MR CHAN KIN-POR (in Cantonese): President, tourism is one of the four pillar industries in Hong Kong. Last year, over 48 million visitors came to Hong Kong, among whom over 34 million were Mainland visitors. According to the estimate of the industry, some 600 000 people are engaging in the tourism industry and other related industries, bringing $270 billion of income to various industries in Hong Kong. It is an indispensable and important link in the economy and employment market of Hong Kong. Back then, right after the SARS, the revival of the market in Hong Kong was enabled by the Individual Visit Scheme.
But since the tourism facilities and the visitor carrying capacity of Hong Kong have failed to cope with the rapid increase in visitors, Mainland visitors in particular, it has given rise to some economic and social conflicts and brought inconvenience to the public. These concerns include the cultural conflicts between visitors and local residents, the problem of parallel traders and the overload of the public facilities, and so on. We must face these problems squarely and solve them as soon as possible. However, I disagree that the pace of the development of the tourism industry should be slowed down because of the emergence of social conflicts.
In fact, among the four pillar industries in Hong Kong, the logistics industry has long since lost its competitive edge. It will soon fail to maintain its third position in the world. As for the financial industry, it is facing strong competitors and its prospect is worrying. The growth of the producer and professional services has been very limited in recent years and there is not much room for further development. The tourism industry is the only industry that keeps growing, making it a reliable pillar of our economy. Hong Kong is experiencing a weakening of its competitiveness and an imbalance in industrial development. If the development of the tourism industry is slowed down deliberately, we will be likened to digging our own grave.
As I said earlier, the influx of Mainland visitors to Hong Kong has given rise to many problems, one of which being the problem of parallel traders. Parallel traders have caused nuisances to residents of North District. The snapping up of powdered formula by parallel traders has aroused discontent among many parents in Hong Kong. I will not dwell on the specific details here. There are views proposing abolishing the “multiple-entry permits” arrangement and reclaiming the power of vetting and approval under the Individual Visit Scheme. But I think it is putting the cart before the horse. These proposals are suggesting that if certain visitors do not observe the rules, all visitors should be punished together. In a free society, this is an unfair approach. Besides, it puts parallel traders on a par with visitors.
Indeed, we should stamp out parallel trading activities but not visitors. Actually, efforts of combating smuggling of parallel goods, such as the powdered formula restriction order and other arrest operations, have achieved results in some measure. If parallel trading activities continue to cause nuisances to residents of the New Territories, we may request the Government to deploy additional law-enforcement officers to maintain the order of the community and step up its operation in investigation and arrest. To fully combat illegal parallel trading activities, we may construct large shopping malls in the border areas or control points in the long run, so as to divert visitors coming to Hong Kong for shopping. These are proactive and desirable solutions we may adopt to address the problems, whereas measures to hold back visitors from coming to Hong Kong are tantamount to cutting one’s toes to fit the shoes. Not only is it not beneficial to Hong Kong and the Mainland, it will intensify the conflicts between the two places.
Moreover, the cultural difference between Mainland visitors and Hong Kong residents will indeed provoke social disputes, so it has to be handled carefully. Honestly, some visitors like to yell aloud and behave rudely, and some even commit uncivilized acts, which are considered offensive in society. However, we should give the matter its fair deal, for these uncivilized visitors are only in the minority. Moreover, I believe that with popular education and the need for the Mainland to integrate into the international community, Mainland visitors will change gradually in the long run. The case is comparable to that of Hong Kong in the 1970s to 1980s. Back then, Hong Kong people travelling overseas were often criticized for being rude, but now, we seldom hear such criticism.
The Government may also take the initiative to step up its publicity effort, which will surely bring some effect. For instance, littering is subject to heavy penalty in Hong Kong and most of the visitors will receive the relevant information upon arrival, and in recent years, the number of visitors involved in littering or spitting has decreased relatively. Similarly, the Government may step up its promotion efforts, say reinforcing the promotion work in Mainland travel agencies and control points in Hong Kong to remind visitors of the points they need to note and the regulations they have to comply with, or to point out that certain behaviour, such as relieving themselves wherever they like, are liable to prosecution. I think these measures will achieve deterrence in some measure.
At the same time, Hong Kong may draw reference from the overseas practice of setting up a visitor police force. For instance, a team of 101-strong tourist police has been set up in Seoul recently. I believe the visitor police will not only protect visitors, for they may shoulder the responsibility of maintaining the order of visitors, too. Though it entails a certain amount of resource input, it will surely be effective in some measure in reducing the incidence of disputes between visitors and the public and combating frauds by visitors. These merit further consideration indeed.
As for the problem of overload of public facilities, the existing tourism facilities in Hong Kong are indeed ageing and insufficient. The Government should make improvement as soon as possible and we have to render full support to the relevant work. I would like to raise the concern about the construction of a third runway in particular. In view of the rapid increase in passenger and cargo flow, the existing runways of the airport are expected to reach full capacity of 68 movements per hour in 2015, though it is expected to reach its full capacity in 2018 initially, for the present usage has reached 64 movements per hour. In other words, the runways will reach capacity sooner than expected. When the airport reaches its full capacity and if the movement capacity cannot be increased over a long period, it will fail to meet with the freight demand. Given the shortage of airline seats, prices of air tickets in Hong Kong will definitely go up. By then, it will seriously affect the local tourism industry, which will in turn deal a severe blow to commercial and trade activities in Hong Kong. Therefore, the third runway must be constructed as soon as possible.
I so submit.