
Ends/Wednesday, December 18, 2013
Issued at HKT 16:27
NNNN
