*****************************************
Following is a question by the Hon Vincent Fang and a written reply by the Secretary for Food and Health, Dr York Chow, in the Legislative Council today (July 8):
Question:
The statutory no-smoking areas have been extended to entertainment establishments, such as clubs, bars, mahjong-tin kau premises and nightclubs on July 1, 2009 upon the expiry of the grace period which lasted for two and a half years. The Entertainment Business Rights Concern Group has indicated that such establishments are facing a crushing blow, with an estimate of 2,600 entertainment establishments facing a crisis of closure of business, and the "rice bowls" of some 100,000 employees are in jeopardy. In this connection, will the Government inform this Council:
(a) of the number of entertainment establishments which were given a grace period from the smoking ban, together with a breakdown by their types; whether it knows the current number of employees employed by such establishments; whether the Government has conducted any survey on the smoking preferences of the employees and consumers of such establishments; whether it has estimated the respective numbers of entertainment establishments which will close down and persons who will lose their jobs as a result of the extension of no-smoking areas; whether the Government has studied how to assist such establishments and unemployed persons in changing business or occupation respectively;
(b) whether it knows which other cities worldwide are implementing or planning to implement anti-smoking measures which are nearly as stringent as those in Hong Kong after extension of the no-smoking areas;
(c) given that the authorities indicated on October 19, 2006 at the resumption of the Second Reading debate on the Smoking (Public Health) (Amendment) Bill 2005 that "... therefore the smoking room is feasible... The primary consideration was for the protection of the interest of non-smokers. With the new Ordinance coming into effect, many of the smokers may have to resolve to pursue their habit in open space. Non-smoking road users may probably be left without a choice but to become a second-hand smoker. The setting up of a 'smoking room' could separate smokers from non-smokers", whether the aforesaid opinion had been considered in the conclusion, drawn by the Report on findings of technical feasibility study on smoking room released in April this year, that smoking rooms were not feasible in Hong Kong; if smoking rooms will not be installed, how the Government separates smokers from non-smokers in public areas so as to protect the pedestrians who are non-smokers; and
(d) whether any further anti-smoking initiatives are in place; whether it will make reference to the Bhutanese Government's practice of banning the sale of cigarettes; whether hookah smoking, which is prevalent in the Middle East at present, is subject to regulation under the relevant ordinance?
Reply:
President,
(a) to (c) It is common knowledge that smoking is hazardous to health. Protection of public health through banning smoking at all indoor public places and workplaces was the objective of the amendment to the Smoking (Public Health) Ordinance as well as the consensus reached between the Administration and the Legislative Council (Legco) in 2006. During Legco's scrutiny of the Amendment Bill, the Administration accepted its proposal of deferring the implementation date of the smoking ban at six types of establishments, namely, bars, clubs, nightclubs, bathhouses, massage establishments and mahjong-tin kau premises until July 1, 2009. These establishments were therefore given a transitional period of two and a half years more than all the other indoor places (including shopping arcades, restaurants and karaokes etc.) where the smoking ban started from January 1, 2007 to adapt to the smoking ban and make necessary adjustments . It is also clearly stated in the legislation that the smoking ban will be implemented at these six types of establishments upon expiry of the transitional period in-order to protect the health of the customers and employees of these establishments as at all other indoor public places and workplaces.
According to the Department of Health (DH), there were a total of 1,346 qualified establishments temporarily exempted from the smoking ban as at June 2009, comprising 1,004 bars, 112 massage establishments and bathhouses, 87 clubs, 79 nightclubs and 64 mahjong-tin kau clubs. On the number of employees, statistical data of the Census and Statistics Department (C&SD) indicated that there were approximately 5,100 persons employed at bars and lounges in 2008. The Administration does not have statistics regarding employees at the other types of establishments.
On the possible impact of smoking bans on the trades, both overseas and local data show that such bans have not caused any long-term direct impact on the business or employment of the catering and entertainment industries. Although some local restaurants and karaokes had expressed worries that the smoking ban might lead to business loss and lay-offs, C&SD statistics showed that restaurant receipts had surged by around 30% after the smoking ban had taken effect for around two years, and that employment had also increased in the hospitality industry in the same period.
Earlier this year, the Administration has also commissioned an independent consultant to conduct a questionnaire survey on the smoking habits of the customers of the aforementioned six types of entertainment establishments and their reaction to the smoking ban at these establishments. About 1,700 persons were selected by random sampling for the survey, the findings of which revealed that 45% of the respondents had patronised bars. Among them, more than 80% were non-smokers (67%) or had already stopped smoking (16%). Only less than 20% (17%) of them were smokers. Among the 32% of respondents who said that they had patronised the five types of entertainment establishments, namely nightclubs, sauna bathhouses, massage establishments, mahjong-tin kau premises or mahjong rooms in clubs, 80% were non-smokers (62%) or had already stopped smoking (18%). Only 20% of them were smokers.
According to the same survey, 16% of the respondents said that they went to bars at least once a month on average. However, 19% of the respondents said that they would go to bars at least once a month on average after the introduction of a total smoking ban in bars. In addition, 11% of the respondents said that they went to nightclubs, sauna bathhouses, massage establishments, mahjong-tin kau premises or mahjong rooms in clubs at least once a month on average. 12% of the respondents indicated that they would go to these five types of establishments at least once a month on average after smoking is banned at these establishments.
Taking into account overseas and local experiences with smoking bans as well as the recent survey findings, the Administration does not consider that the extension of no-smoking areas on July 1 would directly lead to business closures or staff lay-off in these establishments. We will continue to monitor the implementation of the smoking ban and help the industries adapt to the ban as much as we can.
In any case, greater efforts in tobacco control would only help reduce the number of smokers as well as the harm of second-hand smoke, thereby improving the health of more people in our community and cutting down on our medical expenditure. According to a report published by the School of Public Health and Department of Community Medicine of the University of Hong Kong in 2005, tobacco costs the Hong Kong economy HK$5.3 billion each year if one counts the annual medical costs, long-term care expenditure, and productivity loss incurred by smoking and second-hand smoke. The tremendous economic benefit of tobacco control is evident if the subject is viewed in context.
As regards the feasibility of smoking rooms, the Secretary for Food and Health stated clearly during the resumption of the Second Reading debate on the Smoking (Public Health) (Amendment) Bill 2005 on October 18, 2006 and October 19, 2006 that there were no internationally recognised ventilation standards that could support the installation of smoking rooms to protect non-smokers from second-hand smoke. The Administration was nevertheless prepared to invite experts to conduct thorough scientific data collections as well as experiments to ascertain whether it is indeed technically possible for smoking rooms to protect non-smokers from the harmful effects of second-hand smoke effectively.
As reported to the Legislative Council Panel on Health Services on April 20, 2009, the findings of the study we commissioned and carried out by the Hong Kong University of Science and Technology indicated that there was as yet no conclusive evidence to substantiate the effectiveness of smoking rooms in separating smokers and non-smokers. Even with stringent room design and ventilation standards, non-smokers outside the room were still exposed to second-hand smoke as long as there was human movement in and out of the room. The findings echoed the World Health Organisation's (WHO) advice that "ventilation and separate smoking rooms do not reduce exposure to second-hand smoke to an acceptable or safe level".
The installation of smoking rooms is not allowed in many major cities in the world, including London, New York, Toronto, San Francisco and Sydney. Many provinces in Canada and individual states in the United States had once allowed smoking rooms while imposing smoking bans indoors but have subsequently banned such rooms after finding the policy of allowing smoking rooms ineffective. We also note that even in cities where the building of smoking rooms is allowed in restaurants and entertainment establishments, such as Paris and Singapore, only a small number of establishments actually built such rooms. Most establishments, especially small and medium enterprises, chose to go entirely smoke-free instead. Reasons most commonly cited are the high costs involved and lack of space for building the rooms.
Given the scarcity of land and the varying building structures in Hong Kong, coupled with the need to ensure fair competition among different industries and among enterprises of varying sizes, installation of smoking rooms in Hong Kong would be fraught with problems. Moreover, under the Smoking (Public Health) Ordnance, managers of premises are not liable for acts in breach of the smoking ban on their premises. But if smoking rooms are allowed, the managers must be held legally responsible for the management of such rooms. In view of the above, the Administration considers that the setting up of smoking rooms is not a viable option in Hong Kong.
