Replies to LegCo questions
LCQ18: Feasibility study on installing smoking rooms
Following is a question by the Dr Hon Kwok Ka-ki and a written reply by the Secretary for Health, Welfare and Food, Dr York Chow, in the Legislative Council today (November 1):
Question:
At the resumption of the Second Reading debate on the Smoking (Public Health)
(Amendment) Bill 2005 in this Council on 19 October this year, the Secretary for
Health, Welfare and Food said that the Government would study the feasibility of
installing smoking rooms. In this connection, will the Government inform this
Council:
(a) whether it has any evidence to prove the effectiveness of smoking rooms in
preventing second-hand smoke from affecting the neighbouring environment;
(b) whether the above study will be conducted solely by the government
departments concerned or undertaken by commissioned consultants;
(c) of the estimated expenditure on the above study; whether such expenditure
would be borne wholly by the Health, Welfare and Food Bureau and whether other
services of the departments concerned will be affected by the additional
expenditure;
(d) whether it will invite health care practitioners, anti-smoking groups,
academics in building services and other relevant groups to participate in the
entire study; and
(e) whether it will report to this Council on the progress of the study
regularly?
Reply:
Madam President,
First of all, I wish to reiterate that what we propose to study is a room which
is solely meant for smokers to smoke therein. There should not be any other
activities going on in the room (including the serving of food and beverages and
provision of any other type of services). Non-smokers and employees should not
be allowed to enter into the room. I also wish to emphasize that with the
passage of the Smoking (Public Health) (Amendment) Bill 2005 (the Bill), the top
priority of the Administration at the moment is to ensure its effective
implementation. We will pool our resources together to mount an intensive
publicity campaign on the many amendments made to the Ordinance, in particular
the smoking ban that will come into force starting January 1, 2007, with the aim
to ensure that the public is well informed of the stipulations for compliance.
At the same time, we will continue to actively promote smoking cessation
services and anti-smoking education in the hope that the number of smokers, in
particular teenage smokers, could be reduced as many as possible. The proposal
of setting up "smoking rooms" is not part of the Bill, neither is the proposed
feasibility study our working priority at this stage.
My replies to the various parts of the question are as follows:
(a) As pointed out by my colleagues from the Bureau during the deliberations of
the Bills Committee over the past year or so, no sufficient evidence from any
scientific research or internationally accepted ventilation standards are
available at the moment to support the feasibility of setting up the type of
"smoking room" mentioned above, on which we propose to conduct a study. This is
precisely why I raised the idea of carrying out a feasibility study in my speech
at the Second Reading of the Bill. One of the focuses of the study will be to
find out whether it is technically feasible to effectively avoid the air outside
the room from contamination by the secondhand smoke produced from within the
room. The overriding principle is to protect the health of those who are outside
the room.
With the new Ordinance coming into effect, it is envisaged that many of the
smokers may have to resort to pursue their habit in outdoor areas. Road users in
some busy districts may probably be left without a choice but to tolerate the
intake of a lot of secondhand smoke. The primary consideration of setting up a
"smoking room" is to afford protection to non-smokers by imposing a more
effective separation between smokers and non-smokers.
(b) to (e) The Bill was just passed on October 19. To date, we have not yet
commenced the study on the "smoking room" and have not reached any conclusion on
its feasibility, neither have we worked out the details for the study, including
the expenditure, the collaborative parties to take it forward or the details of
its implementation.
Nevertheless, as I said at the Second Reading of the Bill, we must have
collected sufficient scientific data and experimental evidence to prove its
technical feasibility before we can be convinced of the feasibility of the
"smoking room" or formulate any specific standards. Hence, it is anticipated
that we shall need the prior assistance of experts from the engineering sector
to carry out a technical study. We will also seek advice from other experts, as
required, if and when we encounter any technical or professional problem.
Only after the completion of the proposed feasibility study will we be able to
give further thought to this proposal and discuss whether it should be put into
practice. At this stage, it is premature to jump to any conclusion. The study,
together with the discussion in the process, will be open and transparent and
the public and this Council will also be consulted at appropriate times.
Ends/Wednesday, November 1, 2006
Issued at HKT 13:21
NNNN