1986 — Page 107

Urban Council Proceedings 市政局議事錄 All AI Reviewed

Page 107 of 201

172

HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL

It was a most productive and rewarding visit, and I think we were all pretty exhausted.

PAPER

(Mr. MAN Sai-cheong arrived during the Chairman's address.)

The following paper was laid on the table:--

(1) Report to the Urban Council by the Director of Urban Services and Secretary, Urban Council, for the month of October 1986.

QUESTIONS

(Dr. Ronald D.B. LEUNG arrived at 2.34 p.m.)

1. MR. MARVIN CHEUNG KIN-TUNG asked the following question (in English):-- Please advise what system is in place to ensure that the Public Toilets in the Urban Council area are maintained in a clean and efficient state and in particular:-

(a) Who is responsible for cleaning the place, USD staff or outside contractors?

(b) Who is responsible for reporting damage to the facilities?

(c) Who is responsible for carrying out the actual repairs to the facilities?

(d) Who is responsible to supervise the work of the above persons?

Please also advise whether you consider the present system to be satisfactory and whether you consider the state of cleanliness and repairs of the public toilets in the Urban Council area in general to be acceptable.

DR. RONALD D. B. LEUNG, CHAIRMAN OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL HYGIENE SELECT COMMITTEE, replied as follows (in English):—This question is in two parts. The first part inquires about the present system for proper maintenance of Urban Council public toilets with particular reference to the responsibilities for cleaning, reporting damage, and carrying out the actual repairs to these facilities and supervision of this work. The second part asks whether this system works satisfactorily in achieving an acceptable state of cleanliness and state of repair in the public toilets.

The answer to the first part is that with the exception of Yau Ma Tei, Mong Kok and Sham Shui Po Districts, where public toilet cleaning duties are performed by private contractors, USD workmen are responsible for the cleaning of all UC public toilets. To ensure maintenance of a reasonable standard of cleanliness and proper repair to these public toilets, the Department has an inspection system which requires daily inspection by departmental supervisors of foremen and surprise checks by other senior supervisors and Health Inspectors to these facilities. USD staff are responsible for reporting any damage detected during their inspections to the Architectural Services Department which then arranges for the actual repair and maintenance work to be carried out by contract.

In brief, it is the duty of USD supervisory and management staff to supervise and direct the work of the departmental workmen and to monitor the performance of the private contractor. The same staff are also able to monitor the progress of repairs to report damages in all public toilets.

With regard to the second part of the question, the present system in general works satisfactorily in achieving an acceptable state of cleanliness and repairs in public toilets managed by the Council, although on some occasions prompt repairs to damage may not be always possible as the Architectural Services Department, which is also responsible for maintaining other government properties, has its own work priorities.

Whilst I say that the system is satisfactory, in the matter of the state of cleanliness this involves a subjective judgement on the part of the department's supervisors and Inspectors. By and large, I feel that the standard of cleanliness of our city's public toilets is generally good but in such matters there is always scope for improvement and the Environmental Hygiene Select Committee will be urging the department to step up the frequency of inspections by supervisors and Inspectors alike and impress on both the USD labour force and the contractors the need for high standards.

(The Hon. Hilton CHEONG-LEEN arrived at 2.36 p.m.)

2. MR. FAN KAM-PING asked the following question (in Cantonese):—Over the years, the Lady MacLehose Holiday Village has remained a popular resort among local citizens. Due to the great demand it has always been difficult for an applicant to be allocated a bungalow. Moreover, the holiday village has been widely used as a venue for various activities organized by the Recreation, Amenities and Sports Offices of the Urban Services Department, local bodies as well as voluntary organizations. However, the Recreation, Amenities and Sports Offices enjoy no privilege in using the holiday village, since the facility is now put under the management of the Regional Services Department.

I understand that a large portion of the local population lives in the urban area, while there are on H.K. island itself many scenic sites where resorts like the Lady MacLehose Holiday Village or the Po Leung Kuk Pak Tam Chung Camp can be built. In view of these, I would like to ask whether the Council would consider building its own holiday village on suitable U.C. sites? Or should costs be too great, can the facility be converted from barracks in the U.C. area which will soon be handed over to the government?

HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL

173

Page 107 of 201

Edit History

2026-05-15 15:36:40 · NVIDIA / meta/llama-4-maverick-17b-128e-instruct
Live
View comparison
AI Proofread
Page 107 of 201 172 HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL It was a most productive and rewarding visit, and I think we were all pretty exhausted. PAPER (Mr. MAN Sai-cheong arrived during the Chairman's address.) The following paper was laid on the table:-- (1) Report to the Urban Council by the Director of Urban Services and Secretary, Urban Council, for the month of October 1986. QUESTIONS (Dr. Ronald D.B. LEUNG arrived at 2.34 p.m.) 1. MR. MARVIN CHEUNG KIN-TUNG asked the following question (in English):-- Please advise what system is in place to ensure that the Public Toilets in the Urban Council area are maintained in a clean and efficient state and in particular:- (a) Who is responsible for cleaning the place, USD staff or outside contractors? (b) Who is responsible for reporting damage to the facilities? (c) Who is responsible for carrying out the actual repairs to the facilities? (d) Who is responsible to supervise the work of the above persons? Please also advise whether you consider the present system to be satisfactory and whether you consider the state of cleanliness and repairs of the public toilets in the Urban Council area in general to be acceptable. DR. RONALD D. B. LEUNG, CHAIRMAN OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL HYGIENE SELECT COMMITTEE, replied as follows (in English):—This question is in two parts. The first part inquires about the present system for proper maintenance of Urban Council public toilets with particular reference to the responsibilities for cleaning, reporting damage, and carrying out the actual repairs to these facilities and supervision of this work. The second part asks whether this system works satisfactorily in achieving an acceptable state of cleanliness and state of repair in the public toilets. The answer to the first part is that with the exception of Yau Ma Tei, Mong Kok and Sham Shui Po Districts, where public toilet cleaning duties are performed by private contractors, USD workmen are responsible for the cleaning of all UC public toilets. To ensure maintenance of a reasonable standard of cleanliness and proper repair to these public toilets, the Department has an inspection system which requires daily inspection by departmental supervisors of foremen and surprise checks by other senior supervisors and Health Inspectors to these facilities. USD staff are responsible for reporting any damage detected during their inspections to the Architectural Services Department which then arranges for the actual repair and maintenance work to be carried out by contract. In brief, it is the duty of USD supervisory and management staff to supervise and direct the work of the departmental workmen and to monitor the performance of the private contractor. The same staff are also able to monitor the progress of repairs to report damages in all public toilets. With regard to the second part of the question, the present system in general works satisfactorily in achieving an acceptable state of cleanliness and repairs in public toilets managed by the Council, although on some occasions prompt repairs to damage may not be always possible as the Architectural Services Department, which is also responsible for maintaining other government properties, has its own work priorities. Whilst I say that the system is satisfactory, in the matter of the state of cleanliness this involves a subjective judgement on the part of the department's supervisors and Inspectors. By and large, I feel that the standard of cleanliness of our city's public toilets is generally good but in such matters there is always scope for improvement and the Environmental Hygiene Select Committee will be urging the department to step up the frequency of inspections by supervisors and Inspectors alike and impress on both the USD labour force and the contractors the need for high standards. (The Hon. Hilton CHEONG-LEEN arrived at 2.36 p.m.) 2. MR. FAN KAM-PING asked the following question (in Cantonese):—Over the years, the Lady MacLehose Holiday Village has remained a popular resort among local citizens. Due to the great demand it has always been difficult for an applicant to be allocated a bungalow. Moreover, the holiday village has been widely used as a venue for various activities organized by the Recreation, Amenities and Sports Offices of the Urban Services Department, local bodies as well as voluntary organizations. However, the Recreation, Amenities and Sports Offices enjoy no privilege in using the holiday village, since the facility is now put under the management of the Regional Services Department. I understand that a large portion of the local population lives in the urban area, while there are on H.K. island itself many scenic sites where resorts like the Lady MacLehose Holiday Village or the Po Leung Kuk Pak Tam Chung Camp can be built. In view of these, I would like to ask whether the Council would consider building its own holiday village on suitable U.C. sites? Or should costs be too great, can the facility be converted from barracks in the U.C. area which will soon be handed over to the government? HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL 173 Page 107 of 201