Meanwhile, we have noticed that after implementation of a total smoking ban at indoor places, some smokers have gathered around and smoked at certain spots on the streets that are close to no smoking areas, and may have affected some of the non-smoking passers-by. We are now evaluating the situation, as well as collecting relevant information and conducting research on the matter. This includes gauging public opinion and drawing reference from the experience and results of measures taken by other countries and places in tackling the issue of smokers clustering and smoking in the vicinity of no smoking areas. As in the past, the Government will take into account the actual circumstances and public expectations when considering the need to further expand the statutory no smoking areas or adopt other tobacco control measures to safeguard public health.
(d) The WHO adopted the Framework Convention on Tobacco Control (FCTC) in May 2003, aiming at fulfilling the objective of tobacco control by reducing the demand and supply of tobacco through adoption of comprehensive measures. To date, there are more than 150 States Parties to the FCTC, each taking gradual steps to implement their tobacco control measures.
China ratified the FCTC on August 28, 2005. From January 9, 2006, FCTC became effective in the country, including Hong Kong. In accordance with the FCTC, China has pledged to render general protection to the public from exposure to tobacco smoke and impose a comprehensive ban on tobacco advertising, promotion and sponsorship by 2011, i.e. five years after the FCTC comes into effect. To implement the FCTC, the Ministry of Health has set up an Office of the FCTC Implementation Leading Groups and proceeded to amend the rules relating to the implementation of a smoking ban at all public places. Currently, there are over 150 Chinese cities that have promulgated a smoking ban at public places. In addition, China has also been organising a number of large-scale anti-smoking activities including the "Smoke-free Olympics" and the "Smoke-free World Expo".
In line with the requirements of the FCTC, the Hong Kong SAR Government's current tobacco control policy is to, inter alia, reduce the harmful effects of smoking and second-hand smoke, prevent young people from smoking and being addicted to smoking, as well as improve our smoking cessation services. To this end, we have amended the Smoking (Public Health) Ordinance in 2006 by significantly extending the statutory no smoking areas and tightening the statutory requirements for packaging and advertising tobacco products. In addition, the Financial Secretary has raised tobacco duty by 50% in this year's Budget to prevent our citizens, in particular the young, from smoking and to encourage smokers to give up smoking. To strengthen publicity and smoking cessation services, we have increased the funding for the Tobacco Control Office of the DH and the Hong Kong Council on Smoking and Health from $18.5 million in 2003-04 to $61.7 million in 2009-10. Both the DH and the Hospital Authority have strengthened their smoking cessation services by setting up smoking cessation clinics, establishing a Smoking Cessation Hotline and enhancing their counselling and referral services. Since February 2009, the DH has also been in collaboration with the Tung Wah Group of Hospitals to launch a three-year pilot community-based smoking cessation programme for provision of free treatment and counselling services to smokers.
Hong Kong's current tobacco control measures are generally in line with the requirement of the FCTC and are similar to those adopted by other advanced economies such as the United States, the United Kingdom, Canada and Australia. Nevertheless, we note that in these countries and most other countries with smoking bans for indoor places, managers of no-smoking premises are legally liable for any acts of illegal smoking on their premises. There is however no such statutory requirement in Hong Kong currently. As such, there is still room for further strengthening our tobacco control efforts in Hong Kong. We will consider various feasible tobacco control measures in the light of the need to protect public health and the expectations of the community. We will also continue to take forward our tobacco control efforts through a multi-pronged approach encompassing publicity, education, enforcement and promotion of smoking cessation so as to safeguard public health.
It is stipulated in the Smoking (Public Health) Ordinance (Cap 371) that no person shall smoke or carry a lighted cigarette, cigar or pipe in a no smoking area. Smoking a hookah in a no smoking area is therefore an offence and, upon summary conviction, the offender is liable to a maximum fine of HK$5,000.
Ends/Wednesday, July 8, 2009
Issued at HKT 13:17
NNNN
