Southern District Council (2020-2023) (SDC) Minutes of the 9th Meeting of the Environment, Hygiene and Healthcare Committee (EHHC)
Date : 11 May 2021 Time : 2:30 p.m. Venue : SDC Conference Room
Present: Mr LO Kin-hei (Chairman of SDC) Mr Paul ZIMMERMAN (Vice-Chairman of SDC) Mr YIM Chun-ho (Chairman of EHHC) Mr WONG Yui-hei, Angus (Vice-Chairman of EHHC) Mr CHAN Hin-chung Mr CHAN Ping-yeung Ms CHAN Yan-yi Mr LAM Andrew Tak-wo Mr LAM Ho-por, Kelvin Ms LAM Yuk-chun, MH Mr Jonathan LEUNG Chun Ms LI Shee-lin Mr PANG Cheuk-kei, Michael Mr POON Ping-hong Mr TSUI Yuen-wa Mr YU Chun-hei, James
Absent with Apologies: Miss YUEN Ka-wai, Tiffany
Secretary: Mr YAM Long-sang, Laurence Executive Officer (District Management), Southern District Office, Home Affairs Department
In Attendance: Mr LEUNG Ying-kit Senior Executive Officer (District Management), Southern District Office, Home Affairs Department Mr HON Ming-sau District Environmental Hygiene Superintendent (Southern), Food and Environmental Hygiene Department Mr HO Yu-tung Chief Health Inspector (Southern) 2, Food and Environmental Hygiene Department Ms LI Lai-ha, Liz Senior Health Inspector (Cleansing & Pest Control) Southern, Food and Environmental Hygiene Department Dr CHIU Yuen-wang, Alex Senior Environmental Protection Officer (Waste Reduction & Recycling) 13, Environmental Protection Department Mr FUNG Wai-yip, Wallace Environmental Protection Officer (Regional South) 34, Environmental Protection Department
For agenda item 3: Ms Lily CHUNG Regional Officer / Hong Kong Island, Independent Commission Against Corruption Mr Eric LEUNG Senior Community Relations Officer of the Regional Office (Hong Kong West & Islands), Independent Commission Against Corruption Mr Jason WONG Assistant Community Relations Officer of the Regional Office (Hong Kong West & Islands), Independent Commission Against Corruption
For agenda item 4: Mr CHAN Fu-man Housing Manager / HKI6, Housing Department Ms YEUNG Yu-shan, Alice Senior Field Officer (Avian Influenza), Agriculture, Fisheries and Conservation Department Ms CHAN Choi-cheung Field Officer I, Agriculture, Fisheries and Conservation Department
For agenda item 5: Mr CHAN Fu-man Housing Manager / HKI6, Housing Department
2 For agenda item 6: Ms CHAN Kit-ying Engineer / Slopes (HES), Highways Department Mr HO Sau-lin Project Coordinator / District (HES), Highways Department Mr TSUI Kin-chuen Senior Inspector of Works / Slopes (HES) 1, Highways Department Mr NG Tsz-wing, Ricky Principal Estate Officer / HKW & S (2) (District Lands Office, Hong Kong West and South), Lands Department
Opening Remarks:
The Chairman said that in view of the latest situation of the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) epidemic, this meeting was closed to the public to reduce the risk of crowd gathering. The Chairman asked members and media representatives attending the meeting to bring their own masks and water. Before entering the venue, everyone would have their body temperatures taken with the assistance of the staff of the Southern District Office (SDO), and was required to use the “LeaveHomeSafe” mobile app to scan the QR code of the venue, complete a health declaration form and declare whether he / she was under compulsory quarantine.
2. In light of the epidemic, to avoid gathering for a long time, members were reminded to speak as concisely as possible, and departmental representatives should refrain from repeating the content of the written replies when responding, so that the meeting could end by the estimated time, i.e. 5:35 p.m.
3. The Chairman welcomed members and the following standing representatives of government departments to the meeting:
(i) Mr HON Ming-sau, District Environmental Hygiene Superintendent (Southern), Food and Environmental Hygiene Department (FEHD); (ii) Mr HO Yu-tung, Chief Health Inspector (Southern) 2, FEHD;
(iii) Ms LI Lai-ha, Liz, Senior Health Inspector (Cleansing & Pest Control) Southern, FEHD;
(iv) Dr CHIU Yuen-wang, Alex, Senior Environmental Protection Officer (Waste Reduction & Recycling) 13, Environmental Protection Department (EPD); and
3 (v) Mr FUNG Wai-yip, Wallace, Environmental Protection Officer (Regional South) 34, EPD.
4. The Chairman further said that according to the Southern District Council Standing Orders, the quorum of a District Council and its Committees was half of their members. To avoid suspension of the meeting due to the absence of a quorum, members should, as far as practicable, notify the Secretary of their early withdrawal in advance, and inform the Secretariat staff at the meeting venue before leaving. Each member would be allotted a maximum of two speaking slots per agenda item, each lasting no more than three minutes, so they should speak as concisely as possible. The electronic timer at the meeting venue would beep at two minutes 30 seconds and three minutes of each speaking slot respectively.
5. The Chairman added that on 5 May 2021, the Secretariat received the Notification of Absence from Southern District Council / Committee / Working Group Meetings from Miss YUEN Ka-wai, Tiffany dated 30 April 2021. She indicated in the Notification that she was unable to attend the EHHC meeting as she had to fulfil civic obligations as required by the law (and specified that she “was not granted a release on bail as per court directive”). According to the Southern District Council Standing Orders, the Committee was required to decide whether to accept her application of absence.
6. The Chairman asked members whether they endorsed the acceptance of her application of absence. The application of absence was accepted with 14 votes in favour (namely Mr CHAN Hin-chung, Mr CHAN Ping-yeung, Ms CHAN Yan-yi, Mr LAM Andrew Tak-wo, Mr LAM Ho-por, Kelvin, Ms LI Shee-lin, Mr LO Kin-hei, Mr PANG Cheuk-kei, Michael, Mr POON Ping-hong, Mr TSUI Yuen-wa, Mr WONG Yui-hei, Angus, Mr YIM Chun- ho, Mr YU Chun-hei, James and Mr Paul ZIMMERMAN), 1 vote against it (namely Ms LAM Yuk-chun, MH) and zero abstention.
Part 1 – Matters Discussed
Agenda Item 1: Confirmation of the Draft Minutes of the 8th EHHC Meeting Held on 16 March 2021 7. The Chairman said that prior to the meeting, the draft minutes of the 8th EHHC meeting had been circulated to members for information. The Secretariat had not received any amendment proposals so far.
8. The Chairman asked members whether to confirm the minutes of the 8th EHHC meeting. The minutes of the aforementioned meeting were confirmed by the Committee.
4
Agenda Item 2: Funding Applications with respect to SDC Subsidy Scheme for Cleansing of Public Places in Private Buildings (EHHC Paper No. 20/2021)
9. The Chairman asked if members needed to declare interests with regard to the agenda item.
10. Mr CHAN Ping-yeung said that he was the Treasurer of the Incorporated Owners of Lei Tung Estate and the Lei Tung Estate was one of the applicants, so he would withdraw from the discussion.
11. The Chairman said that a total of 17 funding applications were received with respect to the SDC Subsidy Scheme for Cleansing of Public Places in Private Buildings (the Subsidy Scheme), involving a total sum of HK$124,500, with details at Appendix 1.
12. The Chairman added that upon the Secretariat’s vetting, it was confirmed that the average annual rateable value of the rental flats of the buildings / housing estates applying for funding did not exceed HK$162,000, which was in line with the requirements for funding applications.
13. The Chairman invited members to vote on the 17 funding applications in one go.
14. The 17 funding applications were endorsed with 15 votes in favour (namely Mr CHAN Hin-chung, Mr CHAN Ping-yeung, Ms CHAN Yan-yi, Mr LAM Andrew Tak-wo, Mr LAM Ho-por, Kelvin, Ms LAM Yuk-chun, MH, Ms LI Shee-lin, Mr LO Kin-hei, Mr PANG Cheuk-kei, Michael, Mr POON Ping-hong, Mr TSUI Yuen-wa, Mr WONG Yui-hei, Angus, Mr YIM Chun-ho, Mr YU Chun-hei, James and Mr Paul ZIMMERMAN), zero vote against it and zero abstention.
15. Mr WONG Yui-hei, Angus put forward the following views:
(i) The budget of HK$800,000 in total for the Subsidy Scheme had not been granted in full; and (ii) Based on his understanding, the application period of the Subsidy Scheme was quite short. Applicants only had around a week to submit their funding applications, so some applicants could not submit their applications in time. He proposed to launch Phase 2 of the Subsidy Scheme, so that applicants could have ample time for detailed consideration and preparation of the relevant application documents, and hoped that the Secretariat could offer assistance.
5
16. The Chairman invited the Secretariat to respond.
17. Mr LEUNG Ying-kit said that the Southern District Office (SDO) was open to SDC’s proposed launching of Phase 2 of the Subsidy Scheme, as long as funding was still available. However, SDO opined that Phase 2 of the Subsidy Scheme should commence only upon reviewing the effectiveness, performance and relevant reports of Phase 1 of the Subsidy Scheme.
18. Mr POON Ping-hong put forward the following views and questions:
(i) Given that the time frame of the application for the Subsidy Scheme was tight, and that some owners’ corporations had not conducted owners’ meetings because of the epidemic, only a total of 17 funding applications were received in Phase 1 of the Subsidy Scheme; (ii) He asked whether SDO, in addition to having applicants download the application forms online, had directly contacted suitable applicants in the district via means such as email to inform them that the Subsidy Scheme was open for application; and (iii) If SDO only allowed applicants to download the application forms online this time, it should extend the scope of contact in the next phase of the Subsidy Scheme and lengthen the application period, so that more applicants would have ample time to prepare the necessary documents, thereby enhancing the effectiveness of the Subsidy Scheme and benefitting the community.
19. The Chairman said that he had discussed with the Secretariat previously whether the invitation letter of the Subsidy Scheme could be mailed to all buildings and owners’ corporations in the Southern District. Even though members redoubled efforts to publicise and promote the Subsidy Scheme in the district, the owners’ corporations of many buildings (such as small or single-block buildings) had still not received news on the Subsidy Scheme. From what he knew, the Secretariat had not notified the buildings and owners’ corporations in the district through mail.
20. The Chairman invited the Secretary to respond.
21. The Secretary said that the Secretariat had earlier uploaded the application documents of the Subsidy Scheme and the relevant annexes to the column “DC Activities” on the SDC website.
22. Ms CHAN Yan-yi put forward the following views and questions:
6 (i) She agreed with the proposal put forward by Mr WONG Yui-hei, Angus; (ii) She asked whether the housing estates and buildings which participated in Phase 1 of the Subsidy Scheme could be allowed to submit applications when Phase 2 of the Subsidy Scheme was launched; and (iii) The durability of anti-virus coating in the market varied, ranging from three months to a year. Since she had no knowledge of the durability of the anti-virus coating used by the buildings and housing estates which participated in the Subsidy Scheme, she agreed to allow housing estates and buildings which participated in Phase 1 of the Subsidy Scheme to submit applications when Phase 2 of the Subsidy Scheme was launched, with a view to providing them with long-term anti-virus protection.
