立法會七題：推動創新科技的發展
＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊

　　以下為署理財經事務及庫務局局長梁鳳儀（在商務及經濟發展局局長缺席期間）今日（五月十六日）在立法會會議上就譚偉豪議員的提問的書面回覆：

問題：

　　有業界人士指出，現時政府的採購政策沒有支援本地的創新科技產品，引致企業缺乏本地應用該等產品的經驗作為參考，不但令技術外流，更導致新一代的科技人才流失。為改變香港現有的營商環境，政府可否告知本會：

（一）有否就提供誘因鼓勵政府部門及工商界優先採用本地的科研成果進行研究；若有，詳情為何；若否，原因為何；

（二）當局有否積極措施加強本地市場及使用者對本土創新科技的信心，以及會否考慮設立類似「香港創造」的認證計劃，以改善本土創新科技在本港被忽視的情況；若有該等措施，詳情為何；及

（三）除了撥款支持營運在創新及科技基金下成立的研發中心外，現時當局有何具體措施協助企業的研發成果商品化，以推動本地創新科技的發展？

答覆：

主席:

　　特區政府一向非常重視創新科技發展，在二○○九年更把它訂定為六項優勢產業之一。

　　發展創新科技需要長遠投資，在過去10年間香港的研發開支一直按每年平均約7%的比率增長。當中，公營機構（包括政府機構及高等教育機構）的研發開支按平均每年4.7%增長，由二○○一年的50億港元，增加至二○一○年75億港元，佔總研發開支的57%。

　　就問題的三個部分，我的回覆如下：

（一）作為國際商業中心，特區政府必須奉行公開公平的採購政策，符合世貿組織清晰規定的招標程序。我們對所有投標者一視同仁，不會因產品的原產地而有所優待。

　　然而，我們了解科研界殷切期望特區政府能從多方面推動創新科技，特別是在公營機構率先試用本地的科研成果，使它們能得到實際應用，為社會帶來裨益。因此，過去兩年間，我們諮詢不同持份者（包括立法會）的意見，積極尋找靈活變通的方法，希望能達到培育本地創新科技的目的。

　　基於上述公平公開的原則，現時政府的採購制度，既看重價格亦看重產品的質素，包括其過往的使用記錄。新產品由於未能大量生產以降低單位成本等各種原因，價格通常較高；在使用記錄方面，亦通常未有優秀的往績。故此，嶄新的本地科研產品要在公開招標中脫穎而出是非常困難的。所以，要促進公營機構採用本地研發的產品，我們不應改變採購制度的要求，而是應透過創新及科技基金尋找方案，協助新產品達致要求的水平。

　　在二○一一年年初前，創新及科技基金的資助範圍只涵蓋至研發工作完成並提交報告為止，並不會包括其後的跟進工作。但要令使用者有信心採用研發成果，只憑一份報告是相當困難的。他們大都希望有現成的原型或樣板供進行詳細研究，或和現有的產品作比較，才能對新產品建立更大信心。更理想是能進一步見到產品在現實環境中的應用情況，以準確評估產品的優劣（例如：速度、反應時間、出現故障的頻率等）。

　　為此，我們於二○一一年年初擴大基金的範圍，除研發工作外，亦資助製作工具／原型／樣板，以及在公營機構內推行試用計劃的開支。公營機構包括政府部門、公共機構及商會等。資助上限定為研發項目原來開支的30%。但在特殊情況下（例如研發的產品對公眾有很大的裨益），創新科技署署長可酌情處理增加資助。

　　以上的新安排對多方面都有好處：

　　（1）對公營機構，如政府部門而言，他們可免費試用新科技以改善部門運作，亦可分享科研專家的知識和經驗；

　　（2）對技術開發者，如大學教授而言，可讓他們見證其研發成果得以在現實環境中應用；

　　（3）對參與研發項目的公司而言，他們可在設計產品的過程中收集使用者的意見，從而改良科研成果，令產品更能切合市場需要；亦可透過公營機構試用計劃為公司的產品取得參考評價，作將來市場推廣之用；以及

　　（4）對市民大眾而言，公營機構採用創新科技後服務質素和效率都得以提升，他們亦能從中受惠。

　　自新安排在二○一一年推出後，已開展了很多項目，其中一些例子包括：

　　（1）香港物流及供應鏈管理應用技術研發中心為香港海關開發了一套基於電子鎖的追蹤平台，以監控車輛活動及確保貨物的安全，並已在多個管制站進行測試；

　　（2）香港理工大學及香港應用科技研究院（應科院）最近研發各種智能家居系統及設備，並與香港房屋協會合作，於油麻地建立示範中心，提供資訊以提升長者的生活質素；

　　（3）路政署亦正試用應科院的發光二極管照明設施；以及

　　（4）納米及先進材料研發院在將軍澳醫院天台安裝了10千瓦的硅薄膜太陽能電池組件，作為輔助電源。

（二）及（三）多位議員在不同會議上均表示研發成果商品化對科技發展十分重要，這點我非常認同。所以我們在推動創新科技發展時，亦視商品化為我們的重點工作。除了上文提及擴大創新及科技基金的資助範圍至製作工具／原型／樣板和在公營機構內推行試用計劃的安排外，其他措施包括：

