Source: Hong Kong Government special administrative region
LCQ15: Development of pet-related industries
Question:
It has been reported that the number of households keeping pets has increased in recent years, with pet-related industries developing rapidly. However, there are views pointing out that Hong Kong still has room for improvement in veterinary medical care and pet-friendly public facilities, as well as in data management and policies regarding the pet industry. In this connection, will the Government inform this Council:
(1) as it is learnt that a number of private shopping centres have introduced pet-inclusive facilities, such as pet accesses and pet rest areas, to attract spending from pet owners and thereby further unleash the potential of the pet economy, whether the Hong Kong Housing Authority will consider drawing on the relevant experience to implement pet-friendly measures in the shopping centres of the public housing estates under its purview; if so, of the details; if not, the reasons for that;
(2) as it has been reported that public or charity-run veterinary organisations have been established one after another in Taiwan, such as in Taoyuan City and New Taipei City, to provide basic veterinary medical services at transparent charges, which not only enhance pet health protection but also boost the pet economy, whether the HKSAR Government has conducted studies or policy planning regarding the establishment of public or semi-public veterinary medical facilities; if so, of the details; if not, the reasons for that; and
(3) as there are views that maintaining pet-related data can help understand the risks of pet epidemics and diseases, as well as the market structure and potential of the pet industry, whether the Government will establish a territory-wide pet data management platform to systematically collect relevant data, including the number of pets, breed distribution, keeping and vaccination records, and pet disease trends, so as to provide a scientific basis for the formulation of policies on pet-friendliness and developing the pet economy policies; if so, of the details; if not, the reasons for that?
Reply:
President,
Having consulted the Housing Bureau, the reply to the question from the Hon Rock Chen is as follows:
(1) As pet keeping has become increasingly common in Hong Kong, there has been more attention in society to bringing animals to enter different premises and use public facilities. In general, the Government needs to take into account different factors when considering whether to further relax existing arrangements, including the nature of individual facilities, whether ancillary facilities are in place and the degree of social acceptance, in order to achieve the policy objective of facilitating people and animals to co-exist harmoniously.
The shopping centres under the Hong Kong Housing Authority (HA) are mainly “neighbourhood shopping centres” located in public housing estates/courts. These shopping centres provide local residents with shopping convenience, with the aim of catering for their basic needs in daily life. All along, guide dogs accompanying the visually impaired have been allowed to enter the HA’s shopping centres. The HA has further implemented some pet-friendly policies, such as allowing pets to enter shopping centres if they are placed in pet carrier bags or pet strollers and that no hygiene and environmental nuisance will be caused. The HA will keep in view the development and needs of the community for pet-friendly spaces and facilities, and design “neighbourhood shopping centres” that are in line with the actual situation.
On the other hand, the Domain located in Yau Tong is a large-scale regional shopping centre under the HA. Coupled with spacious indoor space, outdoor activity areas, wide passageways and multiple entrances at different locations, it is more equipped with the requisites for development into a pet-friendly mall than typical “neighbourhood shopping centres” located in housing estates. The HA will review whether it is appropriate to further provide pet-friendly measures in the Domain, such as installing relevant human-pet friendly facilities to appeal to pet owners for boosting consumption and visitor flow.
(2) The Agriculture, Fisheries and Conservation Department (AFCD) has been carrying out publicity and public education to remind the public to consider carefully before deciding to keep pets, to assess whether one could fulfil the duties of pet ownership in meeting the pets’ basic needs in diet, environment, daily care, healthcare, etc.
On veterinary services, the Veterinary Surgeons Board of Hong Kong (VSB) established under the Veterinary Surgeons Registration Ordinance (Cap. 529), is currently responsible for the regulation, registration and disciplinary control of veterinary surgeons, so as to ensure a high standard of veterinary services in Hong Kong. The VSB learns about the overall veterinary services through data gathered in the regulation of the veterinary profession. The number of registered veterinary surgeons (RVS) has been consistently on the rise since 2015, from 823 in 2015 to 1 364 in April this year, representing an increase of 65 per cent. RVS comprises many specialties, such as small animal internal medicine and surgery, dermatology, cardiology, neurology and veterinary pathology, and therefore animal owners should be able to find appropriate veterinary services for their pets. To meet unexpected medical expenses, members of the public may also purchase pet insurance products available in the market as appropriate.