(Mr Jonathan LEUNG Chun joined the meeting at 2:38 p.m.)
23. Mr LAM Andrew Tak-wo said that based on his understanding, the management company of Chi Fu Fa Yuen originally intended to apply, but its rateable value exceeded the upper limit of HK$162,000 for applications. To this end, he asked if the upper limit of the rateable value of Phase 2 of the Subsidy Scheme was the same as that of Phase 1 and whether there was room for upward adjustment.
24. The Chairman said that the Committee had launched a discussion on the upper limit of the rateable value in late 2020. The current upper limit of HK$162,000 for applications was set by the Home Affairs Department (HAD). Increasing the upper limit of the rateable value might involve rounds of painstaking negotiations between HAD and SDO, which would be time-consuming. He further said that based on his understanding, HAD had a firm stance on the upper limit of the rateable value, and that he would invite SDO representatives or the Secretary to respond later.
25. Mr LO Kin-hei put forward the following views:
(i) He understood the limitation with respect to the upper limit of the rateable value; (ii) In terms of the cost for spraying the coating, as the buildings participating in the Subsidy Scheme had to pay half of the cost, which constituted an excessive burden on the applicants, resulting the number of applications for the Subsidy Scheme was relatively low; and (iii) Based on his understanding, HAD had not laid down the funding percentage for applicants. Recently, the Government, in partnership with the Urban Renewal Authority, launched the Building Drainage System Repair Subsidy Scheme, with the funding ratio of the Government to the participating buildings being 80:20. In view of this, he proposed that SDC could use the funding ratio of the above scheme as a
7 reference. He believed that this would be in line with the requirements of the departments and make the Subsidy Scheme more attractive to single-block buildings.
26. The Chairman invited SDO to respond.
27. Mr LEUNG Ying-kit gave a consolidated response as follows:
(i) SDO was open to suggestions that the housing estates and buildings which had participated in Phase 1 of the Subsidy Scheme should be allowed to submit applications in Phase 2. However, he stressed that for the sake of fairness, SDO might accord a lower priority to housing estates and buildings which had participated in Phase 1 of the Subsidy Scheme when vetting the funding applications in Phase 2 of the Subsidy Scheme; (ii) Until now, the upper limit of HK$162,000 for the rateable value was deemed by HAD to be the only option. If members intended to adjust the upper limit of the rateable value, SEO would reflect members view to HAD in the normal procedures. This would inevitably affect the implementation schedule of the Subsidy Scheme; and (iii) SDO would relay Mr LO Kin-hei’s views and suggestions on the adjustment of the funding ratio to HAD for consideration.
28. The Chairman said that the Committee agreed to launch Phase 2 of the Subsidy Scheme, and proposed that for the spraying of the anti-virus coating, the funding ratio of SDC to the participating buildings should be adjusted from 50:50 to 80:20, with reference to the Building Drainage System Repair Subsidy Scheme. He urged SDO to buy time to consult HAD on the above proposal as soon as possible. He further said that it was pointless to fuss about the adjustment in the upper limit of the rateable value, and that it was advisable to maintain the upper limit of the rateable value at the current level of HK$162,000.
29. The Chairman invited members to put forward their views or questions.
30. Mr LO Kin-hei said that he hoped that the Secretary could provide additional information on the deadline for using the funding in this phase of the Subsidy Scheme, as well as information on the deadline for completing the relevant application procedures.
31. The Chairman invited the Secretary to provide additional information.
32. The Secretary added that the Subsidy Scheme required applicants to hire companies from 1 June to 30 June this year to provide anti-virus coating spraying service for housing estates / buildings, as well as submit the relevant documents for funding reimbursement to the Secretariat within three weeks upon completion of the service or by 21 July.
8
33. Mr LO Kin-hei said that he believed that SDO had already set aside a provision accordingly from the overall estimated expenditure upon granting the funding for this phase of the Subsidy Scheme. Therefore, funding applications for Phase 2 of the Subsidy Scheme could be open shortly after the deadline for the funding applications of Phase 1 of the Subsidy Scheme. He further pointed out that it was necessary to consider the durability of the anti- virus coating and continue to grant the remaining funding under the Subsidy Scheme. He proposed to consider abolishing the time limit for using the funding to cater for the needs of various parties.
34. The Chairman said that he agreed with the proposal put forward by Mr LO Kin-hei, and remarked that SDC had approved HK$800,000 for anti-epidemic purposes, so that housing estates and buildings could carry out aerosol disinfection. If members had no other views on the above proposals, Phase 2 of the Subsidy Scheme could be launched along the above direction.
35. The Chairman asked the Secretary to inform the 17 applicants that their funding applications had been approved, so that they could commence the relevant procedures.
(Ms Lily CHUNG, Mr Eric LEUNG and Mr Jason WONG joined the meeting at 2:47 p.m.)
(The Vice-Chairman of EHHC presided over the meeting for discussion of the following item.)
Agenda Item 3: Independent Commission Against Corruption Regional Office (Hong Kong West/Islands) Work Plan 2021/22 (Item raised by the Independent Commission Against Corruption) (EHHC Paper No. 21/2021)
36. The Vice-Chairman welcomed the following representatives of the Independent Commission Against Corruption (ICAC) to the meeting:
(i) Ms Lily CHUNG, Regional Officer / Hong Kong Island of ICAC;
(ii) Mr Eric LEUNG, Senior Community Relations Officer of the Regional Office (Hong Kong West / Islands), ICAC; and
(iii) Mr Jason WONG, Assistant Community Relations Officer of the Regional Office (Hong Kong West / Islands), ICAC.
9 37. The Vice-Chairman invited Ms Lily CHUNG to brief members on the agenda item.
38. Ms Lily CHUNG briefed members on the Work Plan 2021/22 of the Regional Office (Hong Kong West / Islands) of ICAC.
39. The Vice-Chairman invited members to raise comments or enquiries.
40. Mr CHAN Ping-yeung enquired how the Warehouse Teenage Club and the Hong Kong Correctional Services Museum were related to Hong Kong’s anti-corruption history as well as why they were included in the itinerary of the “Anti-corruption Walks”.
41. Mr Jonathan LEUNG Chun said that over the past two years, some of the owners’ corporations (OCs) in his constituency had expressed their concern that some building management bodies might be involved in corruption. He asked whether ICAC had any promotional activities targeted at OCs as well as buildings without OCs or management companies. Moreover, he asked ICAC about the number of prosecution instituted cases involving corruption in property and building management in the Southern District.
42. The Vice-Chairman invited the ICAC representative to respond.
43. Ms Lily CHUNG gave a consolidated response as follows:
(i) Through the “Anti-corruption Walks”, ICAC hoped to introduce Hong Kong’s anti- corruption history, ICAC’s work as well as other attractions with district characteristics, with a view to enhancing the awareness of anti-corruption among the public in a more interesting way. “Anti-corruption Walks” were designed by the youth volunteers of ICAC, and the places to be visited included the attractions and landmarks which were related to Hong Kong’s anti-corruption history or important for anti-corruption in the Hong Kong Island and Southern District. The Warehouse Teenage Club was a building which had historical value and distinctive features in the Southern District, and had attracted a lot of young visitors. As such, ICAC intended to introduce participants to the work of the ICAC’s youth moral education to prevent corruption. As the Hong Kong Correctional Services Museum exhibited the history of Hong Kong’s correctional system, ICAC intended to educate the public on the consequences of corruption, thereby reminding them to avoid breaking the law and report corruption cases; (ii) ICAC had all along been providing anti-corruption education services such as arranging talks, visits and seminars on anti-corruption for OCs and building management bodies. It had frequently participated in the seminars held by the District Offices or the Urban Renewal Authority every year to brief building residents
10 on the Prevention of Bribery Ordinance and corruption cases related to building management. In addition, ICAC had exhibited and distributed publicity items on clean building management to the residents through district activities from time to time. Residents in buildings without OCs could enquire about the legislation and information on anti-corruption via the Integrity Building Management Enquiry Hotline and ICAC’s thematic website; and (iii) ICAC did not have a breakdown of the number of complaints by district against corruption cases related to property and building management.
44. The Vice-Chairman invited members to raise comments or enquiries.
45. Mr CHAN Ping-yeung raised the following comments:
(i) If ICAC selected the Warehouse Teenage Club mainly for promoting the awareness of anti-corruption among young people, it could indeed select any youth centre; and (ii) As there were four “salt water buildings” in Wah Fu Estate, he proposed that ICAC could include the estate as one of the destinations of the “Anti-corruption Walks”, where it could introduce one of the well-known corruption cases in the last century.
46. Mr TSUI Yuen-wa raised the following comments:
(i) As some elderly had been receiving small gifts from individual organisations or local personalities for a long time, they might use their votes as a reward to the relevant organisations or candidates during elections. He considered that such an act was contrary to the culture of a clean society; (ii) Although ICAC had stated that it would carry out publicity work for residential care homes last year, the work was still inadequate. He suggested that ICAC should step up education work for the elderly during election years instead of just focusing on promotional activities targeted at young people; and (iii) He commended ICAC for the efficiency of its Integrity Building Management Enquiry Hotline and thanked ICAC for its work.
(Mr Paul ZIMMERMAN left the meeting at 3:09 p.m.)
47. The Vice-Chairman invited the ICAC representative to respond.
48. Ms Lily CHUNG gave a consolidated response as follows:
11 (i) ICAC would consider the suggestion of Mr CHAN Ping-yeung. Members were welcome to give suggestions on the itinerary of “Anti-corruption Walk” in the Southern District; (ii) She thanked Mr TSUI Yuen-wa for his commendation. ICAC would continue its work to promote clean building and property management; and (iii) ICAC will contact residential care homes before public elections and promote clean election messages through seminars or distribution of promotional materials. ICAC will continue to review how to strengthen the integrity education for the elderly in various public elections.
49. The Vice-Chairman asked whether members agreed that SDC should be a supporting organisation of the “Shine with Integrity” Youth Integrity Project for Southern District in 2021/22. Members raised no objection. The Committee endorsed that SDC should be a supporting organisation of the “Shine with Integrity” Youth Integrity Project for Southern District in 2021/22.
50. In conclusion, the Vice-Chairman hoped that ICAC would not only organise promotional activities mainly targeted at young people, but should also strengthen its publicity and education work for the elderly. Moreover, as many buildings in the district were to carry out major maintenance works, he hoped that ICAC would step up its work in disseminating the message of clean building management.
(Ms Lily CHUNG, Mr Eric LEUNG and Mr Jason WONG left the meeting at 3:12 p.m.)
(Ms Alice YEUNG, Ms CHAN Choi-cheung and Mr CHAN Fu-man joined the meeting at 3:12 p.m.)