　　（1）鼓勵研發中心建立專責團隊進行科研成果商品化的工作；

　　（2）創新科技署舉辦各項交流活動，匯聚「官、產、學、研」各界別代表共同磋商不同科技範疇的研發及商品化需求，以物色及擬定共同研發的項目；

　　（3）為支持中小型科研企業進行研發，當局設有小型企業研究資助計劃，以等額資助形式，鼓勵中小企進行科研及推動成果商品化。為強化計劃成效，我們已由今年四月起將每個項目的資助上限，由400萬元提高至600萬元，並擴闊資助範圍至工業設計、原型測試和認證、臨床前試驗等，以促進商品化工作；以及

　　（4）香港科學園亦為新晉科技公司提供全面的培育計劃，包括培訓、營商、法律、籌集資金等顧問服務，以協助科技創業。

完

２０１２年５月１６日（星期三）
香港時間１３時１１分

資料來源: http://www.info.gov.hk/gia/general/201205/16/P201205160263.htm

LCQ7: Promoting development of innovation and technology

********************************************************

     Following is a written reply by the Acting Secretary for Financial Services and the Treasury, Ms Julia Leung, (in the absence of the Secretary for Commerce and Economic Development) to a question by the Hon Samson Tam in the Legislative Council today (May 16):

Question:

     Some members of the industry have pointed out that the existing procurement policy of the Government does not provide support for local innovative technology products, resulting in local enterprises lacking the experience in using such products which may serve as references, which has not only caused an outflow of technology but has also led to a drain of technology talents of the new generation. In order to change the present business environment in Hong Kong, will the Government inform this Council:

(a) whether it has conducted any study on the provision of incentives to encourage government departments and the commerce and industry sectors to accord priority to using the results of local scientific researches; if it has, of the details; if not, the reasons for that;

(b) whether the authorities have any proactive measure in place to boost the confidence of the domestic market and users in local innovative technology, and whether they will consider setting up a certification scheme similar to that of "Created by Hong Kong", so as to improve the situation of local innovative technology being neglected in Hong Kong; if such measures are in place, of the details; and

(c) apart from providing funds to support the operation of the Research and Development Centres set up under the Innovative and Technology Fund, what specific measures the authorities have put in place at present to assist in the commercialisation of research and development results of enterprises so as to promote the development of local innovative technology?

Reply:

President,

     The SAR Government has been attaching great importance to the development of innovation and technology, and it was designated in 2009 as one of the six industries where Hong Kong enjoys clear advantages.

     It is a long-term investment to develop innovation and technology. Over the past decade, Hong Kong's research and development (R&D) expenditure has been increasing at an average annual growth rate of about 7%. The R&D expenditure by the public sector (including Government and higher education sectors) has increased at an average annual growth rate of 4.7%, from HK$5 billion in 2001 to HK$7.5 billion in 2010, accounting for 57% of the gross R&D expenditure.

     My reply to the three parts of the question is as follows:

(a) As an international business centre, the SAR Government ought to follow an open and fair procurement policy which complies with the tender procedures as clearly set out by the World Trade Organisation. We treat all tenderers equally and will not accord any favourable treatment to products on the basis of their country of origin.

     Nonetheless, we understand that there is a keen expectation from the research sector for the SAR Government to promote innovation and technology on various fronts, in particular on the trial use of local R&D outcome in the public sector. Such trials would bring social benefits by facilitating real world application of the research deliverables. We have been pro-actively seeking flexible measures over the past two years through consultation with various stakeholders (including the Legislative Council), with the objective of nurturing indigenous innovation and technology.

     Following the principles of fairness and openness outlined above, the prevailing Government procurement system puts emphasis on both the price and quality of products, including their usage track record. New products tend to cost more due to various reasons, for example when mass production may not yet be feasible to reduce unit cost. In relation to the usage track record, they do not usually fair well. For these reasons it is difficult for new local R&D products to win in an open tender. In order to promote the use of local R&D products in the public sector, we should explore means to help new products to meet the level of requirements through the Innovation and Technology Fund (ITF), instead of varying the procurement system.

