Page 35 of 120
Page 35 of 120
38 HONG KONG URBAN COUNCILof its own workers, and it does not require a licence. After amendment of the relevant bylaws, factory canteens are required to be licensed and they can provide meals and drinks to workers employed in any factory in the building (but it is stipulated that it cannot cater for workers in other factory buildings). Apart from the requisite restrictions, factory canteens can be operated in the same way as a general restaurant.
I firmly believe that the measures which the Urban Council adopts to bring factory canteens under licensing control are in the simplest form. I also believe that canteen operators do not need large capital outlay to comply with the requirements. Existing factory canteens which are at present exempt from licensing will be given 6 months in which to apply for a licence. If owing to various reasons that the requirements cannot be complied with, a longer grace period will be granted to ensure that all hygiene requirements are met.
Mr. Chairman, I beg to move. If this motion is passed, the amended by-laws will be effective from 1 August this year.
MR. SHUM CHOI-SANG (in Cantonese):-Mr. Chairman, I second the motion.
DR. DENNY M. H. HUANG (in Cantonese): --Mr. Chairman, at the Standing Committee of the Whole Council, I had repeatedly objected to the fact that food canteens in factories must be licensed and I would like to reiterate and supplement the reasons for my objections and say that these reasons be recorded. I hope that the reasons I am about to put forward will have the support of my colleagues.
From the Standing Committee of the Whole Council and during the meeting of the Food Hygiene Select Committee, I gather that there are two reasons for the requirement for licensing. The first is, as Mr. CHOW has said, to safeguard public health and this is our statutory responsibility. As the only Member of this Council having received medical training, and having served in the Environmental Hygiene Select Committee for 14 years and in the Food Hygiene Select Committee for 5 years, I, of course, would not object to carrying out our statutory responsibility in safeguarding food hygiene, but I feel that in treating the matter of factory canteens, licensing is not the only or the best solution. In fact, as to the statutory duty of safeguarding public hygiene, our former Sanitary Board has already carried out this responsibility and there is no increase or decrease of this statutory power in any way. As to safeguarding public hygiene, and because workers contribute to our prosperity, we must look after their health. Is this the only reason? If we are to safeguard public health and ask that all factory canteens be licensed, do we mean that the various food premises would also have to be licensed? This would include Government canteens and include a lot of staff canteens in the large department stores, canteens of various sports associations and hundreds of canteens in schools, and those
HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL Page 35 of 120 39who eat in these premises should also have to be looked after by this Council. Then there are the canteens of hospitals and of the Prisons Department. In the premises that I have mentioned, there were cases of food poisoning. Food poisoning is not limited only to factories. The second point is that there is a certain canteen in a factory in which two cases of food poisoning have occurred in 4 years. Therefore, is it our statutory responsibility to exercise strict control and to issue a licence to prevent similar occurrences? First of all, I remember that during the Select Committee meeting, the person in charge of the hygiene in our department said that the real reason for the food poisoning was still under investigation, so whether that case of food poisoning related to the issue of a licence or otherwise was still unknown. Secondly, issuing a licence does not mean that we can thus prevent food poisoning. I remember that recently a large scale restaurant in Tsim Sha Tsui was the scene of two cases of food poisoning involving hundreds of people in one year and I believe that the issue of a licence does not guarantee that there would not be cases of food poisoning. In 1973, I was invited to visit the Greater London Council and I know that the opening of a restaurant in England does not necessitate the issue of a licence and this would include thousands of Chinese restaurants that Hong Kong people opened in England recently. Although there are differences between Hong Kong and U.K., does this not prove that the Greater London Council, while safeguarding public health as their statutory duty, would not carry out their responsibility as thoroughly as we are in Hong Kong? I remember that 7 or 8 years ago there was a case of food poisoning in a boarding school in Stanley and I was still the Vice-Chairman of the Food Hygiene Select Committee. At that time, we did not ask that all school canteens be issued with a licence, but what we did was to step up our education and inspection. All these years, there was not a second case of food poisoning from the same school.
Aside from the two reasons given above, there was a rumour and I believe that this could be the third reason. This rumour upset me very much because this was not the first case when this Council was fooled. In 1973 when Hong Kong was in the recession those high-ups asked that we carried out the Hawker Permitted Area Scheme which had proved impracticable and we openly objected but failed. Nowadays, the hawkers do not want to return to the factories. The traffic in 19 streets were blocked. The legal rights of the shops on both sides of the streets were being hindered and the residents on the streets were being inconvenienced as well. Because Hong Kong is a colonial system, we have thus been fortunate to avoid censor by law. Several years ago, those high-ups wanted us to do away with food caterers and so, as a result, factories and fast food shops benefited, but the blue collars and white collars would have to spend more money for lunches. Last week during a meeting with the factory owners and industrialists, the discussion was carried out as to the issue of licence and they said that 'well since those high-ups had decided, it was useless to object.' What those high-ups wanted is widely
Page 35 of f
Page 35Page 36
Page 36 of 120
40
HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL