塑膠廢物對環境造成負擔，在2019年冠狀病毒疫情下，市民更常使用外賣服務，即棄塑膠餐具用量飆升，問題更嚴重。有意見指出，政府應研究透過改例，管制或禁制即棄塑膠餐具，本局會視乎建議之可行性及效用而認真考慮該建議。
首先，管制／禁制即棄塑膠餐具可減少污染，改善環境。透過改例，能有效減少即棄塑膠餐具製品，以及固體垃圾量，從而減少對本地堆填區及海洋生態系統的負擔。相關環境保護法例有助增加大眾對環境保護的意識，在環境保護的角度有絕對的利益。
其次，修例管制／禁制即棄塑膠餐具有利政府的形象。政府以身作則，主動做推行政策改善環境問題，可改善政府形象。正面的政府印象會令施政更容易得到支持。獲得大型環保團體，包括世界自然（香港）基金會、緣色和平、長春社等的信任和支持，絕對有利政府將來更順暢地提出其他有關環境的議題。
第三，修例管制／禁制即棄長遠而言可減少政府的開支或負擔。本地固體垃圾量減少，長遠而言可以減少政府的垃圾處理開支。因此而節省的相關開支，除了收集垃圾所導致的清潔人員費用或垃圾站支出，亦有可能減少承載垃圾的土地要求，其省卻的土地費用無法估算。修例可減輕政府長遠負擔。
然而，修例不利本地經濟發展，減少國民生產總值。塑膠生產商和食品零售商的職位流失，令市場上相關工作機會減少，失業率上升。管制或禁制即棄塑膠餐具會對相關行業發展大受打擊，盈利下跌影響行業發展。受連鎖效應影響的包括製造業、零售業。本地經濟在2019冠狀病毒疫情下已經疲弱，只會更受打擊。
再者，此舉可能會增加社會矛盾，減少社會凝聚力。受修例影響的即棄塑膠餐具用家數量在2019冠狀病毒疫情下上升。因為家中住所不適宜煮食，例如住劏戶竹的住戶，就要承受因管制或禁制即棄塑膠餐具而被轉嫁的餐具成本，令他們在疫情中面對的經濟壓力百上加斤，對社會的不滿增加。修例有機會導致社會矛盾。
縱觀以上所述的利弊存在矛盾，然而環保始終是一個長遠的命題，塑膠廢物對環境造成的傷害是不可逆轉。為了本地的可持續發展，本局見到修例的必要性。以下是本局的建議，為求確保方案可有效達致其政策目的。
第一，本局會就管制/禁制即棄塑膠餐具進行公眾諮詢，在修改法例管制/禁制即棄塑膠餐具時顧及民意，聽取各持份者的意見，譬如約見業界及環保團體，亦會開放接受大眾對修例的意見。在之後制定法例落實內容時，會研究並回應收集的意見是否可行。
第二，本局會參考海外地區，如歐盟成員國的成功經驗，再作研究。另外，與香港有近似消費背景的台灣，近年都開始管制即棄塑膠餐具，本局亦會主動參考其利弊得失，取長補短。這些海外地區的成功經驗有不少值得香港借鑑、參考，確保方案可有效達致其政策目的。
同時，環保由教育開始。除了修例，本局亦期望通過公民教育，如學校巡迴講座，加強社會對源頭減廢、保護環境的意識。亦會透過推廣活動，如播放電視或電台廣篩、巴士站或巴士車身廣告、網上廣告，宣傳管制或禁制即棄塑膠餐具的優點，以爭取公眾支持。
考慮到疫情下，本地經濟已處於低俗，本局建議押後實施期，設立合理的寬限期，例如在實行管制首半年甚至更長時間，初犯者僅會被警告。讓業界有時間按新政策改變營運模式，研究其他對環境傷害比較低的即棄膠餐具代替品，例如含少量塑膠成分的紙質或植物纖維餐具，以符合新法例要求。
除了着手修改法例，本局會繼續多方面推動本地環保的發展，減少本地固體廢物量。
即棄膠餐具產生的塑膠廢物對環境造成負擔，在2019年冠狀病毒疫情下，市民因一系列限聚令措施、外出用膳受限及衞生理由，更常使用外賣服務，導致即棄塑膠餐具用量飆升，問題更加嚴重。有意見指出，政府應研究透過改例，管制／禁制即棄塑膠餐具，本局會視乎建議之可行性及效用而認真考慮該建議。
首先，管制／禁制即棄塑膠餐具可減少污染，改善環境。透過改例，能有效減少即棄塑膠餐具製品及固體垃圾量，從而減少對本地堆填區及海洋生態系統的負擔。相關環境保護法例有助增加大眾對環境保護的意識，對環境保護有利。
第二，修例管制／禁制即棄長遠而言可減少政府的開支或負擔。本地固體垃圾量減少，長遠而言可以減少政府的垃圾處理開支。因此而節省的相關開支，除了收集垃圾所導致的清潔人員費用或垃圾站支出，亦有可能減少承載垃圾的土地要求，其省卻的土地費用無法估算。修例可減輕政府長遠負擔。
然而，修例有損本地經濟發展，減少國民生產總值。塑膠生產商和食品零售商的職位流失，令市場上相關工作機會減少，失業率上升。管制／禁制即棄塑膠餐具會對相關行業發展盈利下跌不利行業發展。受連鎖效應影響的包括製造業、零售業。本地經濟在2019冠狀病毒疫情下已經疲弱，修例只會對經濟造成更大打擊。
其次，此舉可能會增加社會矛盾，減少社會凝聚力。受修例影響的即棄塑膠餐具用家數量，在2019冠狀病毒疫情下上升。因為家中住所不適宜煮食，譬如住劏戶竹的住戶，就要承受因管制或禁制即棄塑膠餐具而被轉嫁的餐具成本，令他們在疫情中面對的經濟壓力百上加斤，對社會的不滿增加。修例有機會導致社會矛盾。
