Page 49 of 182
90
HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL
On the basis of what the Department is doing at present in the field of mosquito control, it is believed that the present measures are adequate and efficient. Should the need arise, the Department will seek additional staff with a view to stepping up its control situation.
2. MR. FREDERICK K. K. FUNG asked the following question (in Cantonese):—About 18 months ago, I questioned the clearance of junk on the roadside and pavement of Apliu Street, which seriously affected the traffic and pedestrians. At that time, the Council's reply was that it would take enforcement action. However, after 18 months, the situation of that street has become even worse. I would like to know whether it is due to: (1) inactive enforcement by the Department, (2) insufficient manpower, (3) the Department not being given adequate and appropriate authority to tackle this problem under the existing legislation or (4) any other reasons. I would also like to know whether the Department has any plan to deal with such a great deal of junk obstructing Apliu Street.
DR. RONALD D. B. LEUNG, CHAIRMAN OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL HYGIENE SELECT COMMITTEE replied the question (in English):—Madam Chairman, this question concerns the clearance of junk on the roadside and pavement of Apliu Street which seriously affected the traffic and pedestrians. The question further asks that as the situation has worsened, whether it is due to: (1) inactive enforcement by the Department, (2) insufficient manpower, (3) the Department not being given adequate and appropriate authority to tackle this problem under the existing legislation or (4) any other reasons.
I am sure that Mr. FUNG is well aware of the historical background of Apliu Street. The section of the street between Nam Cheong Street and Yen Chow Street has been a traditional trading place for a large number of dealers in the sale and exchange of old and salvaged electrical or other household articles which may have some residual value. In normal terms, these articles could be considered as scraps of no commercial value. However, there are still seekers of different interests who would come to this place looking for various items for their particular own need. There are at present 160 licensed and about 400 unlicensed hawkers congregating in this area trading as a sort of marine dealers. The old articles, some of them are of considerable size and weight, take up large areas of the pavement and even roadside space. They are unlike other mobile hawkers who would move away upon the approach of enforcement staff. When the GDT is taking action against these hawkers, they simply leave their articles and disappear themselves. Removing these bulky articles requires transport and manpower which are time-consuming and taxing the resources of the GDT.
HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL
Page 49 of 182
91
Since Mr. FUNG last raised this question some 18 months ago, the Urban Services Department had carried out 52 joint operations with the Police and another 23 operations independently. A total of 142 lorry-loads of junk had been removed and disposed of. Furthermore, the GDT had made 2 483 arrests and 514 seizures in Apliu Street and its vicinity. Because of the limited manpower and resources, the Department cannot sustain persistent enforcement actions by the GDT in the area. Although the kind of articles they are dealing with sometimes appears to be unsightly and bulky causing obstruction to pedestrians and traffic, they do not constitute too serious a hygiene problem. Therefore, the Department did not accord a very high priority in tackling this problem. However, the Department will continue to take enforcement actions to reduce the nuisance as frequently as its manpower and resources permit. The existing authority under the Public Health and Municipal Services Ordinance is considered quite adequate and appropriate in tackling these problems.
MR. FREDERICK K. K. FUNG (in Cantonese):—Madam Chairman, 18 months ago, I asked the same question and Dr. LEUNG replied that according to the legislation, if we wanted to remove the goods on the road, a notice asking the owner to remove them within 24 hours had to be put up. Failing such, the goods would be confiscated. However, this point is not mentioned in the present reply. If this law is still applicable today, people could always make use of this loophole to move away the goods just a short distance after the notice to that effect is served. This means that we have to serve another notice and to give them another 24 hours to comply with the notice. Again, they will use the same tactic of moving the goods for two or three feet away from the original position. It appears to me that the problem cannot be solved forever. So I would like to know whether the Department has got sufficient legislative power to take away and confiscate the goods on the road right away. Do you consider that serving the notice of 24 hours for removing the goods is too long?
DR. RONALD D. B. LEUNG (in Cantonese):—Madam Chairman, in the past 18 months, we did issue 277 notices of this nature. When I replied to the question, I did outline that the Department did not have sufficient manpower and resources to tackle the whole problem. It is a really time-consuming process. There are constraints on our resources if we are to issue so many notices. I am sure Mr. FUNG understands that as long as the owner moves away the goods for a short distance, he has complied with the notice. I think the whole question depends on the availability of resources and manpower.
MR. FREDERICK K. K. FUNG (in Cantonese):—Madam Chairman, I don't think Dr. LEUNG has answered my third part of the question. Is there any loophole in our legislation? Are we empowered with the adequate legislation to deal with this? Can we remove all the goods on the road at once without serving them any notice at all? For example, for illegal parking, the cars will be towed away or prosecuted without
Page 49 of 182
Page 49 of 182
90
HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL
On the basis of what the Department is doing at present in the field of mosquito control, it is believed that the present measures are adequate and efficient. Should the need arise, the Department will seek additional staff with a view to stepping up its control situation.