     Before early 2011, the ITF would only provide financial support for the completion of the R&D work cumulating in the submission of a report; and any follow-up would not be funded. However, it is very difficult to convince users to adopt such R&D outcomes with confidence simply based on a report. Most of them would like to study the prototypes or samples in more detail, or to compare them with existing products before they feel more confident about the new offers. It would be even more desirable to observe the products in a real world application to enable an accurate assessment of their merits (e.g. speed, reaction time, failure rates etc.).

     To this end, we have extended the scope of ITF funding in early 2011 to cover, in addition to R&D work, the production of tools/prototypes/samples and the conduct of trial schemes in the public sector. The public sector includes government departments, public bodies and trade associations, etc. The funding ceiling for these additional work is capped at 30% of the original R&D project cost. Moreover, the Commissioner for Innovation and Technology may exercise discretion for additional spending under exceptional circumstances (e.g. the product developed would bring great benefits to the community).

     The above new arrangements are beneficial to various parties:

     (1) For the public sector such as government departments, they can conduct trial use of new technologies at no cost to improve their operations. They also have the benefit of sharing the knowledge and experience of the research experts;

     (2)For technology developers such as university professors, they can witness real world applications of their R&D outcomes;

     (3)For companies that have funded the R&D projects, they can collect user feedback in the process of product design and fine-tune research outcomes so that their products can better meet market needs. They can also obtain references for their products from the public sector through the trial, and that the references will be useful for future marketing efforts; and

     (4)For the general public, they can also benefit from the enhanced service quality and efficiency of the public sector following the adoption of innovative technologies.

     Since the launch of the new arrangements in 2011, a large number of projects have been conducted. Some examples include:

     (1)The Hong Kong R&D Centre for Logistics and Supply Chain Management Enabling Technologies has developed an E-lock-enabled tracking platform for the Customs and Excise Department to monitor the movement of the vehicles and ensure cargo security. Trial runs have been conducted at various control points;

     (2)The Hong Kong Polytechnic University and the Hong Kong Applied Science and Technology Research Institute (ASTRI) have recently conducted R&D on various intelligent home systems and equipment and set up a demonstration centre in Yau Ma Tei with the Hong Kong Housing Society, providing information to enhance the quality of life for the elderly;

     (3)The Highways Department has been conducting trial use of ASTRI's LED lighting facilities; and

     (4)The Nano and Advanced Materials Institute has installed a 10kW thin-film silicon solar cell unit on the rooftop of the Tseung Kwan O Hospital as a supplementary source of power.

(b) and (c) I strongly share the view expressed by a number of Members at different meetings that commercialisation of R&D results is vital to technology development. This is also regarded as a priority area in our efforts in promoting innovation and technology development. Apart from the above-mentioned arrangements on extending the scope of ITF funding to cover the production of tools/prototypes/samples and the conduct of trial schemes in the public sector, other initiatives include:

     (1) Encouraging the R&D Centres to set up dedicated teams on the commercialisation of research outcomes;

     (2) The Innovation and Technology Commission organising various networking events to bring together representatives from the Government, industry, academic and research sectors to discuss their need in relations to R&D and commercialisation activities under different technology areas, so as to identify and devise R&D projects for collaboration;

     (3) In order to support the R&D activities of technology-based small and medium enterprises (SMEs), the Administration has launched the Small Entrepreneur Research Assistance Programme (SERAP) to provide SMEs with funding in the form of a matching grant to encourage them to undertake R&D and promote commercialisation of deliverables. To enhance the effectiveness of SERAP, we have since April increased the funding ceiling for each project from $4 million to $6 million and expanded the funding scope to facilitate commercialisation, including industrial designs, testing and certification of prototypes, pre-clinical trials, etc.; and

     (4) The Hong Kong Science Park also provides technology start-ups with a comprehensive incubation programme comprising consultancy services in training, business, legal and fund-raising, etc. to facilitate technopreneurship development.

Ends/Wednesday, May 16, 2012

Issued at HKT 13:15

Source: http://www.info.gov.hk/gia/general/201205/16/P201205160267.htm 

請按下連結查看詳細內容：

請按下連結查看所有問題：

譚偉豪議員：主席，剛才我們“五散人”的黨友林大輝議員問特首派成績表，明年他便執政了7年。特首回覆說要回顧5年前定下的政綱。我覺得這樣來定自己的成績表其實有點危險，因為如果風平浪靜、全世界不變的話，那當然沒有所謂，可以按本子辦事，但如果政治及社會環境一變，如果不跟着來變，便要承擔很大風險。

