MEMBERS who stepped into the Legco chamber a few minutes late yesterday found a shocking debate in progress which appeared to be about group sex. ''For 1,000 people in Hongkong Island there are five beds. For the New Territories East, the ratio is nine people to a bed,'' said Tik Chi-yuen. Libby Wong, Health Secretary, added: ''When we talk about bed population ratios I would like to share with members some very revealing statistics.'' Hongkong as a whole has a similar population/bed ratio to the UK - approximately three. ''We are also leading in a number of areas, such as the utilisation of beds,'' she added proudly. ''Average bed occupancy rate is 81 per cent.'' Are there really three in a bed in Hongkong 81 per cent of the time? No. Latecomers soon lowered their eyebrows. Members were talking about occupancy of hospital beds. The New Territories five-in-a-bed incident apparently referred to by Mr Tik was merely a metaphorical statistic, and there was no evidence five people had ever been under one set of sheets at one time. Dr Tang Siu-tong wanted a specific bit of information. He wanted to know precisely when a plan would be made for the 1997 transfer of power. Michael Sze, replying for the administration, did not want to actually answer the question. But he knew that he could not fob them off with the word ''soon'', a popular government word examined and dissected in great detail last week. He decided to try a different tack. ''In due course,'' Mr Sze said. The sharp-minded Ron Arculli was not fooled for a moment. He knew ''in due course'' was not a date. He demanded that Mr Sze tell them precisely when the Joint Liaison Group would reconvene so that this matter could be resolved. Mr Sze stood up again. ''Before too long,'' he said, with a straight face. Then Mr Howard Young decided to try a different tack. He asked what bits of the plan they would start with. Mr Sze still refused to be pushed into saying anything precise. ''How long is a piece of string?'' he said. You could see members' brows knotting in puzzlement at this point. Why was the Government measuring bits of string in preparation for 1997? By this time, it seemed as if the administration was running rings around legislators. So there were smiles when tough-speaking legislator Jimmy McGregor rose to his feet to ask a question. ''Sir,'' he said. ''In the . . .'' Then Jimmy stopped and a horrible realisation hit him. He didn't have anything to ask. ''I'm sorry. I have no question,'' he said and sat down. The spotlight was back on the Government. Ken Woodhouse, speaking for the Security Department, revealed that the Government had thought up a cunning plan to combat criminal activities in schools. They had placed large numbers of ''Student Crime Information Forms'' into various schools. Children were urged to fill these in and post them to GPO Box 999. Mr Woodhouse did not tell members precisely what was on the forms, and you could see their eyes widen as they tried to imagine what sort of questions were on them: ''Are you a murderer or a drug trafficker? Discuss.'' Then Stephen Cheong asked why the Government allowed domestic helpers into Hongkong from all sorts of countries, but refused to let in any at all from China. Bizarre though it may seem, the Government explained that amahs from China would blend into Hongkong society very easily - and that's why they were banned. John Chan, Secretary for Manpower, said that if they let in Chinese amahs, it would be tough ''ensuring that domestic helpers do not integrate very easily into society and therefore acquire residence''. You can't have happy amahs who smoothly integrate with the population. After all, you may end up increasing Mrs Wong's three-in-a-bed ratio.