Page 70 of 115
137
HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL
normal course of actions would be taken against them. First, a warning will be issued, and if the warning is ignored, a second warning will be issued after 4 days and thereafter a third warning will be issued in 12 days. This will be followed by prosecution action. This is the standard approach. I would like to know if there are any suggestions or alternative approaches to be adopted.
MR. DANIEL WONG KWOK-TUNG (in Cantonese):—You said that of the 250 shops, 160 have got licenses for non-bottled drinks. However, I can tell you that many of them are selling something other than non-bottle drinks. They are operating like restaurants or dessert shops. I would like to know why they do not need to get a general restaurant or food factory license. Can you point out which of these premises have got general restaurant or food factory licenses? You have been saying that follow-up actions and warnings have been issued. I would like to know whether the Department has followed up on these cases with physical closure orders? I understand that none of these shops have been closed so far. So, is UC/USD not going to do anything until people are actually poisoned?
CHAIRMAN (in English):—This is not a question but rather a statement criticising the Department of not carrying out its duties.
MR. PAO PING-WING (in Cantonese):—I believe Prof. LEUNG's reply cannot entirely satisfy Mr. WONG because he has asked a very complex question and I don't think a number of prosecutions or routine approaches will make Mr. WONG happy. I would like to know if it would be possible to refer Mr. WONG's question back to the Public Health Select Committee for a thorough review to see whether special measures will need to be taken? Should we stop discussing this and let the Public Health Select Committee take this up?
PROFESSOR LEUNG PING-CHUNG (in Cantonese):—This can be arranged before anyone dies of food poisoning.
THE HONOURABLE MAN SAI-CHEONG (in Cantonese):—I also believe that this question should be taken up by the relevant select committee before coming to this open session. I am really surprised that Mr. Daniel WONG did not bring this up at the Public Health Select Committee. What I am worried about is that the situation is so serious that the reply given today cannot satisfy us.
It is noted that it is relatively easy to obtain a Chinese herbal tea permit but not so to get a restaurant license. In order to protect the health of the public, a restaurant license is more effective than a herbal tea shop permit.
I would like to know whether Kwai Ling Ko which members of public very often consume is one of the twelve approved items sold in herbal tea shops? Secondly, whenever a new herbal tea shop is opened, do USD Health Inspectors take the initiative to inspect their licence?
PROFESSOR LEUNG PING-CHUNG (in Cantonese):—Mr. MAN's first question is relatively easy to answer. Kwai Ling Ko is definitely one of the twelve approved items sold in the herbal tea shops.
Secondly, if you want to blame the Chairman of the Public Health Select Committee for giving too shallow an answer or blame the Department for not giving a comprehensive answer, I think the question itself should also take some of the blame because it hasn't indicated the seriousness of the situation. I have not consulted Mr. WONG who raised the question. From the question itself, I really have no way of knowing that the question is on the chain herbal tea shops that have become very popular these days. The question should be more specific and detailed if it wants an answer to this complex issue.
THE HONOURABLE MAN SAI-CHEONG (in Cantonese):—Let me elaborate more. As a Chinese herbal tea permit is very easy to obtain, some operators obtain a Chinese herbal tea permit but sell other food items instead. It seems that the Urban Council has not carried out its statutory responsibility properly.
My question is whether our Health Inspectors have done their job in checking new herbal tea shops to see if they are selling other food items in addition to herbal tea.
PROFESSOR LEUNG PING-CHUNG (in Cantonese):—I think I cannot answer the question. You pointed out a phenomenon i.e. an operator gets a Chinese herbal tea permit but sells other food items that are not included in a herbal tea permit. This is a very complex phenomenon and to deal with this, I am afraid the Public Health Select Committee would need a paper for detailed deliberation. We also need some time to deliberate on the paper and do some research. Members would probably have to make some site visits to get some first-hand information of the situation. I am quite ignorant about the issue and I need to get first-hand information through site visits. I cannot provide a satisfactory reply if the question is raised at this forum.
CHAIRMAN (in English):—I think in summary Mr. Daniel WONG and Councilors have raised a very complicated and important issue. At this stage, without further background information and without fully reviewing the situation, it would be difficult for us to discuss the issue. As Mr. PAO has suggested, I agree that the Public Health Select Committee should take up the issue with the Department, have a thorough review of the situation and have a paper for discussion in their Public Health Select Committee. We will have to leave the other questions to be answered at a later stage.
MOTION
MR. RONNIE WONG MAN-CHIU, CHAIRMAN OF THE RECREATION SELECT COMMITTEE, moved the following motion:—
'RESOLVED that the Public Health and Municipal Services (Public Pleasure Grounds) (Amendment of Fourth Schedule) (No. 7) Order 1994 be made under section 106 of the Public Health and Municipal Services Ordinance, Cap. 132.'
Page 70 of 115
HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL
MR. WONG said (in English):—As Chairman of the Recreation Select Committee, I rise on the motion standing in my name.
'RESOLVED that the Public Health and Municipal Services (Public Pleasure Grounds) (Amendment of Fourth Schedule) (No. 7) Order 1994 be made under section 106 of the Public Health and Municipal Services Ordinance, Cap. 132,'
The Purposes of the Order are to set aside Chai Wan Road Temporary Rest Garden, Comfort Terrace Rest Garden, Hoi Ning Street Temporary Sitting-out Area, Shek Pai Wan Road Amenity Plot, Western Park Indoor Games Hall and Fung Tak Park as public pleasure grounds and to delete Wong Huk Hang path Sitting-out Area, Lei Cheng Uk Swimming Pool Sitting-out Area No. 1 and Lung Cheung Road/Tai Po Road Garden from the Fourth Schedule.
I so move.
MR. CHIANG SAI-CHEONG, VICE-CHAIRMAN OF THE RECREATION SELECT COMMITTEE, seconded the motion (in Cantonese):—I second the motion.
The question was put.
The motion was carried unanimously.
CHAIRMAN (in English): This concludes the business of today's meeting. Council stands adjourned until Tuesday, 13 December 1994 at 2.30 p.m.
ADJOURNMENT—4.40 p.m.
Page 71 of 115
138
HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL
Page 71Page 71 of 115