The Limited Times

Now you can see non-English news...

The key to plastic bag levy is not one yuan or two yuan

2022-08-16T11:17:13.658Z


Recently, members of the Legislative Council have debated whether the plastic bag levy should be increased by $1 or $2. Some members worry that the amount is too low and the policy will become invalid again. plastic bag sign


Recently, members of the Legislative Council have debated whether the plastic bag levy should be increased by $1 or $2. Some members worry that the amount is too low and the policy will become invalid again.


The purpose of the plastic bag levy is, firstly, that the polluter pays for it, and secondly, it is to encourage citizens to reduce usage and bring their own plastic bags.

To encourage the public to reduce the use of plastic bags, the amount of the levy must have a deterrent effect.

However, everyone has different sensitivities to levies. In theory, the upper-middle class will have a higher tolerance. To change their habits, higher fees may be levied.

Relatively speaking, lowering the amount charged to the grassroots has enabled them to give up the use of plastic bags.

Waste reduction must take into account both principles and reality

Since merchants do not "check the net worth" of each customer, it is common practice around the world to levy a single plastic bag levy.

The Hong Kong government started to implement the levy in 2009, and set a fixed price of 0.5 yuan for each. In response to the increase in the use of plastic bags, the government carried out legislative amendments in June this year to expand the types of levies and increase the amount. It is expected to take effect by the end of the year.

The government originally preferred a levy of $1, but in recent months it has relaxed its tone, saying that if a Legislative Council member proposes to revise the minimum fee level to more than $1, the government will also accept it.

Councillors Tse Wai-chuen and Lam Shao-hung subsequently supported the levy of $2. The latter believed that citizens could choose to bring their own shopping bags, and that increasing the fee during the economic downturn would have the greatest effect. They also said that they would seek support from the community in the future.

However, there are also members who are against it. Kowloon West directly elected member Yang Wing-kit bluntly said that the levy itself is wrong, and it increases the burden on the grassroots. It should not be charged at all, so as to educate and encourage citizens to reduce waste.

The Liberal Party's wholesale and retail member Shao Ka-fai also said that he did not support the increase to 2 yuan, but supported the 1 yuan plan. It was pointed out that the DAB did not initially plan to support the 2 yuan plan.

The Environment Bureau submitted a document to the Legislative Council recommending that the levy for plastic bags be raised to $1.

(Photo by Lu Yiming)

The new arrangement will no longer exempt some plastic bags from the levy. Although the public can bring more containers, the chances of purchasing bags on the spot will increase if they are insufficient.

Roughly assume that each family buys a plastic bag every other day. Under the 1-yuan and 2-yuan plans, the monthly expenses are 30 and 60 yuan respectively.

Although it is not considered a huge expenditure, for the 2 yuan plan, the monthly expenditure can be worth one meal, and the amount cannot be considered insignificant.

Of course, if the new charges can reduce the use of plastic bags by the public, the overall expenditure of the public may not necessarily increase.

The telephone survey commissioned by the Sustainable Development Committee earlier by research institutions is worthy of reference from all walks of life.

Among the respondents in favor of raising the levy, nearly half believed that the $1 levy would prevent the public from using plastic bags, and about a quarter believed that the levy was $2.

According to the analysis of monthly income, most of the strata tend to support 1 yuan, but the respondents with income less than 8,000 yuan more support the 2 yuan and 5 yuan plans.

The committee also collected online and in-person opinions, with about 30% of the individual respondents supporting the $1 and $2 options each.

After reviewing other public comments, the committee ultimately backed either the $1 or $2 option.

The above survey did not directly ask the respondents about their behavioral changes in levy, nor did they directly ask about affordability, which reflected the respondents' expectations of the general public.

In this regard, the government can first introduce a 1 yuan levy according to the wishes of the majority of the public, but it must remind the public that if the effect is not received, the amount will be increased.

Members of Congress and political parties participating in the debate may wish to entrust an agency to conduct an investigation into the changes in the behavior of individuals from different strata of the levy, so that there is no need for a war of words to improve the quality of debate.

Yang Yongjie.

(file picture)

Any policy should also have a class perspective

The debate over the levy for plastic bags has raised the issue of class differences in environmental protection.

In fact, most citizens support waste reduction, but in many cases, environmental protection behavior always has a middle-class taste.

If the environmental protection policy is to be effective, it is necessary to take into account the will of the general public and the ability to bear the consequences.

That is to say, when formulating and deliberating policies, politicians must also have a class perspective.

In fact, it's not just about environmental protection. Politicians must also have a class perspective when discussing the recently discussed Fanling golf course, the use of country parks, and the "hot trick" of property stamp duty.

The disparity between the rich and the poor and the inequality of housing have plagued Hong Kong for a long time, but some politicians have a lot of evasions when they talk about specific livelihood initiatives. Among them, the excuse that they use to destroy the landscape and oppose the construction of golf courses is even more eye-catching. In the end, it aims to safeguard vested interests .

Even if they come from a certain class or faction, politicians should aim to integrate different social classes and groups when discussing politics. This is for the sake of the long-term future well-being of Hong Kong people.

The plastic bag fee should not only promote recycling, but also refute the policy left by Huang Jinxing, "the theory of golf course release".

Source: hk1

All news articles on 2022-08-16

You may like

Trends 24h

News/Politics 2024-03-27T16:45:54.081Z

Latest

© Communities 2019 - Privacy

The information on this site is from external sources that are not under our control.
The inclusion of any links does not necessarily imply a recommendation or endorse the views expressed within them.