Agenda Item 4: Pilot Scheme on Feeding of Contraceptives to Wild Pigeons (Include agenda items on “Request to extend the Pilot Scheme on Feeding of Contraceptives to Wild Pigeons to the Southern District” by Mr YU Chun-hei, James and “Discuss the Pilot Scheme on Feeding of Contraceptives to Wild Pigeons” by Mr POON Ping-hong and Mr CHAN Ping-yeung) (EHHC Paper No. 22/2021)
51. The Vice-Chairman said that the following discussion would include the agenda items on “Request to extend the Pilot Scheme on Feeding of Contraceptives to Wild Pigeons to the Southern District” raised by Mr YU Chun-hei, James and “Discuss the Pilot Scheme on
12 Feeding of Contraceptives to Wild Pigeons” raised by Mr POON Ping-hong and Mr CHAN Ping-yeung.
52. The Vice-Chairman welcomed the following departmental representatives to the meeting:
(i) Ms Alice YEUNG, Senior Field Officer (Avian Influenza), Agriculture, Fisheries and Conservation Department (AFCD); (ii) Ms CHAN Choi-cheung, Field Officer I, AFCD; and (iii) Mr CHAN Fu-man, Housing Manager / HKI6, Housing Department (HD).
53. The Vice-Chairman invited Mr YU Chun-hei, James to briefly introduce the agenda item.
54. Mr YU Chun-hei, James raised the following comments and enquiries:
(i) There was a neuter programme for stray cats. But since it was difficult to capture wild pigeons, one could only use relatively humanitarian means to reduce their number and minimise the conflict between human beings and pigeons. It was hoped that the Pilot Scheme on Feeding of Contraceptives to Wild Pigeons could be implemented in the Southern District as soon as possible to control the number of wild pigeons; and (ii) AFCD responded that the Southern District would not be included in the Pilot Scheme. He enquired when the Scheme could be implemented in the Southern District at the earliest if the two-year Pilot Scheme on Feeding of Contraceptives to Wild Pigeons could achieve the desired effects in the other districts.
55. The Vice-Chairman invited Mr CHAN Ping-yeung and Mr POON Ping-hong to briefly introduce the agenda item.
56. Mr CHAN Ping-yeung raised the following comments and enquiries:
(i) He enquired about the total amount of fund granted to the Pilot Scheme on Feeding of Contraceptives to Wild Pigeons and the amount of fund for each trial area; (ii) In view of AFCD’s response that the bird repellent liquid currently used was the only available repellent liquid in the local market, he enquired whether AFCD would use other types of bird repellent or bird repellent that was suitable for a large outdoor area. AFCD had recently applied bird repellent to the fire escape of Marina Habitat on a trial basis. The bird repellent had frequently been applied by the owners’
13 corporation to bay windows or the top of air-conditioners. However, the effect of the repellent for a large outdoor area was doubtful; and (iii) The data on the effectiveness of the pigeon contraceptives used in other countries.
57. Mr POON Ping-hong raised the following comments and enquiries:
(i) He had collected a lot of data about the problems of the pilot schemes on using pigeon contraceptives in Taiwan and Singapore in the past. One problem was that the pigeon contraceptives used in Taiwan were too big and disliked by wild pigeons, resulting in failure of the pilot scheme. Likewise, a pilot scheme was launched in Singapore in 2015, but it also failed in 2018; and (ii) He enquired whether AFCD would draw reference from the successful or unsuccessful experiences of other regions which were applicable to Hong Kong and whether there were different factors which would affect the applicability of pigeon contraceptives to the local environment. For example, he knew who were feeding wild pigeons in the Southern District. He enquired how AFCD would tell these people the wild pigeons had already been fed and so they need not feed the wild pigeons. He did not hope to see that the Pilot Scheme on Feeding of Contraceptives to Wild Pigeons would finally fail.
58. The Vice-Chairman invited the AFCD representatives to respond.
59. Ms Alice YEUNG gave a consolidated response as follows:
(i) The Pilot Scheme on Feeding of Contraceptives to Wild Pigeons launched by AFCD would last for two years, during which AFCD would collect data for analysis and engage an outsourced consultant to conduct an evaluation. An interim report on the effectiveness would be prepared between nine months and one year after the launching of the Scheme to decide whether to extend the Scheme to other districts, including the Southern District; (ii) The total amount of funds granted for implementing the Pilot Scheme on Feeding of Contraceptives to Wild Pigeons at three locations, including the fund for procuring pigeon contraceptives, employing workers to feed contraceptives to feral pigeons and engaging an outsourced consultant, was around HK$4 million; (iii) The bird repellent liquid used by AFCD was the only available repellent liquid in the local market. While there were other bird repellents in foreign countries, all these bird repellents had the same effective ingredients. The bird repellent currently used was suitable for used in outdoor environment. If the bird repellent could effectively reduce the nuisance of wild pigeons, AFCD would pass the relevant information to
14 the relevant property management, who would consider whether to procure the bird repellent for use in their buildings or housing estates; (iv) Pigeon contraceptives had been used to reduce the number of feral pigeons in other regions and AFCD has taken multiple references. For example, after experimenting for several years in Spain, it was found that the number of feral pigeons had fallen by around 50%. To figure out the effectiveness of these contraceptives in Hong Kong, data from three locations had to be collected and analysed. Moreover, similar schemes implemented in Taiwan and Singapore had failed owing to different problems. A number of District Councillors in Hong Kong had proposed the implementation of the Pilot Scheme on Feeding of Contraceptives to Wild Pigeons. But the Scheme could not be launched until recently because AFCD had to draw reference from the experiences of other regions. The pigeon contraceptives used currently would be mixed with natural corn kernels, and then fed to birds with sizes similar to wild pigeons. But they could not be consumed by birds with smaller sizes that were commonly seen in Hong Kong, such as sparrows; (v) In foreign countries, automatic feeding machines were used. But under AFCD’s Pilot Scheme, natural corn kernels mixed with contraceptives would be thrown on the ground manually to feed feral pigeons. In case wild birds under protection or other animals were found during the process, the workers concerned would drive them away to ensure that the contraceptives would not be eaten mistakenly by other animals or birds; and (vi) AFCD had considered that the test results might be affected if other feeders did the same thing when AFCD workers were feeding the feral pigeons, and so it had decided that it would not launch the Scheme throughout the territory for now but would instead conduct a pilot run at three locations first. The contraceptives would be fed in the early hours before the appearance of other feeders so as to minimise the influence of other feeders. AFCD had notified FEHD of its feeding period as well as the whole feeding process. AFCD would clear the natural corn kernels mixed with contraceptives left on the ground.
60. The Vice-Chairman invited the HD representative to respond.
61. Mr CHAN Fu-man gave a consolidated response as follows:
(i) HD was mainly responsible for cleaning and disinfecting areas where feral pigeons usually gathered with diluted bleach solution. It would also monitor the black spots of illegal feeding of feral pigeons by stopping the misdeed immediately and taking corresponding follow-up actions. If the feeder was found to be a resident of the public housing estate concerned, HD would institute prosecution and allot points to the household under the Marking Scheme for Estate Management Enforcement; and
15 (ii) If AFCD planned to implement the Pilot Scheme on Feeding of Contraceptives to Wild Pigeons in public housing estates in the Southern District, HD would collaborate with the relevant work, and would maintain close communication and discuss the implementation details with AFCD.
62. The Vice-Chairman invited the FEHD representative to respond.
63. Mr HON Ming-sau gave a consolidated response as follows:
(i) As always, FEHD would step up its law enforcement actions against contaminating public places due to illegal feeding of wild birds; and (ii) Where necessary, FEHD was willing to collaborate with AFCD in implementing the Pilot Scheme on Feeding of Contraceptives to Wild Pigeons.
64. The Vice-Chairman invited members to raise comments or enquiries.
65. Ms LI Shee-lin raised the following comments and enquiries:
(i) She enquired how HD would handle the case if a resident of a public housing estate fed wild birds in another district or housing estate; (ii) She requested that the Southern District be included in the trial areas under the Pilot Scheme on Feeding of Contraceptives to Wild Pigeons; (iii) She requested that AFCD step up its community education work especially targeted at the middle-aged and the elderly rather than just focusing on the youngsters and children, because the feeders were mostly middle aged and elderly who might have used the wrong way to show care for the animals; and (iv) She opined that illegal feeding of wild birds might give rise to the problems of rodent infestation and wild pig nuisance.
66. Mr CHAN Ping-yeung raised the following enquiries:
(i) He enquired whether all bird repellents in the world had the same ingredients; (ii) He enquired whether the consumption of a wild bird which had eaten the contraceptive drugs would cause harm to the human body; and (iii) The feeders of wild birds in Ap Lei Chau North constituency usually appeared in the small hours, he enquired how AFCD would handle the situation if the Pilot Scheme on Feeding of Contraceptives to Wild Pigeons was implemented in the Southern District.
67. Ms CHAN Yan-yi raised the following comments and enquiries:
16
(i) She enquired that apart from bird repellent liquid, the effectiveness of other means of repelling wild pigeons such as ultrasonic repellent and bird repellent gel; and (ii) She enquired about the duration that bird repellent liquid remained effective and the area in which bird repellent liquid must be applied for the repellent to take effect.
68. Mr POON Ping-hong raised the following comments and enquiries:
(i) After searching the Internet, he found that there was only one type of pigeon contraceptive in the world. He enquired whether Hong Kong was using this type of pigeon contraceptive; (ii) Some feeders would appear in the small hours. Some would also feed wild birds in public housing estates other than their own, making it hard for the relevant department to take enforcement actions. He enquired how the department concerned would handle such cases. He suggested that AFCD step up its publicity work when implementing the Pilot Scheme on Feeding of Contraceptives to Wild Pigeons. He also suggested appointing the feeders as caring ambassadors and assigning them the job of feeding the pigeon contraceptives so as to satisfy the needs of both sides; and (iii) He said he was glad to see that AFCD had made reference to other countries’ practice of using pigeon contraceptives. But he also held the view that to control the wild pigeons effectively, one could not just rely on a single method, but had to adopt a multi-pronged approach that suited the local conditions. He thus hoped that the Government would deliberate with the local stakeholders and combine different methods to resolve the wild pigeon nuisance having regard to the actual situation.
69. The Chairman raised the following comments and enquiries:
(i) He commended AFCD for its attempt to introduce new methods for repelling wild pigeons, such as reflectors and use of special sound. He urged AFCD to continue trying new methods for repelling wild pigeons; and (ii) He enquired how AFCD would evaluate the effectiveness of the Pilot Scheme on Feeding of Contraceptives to Wild Pigeons in an objective way.
70. Ms LAM Yuk-chun, MH said she hoped that the existing methods for repelling wild pigeons would continue to be used before the Pilot Scheme on Feeding of Contraceptives to Wild Pigeons was officially launched. For example, FEHD, HD or other relevant departments could apply bird repellent to wild pigeon black spots to prevent the hygiene problems caused by wild pigeons.
17 71. The Vice-Chairman said that there were quite a number of wild pigeon black spots in Aberdeen. He said that he had used bird repellent without a satisfying result. He thus enquired about the effectiveness of using bird repellent in open-air areas. He further said that as bird repellent did not have a strong smell and had no effect on the passers-by, he suggested making extensive use of bird repellent if it is effective.