主席，在過去3年，我進入立法會後“日哦夜哦”，希望政府及議員能重視科技及創新。現時我看見劉慧卿議員及工聯會的朋友也覺得這方面越來越重要，我心感安慰。

時勢變了，當年與現在有很大分別，所以，我在此想問特首，現在是否做創新及科技的適當時機呢？如是，原因為何？如否，原因又是甚麼？

行政長官：我完全同意你所說的，除了要履行政綱及在上任前對市民作出的承諾外，還要在執政期間，處理世界或本地所發生的事情。在這屆政府期間，發生了全球金融海嘯，而這個海嘯在2007年未能預見，但我們立即採取了特別的方法，亦建議利用那契機發展6項產業，你還記得嗎？這些是那時所沒有的。換句話說，我們要彈性處理，回應當時社會的需要，作出最佳的對策。

創新科技正好是該6項產業的其中一項。大家都知道，我們已成立了創新及科技督導委員會，由財政司司長督導處理此事，當中已落實很多創新的措施，我相信這個問題你比我更要熟悉，對嗎？這包括擴大基金的範圍、在公營機構推行試用計劃，還有進一步推動科研成果的產品。我們的環保車已推廣至世界各地，這些你都清楚知道的。

在資源方面，去年4月，我們推出了2億元的“投資研發現金回贈計劃”，鼓勵企業盡量在生產方面多做一些科研。此外，我們亦落實了科學園第三期的發展，現時正陸續進行這些工作。我很希望你與我們一起，如果你有甚麼其他意見是我們還未做到的，我很樂意聽取。無可否認，我們覺得創新科技是香港有潛力發展的新工業之一。

譚偉豪議員：多謝特首肯定創新及科技的重要性。本會在7月6日通過一項議案，促請政府落實研究在下一屆政府成立創新及科技局，不知特首對此有何看法？

行政長官：我會通知下一任特首。

資料來源 (頁面編號：10420－10421)

http://www.legco.gov.hk/yr10-11/chinese/counmtg/hansard/cm0715a-translate-c.pdf

*********************************************************************

THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE'S QUESTION AND ANSWER SESSION

DR SAMSON TAM (in Cantonese): President, just now, Dr LAM Tai-fai, one of us who are called the "Five Loners", asked the Chief Executive for a report card on his achievements, saying that next year, he would have been in power for seven years.  The Chief Executive replied  that in that case, he would need to look back at the political platform he set down five years ago.  I think that it is a bit risky for one to compile one's report card in this way.  The reason is that if times are uneventful and the world does not experience any changes at all, it is of course alright to do things strictly as planned, but in case there are any changes in the political and social environments, one will bear very great risks if one does not make corresponding changes.

President, over the past three years, since I joined the Legislative Council, I have been "nagging" around, in the hope that the Government and Members could attach importance to technology and innovation.  These days, seeing that both Ms Emily LAU and Members belonging to the Federation of Trade Unions have started to feel the increasing significance of this matter, I am truly gratified.

Times have changed, and there is a big difference between many years ago and now.  For this reason, many I ask the Chief Executive whether it is now the right time to promote innovation and technology?  If yes, why?  If not, why not?

CHIEF EXECUTIVE (in Cantonese): I agree entirely with you that apart from implementing my political platform and  honouring the pledges I made to the people before my assumption of office, I must also respond to all the events that happen locally or around the world during my term of office.  During the term of the incumbent Government, there occurred a global financial tsunami which was practically unforeseen in 2007.  However, we still managed to adopt a number of immediate and special measures in response, proposing to turn this into an opportunity of developing the six industries.  Can you still remember this?  At the time, this idea had been unheard of.  In other words, we must always flexibly respond to the prevailing needs in society and formulate the best possible response strategy.

 Innovation and technology happens to be one of these six industries.  As Members know, we have set up the Steering Committee on Innovation and Technology under the chairmanship of the Chief Secretary for Administration to handle this issue.  Many measures on encouraging innovation have already been implemented.  I believe you should know better than I do, right?  Such measures include extending the scope of the fund, introducing a pilot scheme in public organizations and further promoting the productization of technological research achievements.  The market of the environment-friendly vehicles we have manufactured has been extended to places all over the world.  You should be clearly aware of all these.

 Regarding resource support, in April last year, we rolled out the $200-million Research and Development  Cash Rebate Scheme to encourage enterprises to engage in more production-related technological research.  Besides, we have also carried out  the Phase 3 Development of Hong Kong Science Park, and many other efforts are being made.  I very much hope that you can join hands with us.  In case you think that there is anything we have not yet done, we are always more than happy to listen to your ideas.  It cannot be denied that innovation and technology is one of the new industries which Hong Kong is potentially capable of developing.

