Sewage Disposal Scheme
There is no free, clean water in Hong Kong
P icture the scene: the sea is black and full of rubbish, plastic garbage and foam. It is a serious warning. This is a picture that describes the future Victoria Harbour.
To deal with this serious pollution problem, the Drainage Services Department of the Hong Kong Government proposed the Sewage Disposal Scheme in 1987, which consists of a network of deep tunnels, pumping stations and primary sewage treatment works.
Under this scheme, a trading fund was introduced to cover the operating and maintenance costs of the scheme. The only charge for domestic households is the sewage charge. It is at a prescribed rate of $1.2 per cubic metre of water consumption. The first 12 cubic metres are free of charge in a four-month billing period.
Business, trade and manufacturing sectors have to pay a sewage charge and a trade effluent surcharge. The sewage charge is the same rate as that charges the households. The surcharge rate depends on the quality as well as the quantity of sewage discharged by different industries.
Mr. Eddie Lam Wai Chuen, an engineer at the Drainage Services Department, said, “There are two main reasons for introducing fund arrangements. The first one is to provide an alternative and faster means of getting on with works to upgrade the sewage system.
“The second is to reduce pollution by establishing the ‘Polluters Pay Principle’,” said Mr. Lam.
Chief secretary of the Green Power Alexander Yan supports the principles of the sewage treatment scheme.
He said, “Polluters should take up the responsibilities. Thus, they need to pay.”
A survey conducted by Green Power investigated the public’s support towards government’s plans and their willingness to pay the sewage disposal fee.
Seventy five percent of the 513 respondents agreed that the water pollution is serious in Hong Kong. Two-thirds agreed to pay an extra sewage disposal fee from $10 to $30 per month, according to the amount of water consumed.
Miss Chow Siu Ling, 34, is a housewife living in Nga Tau Kok. She said that she was willing to pay the fee.
“I am willing to pay if it can help improving the environment. The charge is acceptable and manageable. I am one of the polluters, so I should pay,” said Miss Chow.
Miss Kwok Kar Man, 19, a student, also said that she would pay the fee.
She said, “We must reckon that our harbour is seriously polluted. It is our responsibility to make it clean again. Although most Hong Kong people aim at making profits, it is our duty to protect the environment at the same time.”
However, there is also criticism about the implementation of the Strategic Sewage Disposal Scheme.
Mr. Yan said, “The scheme is good, but I think the government can improve it by doing more promotions. Many people do not know clearly what the sewage treatment scheme is. Maybe the scheme is operating too fast.”
In response, Mr. Lam of the Drainage Services Department said, “We must admit that the promotions are a bit late. We need the approval of the Legislative Council. We started to promote after they have finished the discussions. That is why we are a bit late.”
Some citizens criticized that the government should use the tax revenue to pay for the charge. Mr. Lam replied, “Taxes are distributed to all departments of the government. If our department gets a smaller share, then we need to slow down the scheme.”
Some restaurants complained that the scheme is unfair to them.
If consumption is a measurement standard, they need to pay more than that they pollute, as some of their products are made of water, for example, soup and drinks.
Mr. Lam replied, “We already have a 20 percent discount for restaurants.
“Some industries, like the manufacturers of drinks, use a lot of water but create little pollution. They can apply for a license so that they can pay less if they can prove themselves to be non-polluters.”
Mr. Lam added, “With the implementation of the scheme, it is possible to gain an environmental improvement in the water quality of Victoria Harbour. We can also maintain clean beaches, prevent seafood contamination and safeguard general public health.”
