118
HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL
The theme of this Motion is (1) to reduce to its minimum the time for refuse and refuse-collecting vehicles to remain at residential or shopping areas, and (2) to ensure that no refuse shall be left exposed in a public place. As it is now, the rattan baskets containing refuse without lids (in some there is a piece of torn cloth on top) remain in the refuse-collecting station too long. The same is true for the refuse-collecting van with its engine on, because it has to wait for all baskets of refuse to be emptied as in an incineration plant. At the same time, refuse can be seen spread on the ground for the workers to sort out any articles of value. All these make for unnecessary long stays of refuse-collecting vans near residential areas, during which air pollution from the exhaust pipes of the refuse vehicles, pungent odours from refuse, and unsightly refuse spread on the ground for sorting out, are indeed undesirable elements that should be removed.
Plastic bags for household use to contain refuse in place of rattan baskets, and plastic boxes for holding these bags with lids on (no opening of these boxes should be allowed by USD workers for sorting out things) are proposed with the hope of minimizing the above undesirable elements. Firstly, refuse would be kept "closed" in the bags from the kitchen to the collecting points in the corridors of apartments. Secondly, plastic boxes with lids on for holding the household refuse bags would help to stop spreading the refuse on the ground for "sorting out" purposes. Owing to their shape these boxes would make best and quickest use of the space inside the refuse collecting vehicle. Thus the time is shortened and the refuse now unexposed. Also, refuse collecting stations would not be used for incineration purposes as they apparently and partially are now.
Mr. Chairman, I beg to move.
MR. TSIN (in English):-I beg to second.
MR. FORSGATE (in English):-Mr. Chairman, my Friend Dr. P. C. WONG is really showing himself "with it" in putting a motion to containerize a refuse collection system. Perhaps I may be permitted to put in my penny's worth as I've a fair amount of experience in dealing with the "magic box”, as container is known in the field of transportation. I am not too sure that Dr. WONG appreciates that the objectives of containerization are to achieve massive savings in labour by the introduction of costly capital-intensive items of mechanical equipment. To be effective in the housing setup in Hong Kong, a complicated system of garbage chutes would be required in every block of flats, plus containers and the necessary handling equipment. This may well come about in the future. But at this moment in time, less labour-intensive methods such as those presently adopted could not be used until sufficient off-street collection points have been constructed, and equipment designed and supplied. The whole problem is complicated, as I know from previous discussion on this very subject matter in the Select Committee. It needs much more study in depth than a brief debate in this Council, and I therefore move that this motion be referred to the appropriate Select Committee of which I have the honour to be Vice-Chairman, namely the Environmental Hygiene Select Committee.
HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL
Page 93 of 212
119
CHAIRMAN (in English):-This is a closure motion. Is it seconded before Mr. Lo has the floor?
MR. T. S. Lo (in English):-I am seconding Mr. FORSGATE'S motion to refer the matter to the relevant Select Committee in accordance with section 16(j) of Standing Order 20.
MR. H. L. Hu (in English):—Mr. Chairman, I rise to support the motion proposed by Dr. P. C. WONG and seconded by Mr. TSIN Sai-nin. The motion has given us a new idea and a new approach to the most pertinent question of keeping Hong Kong Clean. We all know that the conventional method to dispose of refuse is probably not very efficient. I welcome the change, and more so in welcoming a new project, Mr. Chairman. With these words, may I support the motion.
MR. T. S. Lo (in English):-I am sorry, on a point of order, Mr. Chairman, I seconded the motion which under Standing Orders could be moved during debate. Do I get it right that Mr. Hu also supports the motion, or he opposes it?
CHAIRMAN (in English):-May I explain the position to you. The original motion was put by Dr. WONG, seconded by Mr. TSIN. Then, under Standing Order 20 Section 16(j), Mr. FORSGATE moved a closure motion to refer to the Environmental Hygiene Select Committee, which was seconded by Mr. T. S. Lo. The floor is still open for any Member to speak on the original motion, or on the motion to refer, and the Chairman will only put the motion to refer after every Member has exercised his right to speak, either in support of or against the original motion, or in favour of the motion to refer. So, Dr. HUANG has the floor now.
DR. HUANG (in Cantonese):-Mr. Chairman, I admire Dr. WONG'S concern for refuse collection. Although he is not a member of the Environmental Hygiene Select Committee, he has made a very good motion. However, to be business-like, I regret that I have to object...