Page 110 of 185
210
HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL
pitch-in to keep Hong Kong clean are on display at fast food venues nearby to remind all comers to contribute to the worthy cause of keeping Hong Kong clean.
To facilitate easy disposal of litter, large refuse drums are placed at convenient locations, particularly on Sundays and public holidays. The Department also deploys more hands for clean up purpose including more frequent removal of contents in the litter bins on such days.
For those who choose to ignore the law, the Department takes constant action against them. For the past six months in the vicinity of Statue Square, 270 prosecutions have been instituted against littering. In Statue Square alone, 95 prosecutions have been instituted during the same period. More concentrated efforts are being made to apprehend the offenders including the deployment of staff disguised as civilians for the easy detection of culprits among the crowds as well as by the use of radio communications.
MRS. CHOW CHEUNG WAI-PING (in English):—Mr. Chairman, is it possible to let these frequent visitors know the prosecutions we have made so as to have a deterrent effect.
DR. RONALD D. B. LEUNG (in English):—This message can be included in our Public Health Education as one of the contents in the Education.
MR. JOSEPH Y. S. CHAN (in Cantonese):—Mr. Chairman, in our vicinity of the footbridge quite near the Star Ferry and the Post Office, I have constantly got the smell of urine and I understand that many street sleepers there just obey the call of nature there and the passers-by have been enduring a great nuisance. It is unsightly as well. I am sure that they have to obey their call of nature there. Other than cleaning up the place, do we have other measures to deal with the problem, say for example, to provide some sort of container or to provide some sort of temporary lavatory to suit the need of the street-sleepers.
DR. RONALD D. B. LEUNG (in English):—I think that there is a new public toilet in the nearby area. If the street-sleepers determine not to use this facility, however near you put the containers they would not use the containers provided.
7.
MR. JOSEPH Y. S. CHAN asked the following question (in Cantonese):—May I ask whether it is an offence for a restaurant operator to serve his customers with broken crockery and if not, why not and if so what is the highest penalty for such an offence and what measures are being taken by the Department to check against these offensive practices?
MR. L. H. KWAN, CHAIRMAN OF THE FOOD HYGIENE SELECT COMMITTEE, replied as follows (in Cantonese):—This question concerns the use of broken crockery by restaurant operators. It asks whether such a practice is an offence in law, and if so, what the maximum penalty is, and what measures are being taken by the department to deal with such an offence.
HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL
211
The use of cracked or chipped utensils by restaurateurs in the service of food or in food preparation is an offence under By-law 6 of the Food Business (Urban Council) By-laws which states that any person who carries on a food business but fails in the course of such business to keep the utensils with which food comes into contact free from cracks and chippings commits an offence. The maximum penalty upon conviction is a fine of $5,000 plus 3 months imprisonment, and, where the offence is of a continuing nature, a maximum daily fine of $150 may also be imposed.
It is an on-going job of Departmental staff to check on such an irregularity during inspection of restaurants. Upon discovery, the licensee is usually given a health educational talk, followed by a warning which is duly recorded on the inspection record card kept on the premises. Prosecution is instituted in serious cases involving a large number of cracked or chipped utensils in use or where the previous warning has not been heeded.
In the past 12 months, out of 654 warnings given, only 9 restaurateurs were brought to the Court for contravention of the offence in question. The above statistics show that restaurant operators have responded well to health education and warnings. The average fine for such an offence ranges from $300 to $600 depending on the individual circumstances of the case such as the number of defective utensils found in use and the size of the premises in question.
MR. JOSEPH Y. S. CHAN (in Cantonese):—Mr. Chairman, the Chinese have a saying that people with defected mouth is in grave dislike of broken utensils. If prosecution is only made in serious cases, I don't think it is satisfactory because it is difficult to define how serious the case is. The broken crockery may hurt the user's mouth and sometimes bits of glass can be found within a cup. It is said that prosecution will only be made when a large number of cracked or chipped utensils is involved and may I know how large the number is before a prosecution will be instituted? Do you count each cracked or chipped utensils before you decide that the number is large enough? Generally, most restaurants use cracked or chipped utensils in one way or another. It is said to be satisfactory since only 654 warnings have been given. I don't think it is the case. I think some more can be done.
MR. L. H. KWAN (in Cantonese):—Mr. Chairman, regarding the definition for serious cases and actually Mr. CHAN just has now given us a good definition e.g. if the patron of a restaurant has had his mouth hurt or any part of his body hurt by cracked or chipped utensils that will be regarded as serious. On the other hand, as regards the number of cracked or chipped utensils which is large enough to warrant prosecution when our staff inspect the restaurants, they will count the number of cracked and chipped utensils and also take into consideration the percentage of cracked and chipped utensils out of the total number of the utensils used. The restaurant operators will be advised to use utensils in
Page 110
Page 111
Page 111 of 185