Page 134 of 654
HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL
137
He said (in Cantonese):--Mr. Chairman, to save time, I won't read out the wording of the motion. Overall, the spirit should be for the Council to conduct a survey no matter how we start to go about waste reduction. We can choose ten districts and make an analysis of the waste there. The same is being done in Australia and other places. They all take this approach to analyse waste and look into district characteristics. I should think waste of Central and Western, Mong Kok or Yau Tsim Mong are of different compositions. I think such information will be helpful to our future work. With this database set up, we have something to base on when we arrange our work or cooperate with central government in implementing the reduction plan.
My second point concerns the collection of public opinion. The Chairman just said we could ask people how they felt about incinerators in a questionnaire survey, or about waste reduction. I think the survey will lay a foundation for our future work. I hope the idea meets with your approval.
MR. DANIEL TO BOON-MAN (in Cantonese):—Mr. Chairman, I second the motion.
Mr. Albert Lai Wing-lin (in Cantonese):—Mr. Chairman, policies based on survey results are always better. When I first read this motion, I conducted a survey on my own and asked 30 primary and secondary schools for information. Only 10% of the primary schools joined the waste paper recovery programme which is very simple. Half of the secondary schools were participating. When I asked them for reasons of not joining, they said they had joined some time before but found there was not enough space to store the recovered waste paper. I then told them that the Urban Council would move a motion on sorting waste. They responded that finding space to store waste paper was already difficult, not to speak of space for waste sorted into different categories. As to the reason more secondary schools are participating in the waste paper recovery programme, I have found out that they have more space and it is possible to mark out space for waste storage.
I did not survey the housing estates, but I made a survey in about 30 private buildings and found none of them with a waste recovery drive. They came up with a counter proposal too. Regarding affirming the merits of recovery, they thought it would work if the Government could provide storage space free of charge. Those people who could allocate space for storage of waste thought government should subsidise the exercise. This has nothing to do with cost effectiveness. They would like government subsidy to finance the hiring of a worker specially responsible for recovering waste.
Therefore, if the Council is serious about implementing a recovery programme, first of all, we must actively pursue with the Government for the allocation of space to store waste waiting to be recovered. Also, we have to subsidise funds for the exercise. Cost effectiveness should not be the concern.
Page 134 of 654
Page 134 of 654
Page 134 of 654