Page 106 of 237
HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL
In brief, the system is that when new blocks of rooms are allocated the number of decorators permitted to operate is restricted. The decorators are chosen by ballot from the 1,000 odd decorators registered with the Resettlement Department. Those who are successful in the ballot are required to pay a deposit of $500 and must conform to a simple set of conditions.
The new system came into operation with the first blocks to be allocated at Pak Tin and Tsz Wan Shan Estates where it worked successfully. However, the ballot to choose the decorators for new blocks at Sau Mau Ping Estate was not properly carried out; it was found that three of the decorators entering the ballot had contrived to put in two ballot slips. As a result the ballot was cancelled and, as has been publicly announced, any registered decorator will, on this occasion, be allowed to carry out work in the blocks concerned provided that he pays the required deposit and agrees to abide by the conditions.
The ballotting system will be reintroduced when the next batch of new rooms becomes available. The procedures are being re-examined in the meanwhile.
(Mr. Peter C. K. CHAN left the meeting at this point).
MR. HU: Mr. Chairman, may I ask the Commissioner what is the result of the re-examination?
COMMISSIONER FOR RESETTLEMENT: It is still going on, Sir, it has not been completed yet.
MR. BERNACCHI: Can this whole question be referred to the Policy Select Committee? There are points that I consider in favour and against it.
COMMISSIONER FOR RESETTLEMENT: Yes, Mr. Chairman, I would be prepared to do that. The only thing I would say is that it is not a new thing. It has been under discussion, I think in the Policy Select Committee as well, over a long period of time, but I will certainly refer it back again.
(14)
MR. HENRY H. L. HU asked the following question:
What the Council could do regarding the throwing down of rubbish from upper floors in a multi-storey building? Or the piling of rubbish in a neighbouring or opposite verandah which may adversely affect the hygienic conditions of the inhabitants?
HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL
DR. DENNY M. H. HUANG, CHAIRMAN OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL HYGIENE SELECT COMMITTEE, replied as follows:
The first part of the question refers to the throwing down of rubbish from upper floors in a multi-storey building. If the refuse is thrown down to a public street, legal action can be taken against the actual offender. From experience, however, it has been found difficult to identify the actual offender and therefore no successful prosecution has so far been obtained.
The Cleansing Division is now employing two anti-litter squads, one on each side of the harbour. Part of their duties is to go round all multi-storey buildings to advise the residents to refrain from throwing rubbish out of their windows. Some success has been achieved through this educational approach and the progress of these squads is being watched closely to see if more squads should be provided in the future. If, however, the refuse is thrown down to private property, for example, the open space or the yard of the building, then the normal action is for the District Health Inspector, upon a public complaint being received, to visit the premises and to advise the residents not to throw rubbish out of their windows. He also sees that dustbins are provided on the premises as required by law.
The second part of the question refers to the piling of rubbish in a neighbouring or opposite verandah. This constitutes a nuisance under the Public Health and Urban Services Ordinance, and the normal action is for the Council to issue a statutory notice to the occupier of the premises requiring him to remove the refuse.
MR. HU: Mr. Chairman, about throwing of rubbish, I consider that more education is needed for the public. I would very seriously recommend to you that you refer to the Education Department, that in future, mention is made in our civic books that throwing of rubbish is a very bad thing for our children.
MR. FORSGATE: Mr. Chairman, it could cost you a $1,000 to throw rubbish into the harbour, why can you throw rubbish from your window on to the street free of charge? Should we not increase the penalties or introduce some penalties by law and enforce them?
Page 107 of 237