Page 147 of 182
284
# HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL
## ADDRESS BY CHAIRMAN
CHAIRMAN (in English):-Ladies and Gentlemen, the meeting is called to order. The debate on the Statement of Aims for 1989–90 which is adjourned from Tuesday, the 10 of January will now resume. I now call on the first speaker, Mr. TONG Kam-biu.
MR. TONG KAM-BIU (in Cantonese):-Mr. Chairman, I have now served in this Council for six years. During the past few years, I, together with other colleagues, have actively and faithfully commented on various issues and solved problems for this Council and the people of Hong Kong. During the past few years, I have never worked at the front line in this Council. I was the Chairman of a Sub-Committee. But after the Sub-Committee was abolished, I had never been offered any opportunity to chair the meeting. Therefore, today I am very happy to be able to be the first speaker on this second day of the Annual Conventional Debate. I would like to thank whoever arranged me to be the first speaker today.
While we are having a debate on the Statement of Aims for the year 1989–90, the SAR Basic Law Drafting Committee 8th plenary session is just being held in Guangzhou for the purpose of formulating a Draft Basic Law after scrutinizing the (revised) 'Draft Basic Law for Solicitation of Opinions'. The draft will then be submitted to the National People's Congress of the Central Government for approval, prior to the second round of consultation and eventually become the 'supreme law code' that Hong Kong has to abide by for future legislation.
Lately, the most controversial issue about the political system of the 'draft' centres on the so-called 'Mainstream proposal' adopted by the Political Sub-group in November last year. Whether this proposal will be revised by the Drafting Committee at the plenary session is not yet known. But my own view is that this proposal is but one which seeks to annihilate democracy and to stifle public opinions. Neither does it meet the expectation of the majority of the people of Hong Kong. It, however, is a proposal that undermines our confidence, that works not to our advantage nor will it be in line with the long-term interests of China. Therefore, I agree completely that this plenary session should amend or reject this unreasonable proposal. At the same time, I advocate that a universal suffrage be held in Hong Kong to decide for ourselves our fate and to realize the commitment of Hong Kong ruled by Hong Kong People as stated in the Sino-British Joint Declaration.
When our Chairman moved the motion of the 'Annual Debate' on the day before yesterday, he mentioned that Hong Kong cannot have its industrial cake and eat it. I fully concur with him, but I also agree that the environmental improvement policy should be based on the principle of 'holding those who cause the pollution responsible for the consequences', that means, 'the polluter should be asked to remove the pollution'. By no means should we use the taxpayers' money to solve the pollution problems caused by the vested interests.
HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL
285
Hong Kong has been undergoing a rapid process of urbanization and industrialization in the past 30 years. The Government, in the absence of any ecological protection plan to cope with the situation, has all along adopted a non-interference policy towards industry, giving a free rein to the uncontrolled growth of the local industries but at the expense of our ecological well-being.
During these few years, the Government has been aware of the need for environmental protection and has formed the Environmental Protection Department to specially deal with the protection of the environment of Hong Kong, the preparation and execution of the relevant policies and ordinances.
In 1980, the Government enacted the Water Pollution Control Ordinance and in 1983 the Air Pollution Control Ordinance came into being when Tolo Harbour was named the first water quality control zone. In August 1988, the Hong Kong Island, including the area to the south of Lantau Island, was designated as the second water quality control zone. In June the same year, the Animal Wastes Control Scheme came into effect; in July, the Noise Pollution Control Ordinance was approved, and in December, the Environmental Protection Advisory Committee was formed. This year, it is also planned to construct the first Refuse Transfer Station of Hong Kong in Kowloon Bay, to build a chemical wastes Disposal Centre in Tsing Yi, to implement water quality control in Junk Bay and Port Shelter, and to form a Sewerage Branch to deal with the sewerage and trade effluents problems. It is expected that a 'White Paper' on pollution problems will be published in July.
The above-mentioned measures and policies signify that the Government is very concerned with our pollution problem. However, I am of the view that the Government has been using methods that can only get rid of the superficial symptoms of the diseases. For example, when there was a red-tide in Tolo Harbour, then the Government simply announced the inclusion of the Harbour as one of the water quality control zones. When the water quality of such beaches as Silver Mine Bay deteriorated, then the authorities announced their closure. Once the Government came to understand that one of the contributory factors of water pollution is the disposal of animal wastes, then it brought about legislation to impose a district-wide control on the raising of animals and poultry. As the Government is also aware that the marine fish-raising trade also contributes to the deterioration of water quality, it would certainly consider placing that trade under control. I support the Government's analysis that certain trades should be controlled by the introduction of a new law once they have been proved to constitute damage to our environment. But may I ask if we can really solve our pollution problem just by means of simply closing our beaches, controlling the marine fish and animals-raising trade? Can we guarantee that the pollution will not deteriorate? Are the Hong Kong super-polluters, the big industrialists, exempted from paying for the cost of the pollution?
In his address to the Legislative Council on 8 October 1986, the late Governor, Sir Edward YOUDE, pointed out 'the indiscriminate dumping of...
