Letters | Cleaners play a vital role in Hong Kong’s recycling economy
- Readers discuss a way to minimise household waste charges, the library’s move to allow users to borrow more books, and what Hong Kong shops must do to keep their customers
The implementation of the waste-charging scheme has sparked discussion of Hong Kong’s capacity – or lack thereof – for recycling. Contrary to the popular opinion that the city does a poor job of recycling, we are actually quite successful in some areas: we recycle 42 per cent of our used paper, and 92 per cent of our waste metal, including aluminium cans, thanks to the efforts of a dense network of cleaners. We need to do better when it comes to other materials, such as plastics.
In addition to the estimated 2,897 scavengers who collect cardboard and other material in the streets, 13,200 street cleaners, 72,700 estate cleaners and 338,189 foreign domestic helpers – over 10 per cent of our working population – are engaged in handling our waste. Many cleaners separate and store material for sale to recyclers who collect it at regular times.
Few buildings have dedicated rooms for storage of recyclable material. The space used by cleaners for sorting and storage of material to be sold to recyclers is often an informal arrangement. Worse, most buildings do not have dedicated rooms for cleaners to prepare lunch, change their clothes or rest either; often they use the corners of refuse collection rooms.
Part of the success of this recycling effort lies in its informal nature. The money earned from selling recyclables is an unrecorded source of income cleaners share. If the role of cleaners in recycling is formalised, we risk the financial incentive that is crucial to the success of recycling being removed. Instead, communities need to be creative in collaborating with cleaners to improve recycling rates, thereby reducing waste charges.
Once we recognise the role cleaners play in our recycling network, we should support them with the space and facilities needed to collect, separate and sell recyclable material. We must also be generous and let them keep the income from these sales.
Paul Zimmerman, CEO, Designing Hong Kong Limited, and general manager, Drink Without Waste Limited
Borrowing more books does not mean reading more
Raising the loan quotas may seem a good move, but it is ineffective in promoting reading as it does not get to the root of the problem. Many people do not read regularly not because of a lack of loan quota, but because of a lack of interest in books. With the rise of social media reels, anime and video games, books seem monotonous by comparison, especially to young people. Raising the loan quotas won’t get them to the library.
In fact, the move appeals to only a tiny target audience – passionate readers. Yet the campaign should be focusing on non-readers.
Besides, the quota increase could lead to more books being unavailable and make it harder for users to borrow popular books.
Borrowing more books does not mean reading more books. With a loan period of 14 days, renewable for up to five times, this means a user can keep a book for a maximum of around two months. Would most people be able to finish reading eight books in two months, not to mention 10?
In the end, the quota increase won’t tackle the main reasons non-readers are not reading, yet could inconvenience readers. While it is commendable the government has realised the need to promote reading, it should roll out measures that are actually effective.
Lucas Lee, Sha Tin
Hong Kong shops must raise their service game
Hong Kong is an expensive city. It would be impossible to compete on price. The only thing the city can do is to improve the quality of its services and products. There is much to do – it is quite rare, for example, to get a “thank you” from the cashier when making a small purchase at a Hong Kong shop.
Jack Chung, Sham Shui Po
