Replies to LegCo questions

LCQ6: Unauthorised display of publicity materials

Following is a question by the Hon Choy So-yuk and a written reply by the Secretary for Health, Welfare and Food, Dr Yeoh Eng-kiong, in the Legislative Council today (April 2):

Question:

It has been reported that unauthorised display of publicity materials on street has become increasingly rampant. Of the unauthorised publicity materials removed by the Food and Environmental Hygiene Department ("FEHD") recently, almost 40 per cent were from the same finance company. Even though FEHD has issued warnings and fixed penalty notices to the relevant company for a total of 117 times, such non-compliance remains unrestrained. In this connection, will the Government inform this Council:

(a) of the maximum penalty and fine imposed by the court over the past six months for offences of unauthorised display of publicity materials;

(b) whether it has studied how to curb the repeat commission of the relevant offence; if it has, of the study result; and

(c) whether it will consider increasing the penalty for display of bills or posters without permission prescribed under the Public Health and Municipal Services Ordinance (Cap 132) and the Fixed Penalty (Public Cleanliness Offences) Ordinance (Cap 570), with a view to enhancing the deterrent effect and thereby curbing unauthorised display of publicity materials; if it will not, the reasons for that?

Reply:

(a) A person displaying or affixing a bill or poster on Government land without the written permission of FEHD commits an offence under section 104A of the Public Health and Municipal Services Ordinance (Cap 132) and is liable to a maximum penalty of $10,000 upon conviction. The maximum fine imposed by the Court over the past six months for this offence is $2,400.

(b) According to FEHD's operational experience, enforcement actions taken against unauthorised display of publicity materials are generally effective in restraining the commission of such offence. The repeated breach of law by the finance company mentioned in this question is an exceptional case for which FEHD has issued 72 warnings and instituted 53 prosecutions. The relevant legal proceedings are under way, with the court trial for the first batch of prosecutions scheduled for the end of this May.

(c) We will keep under review the existing legislative framework and the relevant penalty provisions on unauthorised display of publicity materials in the context of their adequacy in deterring and curbing such offence in general. We will continue to monitor the situation and take effective enforcement actions to tackle the problem of unauthorised display of publicity materials in the streets.

End/Wednesday, April 2, 2003
NNNN