Hong Kong’s garbage collection fee policy, which has been brewing for nearly 20 years, has once again been delayed in its implementation. On Monday (27th), the government announced the postponement of the implementation of the garbage collection fee, originally scheduled for August 1st. The government cited that most residents still have significant reservations about the garbage fee, and pointed out that there are still deficiencies in public awareness, acceptance, and recycling culture regarding the garbage collection fee. They deemed the postponement a practical and correct step. However, analysts argue that the success of garbage collection and recycling is related to changing social norms, unlike past issues that were resolved immediately after legislation, and have criticized the government’s methods, lack of accountability among officials, and even some supervisors offering protection, making legislators’ efforts seem futile.
The 2021 legislation stirred up public debate on the garbage collection fee, with plans to implement the policy through the use of various sizes and priced designated bags or labels (charging 0.11 yuan per liter of garbage) or by imposing an “entry fee” at landfills or waste transfer stations. While the government has emphasized that the focus of the policy is not on charging fees, but rather on promoting waste reduction and recycling, there have been ongoing voices criticizing the lack of adequate recycling facilities. The Environmental Protection Department submitted a report to the Legislative Council this month on the trial implementation of the garbage collection fee, indicating that the average usage of designated bags in public and private residential properties is only 20-50%, with “three-no” buildings having only a 20% usage rate.
Furthermore, there are still residents who find the government guidelines and instructions unclear, not fully understanding the legislative intent to promote waste reduction and recycling. Cleaning workers and frontline staff believe that the garbage collection fee has increased their workload and time, causing inconvenience by altering work processes. Property management stakeholders have expressed concerns about the need for additional manpower, increased operational costs, and the difficulty in monitoring illegal dumping.
Looking back at the history of the garbage collection fee, it was initially introduced in the government’s “Urban Solid Waste Management Policy Outline” in 2005. Following multiple rounds of public consultations since 2012, the policy was expected to be implemented by 2016. However, the government submitted a bill to the Legislative Council in 2018, aiming for implementation by the end of 2020, though it was not completed by the end of the session. It was only in August 2021, under the leadership of the establishment camp in the Legislative Council following the resignation of the pro-democracy camp, that the bill was passed on its third reading.
When the legislation was passed in August 2021, there was initially an 18-month adaptation period planned, but later the government postponed the implementation to the end of 2023, providing over 24 months for preparation. However, in July 2023, the industry pointed out that the end of the year coincided with the peak holiday season for workers and residents disposing of garbage, making it difficult to manage. Consequently, on July 14th of that year, it was stated that “the end of the year is not a good time, and in the end, we have decided to implement it on April 1st, next year, without any further delays.”
However, in January of this year, the implementation was further postponed to August, with the aim of allowing residents and various sectors to clearly understand the operational details of the plan. It was claimed that the government departments would implement trial runs in advance, expressing confidence in the scheduled implementation in August.
However, feedback from the public during this period indicated that the operations were complex and difficult to adapt to. Member of the Democratic Alliance for the Betterment and Progress of Hong Kong, and Deputy Chairman of the Tenth National Committee of the Chinese People’s Political Consultative Conference, Lu Wenshuan, wrote an article in Ming Pao on April 8th, stating that the garbage collection fee was proposed by the radical opposition in the past and was an “impossible mission.” He believed that the government’s priority should be economic development and argued for putting the garbage collection fee plan on hold.
What was originally a matter of public concern suddenly turned into a political issue. In a Hong Kong where dissenting voices have disappeared, even legislation passed by the government has been politicized, abruptly halted.
Responding to criticisms, Professor Lu Kung-fai, former Deputy Director of the Environmental Protection Department from 2012 to 2017 and current Chief Development Consultant for the Department of Environmental and Sustainable Development at the Hong Kong University of Science and Technology, mentioned that the concept of garbage collection fee was proposed during the term of the former Chief Executive Tung Chee-hwa, implying that its current implementation was not intended to disrupt Hong Kong or serve political interests.
From the enactment of the legislation to the present, the government has spent a total of 177 million yuan on the program, with 30 million yuan allocated for promotion and publicity. In the current fiscal year’s budget, the garbage collection fee was expected to generate revenue of 1.79 billion yuan for the government. However, with the plan now on hold, there have been expenses but no revenue realized so far.
The budget also allocated approximately 580 million yuan for the implementation of the fee originally slated for this year, projected to involve an increase in government personnel to 72.
Moreover, the government had previously awarded nine contracts for the production of designated garbage bags, totaling 1.14 billion yuan. In response to media inquiries, the Environmental Protection Department stated that there are currently approximately 170 million designated bags in stock, with a production cost of about 74 million yuan. Starting in June, the government has decided to distribute 20 free designated bags monthly to public housing tenants for a period of six months.
On the 27th, when questioned by reporters, Secretary for the Environment Xie Zhanhuan and Under Secretary for Home Affairs Sonny Au Yong-hing suggested that there was no need for accountability or apologies towards organizations assisting the government, and that the substantial use of public funds to support the program required an explanation to taxpayers and residents. It was emphasized that Xie had put in tremendous effort at different stages, with valid reasons for the postponements, presenting the current suspension as a practical and correct decision that signifies government for the people, with Au supporting Xie’s actions.
Senior media commentator Li Huiling, in her online program analysis, noted that the government did not specify a timeframe for the suspension of the implementation, questioning the difference between simply disposing of trash at landfills. She criticized the government’s handling of the situation, involving a significant mobilization of resources, manpower, and finances, yet now almost backtracking on the bill without any consequences or accountability for officials. She raised concerns about Au praising Xie’s efforts while failing to address the public’s concerns, asking how the government intends to explain the situation to the citizens.
She expressed admiration for the Legislative Council members for not demanding accountability from Xie during the meetings, leaving it for journalists to inquire about. She also criticized the government for not holding a press conference when announcing such a major decision, but instead addressing the issue with reporters after explaining it in the Legislative Council committee meeting. When questioned about accountability and resignation by reporters, Xie was shielded three times by his superior Au, leading Li Huiling to question Xie’s competence as a high-ranking official earning a monthly salary of 360,000 yuan and describing him as weak and ineffective.
Li further stated that Xie, the former Deputy Director of the Environmental Protection Department in the previous government, was not a newcomer and should have had the capability and responsibility to handle the situation. Yet, officials now seem exempt from accountability.
Another senior media commentator, Wu Zhisen, harshly criticized Xie and the Hong Kong government for incompetence, stating that they had not reached their lowest point yet. He questioned the fact that garbage recycling habits among Hong Kong residents would take years, if not a decade, to establish and that high-ranking officials earning tens of thousands of yuan monthly lacked even common sense to assume that the garbage collection fee legislation could change the habits of Hong Kong residents overnight.
Wu analyzed that officials, following the implementation of the National Security Law, believed that through legislation, issues could be solved instantly. However, they are now facing difficulties as there is no effective way to monitor or enforce the use of designated bags for trash disposal. He questioned the effectiveness of using enforcement officers to apprehend those not using designated bags, as it is simply unrealistic. The issue involves changing social norms, and without citizens’ cooperation, it cannot be enforced. This, he emphasized, is common sense.