Page 111 of 126
278
HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL
support the renewal of the licence? Now the FSD had stated very clearly at the Central and Western District Board before 1 October 1991 that the licence was granted 40 years ago and environmental requirements and standards have changed significantly, and according to existing standard, this roast pig factories can no longer meet existing standards. Beside, this pig roasting factory is situated on the ground floor of a very old building and black smoke emissions do occur everyday. In fact two industrial accidents occured in the past. Has the Department taken note of this? Has the Department considered relocating these pig roasting factories to suitable premises away from residential areas despite the fact that the licensee has complied with the requirements imposed by USD and FSD. I would like to know the overall policy of the Department.
MR. MA LEE-WO (in Cantonese):—I think I have to answer this question in different parts. With regard to the fact that the Department has not received any complaints, if Mr. WONG has received complaints and did not refer the complaints to the Department, it is impossible for the Department to take action. I hope that Mr. WONG can refer the complaints to the Department so that the Department can send staff to have a look. Secondly, with regard to the EPD or the FSD issuing penalty tickets requesting the licensee to make improvements. If the licensee did not make improvements, we would not renew the licence. The Department told me that the licensee had complied with all the licensing conditions and requirements, and so according to the law, we must renew the licence. With regard to black smoke, as far as I know, the black smoke is channelled through a chimney of 3.75 meter to above roof by means of an exhaust system to prevent pollution. The EPD had made an inspection, and was of the view that the black smoke emission was still within existing standards. Regarding industrial accidents, it is not the concern of the Urban Council. We are only concerned about environmental problem. As to whether such factories should be relocated, this is a matter for the Central Government to consider. If the Central Government considers that these pig roasting factories should not exist in these areas, then the Government will take appropriate action.
MR. WONG SHUI-LAI (in Cantonese):--I have one more follow-up question. The EPD had sent a letter to the Department before October 1991 saying that the licence should not be renewed to the Sai Street pig roasting factory. I would like to know the Department or the Council's policy or whether the Council will continue to issue or renew licenses for pig roasting factories in residential areas. Concerning the pig roasting factory on the ground floor of Wah Fai Mansion, this factory was more advanced because it used town gas. But during its operation, a lot of smoke and odour were emitted and as a result the court had decided to suspend the operation of this factory. Therefore, should the Department review its policy in renewing such licences in residential areas?
MR. MA LEE-WO (in Cantonese):-Mr. Chairman, on the 29 March 1967, the Council decided that such licences or new licences would not be issued in the residential areas. As Mr. WONG is well aware, many licences were issued 30 to 40 years ago. As a result last year we have revised licensing conditions. This is applicable to some licences which were issued many years ago, but the licensing conditions have not been changed for some areas or to some premises, where there have widespread complaints from the residents. We would consider imposing additional licensing requirements. We have also liaised with the FSD, BLD and EPD to see what additional requirements should be imposed on the licensees to minimize nuisances. Last year, we had revised requirements, and the licensee at Sai Street had complied with all the requirements, so we renewed the licence. With regard to the case of Wah Fai Mansion, as far as I know, the licence expired last year. The factory at Wah Fai Mansion had ceased operation and its licence holder had decided not to continue operation so no licence was renewed.
MR. CHAN TAK-CHOR (in Cantonese):---I remember that when Mr. WONG raised this question last time, I also asked one question. With regard to the revised licensing requirements, there was one criteria on environmental nuisance. But in issuing licences, we have not made such request. At that time, I asked the relevant Select Committee to review this issue. As far as I know, the Select Committee has not done any review so far, so I would request that the Select Committee can review this I would like to know whether the concept of amortisation can be pursued in the urban areas. Since there are so many obnoxious pig roasting factories there, can amortisation be considered as one of the options?
MR. MA LEE-WO (in Cantonese): Concerning the first question, we will have a discussion at the Public Health Select Committee meeting. Secondly, with regard to amortisation, I think it is difficult for us to do this from a legal point of view. If the licensee can comply with all the licensing requirements, we have to issue a licence to him.
5.
MR. WONG SHUI-LAI asked the following question (in Cantonese):- I observed that almost all fixed pitch hawkers selling newspapers, magazine on the streets or in stores of UC market/complex are now also selling cigarettes. Is there any condition or regulations that these hawkers selling newspaper are allowed to sell cigarettes? If so, what other nature/types of goods can be sold by the fixed pitch for newspaper? If not, how and when the situation can be rectified?
MR. CHAN TAK-CHOR, CHAIRMAN OF THE MARKETS AND STREET TRADERS SELECT COMMITTEE, replied as follows (in Cantonese):-This question queries the legality of the sale of cigarettes at most newspaper stalls, whether fixed pitch or in Council markets. It also asks what items other than newspapers are permitted to be sold at these outlets.
The Council's current policy which was introduced in July 1990 is that, subject to prior application and approval, licensees of fixed pitch newspaper stalls may sell the following commodities in addition to magazines, periodicals, newspapers, books and the like:
Page 111 of 126
279
HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL
...