Baseline (Original)
Page 107 of 201 172 HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL It was a most productive and rewarding visit, and I think we were all pretty exhausted. PAPER (Mr. MAN Sai-cheong arrived during the Chairman's address.) The following paper was laid on the table:-- (1) Report to the Urban Council by the Director of Urban Services and Secretary, Urban Council, for the month of October 1986. QUESTIONS (Dr. Ronald D.B. LEUNG arrived at 2.34 p.m.) 1. MR. MARVIN CHEUNG KIN-TUNG asked the following question (in English):-- Please advise what system is in place to ensure that the Public Toilets in the Urban Council area are maintained in a clean and efficient state and in particular:- (a) Who is responsible for cleaning the place, USD staff or outside contractors? (b) Who is responsible for reporting damage to the facilities? (c) Who is responsible for carrying out the actual repairs to the facilities? (d) Who is responsible to supervise the work of the above persons? Please also advise whether you consider the present system to be satisfactory and whether you consider the state of cleanliness and repairs of the public toilets in the Urban Council ares in general to be acceptable. DR. RONALD D. B. LEUNG, CHAIRMAN OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL HYGIENE SELECT COMMITTEE, replied as follows (in English):—This question is in two parts. The first part inquires about the present system for proper maintenance of Urban Council public toilets with particular reference to the responsibilities for cleaning, reporting damage, and carrying out the actual repairs to these facilities and supervision of this work. The second part asks whether this system works satisfactorily in achieving an acceptable state of cleanliness and state of repair in the public toilets. The answer to the first part is that with the exception of Yau Ma Tei, Mong Kok and Sham Shui Po Districts, where public toilet cleaning duties are performed by private contractor, USD workmen are responsible for the cleaning of all UC public toilets. To ensure maintenance of a reasonable standard of cleanliness and proper repair to these public toilets, the Department has an inspection system which requires daily inspection by departmental HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL Page 107 of 201 173 supervisors of foremen and surprise checks by other senior supervisors and Health Inspectors to these facilities. USD staff are responsible for reporting any damage detected during their inspections to the Architectural Services Department which then arranges for the actual repair and maintenance work to be carried out by contract. In brief, it is the duty of USD supervisory and management staff to supervise and direct the work of the departmental woekmen and to monitor the per- formance of the private contractor. The same staff are also able to monitor the progress of repairs to report damages in all public toilets. With regard to the second part of the question, the present system in general works satisfactorily in achieving and acceptable state of cleanliness and repairs in public toilets managed by the Council, although on some occasions prompt repairs to damage may not be always possible as the Architectural Services Department, which is also responsible for maintaining other government properties, has its own work priorities. Whilst I say that the system is satisfactory, in the matter of the state of cleanliness this involves a subjective judgement on the part of the department's supervisors and Inspectors. By and large, I feel that standard of cleanliness of our city's public toilets is generally good but in such matters there is always scope for improvement and the Environmental Hygiene Select Committee will be urging the department to step up the frequency of inspections by supervisors and Inspectors alike and impress on both the USD labour force and the contractors the need for high standards. (The Hon. Hilton CHEONG-LEEN arrived at 2.36 p.m.) 2. MR. FAN KAM-PING asked the following question (in Cantonese):—Over the years, the Lady MacLehose Holiday Village has remained a popular resort among local citizens. Due to the great demand it has always been difficult for an applicant to be allocated a bungalow. Moreover, the holiday village has been widely used as a venue for various activities organized by the Recreation, Amenities and Sports Offices of the Urban Services Department, local bodies as well as voluntary organizations. However, the Recreation, Amenities and Sports Offices enjoy no privilege in using the holiday village, since the facility is now put under the management of the Regional Services Department. I understand that of the local population lives in the urban area, while there are on H.K. island itself many scenic sites where resorts like the Lady MacLehose Holiday Village or the Po Leung Kuk Pak Tam Chung Camp can be built. In view of these, I would like to ask whether the Council would consider building its own holiday village on suitable U.C. sites? Or should costs be too great, can the facility be converted from barracks in the U.C. area which will soon be handed over to the government?
2026-05-15 15:36:40 · Baseline
View content