72. The Vice-Chairman invited the AFCD representatives to respond.
73. Ms Alice YEUNG gave a consolidated response as follows:
(i) On the publicity and education front, when preparing for the Pilot Scheme on Feeding of Contraceptives to Wild Pigeons, AFCD would continue its publicity and education work at different areas. On 8 and 9 May 2021, AFCD set up an education booth at Wind Tower Park, where there were registered social workers explaining the consequences of feeding feral pigeons to the public, such as causing the feral pigeons to lose their foraging instinct and developing the habit of foraging on the streets, with a view to discouraging the public from feeding feral pigeons. AFCD planned to set up similar education booths at Wah Fu Estate and Wah Kwai Estate in the latter half of 2021 to educate the local residents; (ii) There were different brands of bird repellent on the market. But their ingredients were basically the same as that of the bird repellent registered in Hong Kong as mentioned in the written response. These repellents only differed in their concentration. The bird repellent liquid used by AFCD was the only available repellent liquid in the local market and so AFCD was not able to use other brands of bird repellent for the time being; (iii) AFCD advised the public not to capture feral pigeons and wild birds with their bare hands and consume feral pigeons and wild birds. The pigeon contraceptives used under the Pilot Scheme would only take effect after prolonged use and the effect would disappear when the feral pigeons stopped eating the contraceptive bird feed. The ingredients would only affect the human body if a large amount had been taken over a protracted period and so AFCD considered that the contraceptive bird feed had little effect on the human body; (iv) AFCD had noted members’ comments on the actual feeding habits of the feeders. If AFCD was to implement the Pilot Scheme on Feeding of Contraceptives to Wild Pigeons in the Southern District, it would make reference to members’ comments having regard to the actual conditions and the results of patrols, including selecting feral pigeon black spots in the Southern District as trial areas and completing the feeding process in the small hours before the appearance of other feeders; (v) AFCD had all along been studying different methods to minimise the nuisance caused by feral pigeons. AFCD had used ultrasonic repellent under different
18 circumstances without remarkable effects. AFCD conjectured that the ultrasonic repellent had little effect on the feral pigeons because they had got used to the noisy environment after living in the urban areas for a long time. Bird repellent gel and bird spikes had similar functions. They could only restrict the congregation spots of feral pigeons, but could not drive them away. AFCD was of the view that food was the main factor that attracted the gathering of feral pigeons and so called on the public to stop feeding feral pigeons; (vi) AFCD had tried to use bird repellent in different areas in Hong Kong. There were three trial locations in the Southern District, namely the bus stop near Wah Tai House at Wah Fu Road, the bus stop outside Ap Lei Chau Estate at Ap Lei Chau Bridge Road and the location next to Marina Habitat Tower 1 at Main Street, Ap Lei Chau. AFCD would apply bird repellent at the trial locations once every few days in three consecutive weeks, during which it would notice the weather condition and communicate with FEHD to avoid using bird repellent when it was raining or before street cleansing. The effects of bird repellent might be weakened by the rain or the attraction of food. Bird repellent would only be used on a one-off trial basis. The areas where it was applied were not large and were mainly public places. If FEHD and HD intended to use bird repellent at places under their purview, AFCD was willing to provide them with sample packs of the bird repellent. AFCD would also provide the managing departments of the trial locations, such as FEHD and HD, with the test results and information so that the managing departments could procure the bird repellent; (vii) The pigeon contraceptive used by AFCD was from a different brand than that mentioned by members. But both brands had the same ingredients. They only differed in the percentages of the effective ingredients; (viii) Regarding the suggestion of appointing feeders as caring ambassadors and assigning them the job of feeding pigeon contraceptives, AFCD hoped to avoid conveying the message that anyone could feed the feral pigeons, and so it would only assign the feeding job to outsourced workers wearing AFCD’s uniform at the present stage so as to distinguish workers working under the Pilot Scheme. If the workers saw other feeders when doing the feeding work, they would advise the feeders to stop their misdeed. AFCD would ask FEHD to take follow-up actions if they failed to stop the feeders; and (ix) AFCD would engage a consultant to conduct an evaluation on different factors which would certainly include the number of wild pigeons. The other factors to be evaluated as well as the evaluation method would be proposed in the tenders submitted by tenderers.
74. The Vice-Chairman invited the HD representative to respond.
19 75. Mr CHAN Fu-man gave a consolidated response as follows:
(i) Since the existing Marking Scheme foe Estate Management Enforcement only governed the illegal acts of a tenant or authorised resident within the housing estate where he/she resided, HD was subject to certain constraints when implementing the Marking Scheme. In contrast, the Fixed Penalty (Public Cleanliness and Obstruction) Ordinance had no restriction on the areas where prosecution could be instituted, and so HD could take enforcement actions against any offenders under this Ordinance. But since only officers with a rank of Housing Officer or above were authorised to issue a penalty notice and such officers were not present in an ordinary inspection, HD had to organise special inspections targeted at illegal feeders who appeared frequently. Recently, HD had organised a joint operation comprising officers of FEHD and Wah Fu (I) and Wah Fu (II) Estates on 23 March to combat illegal feeding inside the estates; (ii) HD had used other means in Wah Fu (I) and Wah Fu (II) Estates to reduce the rooftop congregation spots of wild pigeons and avoid causing harm to them. HD would continue to upgrade and review its methods for repelling wild pigeons; and (iii) The estate offices and HD kept an open mind on the trial use of bird repellent. If it was proved that the bird repellent was effective, they would ask AFCD to provide the information for purchasing bird repellent.
76. The Vice-Chairman enquired whether it was true that a tenant feeding wild pigeons illegally in a housing estate other than his/her own, such as a tenant of Wah Fu (I) Estate feeding wild pigeons in Wah Fu (II) Estate, would not be allotted a demerit point.
77. Mr CHAN Fu-man responded that he/she would not be allotted a demerit point because the Marking Scheme was only applicable to the area under the purview of the estate management.
78. The Vice-Chairman invited the FEHD representative to respond.
79. Mr HON Ming-sau supported AFCD’s comment that it was necessary to control the gathering of wild pigeons at source and to reduce the number of illegal feeders by combining the publicity, education and enforcement work. FEHD would continue to step up its enforcement efforts.
80. The Vice-Chairman invited members to raise comments or enquiries.
81. Mr CHAN Hin-chung raised the following comments:
20 (i) There was currently no formal legislation against illegal feeding of birds. At present, people fouling public places when feeding birds would only be fined HK$1,500. He said that not only was it hard for FEHD officers to take enforcement actions under the existing legislation, but the penalty also failed to have any deterrent effect and could hardly control the gathering of wild pigeons at source. It was thus necessary to improve the relevant legislation; and (ii) He said that the Pilot Scheme on Feeding of Contraceptives to Wild Pigeons was worth a try. But if there were only a few trial areas, then the wild pigeons might fly elsewhere and the effectiveness of the Scheme would then be called into question.
82. The Vice-Chairman invited the AFCD representatives to respond.
83. Ms Alice YEUNG gave a consolidated response as follows:
(i) AFCD had no schedule to amend the existing legislation governing the feeding of birds for the time being because the Public Cleansing and Prevention of Nuisances Regulation enforced by FEHD could already achieve sufficient effects. But she would reflect members’ comments to the departmental management; and (ii) Since feral pigeons were used to foraging for food at congregation spots, AFCD considered it unlikely that the wild pigeons would fly elsewhere and thus affect the effectiveness of the Scheme. Of course AFCD would not rule out the possibility. Therefore, the Pilot Scheme intended to test the impacts of different factors on the effectiveness of the Scheme.
84. The Vice-Chairman invited the FEHD representative to respond.
85. Mr HON Ming-sau said that it was difficult for FEHD to solely rely on the Public Cleansing and Prevention of Nuisances Regulation to combat illegal feeding of wild animals. FEHD was eager to see that AFCD would consider amending the existing legislation.
(Mr PANG Cheuk-kei, Michael left the meeting at 3:55 p.m.)
86. The Vice-Chairman concluded that most members hoped that the Pilot Scheme on Feeding of Contraceptives to Wild Pigeons would be implemented in the Southern District as soon as possible and called on AFCD to share the relevant progress and information with the Committee. He further said it was hoped that the various departments would continue to tackle the wild pigeon problem by stepping up their cleansing, management and enforcement work. Finally, he called on the relevant departments to review the adequacy of the existing Marking Scheme and legislation so as to enhance the deterrent effect on the illegal feeders and alleviate the problems caused by the gathering of wild pigeons.
21
(Ms Alice YEUNG and Ms CHAN Choi-cheung left the meeting at 3:56 p.m.)
Agenda Item 5: Explore the Possibility of Implementing Food Waste Collection Programme (Item raised by Mr YIM Chun-ho, Miss YUEN Ka-wai, Tiffany, Mr CHAN Hin-chung, Ms LI Shee-lin and Mr PANG Cheuk-kei, Michael) (EHHC Paper No. 23/2021)
87. The Vice-Chairman said that Mr CHAN Fu-man, Housing Manager / HKI6 of HD, would continue attending the meeting.
88. The Vice-Chairman invited the relevant members to briefly introduce the agenda item.
89. Pointing out that the written response of the Hong Kong Housing Authority (HA) was rather brief, the Chairman asked HA to provide supplementary information about the effectiveness of the pilot scheme on food waste collection implemented in Wah Fu (I) and Wah Fu (II) Shopping Centre over the past three years, the duration of the pilot scheme and whether HD had any plan to include housing estates or residential buildings under the pilot scheme.
90. Mr CHAN Hin-chung briefed members on the agenda item as follows:
(i) According to the information of the Environmental Protection Department (EPD), Hong Kong produced more than 11 000 tonnes of municipal solid waste per day, about 30% of which were food waste. In May 2013, the Environment Bureau unveiled the “Hong Kong: Blueprint for Sustainable Use of Resources 2013-2022”, which mapped out a comprehensive strategy and targets for waste management for the coming 10 years. Later in February 2014, the Environment Bureau unveiled “A Food Waste & Yard Waste Plan for Hong Kong 2014-2022”, which outlined the target of reducing food waste disposal to landfills by 40% in 2022 and mapped out the relevant strategies, including recyclable collection and turning food waste into energy. At a meeting of the Legislative Council Panel on Environmental Affairs in June 2020, EPD briefed members on a Pilot Scheme on Food Waste Collection. In the first phase of the Scheme launched in 2018, food waste was collected from a number of places including the shopping centres and wet markets in 9 public housing estates. In the second phase of the Scheme launched since late 2020, food waste
22 was collected from the shopping centres and wet markets in 59 public housing estates. The target was to increase the quantity of food waste collected from 100 tonnes per day in 2019 to 250 tonnes per day in 2022. He enquired whether the target of collecting food waste from the shopping centres and wet markets in 59 public housing estates had been met; (ii) Given that the Pilot Scheme was mainly targeted at restaurants and shopping centres, he enquired whether there was any plan to include more public housing estates in the Southern District under the Scheme; and (iii) He enquired whether smart food waste collection bins could be used to facilitate domestic food waste collection in housing estates and how to encourage the households to use the bins.
91. The Vice-Chairman invited the HD representative to respond.
92. Mr CHAN Fu-man gave a consolidated response as follows:
(i) The pilot scheme was co-organised by HD and EPD. Currently, food waste was being collected from 18 shopping centres and wet markets. There was no information about the 59 public housing estates mentioned by Mr CHAN Hin-chung for the time being; (ii) Regarding the implementation of the pilot scheme with Wah Fu (I) Shopping Centre as an example, EPD provided funding for HD to employ an additional staff member to collect food waste from the restaurants in Wah Fu (I) Shopping Centre. After collecting the food waste, the staff member would screen the food waste and remove items such as large bones, shells or plastic materials, and then put the food waste into a purple recycling bin. The food waste would be collected by a recycler of EPD every night. To facilitate smooth implementation of the food waste collection work, the staff member would work closely with the business operators and provide guidance about the proper way to handle food waste; (iii) The objectives of the pilot scheme were to educate the business operators about food waste collection and test the actual effectiveness of food waste collection. HD would continue to work closely with EPD so as to achieve the objectives of the scheme; and (iv) He said that he did not have the information of extending the pilot scheme to public housing estates.
