Page 90 of 185
170
HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL
concerns the
MR. TONG KAM-BIU, VICE-CHAIRMAN OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL HYGIENE SELECT COMMITTEE, replied as follows (in Cantonese): This question feasibility of making it compulsory for those who are responsible for delivering refuse to the refuse collection points to put the refuse in plastic bags or suitable containers.
At present, there is no legislation to require the public to put their refuse in plastic bags when delivering such to the refuse collection points. This does not mean, however, that there is no control over the manner in which refuse should be delivered. Under Bylaw 12 of the Public Cleansing and Prevention of Nuisances (Urban Council) By-laws, the public are required to put refuse in suitable containers in such a manner as to prevent the access of flies and the spillage of any of the contents whilst being conveyed in the street or in any public place, subject to a maximum fine of $2,500 for a first conviction or $5,000 for a second or subsequent conviction in case these requirements are not observed. In the last six months, there were 20 prosecutions for contravention of this bylaw. The average fine was $300.
There has been in recent years, a public awareness of the need to use plastic refuse bags. Some District Boards, Wan Chai in particular, are keen to promote such use and the Council has been helping such promotion through the distribution of leaflets, roadside broadcast by broadcasting vans and providing manpower in assessing the end results which proved to be encouraging.
The Department examined, a few years ago, the feasibility of statutorily requiring the public to use plastic bags for the disposal of refuse. Having considered the drawbacks and far-reaching implications in administering and enforcing any such legislation, however, this issue was not pursued any further. Among the main drawbacks, there is the question of getting the money to get this done. A rough estimate is that if each and every household in the Urban Council area is to have a standard refuse bag for the disposal of refuse each day, the cost would be $247M per annum (966,900 (households) × $0.7 (per bag) × 365 (days)). If the households are to provide their own bags, families in the lower income bracket would bear an additional financial burden. If the private refuse collectors, who provide the collection service for gain, are to provide the plastic bags, then they would certainly recover these costs from the householders. Moreover, the carrying capacity of the refuse collection vehicles would be reduced by 12% (according to experience in UK). Thus the Council would have to spend more in keeping a larger fleet of RCVs, paying more for maintenance and repair, and taking up larger garaging facilities. The bags would pose problems to the disposal authorities too. They lower the combustion efficiency of the gratings in the incinerators, and since they do not decompose readily in the landfills, more land (which is in short supply) will be required for refuse disposal. Notwithstanding this, there is a growing trend for the public to use shopping bags to wrap up their refuse prior to disposal. This certainly helps to prevent nuisance arising from refuse collection activities.
HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL
Page 90 of 185
171
Recently, in the territory-wide KHKC Campaign, prominent supermarkets have responded to the Council's request to print the KHKC message on their plastic shopping bags to urge the public to 'pitch in' with such bags. The Council also staged a 'Keep Your Venue Clean Campaign', notably in the Mid-Autumn Lantern Carnivals held at Victoria Park where participants were asked to pick up and put litter in plastic bags in exchange for prize and raffle tickets donated by private enterprises. USD staff too, whenever practicable, use plastic bags for refuse collection purposes. Plastic bags are widely used as liners to litter containers on streets, in parks, playgrounds, beaches and the like to encourage the public to use plastic refuse bags.
The law as it stands gives the public the option to choose either a plastic bag or a suitable container so long as the refuse is covered and no nuisance is caused by spillage. It is believed that the public should continue to be given this option.
3. MR. WALTER M. SULKE asked the following question (in English):— Although we receive a considerable number of complaints about dripping air conditioners, I believe that is just the tip of the iceberg. Many passers-by who get wet are not aware that they can complain and that a dripping air conditioner is against the law. In my view it is not too early to prepare for next year and I would like to know whether we cannot institute a large scale publicity campaign in the Spring of next year to publicize the complaints procedure and remind everyone to get their air conditioners checked so that they will not break the law?
MR. TONG KAM-BIU, VICE-CHAIRMAN OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL HYGIENE SELECT COMMITTEE, replied as follows (in Cantonese):-This question concerns publicity against the nuisance caused by dripping of water from air-conditioners. It asks whether a large scale publicity campaign can be launched next spring to publicize the complaint procedure and to remind the public to check their air-conditioners to avoid breaching the law.
The short answer to the question is 'yes'. In July this year, the Department launched a publicity campaign against nuisance caused by air-conditioners and some 32,000 pamphlets were distributed. Intensive enforcement then followed resulting in the issue of 596 nuisance notices. No prosecution was taken out as the statutory notices were all complied with. The pamphlets were printed with artwork to explain that dripping of water from air-conditioners was an offence liable to a maximum fine of $10,000. The pamphlets also advised the public of the simple way to lodge the complaint by just dialing the hotline number 5-8105599. It also urged the public to check and get their air-conditioners in proper order to avoid breaching the law.
For the coming year, the Department will launch a similar publicity campaign in April-May. In addition to the distribution of pamphlets, greater emphasis will be placed in the dissemination of the message through the mass media. The campaign will, as in this year, be followed by intensive enforcement action.