Page 111 of 126
278
HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL
support the renewal of the licence? Now the FSD had stated very clearly at the Central and Western District Board before 1 October 1991 that the licence was granted 40 years ago and environmental requirements and standards have changed significantly, and according to existing standard, this roast pig factories can no longer meet existing standards. Beside, this pig roasting factory is situated on the ground floor of a very old building and black smoke emissions do occur everyday. In fact two industrial accidents occured in the past. Has the Department taken note of this? Has the Department considered relocating these pig roasting factories to suitable premises away from residential areas despite the fact that the licensee has complied with the requirements imposed by USD and FSD. I would like to know the overall policy of the Department.
MR. MA LEE-Wo (in Cantonese):—I think I have to answer this question in different parts. With regard to the fact that the Department has not received any complaints, if Mr. WONG has received complaints and did not refer the complaints to the Department, it is impossible for the Department to take action. I hope that Mr. WONG can refer the complaints to the Department so that the Department can send staff to have a look. Secondly, with regard to the EPD or the FSD issuing penalty tickets requesting the licensee to make improvements. If the licensee did not make improvements, we would not renew the licence. The Department told me that the licensee had complied with all the licensing conditions and requirements, and so according to the law, we must renew the licence. With regard to black smoke, as far as I know, the black smoke is channelled through a chiminey of 3.75 meter to above roof by means of an exhaust system to prevent pollution. The EPD had made an inspection, and was of the view that the black smoke emission was still within existing standards. Regarding industrial accidents, it is not the concern of the Urban Council. We are only concerned about environmental problem. As to whether such factories should be relocated, this is a matter for the Central Government to consider. If the Central Government considers that these pig roasting factories should not exist in these areas, then the Government will take appropriate action.
MR. WONG SHUI-LAI (in Cantonese):--I have one more follow up question. The EPD had sent a letter to the Department before October 1991 saying that the licence should not be renewed to the Sai Street pig roasting factory. I would like to know the Department or the Council's policy or whether the Council will continue to issue or renew licenses for pig roasting factories in residential areas. Concerning the pig roasting factory on the ground floor of Wah Fai Mansion, this factory was more advanced because it used town gas. But during its operation, a lot of smoke and odour were emitted and as a result the court had decided to suspend the operation of this factory. Therefore, should the Department review its policy in renewing such licences in residential areas?
MR. MA LEE-Wo (in Cantonese):-Mr. Chairman, on the 29 March 1967, the Council decided that such licences or new licences would not be issued in the
Page 111 of 126
HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL
279
residential areas. As Mr. WONG is well aware, many licences were issued 30 to 40 years ago. As a result last year we have revised licensing conditions. This is applicable to some licences which were issued many years ago, but the licensing conditions have not been changed for some areas or to some premises, where there have wide spread complaints from the residents. We would consider to impose additional licensing requirements. We have also liaised with the FSD, BLD and EPD to see what additional requirements should be imposed on the licensees to minimize nuisances. Last year, we had revised requirements, and the licensee at Sai Street had complied with all the requirements, so we renewed the licence. With regard to the case of Wah Fai Mansion, as far as I know, the licence expired last year. The factory at Wah Fai Mansion had ceased operation and its licence holder had decided not to continue operation so no licence was renewed.
MR. CHAN TAK-CHOR (in Cantonese):---I remember that when Mr. WONG raised this question last time, I also asked one question. With regard to the revised licensing requirements, there was one criteria on environmental nuisance. But in issuing licences, we have not made such request. At that time, I asked the relevant Select Committee to review this issue. As far as I know, the Select Committee has not done any review so far, so I would request that the Select Committee can review this I would like to know whether the concept of amortisation can be persued in the urban areas. Since there are so many obnoxious pig roasting factories there, can amortisation be considered as one of the options?
MR. MA LEE-Wo (in Cantonese): Concerning the first question, we will have a discussion at the Public Health Select Committee meeting. Secondly, with regard to amortisation, I think it is difficult for us to do this from a legal point of view. If the licensee can comply with all the licensing requirements, we have to issue a licence to him.
5.
MR. WONG SHUI-LAI asked the following question (in Cantonese):- I observed that almost all fixed pitch hawkers selling newspapers, magazine on the streets or in stores of UC market/complex are now also selling cigarettes. Is there any condition or regulations that these hawkers selling newspaper are allowed to sell cigarettes? If so, what other nature/types of goods can be sold by the fixed pitch for newspaper? If not, how and when the situation can be rectified?
MR. CHAN TAK-CHOR, CHAIRMAN OF THE MARKETS AND STREET TRADERS SELECT COMMITTEE, replied as follows (in Cantonese):-This question queries the legality of the sale of cigarettes at most newspaper stalls, whether fixed pitch or in Council markets. It also asks what items other than newspapers are permitted to be sold at these outlets.
The Council's current policy which was introduced in July 1990 is that, subject to prior application and approval, licensees of fixed pitch newspaper stalls may sell the following commodities in addition to magazines, periodicals, newspapers, books and the like:
Page 111 of 126
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.