再者，現時貿然修例不利政府的形象。政府在2019冠狀病毒疫情期間提出此政策未免令大眾覺得政府「離地」，未有顧及受限聚措施影響而不能在餐廳堂食的人士。大眾對政府有負面印象，會令政府的施政更難獲得支持。市民的怨氣積累之下，也不利政府將來提出其他類似議題，如限制塑膠袋或包裝。
縱觀以上所述的利弊存在矛盾，然而環保是一個重要的議題。不過，本港社會在面對2019冠狀病毒疫情下的打擊已漸見疲弱，修例管制或禁制即棄塑膠餐具似乎並不是目前最有利的舉動。以下是本局的其他建議，以期可減少負面影響，同時減少本地固體廢物量。
第一，本局會就如何減少即棄塑膠餐具進行公眾諮詢，聽取各持份者的意見，例如約見業界及環保團體，亦會開放接受大眾對議題的意見。在之後制定措施或將來研究修改法例時，會視乎收集的意見是否可行再作回應。
第二，本局會參考海外地區的成功經驗，如與香港有近似消費背景的日本、韓國，都有規定市民回收處理用過的塑膠製品，本局亦會主動參考其利弊得失，取長補短。這些海外地區的成功經驗有不少值得香港借鑑、參考，期待透過修例以外的措施能減少本地固體廢物量。
同時，環保由教育開始。本局亦期望通過公民教育，如學校巡迴講座，加強社會對源頭減廢、保護環境的意識。亦會透過推廣活動，如播放電視或電台廣篩、巴士站或巴士車身廣告、網上廣告，宣傳減少廢物對可持續發展的重要性，以爭取公眾主動減少使用即棄塑膠餐具。
考慮到疫情下，本地經濟處於低俗，本局會研究其他經濟手段，如提供誘因以減少即棄塑膠餐具的使用。對生產者、銷售方、消費者課稅或收費，包括對即棄塑膠餐具收費，減少對生產商和真正有需求的用戶的影響。為求在大眾生活及環保之間取得平衡。
無論修例最終實行與否，本局會繼續多方面推動本地環保的發展，減少本地固體廢物量。
In light of the rising number of traffic accidents related to the use of mobile phones, proposal on imposing further restriction on its use by motorists was suggested. In this regard, the government had all along attached great importance to road safety. This paper sets out the pros and cons of adopting the aforementioned proposal and the recommendations in the end.
Enhancing Public Safety
First and foremost, public safety will be improved. By reducing time spent on smart devices, vigilance and road safety awareness of motorists will increase. More time is allowed for them to react to the road conditions, lower chance of traffic accidents will be resulted. This helps to minimise the severity and frequency of traffic accidents, and thus ensure the public safety.
Forging Sense of Security
Secondly, sense of security can be forged within the community. By improving restriction on the use of smart devices, the government could build a safer environment in which other users can feel more secured and safer during commuting. As a result, a better sense of social security can be forged.
However, there are a number of social, economic and political concerns in adopting the proposal.
