TNAG-1858-FCO40-2633-Legislative-Council-of-Hong-Kong-memoranda-and-minutes-of-me-1989 — Page 224

HONG KONG LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL

香港立法局

19 July 1989

一九八九年七月十九日

111

incorporated into an amended Ordinance in 1990. We need to take more similar specific actions.

Finally, on environmental education, I am glad to see the wide-ranging programmes planned or proposed across the community and at all levels. This is a vital seeding programme for the long pull.

One comment I have relates to the publicity campaign. The sum of $400,000 allocated for a general publicity campaign in 1989-90 is totally inadequate. Either we spend say $5 million or we should save the $400,000. Any public relations or advertising professional would be able to substantiate that spending $400,000 would be like throwing the money into our polluted harbour. I therefore strongly urge the Administration to re-evaluate this particular item of expenditure we must be able to come up with a more

meaningful figure.

In conclusion, I would like to take this opportunity to call on all of us to "pitch in" and make Hong Kong an even better place to work and live in.

With these remarks, Sir, I support the motion.

周美德議員致辭:主席先生,我相信每個人收到這份白皮書後,都會同意它的題目;對抗污染莫 遲疑。縱然我們過去在環保問題上未能夠先知先覺,我們起碼要後知後覺,否則,不知不覺間我 們便成為秦檜的同路人,甚至比他更加實質地遺臭萬年。主席先生,這種講法一點也不誇張,試 想想,今天我們家人或傭人又從街市帶回了多少個不能分解的膠袋回家?

白皮書流水帳地列出了政府未來對抗廢物、污水、空氣及噪音污染的方法,這些技術問題我們 能夠回應的地方不多。但以固體廢物的處理而言,白皮書只是重覆着香港廢物的處理草擬計劃的 諮詢。文件的內容,偏重對堆填區的使用。一個更根本的可能解決方法:廢物循環再用,卻未受 推舉。正如白皮書所言,三個龐大的堆填區的壽命,估計亦只有15至20年,始終並非長遠之 計。加上一些不可分解的物質長期埋在地下,造成的生態損害不容忽視。除非政府效法意大利, 在九一年全面禁止生産不可分解的塑膠袋,否則廢物再生始是善法。雖然近日在沙田舉行的收回 膠袋運動失敗,政府仍應全面深入探討這種策略。起碼我便不能同意白皮書所言,政府不宜直接 參與這工作。假如這計劃可行而能減輕堆填區的壓力,帶來社會效益,即使政府要對其補貼,納 稅人仍會樂於接受。

由此而帶出另一個問題,環境教育。今日政府對環境保護的宣傳,只止於勸喻人們將垃圾拋入 垃圾箱,這只是保護了我們看得見的環境,方便了當局收集廢物、污水略經壓縮一、二級處理, 堆積到我們看不見的地方,排出到離岸更遠的大海。難道真是「看不見為乾淨」?政府在宣傳教 育上,何不鼓勵人們減少製造垃圾,減少使用膠袋,將垃圾分類,方便回收,試想想,一盒送與 朋友的曲奇,便需要膠袋內一張花紙、花紙內一個紙盒,紙盒內一個鐵盒、鐵盒內還有膠墊,這