Page 147 of 182
Page 147 of 182
284
HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL
ADDRESS BY CHAIRMAN
CHAIRMAN (in English):-Ladies and Gentlemen, the meeting is called to order. The debate on the Statement of Aims for 1989–90 which is adjourned from Tuesday, the 10 of January will now resume. I now call on the first speaker,
Mr. TONG Kam-biu.
MR. TONG KAM-BIU (in Cantonese):-Mr. Chairman, I have now served in this Council for six years. During the past few years, I, together with other col- leagues, have actively and faithfully commented on various issues and solved problems for this Council and the people of Hong Kong. During the past few years, I have never worked at the front line in this Council. I was the Chairman of a Sub-Committee. But after the Sub-Committee was abolished, I had never been offered any opportunity to chair the meeting. Therefore, today I am very happy to be able to be the first speaker on this second day of the Annual Con- ventional Debate. I would like to thank whoever to arrange me to be the first speaker today.
While we are having a debate on the Statement of Aims for the year 1989–90, the SAR Basic Law Drafting Committee 8th plenary session is just being held in Guangzhou for the purpose of formulating a Draft Basic Law after scrutinizing the (revised) 'Draft Basic Law for Solicitation of Opinions'. The draft will then be submitted to the National People's Congress of the Central Government for approval, prior to the second the round of consultation and eventually become the 'supreme law code' that Hong Kong have to abide by for future legislation.
Lately the most controversial issue about the political system of the ‘draft' centres on the so-called 'Mainstream proposal' adopted by the Political Sub- group in November last year. Whether this proposal will be revised by the Drafting Committee at the plenary session is not yet known. But my own view is that this proposal is but one which seeks to annihilate democracy and to stifle the public opinions. Neither does it meet the expectation of the majority of the people of Hong Kong. It, however, is a proposal that undermines our con- fidence, that works not to our advantage nor will it be in line with the long term interests of China. Therefore, I agree completely that this plenary session should amend or reject this unreasonable proposal. At the same time, I advo- cate that a universal suffrage be held in Hong Kong to decide for ourselves our fate and to realize the commitment of Hong Kong ruled by Hong Kong People as stated in the Sino-British Joint Declaration.
When our Chairman moved the motion of the ‘Annual Debate' on the day before yesterday, he mentioned that Hong Kong cannot have its industrial cake and eat it. I fully concur with him but I also agree that the environmental im- provement policy should be based on the principle of 'holding those who cause the pollution responsible for the consequences', that means, 'the polluter should be asked to remove the pollution'. By no means should we use the tax payers' money to solve the pollution problems caused by the vested interests.
HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL
Page 147 of 182
285
Hong Kong has been undergoing a rapid process of urbanization an in- dustrialization in the past 30 years. The Government, in the absence of any ecological protection plan to cope with the situation, has all along adopted an non-interference policy towards industry, giving a free rein to the uncontrolled growth of the local industries but at the expense of our ecological well-being.
During these few years, the Government has been aware of the need of environmental protection and has formed the Environmental Protection De- partment to specially deal with the protection of the environment of Hong Kong, the preparation and execution of the relevant policies and ordinances.
In 1980, the Government enacted the Water Pollution Control Ordinance and in 1983 the Air Pollution Control Ordinance came into being when Tolo Harbour was named the first water quality control zone. In August 1988, the Hong Kong Island including the area to the south of Lantau Island was de- signated as the second water quality control zone. In June the same year, the Animal Wastes Control Scheme came into effect; in July the Noise Pollution Control Ordinance was approved and in December the Environmental Protec- tion Advisory Committee was formed. This year it is also planned to construct the first Refuse Transfer Station of Hong Kong in Kowloon Bay, to build a chemical wastes Disposal Centre in Tsing Yi, to implement water quality con- trol in Junk Bay and Port Shelter and to form a Sewerage Branch to deal with the sewerage and trade effluents problems. It is expected that a 'White Paper' on pollution problem will be published in July.
The above mentioned measures and policies signify that the Government is very concerned with our pollution problem. However, I am of the view that the Government has been using methods that can only get rid of the superficial symptoms of the diseases. For example, when there was red-tide in Tolo Har- bour, then the Government simply announced the inclusion of the Harbour as one of the water quality control zones. When the water quality of such beaches as Silver Mine Bay deteriorated, then the authorities announced their closure. Once the Government came to the understanding that one of the contributory factors of water pollution is the disposal of animal wastes, then it brought about a legislation to impose a district-wide control on the raising of animals and poultry. As the Government is also aware that the marine fish raising trade also contributes to the deterioration of water quality, it would certainly con- sider placing that trade under control. I support the Government's analysis that certain trades should be controlled by the introduction of a new law once they have been proved to constitute damage to our environment. But may I ask if we can really solve our pollution problem just by means of simply closing our beaches, controlling the marine fish and animals raising trade. Can we guarantee that the pollution will not determinate? Are the Hong Kong super- polluters, the big industrialists, exempted from paying for the cost of the pollution?
In his address to the Legislative Council on 8 October 1986, the late Governor, Sir Edward YOUDE, pointed out 'the indiscriminal dumping of
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.