DR SAMSON TAM  (in Cantonese):  Many thanks to the Chief Executive for recognizing the importance of innovation and technology.  On 6 July, this Council passed a motion on urging the Government to start exploring the establishment of an innovation and technology bureau during the term of the next Government.  What does the Chief Executive think about this proposition?

CHIEF EXECUTIVE  (in Cantonese): I will notify the next Chief Executive accordingly.

Source: Pages numbered 14687-14688

http://www.legco.gov.hk/yr10-11/english/counmtg/hansard/cm0715a-translate-e.pdf

     Following is a question by the Dr Hon Samson Tam and a written reply by the Secretary for Commerce and Economic Development, Mr Gregory So, in the Legislative Council today (July 13):

Question:

     I have recently received complaints from quite a number of members of the public that when they requested to terminate the contracts for residential broadband network services after moving house as they could not continue to use the services due to a lack of network coverage or insufficient cable capacity in their new residence, they were levied a service charge or fine by the Internet service providers. The Office of the Telecommunications Authority (OFTA) introduced the new Code of Practice (CoP) in February 2010, requiring telecommunications service operators (operators) to waive any fee for the aforesaid circumstances, but the CoP is implemented on a voluntary basis only. In this connection, will the Government inform this Council:

(a) of the number of complaint cases received by the authorities from members of the public in the past two years in relation to the levy of service charge or fine on them upon termination of network service contracts because there was no broadband network coverage in their new residence, as well as the follow-up actions;

(b) whether it knows the number of operators which have indicated their willingness to comply with the CoP since its issuance by OFTA; whether it has assessed if the voluntary CoP can effectively regulate the operators; if the result of the assessment is in the negative, when it will introduce more stringent measures to safeguard consumers' rights, and of the details of such measures; whether it will consider incorporating into the licences upon renewal mandatory provisions to require full compliance by the operators; and 

(c) given that the authorities issued the consultation paper on the Customer Complaint Settlement Scheme in June 2010, of the progress of the consultation at present and when they will make public the latest consultation outcome?

Reply: 

President,

     The telecommunications market in Hong Kong is developing rapidly with a variety of fixed, mobile and broadband services widely available to consumers in a highly competitive environment. While maintaining a fully liberalised market and a level playing field for the telecommunications industry, the Administration attaches great importance as well to safeguarding the interests of consumers as they use telecommunications services. The Office of the Telecommunications Authority (OFTA) regulates the telecommunications sector under the powers conferred by the Telecommunications Ordinance, and has all along strived to strengthen consumer protection in this regard. 

     With regard to safeguarding consumer interests, pursuant to the market-led approach and our policy to ensure fair competition, OFTA would encourage the telecommunications industry to adopt self-regulatory measures through the promulgation of industry standards. Nevertheless, OFTA will consider adopting mandatory regulatory measures that are more stringent if the problems persist.

     In respect of telecommunications service contracts, OFTA issued in February last year the Code of Practice for Communications Service Contracts. It sets out the best practices on drawing up service contracts for the reference and voluntary adoption by the industry. Since then, OFTA had been in active discussion with the telecommunications industry on how the relevant measures could be implemented to enhance consumer protection. In December last year, the Communications Association of Hong Kong (CAHK), an industry organisation, issued in collaboration with all the major telecommunications service operators the Industry Code of Practice for Telecommunications Service Contracts (Industry Code), after taking into account the key measures recommended in OFTA's code of practice and the operating environment specific to the telecommunications industry. The Industry Code provides guidelines on drawing up telecommunications service contracts for personal or residential users and includes measures to improve the existing contract forms, sales practices and arrangements ranging from renewals to terminations. The Industry Code is being implemented on a self-regulatory basis by the operators.

     My reply to the question raised by Dr Hon Tam is as follows:

(a) From 2009 to May this year, the number of complaints received by OFTA in respect of persistent service charges in the case of service being unable to cover the relocated address, with a breakdown of fixed telephone and broadband Internet access services, is set out below: 

            No. of complaints   No. of complaints
            on fixed telephone  on broadband Internet
Year        services            access services
----        ------------------  ---------------------
2009                2                    9

2010               30                  153

2011                7                   80
(January to
May)

     The number of complaints rose significantly in 2010 as compared to that in 2009 since a number of fixed network operators altered their service relocation arrangements in 2010 and required their customers to pay the service charges for the remaining contract period even if the service failed to cover the relocated address. Upon receipt of relevant complaints from consumers, OFTA had all the way worked to mediate disputes between the consumers and operators. Such efforts include referring the complaint cases to the operators and requesting them to handle the cases properly. All the aforesaid complaint cases had been referred to the concerned operators for follow-up. To our understanding, the complainants of all these cases have accepted the solutions offered by the operators. Moreover, in accordance with the Industry Code, participating operators have agreed to include terms in newly signed contracts which would ensure that customers would not need to pay the service charges for the remaining contract period should they terminate the service due to unsuccessful relocation.