93. The Vice-Chairman invited the EPD representative to respond.
94. Dr Alex CHIU gave a consolidated response as follows:
23 (i) The first phase of the pilot scheme was launched since July 2018, including 53 FEHD venues and 18 HD’s venues. The tendering exercise for the second phase of food waste collection service contract had started. Tender was closed on 18 December 2020 and the tenders received were being evaluated; and (ii) In the second phase, the pilot scheme on food waste collection would be gradually extended to cover domestic food waste. As compared with the first phase, over 150 new organisations and venues were interested to join the scheme. Private and public housing estates with the experience of food waste source separation would also be invited to join the scheme. The business sector were also encouraged to participate. Interested housing estates with the experience of food waste source separation could submit applications for joining the scheme. EPD would then follow up the applications, including conducting site inspections and discussing how to collect food waste and set up collection point with the property management staff.
95. The Vice-Chairman invited members to raise comments or enquiries.
96. Ms LI Shee-lin raised the following comments and enquiries:
(i) She was eager to know the effectiveness and results of the first phase of the pilot scheme. She enquired whether EPD planned to submit the results of the pilot scheme to the Committee or make the results publicly accessible; (ii) She called on EPD to provide more details about extending the scheme to cover domestic food waste and how to join the scheme; and (iii) She called on EPD to provide more information about how the pilot scheme had actually improved the shopping centres and the domestic environment.
97. Mr YU Chun-hei, James said that many private housing estates knew little about food waste collection. He enquired whether EPD had any plan to provide technical support and advice on food waste collection to private housing estates so as to encourage them to carry out food waste collection.
98. Mr CHAN Hin-chung raised the following comments and enquiries:
(i) The current quantity in tonnes of food waste collected in Hong Kong per day; (ii) Whether the public housing estates had to submit applications for joining the pilot scheme or would be selected by the relevant department; and (iii) Citing the example of Nam Shan Estate in Shek Kip Mei, which had implemented the pilot scheme on food waste collection, he asked the relevant department to provide the experience of implementing the scheme and whether the experience could be
24 applied to the public or private housing estates in the Southern District so as to enhance the effectiveness of the scheme.
(Post-meeting note: EPD has invited public housing estates under HA and the Hong Kong Housing Society to participate in the second phase of the food waste collection pilot scheme.)
99. The Vice-Chairman raised the following comments and enquiries:
(i) The difficulties often encountered by cleansing companies of private housing estates when collecting food waste were related to the sizes of the refuse collection points, the arrangements of the rubbish bins and the recycling work flow. He enquired whether EPD had provided cleansing companies with the relevant ancillary facilities in the second phase of the pilot scheme and stepped up the promotion of the recycling work flow so as to allay the public’s concern; and (ii) Food waste collection points might give rise to hygiene problems, for example, rodent infestation. He enquired how the hygiene problems arising from food waste collection could be prevented.
100. Mr CHAN Fu-man gave a consolidated response as follows:
(i) Between 2011 and 2014, HA implemented the “Green Delight in Estates” programme, under which HD collaborated with environmental protection organisations in rolling out pilot schemes on food waste collection in 14 public housing estates, including Nam Shan Estate. Being implemented on a trial basis, the scheme aimed to encourage the estate tenants to develop the habit of food waste separation and recycling; (ii) HD would continue to cooperate with EPD in food waste collection. If the second phase of the pilot scheme was extended to public housing estates, HD would provide corresponding support; (iii) Many public housing estates had formed estate management consultative committees. These committees would organise activities in collaboration with non- governmental organisations on different topics, which often included topics relating to environmental protection. However, owing to the epidemic, the estate management consultative committees had suspended their major activities since early 2020, including activities in collaboration with non-governmental organisations. There was no time table for resuming these activities currently. In future, HD would continue to promote the concept of food waste collection to the tenants through these collaborated activities; and
25 (iv) If the pilot scheme was extended to public housing estates, the success of the scheme would depend on the prior education work and the cooperation of the households, who needed to separate the food waste properly so as to reduce the cost of food waste collection. When taking the food waste to the collection points, the households had to avoid causing hygiene problems. For this reason, HD would thoroughly consider the selection of housing estates and the locations of the recycling bins with a view to implementing the pilot scheme successfully as well as preventing the hygienic problems in the housing estates.
101. Dr Alex CHIU gave a consolidated response as follows:
(i) In 2020, 94 tonnes of food waste were collected per day. The food waste mainly came from public and private organisations as well as lunch suppliers for schools. In the first quarter of 2021, around 3,300 tonnes of food waste were processed per month on average in O.PARK1 (110 tonnes per day on average); (ii) To encourage more private housing estates to participate, EPD’s Recycling Fund set a specific item for food waste collection which subsidised the use of smart recycling bins by private housing estates with a view to further enhancing the effectiveness of food waste collection; and (iii) EPD would assist property management companies in promoting the pilot scheme on food waste collection to residents of housing estates. It would provide the relevant guidelines and information to the households of housing estates about how to separate food waste properly. It would also assist management company to identify the appropriate way of collecting food waste and map out the recycling work flow.
102. The Vice-Chairman invited members to raise comments or enquiries.
103. Ms LI Shee-lin enquired how the good food waste collection mechanism could help improve environmental hygiene of the Southern District and the measures to resolve the rodent problem.
104. The Chairman raised the following enquiries:
(i) Whether the pilot scheme would be extended to other shopping centres and restaurants; and (ii) Whether there was a long term target to implement food waste collection scheme in all districts and the time table.
105. Mr CHAN Fu-man gave a consolidated response as follows:
26 (i) The food waste in shopping malls of Wah Fu (I) and Wah Fu (II) mainly came from markets and restaurants. Owing to the problems faced during operation, the existing scope of food waste collection might not be able to extend; (ii) Taking the shopping mall of Wah Fu (I) as example, since the main restaurants and the market were located on different floors and there was no connecting elevator, it caused difficulties for the staff responsible for collecting food waste. Many business operators and restaurants had engaged their contractors to handle food waste. Moreover, since food waste separation was required to meet the standard for recycling, the scheme could not be extended without the cooperation of business operators and restaurants. HD would also consult the views of business operators and restaurants which had not joined the scheme to understand their operation and offer advice with a view to increasing the number of participating organisations; (iii) HD would review the work of the food waste collection staff so as to enhance the recycling rate and extend the existing scope of food waste collection; and (iv) Regarding the rodent prevention and control work, HD had all along been adopting measures to eliminate the three fundamental survival conditions of rodents, namely food, harbourage and passages. To keep the housing estates clean and hygienic, HD would also arrange joint inspections, install additional rodent proofing facilities at suitable locations and conduct pest control talks with reference to the advice of FEHD.
106. Dr Alex CHIU gave a consolidated response as follows:
(i) The targets of the first phase of the pilot scheme included public and private organisations such as hospitals, markets and cooked food centres under FEHD, shopping centres and wet markets under HA, wholesale food markets under AFCD and lunch suppliers for schools, etc. The food waste collected would be converted to useful resources by the Organic Resources Recovery Centre Phase 1 (ORRC1); (ii) In the second phase, the pilot scheme would be extended to more venues, including the catering facilities of social service institutions, shopping centres and wet markets of public housing estates, canteens of Government venues and tertiary institutions, more markets and cooked food centres under FEHD and hospitals, etc. All private and public housing estates which had participated in food waste source separation would be invited to join the scheme by EPD. The business sector would be further encouraged to join the scheme; and (iii) Since EPD had to consider the progress of constructing downstream recycling centres, EPD’s present target was to collect 250 tonnes of food waste per day in 2022, which was the total handling capacities of the existing ORRC1 and the “Food Waste/Sludge Anaerobic Co-digestion Trial Scheme” in Tai Po. EPD would
27 implement the scheme on food waste collection gradually having regard to the results of recycling, the level of participation and the amount of recyclables collected.
107. In closing, the Vice-Chairman said that food waste constituted a large proportion among the municipal solid waste in Hong Kong. However, the ancillary facilities and technology for food waste collection had not been mature and the pilot scheme on food waste collection had just entered the second phase. He hoped that the relevant departments would continue working closely with each other and deploy suitable resources to extend the scheme to the around 150 organisations and venues mentioned above. It was also hoped that proper ancillary facilities could be made available gradually to collect domestic food waste and avoid causing environmental hygiene problems.
(Mr CHAN Fu-man left the meeting at 4:33 p.m.)
(Ms CHAN Kit-ying, Mr HO Sau-lin, Mr TSUI Kin-chuen and Mr NG Tsz-wing, Ricky joined the meeting at 4:33 p.m.)
(The Chairman of EHHC presided over the meeting for discussion of the following item.)
Agenda 6: Request for a Comprehensive Review of the Slope Refuse Problem (Item raised by Mr Jonathan LEUNG Chun) (EHHC Paper No. 24/2021)
108. The Chairman welcomed the following representatives of government departments to the meeting:
(i) Ms CHAN Kit-ying, Engineer / Slopes (HES), Highways Department (HyD); (ii) Mr HO Sau-lin, Project Coordinator / D(HES), HyD; (iii) Mr TSUI Kin-chuen, Senior Inspector of Works / Slopes (HES)1, HyD; and (iv) Mr NG Tsz-wing, Ricky, Principal Estate Officer / HKW & S(2) (District Lands Office, Hong Kong West and South), Lands Department (LandsD).
109. The Chairman invited Mr Jonathan LEUNG Chun to introduce the agenda item.
110. Mr Jonathan LEUNG Chun introduced the agenda item. He asked whether there would be a notification mechanism to notify the relevant departments if the staff of the FEHD, LandsD or HyD removing the disposed refuse on slopes found that the refuse did not belong to their area of purview; how the grey areas in which the department responsible was unknown
28 would be handled; how the removal timetable was set; and how to improve the problem of refuse disposal on slopes, such as installing surveillance cameras in disposal black spots.
111. The Chairman invited the representative of HyD to respond.
112. Ms CHAN Kit-ying responded as follows:
(i) HyD had always referred cases to the departments responsible. For instance, FEHD staff who found refuse, dead branches or leaves on slopes under the purview of HyD would issue an internal notice to HyD, which would subsequently notify the contractors to remove them; (ii) According to the contract between HyD and the relevant contractors, a certain number of slope inspections had to be completed every month, including removing refuse which might clog the drainage pipes, such as tissue paper, cans and withered leaves; and (iii) If HyD found personal objects which were large in size, the case would be referred to other departments such as LandsD for law enforcement. If the properties were unclaimed, HyD would assist in removing them.