Reducing Job Opportunities
To begin with, job opportunities for commercial driver will be reduced. Many commercial drivers rely heavily on taxi hailing applications on smart devices. These applications help locate the customers, and assist in route planning. Further imposing restriction on the use of smart devices would directly reduce the number of customers which commercial drivers can serve, and thus lowering their income. By changing jobs for a better earning, structural unemployment may be encountered.
Discouraging Investment
In addition, the increasing cost of business will discourage investment to the related industries, e.g. logistics and supply chain management sectors. They have practical needs for using mobile devices during driving for GPS positioning, updating the transportation status, etc. The restriction will hinder their daily operations and give rise to extra costs for substitutes, eventually discouraging new investments.
Increasing Government Expenditure
Moreover, the administration cost for the proposal is very high due to the complicated enforcement. For instance, the government would have to either hire more patrolling officers or to develop a new set of digital monitoring systems, both of which can deplete a great deal of public money. Extra pressure on public finance is foreseeable.
Worsening the City's Image
Finally, the government image will be adversely affected. As an international city which respects human rights and uphold liberal values, the act of imposing restriction on the use of smart devices for motorists will be considered as an infringement of personal freedom. This would make Hong Kong a less appealing city to overseas talent and companies. The image of the city as an international and liberal city will be tarnished.
In viewing of the potential benefits and drawbacks, it might not be the right moment for a full restriction on motorists' use of smart phones/devices. The government would propose effective recommendations with due regards towards the balance between public safety and the right of the commercial drivers.
Public Consultation
Firstly, public consultation is to be conducted to gauge public views and to engage relevant stakeholders, which include the trades and commercial drivers or holiday drivers. Multiple channels can be adopted to collect public views, e.g. email, fax, before formulating the details. Suggestions collected through the public consultation should be studied and the feasibility should be explored.
Education and Publicity
Secondly, the government needs to step up public education and publicity to enhance awareness on road safety. The government may organize schemes and events, which citizens and motorists may be reminded to be attentive and avoid using mobile devices during driving, various publicity and educational activities can be launched.
Timely Review
Thirdly, timely review is to be conducted on the effects of using smart devices on road safety. By closely monitoring the development of the situation, the government will be able to assess whether further actions should be taken, such as proposing amendments to existing ordinance to further safeguard public safety.
Monitoring and Regulatory System
Last but not the least, the existing monitoring and regulatory system are to be enhanced and consolidated. For instance, the level of punishment is to be increased, such as a deterrent sentence in relation to traffic accidents relating to the use of mobile devices during driving. In terms of monitoring, the government can also introduce new smart devices categories in the driving-offense point system. By enhancing the current systems, administration cost can be minimized.
To conclude, the government had all along been adopting a zero tolerance policy on irresponsible driving behaviours. The government will continue to monitor the situation of rising number of traffic accidents and explore more effective ways with greater deterrence to misuse of smart devices during driving.
Recently, there are public concerns over the import, export and re-export of animal fur products and, the government was asked to ban these products. In this connection, the government is open to all suggestions and will adhere to all invaluable opinion.
To begin with, the proposal is beneficial to animal welfare. A complete ban on the trade of fur products is the most effective way to stop the inhumane killing of animals for fur products. Also, public awareness of animal welfare can be boosted due to the public discussion on the issue.
Secondly, the proposal would have a positive effect on the environment, contributing to a better use of natural resources. By reducing the use of animal furs, less resources such as land and water will be used to produce animal products, leading to a less carbon-centric production process, reducing the risk of land degradation and drought due to overuse and extraction of water. The proposal could enhance sustainability of water.
In addition, banning these products will elevate the city’s status among the international community as animal welfare be enhanced. As a liberal city, Hong Kong has long been adopting a high standard and expectation on maintaining the wellbeing of animals. The proposal could foster better public awareness of animal welfare so as to maintain a similar ideology with the international counterparts. The proposal would thus maintain the city’s appeal to the international community.
However, such benefits are not without challenges.
Firstly, the proposal would reduce the number of job opportunities available in the local fur industry and have a negative impact on the economic development. Being the second largest fur clothing exporter, thousands of jobs are supported by this industry. By limiting the use of fur in the production process, many jobs will be slashed due to lower demand. A higher unemployment rate will be resulted.
Secondly, the proposal has negative implications to the local clothing business and harms the industry development. By banning the use of fur, local businesses would have to source alternatives at a higher cost, e.g. polyester, as substitute in the production, resulting in a higher operation cost. Also, local industry would have to re-train their staff on the new business models. The proposal would increase the operation costs of the local industry and reduce their competitiveness, hindering industry development.