(b) At present, a total of 11 telecommunications service operators (including all the major fixed and mobile network operators and one major external telecommunications services operator) have agreed to adopt the Industry Code (See Note). These operators together have a market share of over 98% each for the fixed telephone services, broadband Internet access services and mobile communications services. Since the issue of the Industry Code in December last year, all of the participating operators have one after another completed the preparatory work in line with the requirements in the Industry Code, including the revision of their contract forms, service platforms as well as sales and internal supporting procedures. Starting July this year, the participating operators would have implemented the necessary measures to ensure that all new contracts signed with their personal or residential customers comply with the provisions of the Industry Code. As mentioned above, one of the provisions in the Industry Code seeks to ensure fairer arrangements for service relocation requests made by customers.

     The implementation of the Industry Code represents the proactive efforts of the telecommunications industry in meeting the expectations of the public to enhance consumer protection. We are confident that the Industry Code will promote good sales practices and customer services to better safeguard the interests of consumers. It will also address contractual-related complaints and disputes more effectively.

     OFTA will monitor closely the progress and effectiveness of the Industry Code. It will continue to work closely with the industry and evaluate the need for further enhancing the Industry Code in future, taking into account the experience of operators in implementing the Industry Code and the feedback from consumers. In addition, OFTA will consider as appropriate other measures for resolving consumer complaints on telecommunications services. It will not rule out the possibility of adopting more stringent regulatory measures, including the imposition of additional licence obligations on consumer protection for the mandatory compliance by operators.

(c) In June 2009, we briefed the Legislative Council Panel on Information Technology and Broadcasting (the Panel) on the progress of a pilot programme for the Customer Complaint Settlement Scheme (CCSS) administered by OFTA. The pilot programme ended in February last year.

     In June last year we submitted another discussion paper to the Panel on the proposed way forward for the CCSS. OFTA also conducted a consultation exercise in the same month to seek the views of the public and the industry on issues relating to the implementation of the CCSS on a long-term basis. The consultation period ended in December last year with 13 submissions received from the industry (including 10 telecommunications operators and an industry association) and other parties (including the Consumer Council and a solicitor firm).

     Having regard to the outcome of the consultation, OFTA is evaluating different options including exploring actively with the industry on the feasibility of setting up a voluntary industry scheme. Once the way forward is firmed up, we will report the details to the Panel.

Note: 
The following telecommunications service operators (including fixed, mobile and external telecommunications operators) have agreed to adopt the Industry Code (in alphabetical order):

* China Mobile (Hong Kong) Co. Ltd
* City Telecom (Hong Kong) Limited
* CSL Limited
* Hong Kong Broadband Network Limited
* Hutchison Telecommunications Hong Kong Holdings Limited
* i-CABLE
* New World Mobility Limited
* New World Telecommunications Limited
* PCCW
* SmarTone-Vodafone
* Wharf T&T

Ends/Wednesday, July 13, 2011
Issued at HKT 12:20

　　以下是今日（七月六日）立法會會議上譚偉豪議員的提問和政務司司長唐英年的書面答覆︰

問題︰

　　據報，現時各政府部門需將公務電郵或公務文件列印存檔。就此，政府可否告知本會：

（一）有否統計去年各政府部門列印儲存公務電郵及公務文件的數量為何，以及所用紙張數量為何；及

（二）鑑於政府已於２００１年開始研究電子儲存系統，亦曾經試用電子檔案保管系統，為何至今仍未能正式使用該系統；會否於短期內再就此進行研究；若會，詳情（包括時間表）為何？

答覆︰

主席︰

（一）根據有關的政府檔案管理規定，在政府尚未全面推行電子檔案保管系統前，各局和部門須把電子郵件檔案列印為紙本檔案，以便管理和儲存。我們沒有有關各局和部門列印儲存公務電郵及文件或所用紙張的數量的資料。

（二）自２００１年起，政府檔案處、政府資訊科技總監辦公室和效率促進組一直攜手為妥善管理電子檔案制訂政策、策略與標準，目的是發展新的檔案管理措施和工具，以協助各局和部門以整合、高效及劃一的方式管理電子與非電子檔案。

　　為推行電子檔案保管系統試驗計劃，政府檔案處委聘了一名承辦商提供系統開發及相關服務。在完成系統開發後，當局於２００７年９月起在政府資訊科技總監辦公室和運輸署選定的辦公室試行該系統，試行期直至２００８年９月結束。該計劃的檢討顯示，當局須進一步推展處理電子檔案管理和電子檔案保管系統的各項工作，包括為元數據制訂檔案管理標準。當局現正跟進該等工作。