Page 90
Page 91
Page 91 of 185
Page 90 of 185
170
HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL
concerns the
MR. TONG KAM-BIU, VICE-CHAIRMAN OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL HYGIENE SELECT COMMITTEE, replied as follows (in Cantonese): This question feasibility of making it compulsory for those who are responsible for delivering refuse to the refuse collection points to put the refuse in plastic bags or suitable containers.
At present, there is no legislation to require the public to put their refuse in plastic bags when delivering such to the refuse collection points. This does not mean, however, that there is no control over the manner in which refuse should be delivered. Under Bylaw 12 of the Public Cleansing and Prevention of Nuisances (Urban Council) By-laws, the public are required to put refuse in suitable containers in such a manner as to prevent the access of flies and the spillage of any of the contents whilst being conveyed in the street or in any public place, subject to a maximum fine of $2,500 for a first conviction or $5,000 for a second or subsequent conviction in case these requirements are not observed. In the last six months, there were 20 prosecutions for contravention of this bylaw. The average fine was $300.
There has been in recent years, a public awareness of the need to use plastic refuse bags. Some District Boards, Wan Chai in particular, are keen to promote such use and the Council has been helping such promotion through the distribution of leaflets, roadside broadcast by broadcasting vans and providing manpower in assessing the end results which proved to be encouraging.
The Department examined, a few years ago, the feasibility of statutorily requiring the public to use plastic bags for the disposal of refuse. Having considered the drawbacks and far-reaching implications in administering and enforcing any such legislation, however, this issue was not pursued any further. Among the main drawbacks, there is the question of getting the money to get this done. A rough estimate is that if each and every household in the Urban Council area is to have a standard refuse bag for the disposal of refuse each day, the cost would be $247M per annum (966 900 (households) × $0.7 (per bag) × 365 (days)). If the households are to provide their own bags, families in the lower income bracket would bear an additional financial burden. If the private refuse collectors, who provide the collection service for gain, are to provide the plastic bags, then they would certainly recover these costs from the householders. Moreover, the carrying capacity of the refuse collection vehicles would be reduced by 12% (according to experience in UK). Thus the Council would have to spend more in keeping a larger fleet of RCVs, paying more for maintenance and repair, and taking up larger garaging facilities. The bags would pose problems to the disposal authorities too. They lower the combustion efficiency of the gratings in the incinerators, and since they do not decompose readily in the landfills, more land (which is in short supply) will be required for refuse disposal. Notwithstanding this, there is a growing trend for the public to use shopping bags to wrap up their refuse prior to disposal. This certainly helps to prevent nuisance arising from refuse collection activities.
HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL
Page 90 of 185
171
Recently, in the territory-wide KHKC Campaign, prominent supermarkets have responded to the Council's request to print the KHKC message on their plastic shopping bags to urge the public to 'pitch in' with such bags. The Council also staged a 'Keep Your Venue Clean Campaign', notably in the Mid-Autumn Lantern Carnivals held at Victoria Park where participants were asked to pick up and put litter in plastic bags in exchange for prize and raffle tickets donated by private enterprises. USD staff too, whenever practicable, use plastic bags for refuse collection purposes. Plastic bags are widely used as liners to litter containers on streets, in parks, playgrounds, beaches and the like to encourage the public to use plastic refuse bags.
The law as it stands gives the public the option to choose either a plastic bag or a suitable container so long as the refuse is covered and no nuisance is caused by spillage. It is believed that the public should continue to be given this option.
3. MR. WALTER M. SULKE asked the following question (in Enlgish):— Although we receive a considerable number of complaints about dripping air conditioners, I believe that is just the tip of the iceberg. Many passers-by who get wet are not aware that they can complain and that a dripping air conditioner is against the law. In my view it is not too early to prepare for next year and I would like to know whether we cannot institute a large scale publicity campaign in the Spring of next year to publicize the complaints procedure and remind everyone to get their air conditioners checked so that they will not break the law?
MR. TONG KAM-BIU, VICE-CHAIRMAN OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL HYGIENE SELECT COMMITTEE, replied as follows (in Cantonese):-This question concerns publicity against the nuisance caused by dripping of water from air-conditioners. It asks whether a large scale publicity campaign can be launched next spring to publicize the complaint procedure and to remind the public to check their air-conditioners to avoid breaching the law.
The short answer to the question is 'yes'. In July this year, the Department launched a publicity campaign against nuisance caused by air-conditioners and some 32 000 pamphlets were distributed. Intensive enforcement then followed resulting in the issue of 596 nuisance notices. No prosecution was taken out as the statutory notices were all complied with. The pamphlets were printed with artwork to explain that dripping of water from air-conditioners was an offence liable to a maximum fine of $10,000. The pamphlets also advised the public of the simple way to lodge the complaint by just dialing the hotline number 5-8105599. It also urged the public to check and get their air-conditioners in proper order to avoid breaching the law.
For the coming year, the Department will launch a similar publicity campaign in April-May. In addition to the distribution of pamphlets, greater emphasis will be placed in the dissemination of the message through the mass media. The campaign will, as in this year, be followed by intensive enforcement action.
Page 90Page 91
Page 91 of 185
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.