First, it is the allegation on 'the indiscriminate use of plastic shopping bags' that baffles opponents of the bag levy. What constitutes an indiscriminate use in the first place and what is wrong with using plastic shopping bags, first as carriers for shopping and for something else before using them as bin-liners, which is what most households have been doing before this discriminatory bag levy?

Contrary to what green groups have claimed and, as has been clearly pointed out time and again in these columns, plastic shopping bags do not pollute or harm our environment. If they did, the department should ban them outright instead of imposing a regressive levy. Clearly, chain stores are just easy targets for the department to conveniently administer its politically correct but symbolic green levy, which does nothing to help our environment.

When the initial problem was the looming volume of waste, the department should have focused on how it could effectively deal with the volume in the first place rather than picking on the innocent plastic shopping bags.

While Ms Hsia says that HK$1 billion has been injected into the Environment and Conservation Fund to support publicity and public education on waste reduction, recovery and recycling, many would rather see the money going to support community projects that improve Hong Kong's environment instead. Most people would prefer tangible results on how the environment has been improved rather than being bombarded with empty and sometimes misguided slogans.

She says an increasing number of shoppers are bringing along reusable shopping bags. They have no choice under this symbolic green levy.

Alex F. T. Chu, Clear Water Bay