I REFER to the recently released document Second Review of the 1989 White Paper: A Green Challenge for the Community, by the Government. The Conservancy Association is heartened to see that many of the long-held positions of the association have been taken on board, such as proposals for a comprehensive conservation strategy, a comprehensive energy conservation policy, a comprehensive community awareness, a more detailed treatment of recycling, and a commitment towards sustainable development and the treaties and conventions adopted at the Earth Summit last year. This demonstrates that the continual dialogue between the association and the Government has indeed been productive. The association takes exception, however, to the approach which the Government is taking in combining a policy review with a ''comprehensive treatment of Hong Kong's environmental issues'' which is ''intended to be an educational and information tool'' (para 2.8 of the review). While both of these - namely, a policy review and a comprehensive statement of Hong Kong's environment - are noble objectives and are much needed, combining them together in a single document could undermine the effectiveness of both. The Conservancy Association should emphasise that it is our view that there should be both a policy paper and an educational statement, but perhaps they should be separate instead of brought together in one document. The policy paper, in our view, should go beyond a review of the 1989 White Paper. Since there has already been a first review, why is there a need for a second review if no policy initiatives are intended? It would be very sad if no policy decisions and initiatives were intended. What is needed is a new comprehensive environmental White Paper, setting out firm proposals with specific targets and a proper consultation procedure (through the use of a Green Paper) rather than a review of a policy paper, 95 per cent of whose targets have been met. The association is glad to see some new initiatives being set by the Government but many of them do not have specific targets and goals; for example, the new measures to control indoor air pollution and construction noise pollution, the storage facility for radioactive wastes, to name just a few. The consultation over the second White Paper review is also disappointing. The Government seems to have paid lip service to the Governor's promise for wider consultation in his address in 1992. The Conservancy Association and other green groups have been given two briefings on the second White Paper review, but no written documents have been sent to the groups. Such ''consultation'' lacks sincerity and could hardly have any fruitful outcome. Currently, the Government is launching a widespread campaign to ask the general public for comments. However, there are insufficient channels for public forums. The document is lengthy - over 170 pages, and there is inadequate provision for incorporatingcomments from the public in the document. The association therefore doubts that the Government intends to give the public a chance to take up the challenge and create a sustainable society. GORDON NG Spokesperson The Conservancy Association