Page 107 of 201

172

HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL

It was a most productive and rewarding visit, and I think we were all pretty

exhausted.

PAPER

(Mr. MAN Sai-cheong arrived during the Chairman's address.)

The following paper was laid on the table:--

(1) Report to the Urban Council by the Director of Urban Services and

Secretary, Urban Council, for the month of October 1986.

QUESTIONS

(Dr. Ronald D.B. LEUNG arrived at 2.34 p.m.)

1. MR. MARVIN CHEUNG KIN-TUNG asked the following question (in English):-- Please advise what system is in place to ensure that the Public Toilets in the Urban Council area are maintained in a clean and efficient state and in particular:-

(a) Who is responsible for cleaning the place, USD staff or outside contractors? (b) Who is responsible for reporting damage to the facilities?

(c) Who is responsible for carrying out the actual repairs to the facilities? (d) Who is responsible to supervise the work of the above persons?

Please also advise whether you consider the present system to be satisfactory and whether you consider the state of cleanliness and repairs of the public toilets in the Urban Council ares in general to be acceptable.

DR. RONALD D. B. LEUNG, CHAIRMAN OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL HYGIENE SELECT COMMITTEE, replied as follows (in English):—This question is in two parts. The first part inquires about the present system for proper maintenance of Urban Council public toilets with particular reference to the responsibilities for cleaning, reporting damage, and carrying out the actual repairs to these facilities and supervision of this work. The second part asks whether this system works satisfactorily in achieving an acceptable state of cleanliness and state of repair in the public toilets.

The answer to the first part is that with the exception of Yau Ma Tei, Mong Kok and Sham Shui Po Districts, where public toilet cleaning duties are performed by private contractor, USD workmen are responsible for the cleaning of all UC public toilets. To ensure maintenance of a reasonable standard of cleanliness and proper repair to these public toilets, the Department has an inspection system which requires daily inspection by departmental

HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL

Page 107 of 201

173

supervisors of foremen and surprise checks by other senior supervisors and Health Inspectors to these facilities. USD staff are responsible for reporting any damage detected during their inspections to the Architectural Services Department which then arranges for the actual repair and maintenance work to be carried out by contract.

In brief, it is the duty of USD supervisory and management staff to supervise and direct the work of the departmental woekmen and to monitor the per- formance of the private contractor. The same staff are also able to monitor the progress of repairs to report damages in all public toilets.

With regard to the second part of the question, the present system in general works satisfactorily in achieving and acceptable state of cleanliness and repairs in public toilets managed by the Council, although on some occasions prompt repairs to damage may not be always possible as the Architectural Services Department, which is also responsible for maintaining other government properties, has its own work priorities.

Whilst I say that the system is satisfactory, in the matter of the state of cleanliness this involves a subjective judgement on the part of the department's supervisors and Inspectors. By and large, I feel that standard of cleanliness of our city's public toilets is generally good but in such matters there is always scope for improvement and the Environmental Hygiene Select Committee will be urging the department to step up the frequency of inspections by supervisors and Inspectors alike and impress on both the USD labour force and the contractors the need for high standards.

(The Hon. Hilton CHEONG-LEEN arrived at 2.36 p.m.)

2. MR. FAN KAM-PING asked the following question (in Cantonese):—Over the years, the Lady MacLehose Holiday Village has remained a popular resort among local citizens. Due to the great demand it has always been difficult for an applicant to be allocated a bungalow. Moreover, the holiday village has been widely used as a venue for various activities organized by the Recreation, Amenities and Sports Offices of the Urban Services Department, local bodies as well as voluntary organizations. However, the Recreation, Amenities and Sports Offices enjoy no privilege in using the holiday village, since the facility is now put under the management of the Regional Services Department.

I understand that of the local population lives in the urban area, while there are on H.K. island itself many scenic sites where resorts like the Lady MacLehose Holiday Village or the Po Leung Kuk Pak Tam Chung Camp can be built. In view of these, I would like to ask whether the Council would consider building its own holiday village on suitable U.C. sites? Or should costs be too great, can the facility be converted from barracks in the U.C. area which will soon be handed over to the government?

Comments

Approved members can add comments, bookmarks, and private notes.

No comments yet.

Private Research Note

Private notes are available after approval.