Also, ban on impact, export and re-export of fur products would reduce government income in the long run. No more trade of fur products in the city will definitely affect the sales of local industry, and thus the taxable income and the tax to the government. The budget of the city will be adversely affected due to the ban.
Owning to the aforementioned circumstances, the government would propose to delay the implementation the proposal in order to minimise the impact to the local fur industry which is crucial to the economy. However, the government would take the following actions to help the industry to reduce reliance on fur products, so as to prepare for the future discussions of the topic.
To start with, the government would conduct a public consultation to engage relevant stakeholders and gauge public views. Industry leaders from the garment industry, legislative member and the public will be invited provide their comments towards the subject. Social consensus is expected.
Secondly, the government would step up public education and publicity to enhance awareness on animal welfare and sustainable consumption. The government may organise schemes and events, which consumers will be reminded to be attentive to the raw materials of garment products and avoid buying fur products. Various publicity and education activities can be launched to discourage the consumption and hence the production of fur product in long run.
Thirdly, product tax for fur product can be another substitute policy. While the tax will be borne by the consumers eventually, market demand of fur product may be reduced. With lower demand, lower supply of the concerned products will be resulted, due to the market mechanism. Product tax can be explored as an effective approach to enhance animal welfare.
Finally, the government would also conduct a pilot scheme to study the potential effect of phasing out the use of fur. The government would corporate with the industry and set up a testing plant which only sustainable raw materials be used. Timely review of the scheme should be conducted, so as to gain more experience on formulating the scope of the law in the future.
All in all, the government had all along put a great emphasis on animal welfare. To this end, the government would strive to uphold a high stand on animal production.
Due to a high demand on Accident & Emergency (A&E) services, the consultancy report had suggested that the government to adjust relevant fees. The government is open to all invaluable opinions. However, any forthcoming adjustment must abide by the principle of affordability.
First and foremost, the increasing A&E service fee, abusive usage of A&E service can be discouraged and excessive demand can be reduced. A higher fee would increase the cost of patients for seeking A&E services with minor symptoms or injury, as the cost-saving advantage diminishes. Hence, the problem of excessive demand can be relieved.
Consequently, more resources can be reallocated to other primary healthcare services with reducing demands on A&E services. The quality and efficiency of the healthcare system can be enhanced. For instances, budget can be used to purchase more equipment, e.g. x-ray scanner to reduce the waiting time of patients. More attention can be given to urgent patients. The overall effectiveness of the healthcare system can be improved.
However, there are a number of issues that may engender public concerns.
To begin with, social security level will be reduced as patients who have financial difficulties will find A&E service unaffordable for the increased costs. For patients who do not have financial capacity to seek treatment from the private section, public healthcare services, including A&E services, are their only means of getting protected. Increasing fee may prompt them to either postponing or skipping the necessary treatment. Adjusting the fee will increase the barrier for destitute patients and reduce healthcare affordability.
Accordingly, adjusting A&E service fees would bring a negative impact to the government image. The act of raising fees may be considered the public as disregarding their struggle and difficulties, especially during tine of post-COVID 19 recovery. As a result, trust between citizens and government may be eroded, with contribution of a non-compassionate image.
In light of the aforementioned proc and cons, the government will deploy measures to further safeguard the efficiency of the A&E services before opting for adjusting the fee.
Firstly, the government will conduct public consultation to gauge relevant views and opinions from all stakeholders, including but not limited to patients, medical staff, social unions and all citizens. They are welcome to provide their views through any channels with an aim to derive a societal consensus.
Secondly, timely review will be conducted on a yearly basis to closely monitor whether alternative approach had borne fruit and, whether the need of adjusting A&E service fee should be reintroduced. In case the demand of A&E services cannot be curbed.
Furthermore, the government would also step up publicity by educating the public on appropriate use of A&E services. Campaigns including territory-wide community engagement in the form of open forums and public dialogues activities.
In addition, exemptions are proposed to facilitate the needy groups for their practical need to use the A&E service if the fee is to be adjusted eventually considering all factors. This is also proposed to considered the direction of adjusting the fee regarding the level of emergency of the patient, i.e. patient in non-emergent conditions or reasonably believed as abuse to pay a higher level of charge.
The government had all along strived to safeguard and ensure the quality of healthcare services, while also maintaining affordability. To this end, the government will take all practicable steps to meet the needs of our society.
