19 July 1989
一九八九年七月十九日
110
HONG KONG LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL
香港立法局
amendments, the Administration will be more decisive than the overall tone of the White Paper.
Let me just cite one example. In the "Planning against Pollution" chapter and I quote, "In order to improve the statutory basis for planning against pollution, it is the Government's intention to include, among the proposals that are being put forward in the current review of the Town Planning Ordinance, certain important provisions that relate to environmental planning Intention is simply too weak and vague. The Administration must not be afraid to make definite commitments in controversial and difficult areas or I can guarantee we will be wasting billions of the taxpayers' money.
TR
On the proposed administrative framework, I cannot but feel that the future role of the Environmental Protection Department (EPD) would seem to be too subservient. I hope my impression is wrong because with the high calibre professionals we have in that department, it would be a real shame if their expertise will not be fully utilized as a result of the reorganisation. For example, some of the major projects, such as the new airport, will have major environmental implications. I trust there will be a proper mechanism for the EPD to have a strong voice in framing these major project plans.
On funding, the $20 billion earmarked, on first impression, may appear to be a substantial sum. Further analysis, however, indicates that this may not be sufficient over a 10-year period if we are really to correct the situation. As such, I must urge the Government not to let the turmoil in China or a temporary economic slowdown unduly affect the commitment made on the spending programmes. We must view having a cleaner, healthier and safer environment as one of the key elements in maintaining long-term confidence in Hong Kong.
On enforcement and compliance, we really must get tough. It is useless to "encourage" compliance because it simply would not work. The Government's "hands off" approach has worked well for Hong Kong in many other ways but this approach should not be adopted in our anti-pollution drive. We are running out of time; we simply cannot afford reliance on friendly persuasion. The industralists must be made to understand that investment in clean technology will be cheaper long term rather than paying "penalties" in the future in the form of buildings requiring more frequent maintenance, in higher medical costs for the staff and a whole string of other hidden costs. I am glad to note that specific changes such as removal of exemptions and the allowance of a 30% increase in discharge over and above the amount discharged at the time the controls in a particular Water Control Zone are implemented will be
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.