Telephone bills environmentally unsound
I AM confident that I am not alone in both using the Autopay system to pay my Hongkong Telecom bill and being concerned over our diminishing natural resources. The following example of a revised billing system which appears to require 400 per cent more paper than previously is therefore thought-provoking.
Up to June 1994, details of the Hongkong Telecom standing charges were advised to subscribers when there was a change in these charges.
Monthly bills were issued for international calls, each bill accommodating up to 19 calls, and each bill measured 188 square centimetres. Additionally, one's account number with the company was one's phone number, a unique number.
Thereafter, as part of 'an upgrading of services' a new billing system was introduced, which each month detailed the standing charges and resulted in two sheets of paper being required when more than four calls had been made. Each sheet was 392 sq cm, resulting, in my case, in a 318 per cent increase in paper requirements.
Additionally, a 17-digit account number was given, and one was requested to quote this number and not one's phone number when making inquiries.
Since December 1995, a further 'enhancement' of the billing system has been introduced, and the size of each page has been increased to 475 sq cm. Again in one billing period I have four international calls, which necessitates two sheets.
My present bills therefore require over 400 per cent more paper than bills for a similar item some 18 months previously.
This contrasts sharply with the bills for Hongkong Electric which have reduced in size over the same period.
Perhaps Hongkong Telecom would care to explain how they equate their enhancements with the worldwide move to protect our scarce resources. If, of course, the bills are now on recycled paper, then the inclusion of the 'recycled' logo would be of immense value in encouraging others to use such material.
The enhancements in the billing system evidently did not include full multi-billing, as I have been advised that although, as in my case, the subscriber and the address is identical I will continue to receive two bills for the two lines to my apartment since they were applied for on different dates.
NAME AND ADDRESS SUPPLIED