　　此外，當局在２０１０年制訂政府電子資料管理策略，把電子檔案管理列作電子資料管理工作不可或缺的一部分。在２０１１年５月，政府資訊科技總監辦公室已向各局和部門公布政府電子資料管理策略和有關架構，讓各局和部門訂定其電子資料管理策略時，必須包括採用電子檔案保管系統。為此，當局現正手向各局和部門提供適當的支援，幫助他們訂定其電子資料管理策略。

完

２０１１年７月６日（星期三）
香港時間１２時２１分

譚偉豪議員：主席， 局長剛才在答覆中一直提及過去10年、8年所做的資訊保安工作，而我認為這方面非常不足。因為，現時談論的不是單打獨鬥，不是個別人士對電腦的攻擊，而是國際黑客的攻擊。美國奧巴馬政府已有指引，把黑客攻擊界定為等同國際襲擊，可視為等同軍事行為。所以，如果以這個層面來說，這不是商務及經濟發展局可以應付的。我希望局長可以參考外國政府的做法，想想如何可以提升至國防或保安局的層次。

主席， 我想問， 既然政府還未有想法， 而雲端電腦又這麼重要，是大勢所趨，各國亦採用，那麼，我較關注的是哪些資料適宜放置於進雲端平台， 哪些資料不適宜放置於平台？

局長在主體答覆中提到，對於高度敏感的資料，政府會將之放在“內部私有雲端平台”。就此，我想問政府，如何界定“高度敏感資料”的定義？ 至於放在“內部私有雲端平台”的資料，政府會否告訴市民，讓市民得知有哪些資料已被放置於網上？

商務及經濟發展局局長：主席，我先回應譚偉豪議員的第一項意見。在保安方面， 我們的確要與國際組織合作， 我剛才在答覆中亦已提到，政府當局已設有恆常機制，與其他國際組織合作打擊黑客入侵。我剛才在主體答覆中亦提到， 因應資料的敏感性， 我們有3種模式，分別有3個不同的平台。

我們現正處於制訂政策的過程中，是設計階段。現時的大方向是把最敏感的資料放置於私有雲端平台，而一般性的公眾資料則會放置在公共雲端平台。任何市民均可以在公共雲端平台看到這些公眾資料，它們所涉及的範疇亦非常廣泛。當然，敏感資料自有其敏感性，我們在制訂政策時會考慮不同的因素， 作出適當的安排。

譚偉豪議員：局長表示還未界定哪些是敏感資料， 哪些是非敏感資料。我的補充質詢的其中一部分是詢問，待當局作出界定後，會否向市民作出公布，讓他們得知其個人資料會被放置於內部的雲端電腦？

商務及經濟發展局局長：主席，涉及市民的資料其實十分廣泛，要告訴市民資料的放置地方......市民在應用雲端技術時， 我們認為如果內部的保安措施做得足夠， 市民在瀏覽時......雲端的定義是， 知道你的資料在雲端電腦的妥善安排是如何，所以，這方面有一定的技術性難度。我們認為，在整體政策中，能在保安層面採取適當措施，這已是一個適當的安排。

資料來源：頁面編號9603-9604

http://www.legco.gov.hk/yr10-11/chinese/counmtg/hansard/cm0706-translate-c.pdf

********************************************************************

DR SAMSON TAM (in Cantonese): President, in his replies just now, the Secretary has mentioned repeatedly work initiatives on information security done in the past 10 or eight years, yet I consider them to be highly inadequate because instead of stand-alone attacks from individual persons, we are now facing attacks from international hackers. Guidelines have already been issued by the OBAMA administration that hack attacks are classified as a form of international threats and deemed as acts of war. Hence, if considered from this perspective, this is not a matter the Commerce and Economic Development Bureau can handle. I hope the Secretary will make reference to the practice of foreign governments and consider how this matter can be escalated to the level of national defense and security.

President, my question is: Given that the Government's stance is still open, and cloud computing is so important as a major trend adopted by many countries, I am more concerned about the types of information that are suitable or not suitable to be placed in the cloud platform.

In his main reply, the Secretary said that highly sensitive information would be placed in the "In-house Private Cloud". In this connection, I would like to ask the Government what the definition of "highly sensitive information" is? Regarding information placed in the "In-house Private Cloud", will the Government inform the public of the same so that they know what sort of information has been uploaded on the Internet?

SECRETARY FOR COMMERCE AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT (in Cantonese): President, I will first respond to the first part of Dr Samson TAM's question. In terms of security, we must indeed co-operate with international organizations. As I replied just now, an established mechanism is available for the Government to join hands with other international organization in combating hack attacks. I have also mentioned in the main reply earlier that three modes or three types of Government Cloud environment will be available to cater for information of varying degrees of sensitivity.