Apart from private veterinarians, the City University of Hong Kong and some animal welfare organisations (such as the Hong Kong Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals) also provide veterinary services and hence the Government currently has no plan to separately establish public medical facilities for pets.
(3) To safeguard public health and prevent the spread of animal diseases, the AFCD monitors and regulates animal activities in accordance with the law, and assesses the risk of pet animal diseases. The AFCD regulates the import of live animals through a permit system under the Public Health (Animals and Birds) Regulations (Cap. 139A) and the Rabies Regulation (Cap. 421A), so as to prevent the introduction of animal diseases into Hong Kong. Furthermore, the AFCD regulates the local animal activities through various licences, for example, regulating the animal trading and dog breeding activities through the Animal Trader Licence and Dog Breeder Licence respectively under the Public Health (Animals and Birds) (Trading and Breeding) Regulations (Cap. 139B), and to require dog keepers to have their dogs vaccinated against rabies, implanted with a microchip, and to apply for a dog licence under the Rabies Regulation, for the prevention of rabies.
The Government last conducted a Thematic Household Survey on pet ownership among households across Hong Kong in 2018. The AFCD and the Census and Statistics Department will conduct another survey later this year to gather the latest data on trends and preferences in pet ownership of Hong Kong families. These findings will assist the trade to learn about the latest trend of pet ownership, for their provision of products and services according to market demand.
Issued at HKT 12:15
NNNN
LCQ7: Draining pipe testing with dye powder
Source: Hong Kong Government special administrative region
LCQ7: Draining pipe testing with dye powder
Question:
It has been reported that on February 15 this year, the water of Tuen Mun River turned red extensively, causing panic among members of the public. The Government’s initial investigation revealed that there was draining pipe testing with red dye powder. Upon arrival of the Government’s investigating officers at the scene, they found that the river water had resumed normal and no fish deaths were found. They collected water samples on the same day for testing and found that the water quality indicators remained normal as well. However, it is learnt that similar incidents also occurred on Lam Tsuen River in Tai Po and Shing Mun River in Tai Wai in August 2023 and November 2022 respectively, which have aroused widespread concern in the community. In this connection, will the Government inform this Council:
(1) of the number of the aforesaid similar incidents in the past five years, as well as the government department(s) involved in the investigation of each incident, the average manpower involved, the time taken for the investigations and the public expenditure involved;
(2) as there are views that although the test results have indicated that the aforesaid incident has not caused impact on the environment, water quality and fish for the time being, the incident has still caused panic among members of the public, whether the Government will take further actions to follow up the incident, so as to enhance protection for the public; and
(3) whether the Government has formulated detailed guidelines on draining pipe testing with dye powder at present; if so, of the details, including whether non-compliance with the relevant guidelines will constitute any offence or attract penalty; if not, whether it will consider formulating the guidelines and enhancing the relevant notification mechanism, so as to avoid causing misunderstanding or panic among members of the public in the event of an incident?
Reply:
President,
The reply to the question raised by the Hon Steven Ho is as follows:
(1) and (2) In the past five years, the Environmental Protection Department (EPD) received a total of 21 cases of inquiries related to dye test. Upon receiving relevant complaints, the EPD will promptly dispatch personnel to conduct investigation on site, including measuring the dissolved oxygen content and pH level in the water, as well as collecting water samples for further testing to determine the cause of water coloration and whether pollution has occurred. The EPD will also check in the vicinity of the site concerned for any fish deaths or other unusual circumstances, and trace the source of pollution along the stormwater drains. Depending on individual circumstances, the Drainage Services Department (DSD) may also assist in the tracing investigation. If illegal discharges of wastewater are found, the EPD will take appropriate enforcement actions in accordance with the law. The investigation of water coloration incidents is part of the EPD’s integrated enforcement efforts and the duration of investigation may also vary depending on the location and scope of individual case. Therefore, there is no breakdown of the expenditure involved.