113. The Chairman invited the representative of LandsD to respond.
114. Mr NG Tsz-wing, Ricky remarked that refuse was divided into household refuse and construction waste, and LandsD was mainly responsible for handling construction waste abandoned on unleased and unallocated government land. Should construction waste be found on unmanaged slopes, LandsD’s contractors would be arranged to remove it as soon as possible. If the construction waste was disposed in a grey area, the land status plan would be checked first and the case would be referred to relevant government departments or building management staff concerned according to the information of the land status plan.
115. Mr LAM Ho-por, Kelvin put forward the following views and questions:
(i) One or two months ago, there was a similar situation on the slope along Lee Nam Road in South Horizons. He had communicated with various departments to identify the responsibility of the grey areas to remove the refuse as soon as possible. Thanks to the coordinated efforts of the departments, the removal was almost complete. Nevertheless, he opined that it was necessary to develop a more efficient mechanism to quickly differentiate who was responsible for the grey areas; and (ii) Last week, he received a report of refuse in a grey area. HyD rendered that Towngas should be responsible for the removal, but Towngas denied that. Subsequently, LandsD had to intervene to differentiate the responsibilities. He had not received a reply so far and stated that he hoped to resolve the grey area issue as soon as possible.
29
116. Ms LAM Yuk-chun, MH put forward the following views and questions:
(i) Almost all of the buildings in the Ap Lei Chau Estate were built around slopes. Though such slopes were piled up with a large amount of refuse, it was difficult for FEHD staff to clean every place, so this must be handled by another team of staff; (ii) HyD mentioned earlier that the contractors would regularly conduct inspections on the slopes of various districts. She asked if only the district under the purview of the department would be inspected, or if there was another team of staff responsible for all slope inspections; (iii) She thanked the staff of the Leisure and Cultural Services Department who came to the Ap Lei Chau Estate that day to remove the refuse on the slopes, as well as the staff of the Housing Department who coordinated the removal. In grey areas where it was unclear whose responsibility it was, refuse such as lunch boxes, face masks and water bottles had been piling up for a long time. With the rainy season coming soon, dampened refuse on slopes would lead to a mosquito plague; and (iv) She enquired on how often the inspections mentioned by HyD would be conducted, and whether it would remove the refuse found instantly or according to a fixed schedule.
117. The Chairman said that the current-term SDC had discussed similar issues. In the discussions, Mr Paul ZIMMERMAN mentioned that the coordination mechanism was helpful for resolving the issues, and that in the past, district coordination had always been undertaken by SDO. He invited SDO representatives to elaborate on the coordination details later, and invited the representatives of HyD to provide additional information.
118. Mr TSUI Kin-chuen gave a consolidated response as follows:
(i) Upon receiving complaints about the waste disposed near Towngas, HyD had conducted inspections at the site, and found that grass cuttings were disposed behind the Towngas building. According to HyD records, LandsD had allocated that lot to Towngas for routine maintenance. Subsequently, HyD made an enquiry to Towngas, but Towngas replied that there was no such cleaning arrangement. Subsequently, the grass disposed was found to be removed and the incident was deemed to be settled; and (ii) The HyD contractors had developed a mechanism for the frequency of slope inspections to be conducted. During the inspection, photos would be taken for record and if slopes were found to be damaged or have refuse, arrangements would be made to repair the damaged slopes, while refuse would be removed immediately. If a large amount of refuse accumulated in the drainage pipes, the refuse would be cleared first before a vehicle would be arranged to transport it away. Therefore, during the inspection, if conditions allowed, the refuse found would be dealt with immediately.
30
119. Mr NG Tsz-wing, Ricky gave a consolidated response as follows:
(i) The LandsD contractors performed grass cutting work in Lee Nam Road earlier. The grass cuttings would be put aside first, before a vehicle was arranged on the day or the next day to transport them away. LandsD was responsible for removing the waste generated from its grass cutting. According to HyD representatives, the grass cut by HyD should have been removed by LandsD contractors; and (ii) LandsD’s “Slope Maintenance Responsibility Information System” could be used to check the department responsible for a certain slope to refer the case to that department for removal. For slopes which had not been assigned to any departments or organisations, LandsD would handle the construction waste on unallocated slopes.
120. The Chairman invited the FEHD representative to respond.
121. Mr HON Ming-sau said that FEHD has signed contracts for the cleaning work in grey areas, such as ungazetted beaches or shores. Covering 118 locations, the new contracts stipulated the cleaning frequency based on past inspections or the number of complaints received. If more complaints with respect to a certain location were received, FEHD would, in light of the circumstances, increase the cleaning frequency in that location under the new contract. If FEHD staff found refuse during inspections, they would inform the contractors as soon as possible to arrange for cleaning.
122. Mr LEUNG Ying-kit said that SDO had been working with FEHD to tackle the problem of refuse in grey areas under the District-led Actions Scheme (DAS) of the Southern District. If members found that refuse had been piling up on slopes for a long time, they could refer the matter to FEHD. FEHD would follow up through contract variation to meet needs.
123. Mr Jonathan LEUNG Chun put forward the following views and questions:
(i) HyD representatives had mentioned that contractors would inspect the slopes registered with the department at least once a month, and so would FEHD staff. However, he did not know much about the details of the inspections mentioned just now by LandsD representatives. He asked whether the place where the refuse was found would be recorded and inspected regularly, as well as the inspection frequency and the number of government sites which were currently enclosed. He asked how the large amount of refuse currently being disposed in government sites enclosed by barbed wired fences would be handled;
31 (ii) He hoped that there would be a notification mechanism among departments, and hoped that contractors who found refuse in areas not under their purview would refer the case to the relevant departments; (iii) Some members of the public observed that that the cleaning staff only cleaned a particular area, completely ignoring the refuse in nearby areas. He said that members of the public did not know how to differentiate which department was responsible and only knew that the staff were government staff. He asked whether all the departments thought that the existing practice was adequate in resolving the problem, and hoped that the notification and referral mechanism could be improved; and (iv) FEHD said that the refuse which had been piling up for a long time at the bottom of the slopes was extremely difficult to remove, and more time might be needed to arrange the cleansing operation. He asked whether there was a specific cleaning plan for this type of refuse, such as a cleaning operation once or twice a year. He cited the example of Repulse Bay Road, along which trees fell as a result of Typhoon Mangkhut and piled up with other refuse, and asked how this would be handled.
124. The Chairman asked how to improve communication between various departments, such as whether contractors could directly refer cases to the relevant departments, or whether they had to do so via their own department.
125. Ms CHAN Kit-ying responded as follows:
(i) Given that HyD was responsible for managing over 3,000 slopes, contractors might not be able to inspect the same slope several times a month. Each slope would only be inspected around once every half a year; (ii) Apart from contractors finding refuse on slopes through their own inspections, HyD, upon receiving complaint emails, calls or complaints referred from LandsD, would also notify contractors immediately for removal. She opined that the current notification mechanism was more or less smooth. Even if no complaints were received with respect to certain locations, if members reported the problem to HyD, the department would handle it immediately; and (iii) HyD would enhance communication with contractors so that they would take the initiative to remove refuse found on the slope managed by HyD near the inspection areas when they handled refuse on slopes in the future.
126. The Chairman asked what HyD contractors would do if they found refuse on slopes under the purview of other departments.
127. Ms CHAN Kit-ying said that if HyD was responsible for cleaning a slope covering the area 5-10 metres up from the ground, and found refuse above this area, contractors would notify
32 HyD engineers and have them refer the case to the staff responsible in the relevant departments. Since contractors did not know the relevant details, they would not notify the contractors of relevant departments on their own.
128. Mr HON Ming-sau added the following:
(i) FEHD contractors who conducted routine inspections and found refuse on slopes which was within the scope of the contract would clean the refuse as soon as possible. If it was unclear whether the responsibility lied with a department or a private place, FEHD colleagues would check and refer the case accordingly; and (ii) For the refuse on the slope of Repulse Bay Road mentioned by Mr Jonathan LEUNG Chun, he could find its exact location after the meeting, and whether it was within the scope of the contract, he could also explore whether it was possible to include it in the contract of DAS to facilitate removal.
129. Mr NG Tsz-wing, Ricky added the following:
(i) LandsD contractors had regular inspection arrangements for enclosed government land, and if refuse or dead branches were found, they would be handled as appropriate. As for the unleased and unallocated government land outside the enclosed area, including unallocated slopes, given that they covered such a vast area, there were currently no mechanisms for regular inspections; and (ii) Based on past experience, complaints about refuse or dead branches received via the 1823 hotline or other departments would usually be referred to FEHD first. If FEHD had queries, it would ask LandsD about the land status plan of the specific location and its details for further action.
(Mr WONG Yui-hei, Angus left the meeting at 5:00 p.m.)
130. Mr CHAN Hin-chung put forward the following views and questions:
(i) There were lots of refuse on the slope of Shek Pai Wan, Shek Yue but no one to remove them. He took the opportunity to thank FEHD as it had helped remove refuse on the slope. This slope had been registered in 2018 but the department responsible for the slope had never been designated until recently, when the slope was designated to be managed by the Government Property Agency; and (ii) He asked LandsD how many such slopes there were in the Southern District for which the department or organisation responsible had not been designated.
33 131. Mr NG Tsz-wing, Ricky said that in general, man-made roadside slopes would be assigned to HyD for management; man-made slopes made under private construction projects would be assigned to the owners of the buildings. A large proportion of the unallocated slopes were natural slopes. He did not have the updated figures at the moment.
132. Mr CHAN Hin-chung further asked whether most of the slopes with refuse mentioned in the previous meeting were natural slopes, and whether refuse piled up because there were no departments managing them at the moment.
133. Mr NG Tsz-wing, Ricky said that if a slope had been assigned to a party for management, that department or organisation was responsible for removing the refuse; if refuse was found on an unallocated natural slope, the removal work would be shared among various departments. Construction waste would be removed by LandsD while household refuse would be removed by FEHD.
134. The Chairman hoped that this meeting would allow members to learn more about the notification mechanism among departments, and hoped to foster a closer liaison among departments, so that the problem of refuse on slopes could be resolved in an effective manner.
(Mr Paul ZIMMERMAN joined the meeting at 5:04 p.m.)
135. Mr Paul ZIMMERMAN thanked the government staff for removing the refuse on slopes in Pokfulam and said that although it was an arduous task, good progress was made.
136. The Chairman said that as mentioned just now by departmental representatives, for slopes which were more difficult to clean, it was necessary to have contractors handle them. He hoped that arrangements would be made for this in DAS in the future.
((Ms CHAN Kit-ying, Mr HO Sau-lin, Mr TSUI Kin-chuen and Mr NG Tsz-wing, Ricky left the meeting at 5:06 p.m.)
Agenda Item 7: Operational Effectiveness of GREEN @ COMMUNITY in the Southern District (Item raised by Mr WONG Yui-hei, Angus and Mr CHAN Ping-yeung) (EHHC Paper No. 25/2021)
34 137. The Chairman invited Mr CHAN Ping-yeung to briefly introduce the agenda item.
138. Mr CHAN Ping-yeung raised the following enquiries:
(i) He enquired about EPD’s criteria for evaluating the tenders received for GREEN @ TIN WAN; and (ii) He enquired whether EPD would maintain the practice of submitting quarterly reports of GREEN @ TIN WAN to EHHC as promised in its written response.