2. MR. FREDERICK K. K. FUNG asked the following question (in Canton- ese):—About 18 months ago, I questioned the clearance of junk on the roadside and pavement of Apliu Street, which seriously affected the traffic and pedestrians. At that time, the Council's reply was that it would take enforcement action. However, after 18 months, the situation of that street has become even worse. I would like to know whether it is due to:
(1) inactive enforcement by the Department,
(2) insufficient manpower,
(3) the Department not being given adequate and appropriate authority to tackle
this problem under the existing legislation or
(4) any other reasons.
I would also like to know whether the Department has any plan to deal with such a great deal of junk obstructing Apliu Street.
DR. RONALD D. B. LEUNG, CHAIRMAN OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL HYGIENE SELECT COMMITTEE replied the question (in English):—Madam Chairman, this question concerns the clearance of junk on the roadside and pavement of Apliu Street which seriously affected the traffic and pedestrians. The question further asks that as the situation has worsened, whether it is due to:
(1) inactive enforcement by the Department,
(2) insufficient manpower,
(3) the Department not being given adequate and appropriate authority to
tackle this problem under the existing legislation or
(4) any other reasons.
I am sure that Mr. FUNG is well aware of the historical background of Apliu Street. The section of the street between Nam Cheong Street and Yen Chow Street has been a traditional trading place for a large number of dealers in the sale and exchange of old and salvaged electrical or other household articles which may have some residual value. In the normal terms, these articles could be considered as scraps of no commercial value. However, there are still seekers of different interests who would come to this place looking for various items for their particular own need. There are at present 160 licensed and about 400 unlicensed hawkers congregating in this area trading as a sort of marine dealers. The old articles, some of them are of considerable size and weight, take up large areas of the pavement and even roadside space. They are unlike other mobile hawkers who would move away upon the approach of enforcement staff. When the GDT is taking action against these hawkers, they simply leave their articles and disappear themselves. Removing these bulky articles requires transport and
HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL
Page 49 of 182
91
manpower which are time-consuming and taxing the resources of the GDT. Since Mr. FUNG last raised this question some 18 months ago, the Urban Services Department had carried out 52 joint operations with the Police and another 23 operations independently. A total of 142 lorry-loads of junk had been removed and disposed of. Furthermore, the GDT had made 2 483 arrests and 514 seizures in Apliu Street and its vicinity. Because of the limited manpower and resources, the Department cannot sustain persistent enforce- ment actions by the GDT in the area. Although the kind of articles they are dealing with sometimes appears to be unsightly and bulky causing obstruction to pedestrians and traffic, they do not constitute too serious a hygiene problem. Therefore, the Department did not accord a very high priority in tackling this problem. However, the Department will continue to take enforcement actions to reduce the nuisance as frequently as its manpower and resources permit. The existing authority under the Public Health and Municipal Services Ordinance is considered quite adequate and appropriate in tackling these problems.
MR. FREDERICK K. K. FUNG (in Cantonese):----Madam Chairman, 18 months ago, I asked the same question and Dr. LEUNG replied that according to the legislation, if we wanted to reomve the goods on the road, a notice asking the owner to remove them within 24 hours had to be put up. Failing such, the goods would be confiscated. However, this point is not mentioned in the present reply. If this law is still applicable today, people could always make use of this loophole to move away the goods just a sort distance after the notice to that effect is served. This means that we have to serve another notice and to give them another 24 hours to comply with the notice. Again, they will use the same tactic of moving the goods for two or three feet away from the original position. If appears to me that the problem cannot be solved forever. So I would like to know whether the Department has got sufficient legislative power to take away and confiscate the goods on the road rightaway. Do you consider that serving the notice of 24 hour for removing the goods is too long?
DR. RONALD D. B. LEUNG (in Cantonese):-Madam Chairman, in the past 18 months, we did issue 277 notices of this nature. When I replied the question, I did outline that the Department did not have sufficient manpower and resources to tackle the whole problem. It is a really time consuming process. There are constraints on our resources if we are to issue so many notices. I am sure Mr. FUNG understands that as long as the owner moves away the goods for a short distance, he has complied with the notice. I think the whole question depends on the availability of resources and manpower.
MR. FEDERICK K. K. FUNG (in Cantonese):--Madam Chairman, I don't think Dr. LEUNG has answered my third part of the question. Is there any loophole in our legislation? Are we empowered with the adequate legislation to deal with this? Can we remove all the goods on the road at once without serving them any notice at all? For example, for illegal parking, the cars will be towed away or prosecuted without
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.