Replies to LegCo questions
LCQ12: Assistance for persons affected by trawling ban
Following is a question by the Hon Steven Ho and a written reply by the
Secretary for Food and Health, Dr Ko Wing-man, in the Legislative Council today
(November 30):
Question:
The legislation banning trawling activities in Hong Kong waters (the trawling
ban) came into operation on December 31, 2012. In this connection, the
Government has introduced a one-off assistance scheme for the affected
fishermen, including granting them ex-gratia payments. Between the commencement
of the scheme and October 2015, there were 858 appeals lodged by owners of
trawler vessels against the amount of ex-gratia payments granted to them. As at
August 2016, the Fishermen Claims Appeal Board (FCAB) made decisions on and
completed hearings for only 40 and 47 cases respectively, and there is no
timetable for completion of the processing of all other cases. Besides, some
fishermen have pointed out that there are quite a number of fisheries-related
industries that have also been affected by the trawling ban, such as ice-making
industry, fresh water supply vessels, fishing gears industry and wholesale fish
markets. All such industries have not received any compensation from the
Government. The Aquatic Products and Crustacean Merchants' Association, which
has been providing sales and loans platforms for the fisheries industry for some
70 years, has indicated that the aggregate value of sales of seafood, as
affected by the trawling ban, has dropped by more than 10 per cent in the past
two years as compared with those of several years ago. Nevertheless, the
Government has not provided any assistance to the affected persons concerned. In
this connection, will the Government inform this Council:
(1) whether it knows the employment or operating conditions in the past three
years of the fishermen who have been affected by the trawling ban, including the
respective numbers of those who have switched to work in (i) other capture
fishery industries, (ii) marine fish culture industry, (iii) fisheries
industries other than (i) and (ii), and (iv) fisheries-related industries;
(2) when FCAB is expected to complete the processing of all of the aforesaid
appeal cases; the measures in place to improve FCAB's arrangement for and
progress in processing the appeals, so as to avoid fishermen waiting for an
indefinite period of time; of a breakdown, by type of fishing vessels, of (i)
the decisions made and (ii) the number, of such cases; whether it will consider
improving the existing way of displaying information on FCAB's website,
including setting out the relevant information according to the aforesaid
categorisation;
(3) of the justifications for the Government to claim, at the time when the
assistance scheme for the trawling ban was introduced, that the ban would not
have significant impacts on other fisheries-related industries; whether it has
assessed (i) the impacts of the trawling ban on fishermen and fisheries-related
industries so far, and (ii) the operating conditions in recent years of the
affected persons who engaged in fisheries-related industries; if it has, of the
details; if not, when it will conduct such an assessment; and
(4) whether the Government has plans to provide assistance to those
fisheries-related industries that, albeit confirmed to have been affected by the
trawling ban, have not received any compensation, so as to reduce the losses
suffered by them; if it does, of the details; if not, the reasons for that?
Reply:
President,
In order to restore the seabed and depleted marine resources, the Government has
been implementing a series of fisheries management measures in the past few
years, including the implementation of the trawl ban in Hong Kong waters since
December 31, 2012. To assist fishermen affected by the trawl ban, the Government
has introduced a one-off assistance package which includes making ex-gratia
allowance (EGA) payment to affected trawler owners, buying out inshore trawlers
from affected owners who voluntarily surrender their vessels, and providing
one-off assistance to local deckhands and inshore fish collector owners. A total
of $953 million has been disbursed. Moreover, the Agriculture, Fisheries and
Conservation Department (AFCD) has introduced a special training programme and
loan arrangements to assist affected fishermen in switching to other sustainable
modes of fishing operation. The Government also established a $500 million
Sustainable Fisheries Development Fund in 2014 to provide the industry with
financial assistance in developing sustainable modes of operation.
My reply to the various parts of the questions is as follows:
(1) The owners of the 269 inshore trawlers operating in Hong Kong waters were
most affected by the trawl ban. According to AFCD's records of various schemes
and its survey on the trade, about half of the inshore trawler owners have
switched to operate in the Mainland waters after receiving EGA, while some 40
inshore trawler owners have switched to other forms of capture fishery or fish
culture industry. The remaining trawler owners after receiving EGA have either
withdrawn from the industry or yet to decide whether to stay in the fishing
industry.
In addition, there are around 700 larger trawlers (the owners also received EGA)
not normally operate in Hong Kong waters. The trawl ban does not have a
significant impact on their mode of operation.
(2) The Fishermen Claims Appeal Board (Trawl Ban) (FCAB) received a total of 858
appeal applications, of which 82 cases were subsequently withdrawn by the
appellants.
As at mid-November this year, a total of 127 hearings have been held by FCAB.
FCAB has issued decisions on 51 appeal cases, of which 3 were allowed. The
hearings for another 60 cases have been completed, pending drafting of
judgements by legal advisers. FCAB has been stepping up its efforts to process
the remaining 665 cases, including through increasing the number of its members
and frequency of hearings since last year.
To ensure that all appeal cases are handled in a fair and just manner, FCAB
would carefully examine and consider the information of each case, including
statements submitted and arguments put forth by both parties. Hearing is held
for each case. The workload involved in processing the appeals is exceptionally
heavy, and it may require more than one hearing in order to conclude a
complicated case. Besides, processing of certain cases is prolonged as the
fishermen concerned need to carry out fishing operations outside Hong Kong and
are thus unable to submit the information requested by FCAB or attend the
hearings. Given that the appeals are considered by FCAB on a case-by-case basis,
it is difficult to predict the time needed to conclude all cases.
To enhance transparency, FCAB has started uploading the decisions of appeal
cases for public information by year of the decisions made onto its website
since this February. In addition, FCAB also informs appellants in writing of its
work progress regularly. FCAB will further consider the proposal of improving
the presentation of information on its website.
(3) and (4) In formulating the assistance package, the Government has already
given due consideration to the possible impacts of trawl ban on related trades.
This was also thoroughly deliberated by the Legislative Council Finance
Committee when it examined the assistance package. At that time, we were of the
view that impact of the trawl ban on related trades (including ice manufacturing
and fishing gear supplies) should not be significant.
Since the implementation of the trawl ban, we have been monitoring the situation
of the relevant trades. Having regard to the impact on inshore fish collectors
which mainly served trawlers and their owners were facing genuine difficulties,
the Government decided in 2014 to provide assistance to them. We have completed
the vetting of all such cases in mid-2016, and are arranging disbursement of EGA
of $90,000 and relevant loan interest subsidies for each eligible fish collector
owner. The total outlay is about $2.5 million. In addition, to help sustain the
development of fish collectors, their owners may apply for various fisheries
loan funds from AFCD, including the Fish Marketing Organisation Loan Fund and
Fisheries Development Loan Fund.
AFCD has also maintained close liaison with stakeholders of other related
trades. According to our understanding, after the implementation of the trawl
ban, some inshore trawlers have switched to other modes of operations while the
remaining fishing vessels (including those operating outside Hong Kong waters
and local non-trawlers) have continued their original mode of operation. They
continue to demand for services offered by the related trades.
Fish traders operating in the wholesale fish markets of the Fish Marketing
Organisation (FMO) once indicated that they were affected by the trawl ban. Yet,
records of FMO show that after the implementation of the trawl ban, the total
volume of fresh marine fishes marketed through FMO has remained largely stable
in the past three years, ranging from 35 400 tonnes to 36 100 tonnes each year.
The total value of sale during the same period has increased from $1.76 billion
to $2.12 billion.
Ends/Wednesday, November 30, 2016
Issued at HKT 16:10
NNNN