139. The Chairman invited the EPD representatives to respond.
140. Dr Alex CHIU gave a consolidated response as follows:
(i) Every contractor would post its quarterly report regularly on its social media page, namely Facebook. But the report would only be in the form of photos and only Chinese version is available currently. The Chinese version of the latest quarterly report prepared by GREEN @ TIN WAN had been submitted to members via the Secretariat before the meeting, whereas the submission of English version would be arranged in due course; and (ii) Through open tender, EPD appoints qualified non-profit organisations to operate the “Recycling Stores. EPD would evaluate the technical and financial proposal of the tender documents according to established procedures. EPD would then select the successful tenderer according to the selection criteria listed in the tender documents.
141. The Chairman said it was learned that the Secretariat had received the quarterly report submitted by EPD before the meeting and would upload it to SDC’s website after the meeting. He also thanked EPD for lending support to the Committee’s work by submitting quarterly reports on a regular basis. He invited members to raise comments or enquiries on the tender evaluation criteria.
142. Mr CHAN Ping-yeung raised the following comments and enquiries:
(i) Reiterating the comment given in Appendix 1 that the inclusion of “Tenderer’s Experience” as one of the tender evaluation criteria, without considering the actual performance of relevant work and whether the tenderer could achieve the expected target, might cause unfairness. He enquired whether EPD would plug this loophole; and (ii) He requested EPD to provide the content of the tender evaluation criteria and the actual figures to facilitate comparison with and evaluation of the quarterly reports.
35 143. Mr LO Kin-hei said that there had been major environmental protection programmes at the district level such as GREEN @ KWUN TONG, GREEN @ EASTERN in the past. But the recent environmental protection programmes were only restricted to small areas. He enquired whether the major district programmes were still going on. He enquired whether the Southern District could participate in the programme as well.
144. The Chairman said that at the 6th meeting of the Working Group on Environmental Protection and Hygiene, quite a number of green groups considered that the performance of Baguio in glass bottle recycling and processing was unsatisfactory. The effectiveness and amount of recyclables collected were inferior to the recycling services provided by minor district green groups in the past. He enquired about EPD’s mechanism for monitoring the effectiveness of outsourced recycling projects and the number of reviews conducted on these projects, and how the relevant stakeholders could air their views on the outsourced contractors.
145. Dr Alex CHIU gave a consolidated response as follows:
(i) The figures mentioned in Annex 1 did not tally with those recorded by EPD. The news reported that the amount of recycled waste plastics collected by 121C Society for recycling did not meet the targets. But according to the information on projects approved under the Environment and Conservation Fund, 121C Society had received fund for recycling work between 2015 and 2020, during which the total amount of recycled waste plastics collected by it had exceeded the target by about 15%. The reason for the discrepancy between the figures might be that the news figures only covered part of the period of the whole funding duration; (ii) The Recycling Store GREEN @ TIN WAN commenced operation in mid-November 2020. In the first quarter since it commenced operation, it had exceeded its recycling targets. The amount of waste plastics and designated recyclables other than plastics collected had exceeded the corresponding targets stated in the contract by about 30% and 200% respectively. EPD was verifying the figure in the 1st quarter of 2021. According to the preliminary figures, GREEN @ TIN WAN had collected more than 40 tonnes of recyclables in total, which had exceeded the 24 tonnes collected in the 4th quarter of 2020 by 70%; (iii) EPD has named the new programme “Community Recycling Network” as GREEN @ COMMUNITY since October 2020, comprising Recycling Stations, Recycling Stores and Recycling Spots. The Recycling Stations were larger size facilities that provided education on environmental protection and recycling support, and would continue expanding its coverage. For example, EPD had granted the operation contracts for two new Recycling Stations (GREEN @ WAN CHAI and GREEN @ SAI KUNG) in May 2021. Although no suitable location was found in the Southern District for setting up Recycling Station, EPD was planning to set up one additional
36 Recycling Store by the end of the year. The tendering exercise for providing another Recycling Store in the Southern District began in April 2021 and EPD welcome eligible non-profit organisations to join the tendering exercise; and (iv) Stakeholders who had any comments on the glass recycler were welcome to contact the relevant officers of EPD, including him and Mr Wallace FUNG. EPD would follow-up with the contractor.
(Post-meeting note: Recycling Store was a new community recycling facility. The marking scheme of the tender split into technical and financial evaluation. The technical evaluation included (1) Plans on operating the Recycling Store (2) Arrangement on management construction and human resources (3) Innovative suggestions (4) Experience in offering recycling service in the district over the last five years.)
146. The Chairman invited members to raise comments or enquiries.
147. Mr TSUI Yuen-wa raised the following comments and enquiries:
(i) He expressed regret that GREEN @ SOUTHERN might fail to be implemented after GREEN @ COMMUNITY was integrated to the new “Community Recycling Network”; and (ii) Apart from the amount of recyclables collected, he was also concerned about whether the community recycling work could develop a recycling network in the community as well as a green culture. Regarding the glass bottle recycling and processing service provided by Baguio, he pointed out that both the contractor and EPD only focused on the amount of recyclables collected and had attached little importance to the publicity and education work in the community. He hoped that EPD would actively liaise with the contractor and urge the latter to fulfil its obligations concerning publicity and education as specified in the operation contract so as to satisfy the community’s need for environmental protection.
(Mr Paul ZIMMERMAN left the meeting at 5:20 p.m.)
148. Mr CHAN Ping-yeung requested EPD to provide the content of the operation contract of GREEN @ TIN WAN as well as the target amount of recyclables to be collected, such as the collection amount of each type of recyclables that had met the target, after the meeting.
149. The Chairman enquired whether the target recycling figures set by EPD in the operation contract of GREEN @ TIN WAN was the same every year or would rise on a yearly basis.
37
150. Dr Alex CHIU gave a consolidated response as follows:
(i) He would explore with colleagues on whether to provide the content of the operation contract and target amount of recyclables. He said that the operation contract had specified the target amount of recyclables collected per month; (ii) It was not the case that GREEN @ SOUTHERN could not be implemented. The actual problem was that EPD and the department concerned had not been able to identify a suitable site for GREEN @ SOUTHERN yet. EPD would consult the Committee once it had identified a suitable site; and (iii) EPD had noted members’ comments on the glass bottle recycling and processing service provided by Baguio and would pass the comments to corresponding staff to follow up in due course.
(Post-meeting note: (i) The content of the operation contract include (1) setting up and operating the community recycling center to collect recyclables from the public and send to the downstream recyclers (2) promoting, publicizing and educating the public about recycling at source in the community (3) supporting EPD (such as outreach teams) to organise recycling activities. The target amount of recyclables collected per month for GREEN @ TIN WAN was 4 tonnes of plastics and 1 tonne of other designated recyclables other than plastics. The target amount of recyclables collected per month remained unchanged during the operation contract period.
(ii) To monitor the performance and the service provided by glass recycling contractor, EPD would perform regular spot check, including to review the contractor’s performance in collecting waste glass containers at collection points. For any enquiries or opinions on the glass container recycling service, EPD welcomes the public to enquire through their hotline 2838 3111 or contractor’s (Baguio) hotline 8100 2541. According to the contractor requirement, the contractor was also required to organise education activity in service area to promote clean glass containers recycling. The activity was postponed previously due to COVID-19, the contractor had resumed the activity since April 2021 and organised 7 education activities in one of the private estates in the Southern District and Wah Kwai Estate within two months. EPD welcomes feedbacks and enquires from Committee members, organisations in the Southern District, venue joining the collection service and the public. EPD also welcomes the element of recycling
38 waste glass containers to be included in environmental protection activities.)
151. The Chairman enquired about the location for the second phase of Recycling Store in the Southern District.
152. Dr Alex CHIU responded that the second phase of the programme of setting up Recycling Stores would be implemented in ten districts in Hong Kong, among which Southern District was one of the districts. Since the Recycling Stores would be operated in suitable commercial premises rented by the operating organisation, the sites for implementing the programme had not been finalised yet. Since the service targets of the Recycling Stores were mainly private housing estates, single-block buildings without waste separation facilities and “three-nil buildings”, EPD aimed to select sites which were near the service targets and where there were no recycling facilities in the vicinity. He emphasised that apart from providing Recycling Stores, the contractors also had to provide Recycling Spots and door-to-door collection service.
153. The Chairman enquired whether the requirements for the second phase of Recycling Store in the Southern District were the same as those for the first phase of Recycling Store, namely GREEN @ TIN WAN.
154. Dr Alex CHIU responded that he did not have the specific information of the requirements on hand. But as far as he knew, EPD had improved the contract requirements for the second phase of the programme after making reference to the experiences of the first phase. For example, the target amount of recyclables collected had been adjusted and the operating organisations were required to provide additional recycling vehicles for carrying out door-to-door collection service.
155. The Chairman said that members who had any comment on GREEN @ TIN WAN could contact Dr Alex CHIU. EPD was also arranging for members to conduct a site inspection at GREEN @ TIN WAN, which was expected to take place in June. He enquired whether 121C Society would score extra marks because of its experience in operating the first phase of the programme, namely GREEN @ TIN WAN, if it bid for the second phase of the programme.
156. Dr Alex CHIU responded that he did not have the specific information of the marking scheme on hand. But as far as he knew, open tendering procedures would be adopted for the second phase of the programme. The tendering documents had also specified the technical requirements for the tenderers. EPD would conduct a comprehensive evaluation according to the marking scheme.
39
(Post-meeting note: (i) The operation contract for the second phase of the Recycling Stores includes (1) setting up and operating the Recycling Store and workshops (2) collecting at least eight type of recyclables and send to the downstream recyclers (3) providing door-to-door recycling services for residential buildings and more frequent Recycling Spots service.
(ii) In terms of bidding for the second phase of the Recycling Stores, taking reference to the operating experience of the existing Recycling Stores, EPD required the bidder to submit records of types of community services and activities offered in the district and information on the established community connections with the residents organisations (including housing estates, single-block buildings and “three-nil buildings”) in order to evaluate whether the bidder had sufficient resources in the community network to expend the existing recycling network rapidly.)
157. The Chairman said that members were concerned about the implementation of the second phase of the programme in the Southern District. It was hoped that EPD would regularly report the progress of the second phase to the Committee.
158. Dr Alex CHIU responded that the programme had high transparency. EPD would disclose the information of the successful bidders on the Internet and would disseminate timely information to the Committee. The successful bidders had to carry out a lot of preparation work. EPD would invite the Committee to exchange views with the contractor, as was done in the implementation of GREEN @ TIN WAN.
159. The Chairman said that GREEN @ TIN WAN was implemented unexpectedly. Before GREEN @ TIN WAN started operation, the Committee had not received any information. He thus hoped that EPD would invite the Committee to participate in discussion during the preparation stage for the second phase of the programme.
160. Dr Alex CHIU said that members’ comments had been noted and EPD would make arrangements as far as practicable.
Agenda Item 8: Any Other Business
161. The Chairman said that attending members had not raised any other business.
Part II – Items for Information
40
Anti-mosquito Campaign 2021 (Phase II) in Southern District (EHHC Paper No. 26/2021)
162. Mr CHAN Ping-yeung pointed out that as shown in the paper, the number of warning letters issued during the Anti-mosquito Campaign (Phase I) was zero. He asked whether offenders made an improvement immediately after receiving verbal warnings from FEHD officers, or fewer mosquitos were found at the locations where an offence was committed.
