Page 67 of 126
114
HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL
MR. CHIANG SAI-CHEONG (in Cantonese):-Thank you, Mr. Chairman. My comments are similar to those of Mr. San Stephen WONG. Because many of my colleagues have explained the situation very clearly, I would like to talk about our experience in Vancouver and Singapore. As for the incineration plant at Burnaby, Vancouver, I would like to say that its characteristic is that it is not very big, but very effective. Everything is computerized. The RCVs are computerized, the gates are computerized and when the RCV reaches a certain point then the gate will be opened and the operation will start. The manpower involved is not very much and the electricity generated was supplied to the industrial buildings in the vicinity. And so the incinerations were an effective method to reduce wastes. As for Singapore, we also visited the incinerators there. The climate in Singapore is very much the same as ours. When we entered the plant, the odour was not very strong, the operation was again computerized, huge prongs were used to pick up the wastes. Of course no one would like to come into contact with refuse, but if refuse collection can be effectively managed by computers, then wastes can actually be classified and burnt and this will be of great help to the environment. I also noticed that no black smoke or dust were emitted from the chimneys, only white particles and steam were emitted, and the impact on natural air was minimal. And they indicated that over 98% of the substances could be burnt. In conclusion, as a long term strategy, the Council should try to cooperate with the Government and urge members of the public to reduce wastes and classify wastes so as to obtain a better result. It is good that this Council holds this motion debate today and I support the motion. Thank you.
MR. WONG SIU-YEE (in Cantonese): Mr. Chairman, with regard to formulation of policy we have to take into account developments on various factors and to adopt flexibility in order that we can be as near perfection as possible. The policy itself must incorporate as part of it, the provision of good services to the public. In 1989, the relevant departments came up with a White Paper on Waste Disposal and the formulation took some ten years and that to do with the creation or the installation of refuse transfer centres and things like that. Old incinerators should be replaced that is only good. But with advances in science and technology, our policy must be able to keep up with the time and to be reviewed regularly, otherwise good intentions may lead to nothing good. I have prepared some arguments with regard to the pros and cons of landfilling and incineration, but many of my colleagues took the words out of my mouth. Therefore, I will skip those parts. If we make use of modern incinerators and landfilling as a two-pronged approach, we will be able to achieve our aim. So it is hoped that the Government departments would come up with a review as soon as possible and not to hesitate as to whether past policies should be amended. Mr. Chairman, let me put forward one more proposal. When we ask the Government departments to come up with a review as soon as possible to see whether an environmental-friendly and cost effective incinerators of modern type should be built, I think it is also essential for us to come up with ways of collection of domestic waste that is environmental-friendly. The Urban Council should come up with an ad-hoc group to deal with that.
Page 67 of 126
HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL
Page 67 of 126
115
The policy has two aims. First, there should be a better way of collecting refuse. Second, we should encourage the public to protect the environment and when they dump refuse, they should ensure that the refuse can be handled properly. And that will complete our debate today. I support the motion, Mr. Chairman.
MR. JOSEPH Y. S. CHAN (in Cantonese):—Mr. Chairman, I would like to say a few words on the motion. First of all, in 1989 the Government formulated the policy of replacing incinerators by landfills. This unilateral decision was a wrong one in my opinion. Secondly, we should use modern incinerators as well as landfills together to treat wastes. Thirdly, apart from domestic wastes, we should at the same time pay attention to and treat commercial wastes. Hong Kong is a commercially prosperous society. In future if incinerators cannot accept commercial wastes, then it will be unfair. We can consider charging commercial enterprises for treating wastes. Now the formulation of waste disposal policy and the fee charging are not compatible with each other. We cannot interfere with the policy of collecting wastes. In Hong Kong, this strange phenomenon happens everywhere. Two different institutions formulate two different sets of policies. So it is just normal that they are incompatible. That is why we came up with the wrong decision in the past. Now the Environmental Protection Department did not take part in formulating waste disposal strategy. It did not take part in the recycling policy decision either, so we must think of how wastes can be classified. As regards the clearance of marine waste, I think it is inappropriate for the Marine Department to deal with it as it lacks the knowledge of environmental cleanliness. If the resources of the EPD can be concentrated in the Urban Council, then I believe that more effective policies can be formulated to maintain environmental hygiene in Hong Kong. Apart from supporting the motion that incinerators should be built by the Government, I am also of the opinion that we should have the right to make decisions on the construction of incinerators. So I suggest that the EPD should be done away with and its duty should be vested in this Council, that will be better. Thank you, I support the motion.
The question was put.
The motion was carried unanimously.
CHAIRMAN (in English):-I must thank members for their views and opinion expressed. This is indicative of a so searching, acknowledgeable, and in-depth research by our Councillors. To provide information to the Central Government to introduce new high-tech incinerators as a supplementary means for disposal of domestic wastes. Please note that members' views will be forwarded to the relevant branches and departments for consideration and I will invite the government representatives to respond to this debate at a future meeting of the Standing Committee of the whole Council.
Page 67 of 126