*********************************************************

Following is a speech on " The Art and Science of Environmental Protection" by the Secretary for the Environment and Food, Mrs Lily Yam, at the "Towards a Better Environment in HK: Scientific and Policy Issues" Conference held at the City University of Hong Kong this morning (November 4):

Professor Ng, Ladies and Gentlemen,

I am very pleased to have the opportunity this morning to meet our eminent visitor and members of the Hong Kong Institute of Science and to discuss with you how we can use scientific knowledge and the art of communication to create a better environment in Hong Kong.

I should perhaps begin by thanking the many scientists whose research and teaching help to make my job a little easier. Without the work that you do to raise understanding of the interaction of human societies and their natural environment, without the training you give in identification of questions and risks, without your advocacy of appropriate methodologies and rigorous analysis, governments and our society as a whole will not be able to address competently the threats that human activities present to the environment that sustains us.

After many years of neglecting our environment for the expediency of rapid economic development to feed our ever growing population, Hong Kong, like many other cities, is finally facing up to the urgent need to arrest the process of environmental deterioration. And once we set ourselves this mission, we tackle it in characteristic Hong Kong fashion: with vigour, and determination. A year ago, our Chief Executive, whom you would meet later this morning, set out a comprehensive blueprint for improving our living environment. Two months later, he established a new policy bureau to put this blueprint into action. I had the privilege of being appointed the first Secretary for the Environment and Food in Hong Kong.

Within a short period of 10 months, we have made significant progress with an aggressive air quality programme. We are now the first city outside Europe to use ultra-low sulphur diesel, we are replacing our entire fleet of 18,000 diesel taxis with LPG vehicles, together with the Guangdong Provincial Government, we are tracing the sources of air pollution in the region. When the result is available next spring, we will work together on possible solutions.

In spite of all this effort, we are fully aware that enhancing the quality of our environment does not consist of tackling air quality issues alone. In the next 12 months, we will be directing all our energy to working out a more effective waste reduction and recovery programme, arriving at a community consensus on the optimum level of sewage treatment for eh main urban areas, reducing our citizens' exposure to excessive noise and establishing the way forward for conserving our natural resources.

You may well ask: can government do all this alone? The answer is obvious. During my short tenure in my current post, I have been dedicating a considerable amount of my time to building bridges, not only with business and the professions, but also with NGOs and local groups, and with members of the extensive academic community like you.

The gathering today gives me an opportunity to put three questions to you. First, are you doing enough to make society, legislators and, yes, public servants, aware of the risks that environmental degradation presents to this city, and of the means and opportunities for reform? Second, do you know enough about what is already being done to address the problems? Third, how can we work together better?

Many of us may be wary of expressing our views in public, possibly because of bad experiences with being misquoted in the media. But if we leave the field to those who are happy dispensing half truths, false accusations and simplistic solutions that do not even begin to address complex problems, what chance is there of the public understanding the challenges we face on the environmental front and their participation in making decisions on our future? As a start, I was very pleased to learn of efforts being made by HKU to educate journalists about environmental issues so that in turn they can help to spread the message to the public at large. Such efforts need to be maintained and extended.

I know that some of you may be concerned that if you start engaging in a dialogue about the issues with Government, legislators and the public, you will be getting involved in "politics". As I see it, "politics" is not such a terrible thing as it is sometimes made out to be. It is really the art of living together in a city. As this city becomes richer and more sophisticated, the need to become adept at that art is ever more important. So, too, is the need to use the tools and the insights of science to reveal the effects that human activities are having on their environment, in order to help society adapt in beneficial ways. Your willingness and your competence in contributing to the debate about how we can live together without destroying the environment that nurtures us are vitally important to the success of our policy and programmes in this area.

My ability to do a good job depends not just on my understanding of the social and political dynamics within which I have to operate, but also on how well I understand and can make use of the scientific information that you provide. Your ability to contribute effectively and constructively to the debate depends not only on your skill in presenting your findings and arguments in terms that are clear to non-scientists, but also, I would suggest, on your understanding of the processes of Government, of the progress being made and of the aspirations of different citizens.

I'm sure that over the years you have on occasion complained to your colleagues about 'misguided' and "ignorant" civil servants just as we have grumbled about academics who don't seem to know what is going on. It is very easy to allow the media to paint us into the trite stereotypes of 'bureaucrat' and 'boffin' that makes it hard for the two of us to talk to each other constructively.

Two ideas come to mind. On the Advisory Council on the Environment, we have representatives from green groups and the commercial sector. Although there are already a small number of academics there, could we set up a systematic dialogue between the Council and the scientific community?

We have invited local scientists, engineers and economists as well as international experts to sit on the review panel on our sewage treatment and disposal strategy. Is this a model that can be used for other contentious issues?

We need to ensure that we develop a much more vigorous dialogue in the months ahead so that in formulating government policy on environmental issues, we would have the benefit of your input. I have put forward a couple of suggestions on how we can work more closely together. I would welcome your ideas on other possibilities.

In tackling our environmental agenda, the priorities for action are clear. The means to build the public understanding and community support for often-unpalatable solutions are less well developed. To guide that process, we need good science and good sense.

To cultivate effective partnerships with others involved in environmental work, government officials need to listen, to explain and to promote discussion and trust: that will be at the heart of all the initiatives that we will launch in the coming years.

By the hard work of many who have worked in this field long before me, the ground has been prepared for Hong Kong to transform itself into a city in which economic and social aspirations are brought into harmony with environmental quality. The seeds that have been planted need the constant nourishment of communication and education if they were to be harvested for the benefit of ourselves and our children. I look forward to working with you in realising this vision.

End/Saturday, November 4, 2000

NNNN