163. Ms LI Lai-ha, Liz said that when patrolling construction sites, areas under the purview of property management companies, such as private housing estates, FEHD officers might issue warning letters, according to the situation, for any housing estates which were identified prone to mosquito infestation. FEHD will not issue warning letters to public who dispose refuse which might cause mosquito infestation.
Progress Report on District Minor Works of Public Toilets in Southern District (EHHC Paper No. 27/2021)
164. The Committee noted the content of the paper.
Street Management Report (as at 30.4.2021) (EHHC Paper No. 28/2021)
165. Mr TSUI Yuen-wa pointed out that the prosecution figures were particularly high in February 2021 but very low in other months. He asked whether this was due to administrative and judicial procedures, or a higher number of offences in February compared with other months.
166. Mr HO Yu-tung said that the prosecution figures were higher in February since more shops operators violated the regulations.
167. Mr TSUI Yuen-wa put forward the following views:
(i) He reckoned that FEHD officers stepped up their enforcement efforts as the Committee had included the aforementioned issue in the meeting agenda in February 2021 and issued a letter to FEHD enquiring on the prosecution figures. As shown in the paper, the prosecution figures had returned to the original level afterwards;
41 (ii) He opined that the failure of FEHD officers to continuously step up enforcement resulted in a loss of deterrent effort. He hoped that this would not happen again. If stringent enforcement was not maintained, the situation would deteriorate and shop operators would continue to place their goods on the streets; and (iii) As the Aberdeen Market was about to be closed, its shop operators would move to other markets or rent a nearby shop to continue their business. The problem of shop front extension (SFE) would worsen, as was the case at the shops along the “Fifteen Houses”. He hoped that FEHD would not loosen its enforcement, otherwise the situation would deteriorate and there would be even more complaints.
168. Mr HON Ming-sau said that FEHD had all along been monitoring the SFE situation at the shops of the “Fifteen Houses” and the Aberdeen Centre, and would not loosen its enforcement. FEHD did not want the SFE situation to deteriorate at the shops of the nearby Aberdeen Centre and “Fifteen Houses” when the Aberdeen Market is closed for renovation. He said that FEHD would definitely continue to enforce the law in a stringent manner.
169. The Chairman asked the EPD representative about the locations of the “Illegal Dumping of Small Construction and Large Household Waste” on page 3 of the paper.
170. Mr FUNG Wai-yip, Wallace responded that the figures reflected the situation of the entire Southern District, and the exact dumping locations would be provided later.
171. The Chairman said that he would like to know whether the dumping locations mentioned in the paper were the same as those in the previous reports. He hoped that Mr FUNG Wai-yip, Wallace would advise on that after the meeting.
(Post-meeting note: EPD received 4 complaint cases related to illegal dumping of small construction and large household waste during March and April 2021. The 4 locations were Repulse Bay Road, Aberdeen Main Road, Island Road and Ocean Park Road. There were no duplicate complaints at the above-mentioned locations in the past 3 years.)
Report on Recycling Bins and Recyclables (as at 31.3.2021) (EHHC Paper No. 29/2021)
172. The Chairman said that the statistical figures of “GREEN @ TIN WAN” would be incorporated into the annex of the paper for reference in future.
Progress Report on the Market Modernisation Programme Project in Aberdeen Market (EHHC Paper No. 30/2021)
42
173. Mr HON Ming-sau gave a brief introduction and mentioned that FEHD had organised two briefing sessions on 31 March 2021 to explain to all market tenants the arrangements for staying in the market, leaving the market and relocating their stalls permanently. Tenants had returned their reply slips indicating their intentions with respect to the above three arrangements in April 2021. For stall operators opted to stay in the market, their tenancies would be extended for four months until 31 October 2021. For stall operators opted to leave the market, their tenancies would not be renewed and they must return the stalls by 30 June 2021. For stall operators opted to relocate their stalls permanently, they must also return the stalls by 30 June 2021. These stall operators would participate in the auction of vacant stalls in the designated markets of the Southern District in late May so as to continue their business. Considering some stall operators who opted to leave the market might wish to postpone the date of returning their stalls due to the economic environment or personal reasons, FEHD allowed them to apply for postponement where their tenancy would be extended until 31 October 2021. FEHD was vetting the applications on a case-by-case basis;
174. On behalf of Mr WONG Yui-hei, Angus, the Chairman asked Mr HON Ming-sau about the details of the measures for minimising the impact of the construction. If possible, he hoped that FEHD could announce the arrangements for the construction works and the traffic as soon as possible. In addition, he wished to be informed at the next meeting of the details of the finalised design, such as the layout plan, the design of the dwarf walls, the arrangement of stalls as well as distribution of various shops.
175. Mr HON Ming-sau responded as follows:
(i) He understood members’ concerns over the construction arrangements, and would convey to the team responsible that members would like to have the construction period and construction details to be published as soon as possible; and (ii) FEHD had collected the views of members and stall operators on the distribution of shops and the design of dwarf walls in earlier meetings. Given that the overall design and layout had to be taken into account, the team responsible needed some time to review the aforementioned comments, and would report updates to stall operators and the Committee as soon as possible.
Strategies and Tasks on Improving Environmental Hygiene in Hong Kong (EHHC Paper No. 31/2021)
176. The Chairman said that the paper was supposed to be discussed in “Part I – Items for Discussion” of the meeting. However, as FEHD had submitted the paper to the Secretariat
43 late, the Committee received the paper at a later time. In view of this, the Committee decided that the paper would be discussed in “Part II – Items for Information”.
177. The Chairman invited members to put forward their views or questions.
178. Mr CHAN Ping-yeung put forward the following views and questions:
(i) Rodent infestation was quite serious in Ap Lei Chau, with more rodents found in the restaurants near the west end of Wah Ting Street. Recently, a thermal detector was placed in the district and the relevant statistics were being collected. He hoped that this practice would help to eradicate rodents; (ii) He opined that water seepage in buildings was often difficult to handle as the source was unknown. Even when the source of the water seepage could be identified at times, the reply from FEHD was ambiguous. If the occupants living upstairs were reluctant to address the problem of water seepage, even if the victims were willing to handle the problem on their own, they were discouraged from doing so because of the complicated procedures involved in claiming the cost through the Small Claims Tribunal; and (iii) It was mentioned in the paper that FEHD had now adopted new technologies in eight districts to tackle the problem of water seepage. He asked when such technologies would be tried out in the Southern District.
179. Mr CHAN Hin-chung pointed out that Aberdeen Market would be closed for 14 months and it was anticipated that members of the public would buy from other markets, including Yue Kwong Road Market. Since Yue Kwong Road Market was too old, there was no barrier free access for the elderly and people with impaired mobility. He understood that due to the structural constraints, facilities such as escalators and lifts could not be installed in the market. He asked whether FEHD and the Architectural Services Department had any improvement measures to cater for the elderly and people in need.
180. Mr POON Ping-hong put forward the following views and questions:
(i) As far as he knew, 14 shop operators would move to Tin Wan Market to continue their business during the closure of Aberdeen Market, so he believed that some local residents would buy from Tin Wan Market instead. However, Tin Wan Market was ill-managed and unhygienic, with many miscellaneous articles and vacant stalls, putting off local residents. He proposed to renovate Tin Wan Market from May to October 2021 to make it more attractive; and (ii) He said that when he was handling cases of water seepage, he could not contact the staff of the Joint Offices for Investigation of Water Seepage Complaints (JO) and
44 therefore difficult to follow up the matter. He hoped to establish a good relationship and strengthen communication with the staff of JO and FEHD. Moreover, he invited them to the meetings of the Committee.
181. The Chairman said that according to the paper, the Hong Kong Regional Joint Office in Wong Chuk Hang commenced operation from January last year. He asked whether JO operated independently or was subordinate to the Southern District Environmental Hygiene Office. Since a member had mentioned that it was difficult to contact the JO officers, he asked whether he should seek assistance from the Southern District Environmental Hygiene Office or JO for water seepage problems. He also asked FEHD to respond on the renovation and improvement arrangement for the markets.
182. Mr HON Ming-sau gave a consolidated response as follows:
(i) In the past, different departments like FEHD, the Buildings Department and the Water Supplies Department had always faced communication problem. Therefore, they had decided to set up JO to enhance efficiency. There was one regional joint office in Hong Kong Island and in Kowloon respectively, and two offices in the New Territories. The Hong Kong Island Regional Joint Office was mainly responsible for handling water seepage cases on Hong Kong Island, and was not subordinate to the Southern District Environmental Hygiene Office. However, if members were unable to contact the JO staff, he was willing to assist with the liaison and referral of cases; (ii) As for when the new technologies would be tried out in the Southern District to tackle the water seepage problem, he said he would first ask JO when the current round of tests would be completed and the timetable of including the Southern District as a pilot district, and then give an account of the details in due course; and (iii) As Yue Kwong Road Market and Tin Wan Market had been in operation for about 30 years, they were facing problems such as ageing facilities. He said that he would have a site visit with the staff of Markets Section and explore how to improve the hardware facilities, so as to help the stall operators move to the aforementioned markets to continue their business during the closure of Aberdeen Market, with a view to revitalising these markets. He said he would further follow up management problems such as an excessive amount of miscellaneous articles in the markets.
(Post-meeting note: JO has applied the new testing technology for water seepage investigation in suitable cases in the three testing districts (Kowloon City, Wan Chai and Central & West District) since late June 2018. After considering the testing statistics of the three testing districts using the new testing
45 technology and assessing the undertaking ability of existing service provider in the market, JO has expended the use of the new testing technology to Sham Shui Po, Kwai Tsing, Tuen Mun, Tai Po, North District, Eastern District, Wong Tai Sin, Sai Kung and Yuen Long since late September 2019. This implied that the number of testing district has increased from three to twelve.
For more complex cases in non-testing district where the source of water seepage cannot be found with traditional testing methods, such as involving cases where the humidity value monitoring shows that the humidity is continuously high while being affected by the severe impact of water seepage for a long time, cases where there are signs of deterioration in locations affected by water seepage for a long time and cases of water seepage reappeared after repeated investigations, JO would consider to apply the new testing technology on case by case basis.
As the JO has been using the new testing technology for a short time only, it is now accumulating experience to improve the relevant procedural guidelines. In addition, taking into account the number of consulting companies in the market, it is safer to implement gradually, which can also ensure the quality of handling cases. JO will pay close attention to the supply of consultants in the market and consider further adopting new testing technology in more districts. JO has conducted a market consultation in the second quarter of 2020 to assess the number of service providers with relevant testing equipment in the market and to consider arrangements for the promotion of the new testing technology to other districts.)
183. Mr CHAN Hin-chung hoped that Mr HON Ming-sau and the staff of Markets Section would inform him when they had plans to inspect the markets so that he could go together to find out more about the situation and exchange views with them.
184. Mr HON Ming-sau welcomed the suggestion and will make suitable arrangements.
Date of Next Meeting
185. The Chairman said that the 10th EHHC meeting would be held at 2:30 p.m. on 13 July 2021 (Tuesday).
46 186. There being no other business, the meeting was adjourned at 6:01 p.m.
Secretariat, Southern District Council July 2021
47