To foster protection to the general public, the EPD will respond to inquiries from complainants and the media as soon as there are preliminary results of the investigation, in order to enhance information transparency and alleviate public concerns. Depending on individual circumstances, the EPD may also return to the site the day after collecting water samples to inspect whether there have been any changes and to further follow-up as required.
(3) Conducting dye tests is an effective method to check the sewer systems for misconnections to stormwater drains or leakage. When the EPD personnel conduct tests to examine sewer misconnection issues, they will use the minimum amount of dye possible to reduce the impact on nearby rivers and bays.
For the trades and private buildings, as well as housing estates, the EPD, the Buildings Department (BD), and the Food and Environmental Hygiene Department (FEHD) have developed relevant guidelines for dye tests for pipe testing respectively (which can be downloaded from the websites of the EPD, the BD and the FEHD). Through promotion and education, we also remind the trades, including property management companies and building contractors, about the precautions and pollution prevention measures associated with dye tests. These include strictly adhering to the recommendations of the dye manufacturers during testing, arranging for personnel supervision, and notifying the property management company of the testing site and nearby residents in advance to avoid giving rise to public concerns. The above guidelines are administrative measures. However, we must emphasise that the dye used is a biodegradable and non-toxic substance, and does not affect water quality. In this regard, conducting dye test does not violate the Water Pollution Control Ordinance (Cap. 358).
Regarding the notification mechanism, we understand that dye test may lead to public misunderstanding. Therefore, the DSD will issue notifications on its website before conducting regular dye tests to inform the public about the arrangements for these dye tests. The purpose of these regular tests is to ensure the integrity of the submarine outfalls of sewage treatment plants. Since conducting dye tests on submarine outfalls requires a larger amount of dye and involves a wider area, it is more likely to attract public attention.
Based on the complaint and specific circumstances of the case, the EPD occasionally needs to use dye tests to check on sewage misconnection issues or carry out enforcement actions. Yet these circumstances would involve a smaller amount of dye used and a smaller impact area which in general would not cause any impact.
Issued at HKT 11:45
NNNN
LCQ8: Public bicycle parking spaces
Source: Hong Kong Government special administrative region
LCQ8: Public bicycle parking spaces
| YearThe joint operations and enforcement actions are conducted by relevant departments in accordance with established procedures and empowered by relevant legislations. More specifically, the TD and the HKPF will issue and post notices respectively regarding the temporary suspension of the relevant bicycle parking spaces at least 14 days prior to the joint operation. Since such areas are no longer designated public bicycle parking space during the suspension period, any bicycle parked there may be regarded as unauthorised occupation of government land. On the effective day of suspension (generally two days before the joint operation), the HKPF will cover the bicycle parking signage and close off the area. The relevant District Lands Office will post statutory notice on each bicycle still present within the operation area under the Land (Miscellaneous Provisions) Ordinance (Cap. 28) and post notices at appropriate places, requiring the persons concerned to remove the bicycles by a specific date (i.e. the day of operation); otherwise the bicycles will be removed. On the day of joint operation, the FEHD will assist in removing the remaining bicycles parked in the area with notices posted, and hand them over to the local District Lands Office for taking over and disposal; the persons concerned cannot get back the bicycles. The bicycle parking spaces will be re-opened for public use after the operation.
The expenditures of joint operations are absorbed by the overall resources of the respective departments, and have not been separately identified.Issued at HKT 11:45 NNNN Hongkong Post to issue “Intangible Cultural Heritage – Paper Crafting Technique” special stamps (with photos)Source: Hong Kong Government special administrative region Hongkong Post to issue “Intangible Cultural Heritage – Paper Crafting Technique” special stamps NNNN LCQ16: Hong Kong Authorized Economic Operator ProgrammeSource: Hong Kong Government special administrative region LCQ16: Hong Kong Authorized Economic Operator Programme
|