We are now in the process of policy formulation, that is, at the design stage. The general direction envisaged is that the most sensitive information will be placed in the private cloud, and general public information will be placed in the public cloud. Any members of the public can access the public information which covers a wide range of areas in the public cloud. Of course, due to the privy nature of sensitive information, we will consider different factors in the process of policy formulation so that suitable arrangements can be made.

DR SAMSON TAM (in Cantonese): The Secretary said that a decision on the classification of sensitive and non-sensitive information has yet been made. Part of my supplementary question is about whether the Administration will make public its classification decision after a decision has been made, so that members of the public will know that their personal data has been placed in the In-house Cloud?

SECRETARY FOR COMMERCE AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT (in Cantonese): President, in fact, many different kinds of data is related to members of the public. If they are informed of the location of storing such data …… When members of the public access the cloud computing environment, we consider that if there are adequate internal security measures and when they browse …… In the application of cloud computing, it will be important to ensure the proper storage of data in the cloud platform. Hence, certain technical difficulties are involved. We opine that from the perspective of the overall policy, it will be an appropriate arrangement if suitable security measures are adopted.

Source: Pages numbered 13528-13529

http://www.legco.gov.hk/yr10-11/english/counmtg/hansard/cm0706-translate-e.pdf

Question: Use of information technology in schools
**********************************************

     Following is a question by the Hon Samson Tam Wai-ho and a written reply by the Secretary for Education, Mr Michael Suen, in the Legislative Council today (June 22):

Question:

     Regarding the promotion of the development of information technology (IT) in schools in Hong Kong, will the Government inform this Council:

(a) whether it knows the respective numbers of school IT assistants employed by primary and secondary schools in Hong Kong last year, with a breakdown by salary group; as well as the respective average numbers of school IT assistant vacancies and their percentages in the total numbers of such posts; and

(b) given that the Government plans to implement debundling of textbooks and teaching/learning materials for pricing in the new school year commencing in September this year, schools can choose to produce their own teaching materials to meet their teaching needs, whether the authorities will thus allocate additional resources for schools to recruit additional IT staff or purchase additional IT equipment, so as to step up promotion of the development of e-Learning; if they will, of the details; if not, the reasons for that?

Reply:

President,

(a) The Education Bureau has been disbursing a Composite Information Technology Grant to all public sector schools at an annual rate ranging from $155,000 to $484,000, depending on the school type and number of approved classes. The grant can be used in the following areas:

(i) Internet connectivity and Internet security services;
(ii) Employment of technical support personnel or hire of technical support services from service providers;
(iii) Purchase of IT-related consumables;
(iv) Extension of opening hours for school's IT facilities;
(v) Upgrading and replacement of school's IT facilities;
(vi) Arrangement of maintenance services for school's IT facilities procured by government funds; and
(vii) Purchase of digital resource materials for learning and teaching, including annual subscription or renewal fees for licences and software, and other charges for on-line learning resources.

     Under the principle of school-based management, schools can flexibly deploy their resources in any of the above areas to meet their operational needs. As far as technical support services are concerned, schools may engage one or more IT technicians either through direct recruitment or service procurement. Since schools do not have a fixed establishment of IT technicians, we cannot provide their vacancy statistics.

(b) We always emphasise that textbooks produced by publishers are not the only sources of teaching materials. Over the years, the Education Bureau has produced a lot of online teaching resources. Besides, there is a vast collection of teaching resources on the Hong Kong Education City website. In the coming year, we will integrate these teaching resources into a one-stop online platform to facilitate teachers' use. We will also enhance our production of teaching materials to meet the needs of teachers. Our ultimate target is to facilitate teachers' preparation of teaching materials appropriate to the schools' circumstances and students' needs. Current development does not suggest that the process would involve additional resource implications in terms of IT equipment or personnel.

     With regard to the promotion of e-Learning in schools, the Education Bureau has started implementing a three-year pilot scheme since this school year on e-Learning aiming to explore and develop various e-Learning solutions. We will formulate long-term strategy on the implementation of e-Learning in schools based on the outcomes of this pilot scheme.

Ends/Wednesday, June 22, 2011
Issued at HKT 12:20

Source:

http://www.info.gov.hk/gia/general/201106/22/P201106220150.htm (中文)

http://www.info.gov.hk/gia/general/201106/22/P201106220153.htm (Eng)

(資料來源: http://www.info.gov.hk/gia/general/201104/06/P201104060211.htm) 

(source: http://www.info.gov.hk/gia/general/201104/06/P201104060216.htm)