|
past events |
2008/12/18 Navigating into Uncharted Waters: China's New Challenges for 2009 |
Yonghao Pu, Managing Director, Head Wealth Management Research Asia-Pa...
details>> |
|
2008/12/17 Surviving a Retail Downturn |
KPMG's Fergal Power, Director of Financial Advisory Services, and coll...
details>> |
|
2008/12/11 AIG and The Economy: The Way Forward |
Edward Liddy, Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of AIG, spoke at a ...
details>> |
|
2008/12/08 中國增值稅轉型改革午餐研討會 |
此項新税收措施對本港廠商在內地投資將有何影響?廠商應如何部署以盡量利用新措施帶來的優惠?本會誠邀德勤華永會計師事務所有限公司深...
details>> |
|
2008/12/04 Town Hall Forum with Kenneth Chen, Under Secretary for Education |
Kenneth Chen, Under Secretary for Education, exchanged views with memb...
details>> |
|
|
more >> |
|

Back to
Other Index
Our ref : 51/WKC/265 By fax & by post
5 October 2001 3107 9007
Mr Mike Rowse
Director General
Invest Hong Kong
15/F One Pacific Place
Queensway
Hong Kong
Some comments on Hong Kong’s immigration regime
You know that the Chamber is an avowed
advocate of a more business friendly immigration regime. The Chamber’s policy think tank the HKCSI has discussed the subject recently and come up
with some comments. Many of these have been raised before in the IPSG discussion but I
thought it useful to transmit them to you, as follows.
General
As a world city we need to allow more
flexibility in movement of people. Inward migration of knowledge workers and high value
added professionals, whether from the Mainland or from around the world, will help create
jobs for the economy, including for unskilled labourers. For multinational headquarters,
people movement is a norm and Hong Kong needs to make its immigration regime more flexible
if it is to strengthen its headquarter function.
From our experience the problem does not lie so much with the
Secretary for Security or the Director for Immigration, but more with the middle layer of
the Immigration Department who are used to a “control”
rather than a business-friendly mentality. In addition, there is the
bureaucratic tendency of making up rules and sticking to them in enforcement, thus adding
to the hurdles for business in applying for importation of foreign or Mainland workers.
Current Procedures
Currently, there is an importation of 150 one-way permit
holders into Hong Kong every day, often of unskilled labour. There should be more
screening of these immigrants to make sure that they are properly qualified, e.g. children
of Hong Kong parents, family re-unification, work skills, etc.
By contrast, numerous barriers exist in the
importation of workers. The current system does not allow for any staff development or
career growth for the imported worker. This is not doing good for the economy ’s human resources. Also, companies would like to have the freedom to bring
people in from between two weeks (specific course training) to ten years as they would be
able to use them anywhere within their organisation during and
after that time having been able to assess their qualities and progress at close quarters.
The categorisation of imported workers into
different sectors will, even with a liberal interpretation of sectors, be too rigid in the
face of the rapidly changing needs of the business sector.
Immigration officials work on the basis of
hard and fast rules and allows no flexibility. For instance, a Reuters journalist in
Beijing who has not got a university qualification is prevented from coming to Hong Kong
to set up the China securities desk, so Reuters has to employ this person and run its
China securities desk in Singapore instead. If Immigration Department wishes to base its
discretion on some reliable third-party justification, it could have worked out a system
with another government department, say InvestHK, to provide a fast-track procedure for
reputable companies with bona fide applications.
Some Proposals
The current procedure and requirements for
importation of labour should be simplified. If Immigration Department is concerned about
possible abuses, they can consider introducing a bond system by which companies wishing to
import foreign or Mainland professionals can be required to place a bond as an insurance
against any possible abuse of the system. Despite the hassle incurred, most large and
reputed companies should be willing to subscribe to such a system as the alternative (of
not being able to import these people) would be more costly. The SMEs may have difficulty
but in proportionate terms SMEs are not the most significant employers and in any case the
SMEs may be more affected by not being able to import labour than by the requirement of a
bond.
The compliance procedure is over-onerous. A
trust and audit system would have sufficed, with only random checks conducted. Most
companies will abide by the rules, and they should benefit from expediency and greater
efficiency. Those who abuse the system will, when caught, be blacklisted or have their
bond forfeited. The integrity of the system can be maintained with great improvement in
efficiency for businesses.
The decision over applications should be
made quickly, say within one week of application. An appeal board can be set up with the
majority of members coming from the business sector, which should decide on appeals within
another week. This will enable the result to be known in two weeks, thus giving certainty
to business and the applicant worker overseas.
I hope you will find some of these views
useful. As you know the Chamber is organising a seminar on 16 October on work visa
procedures, with your department’s help. I treasure the
cooperation between us to facilitate a more business friendly environment.
Sincerely
Dr Eden Woon
Director
|
| |
|
|