Letters | Hong Kong cannot allow a wait-and-see approach to fire safety
Readers discuss fire safety compliance, palliative care, and the diversity of religious life in Singapore
As a registered professional surveyor, I believe the current enforcement mechanism – primarily reliant on fire hazard abatement notices – is too reactive. When hazards are identified, responsible parties are given a grace period to rectify them, with prosecution only following non-compliance. This process takes an average of three months, according to the Fire Services Department. For life-threatening issues like blocked escape routes or locked emergency exits, three months is far too long.
The proposed fixed penalties address this critical gap. Immediate penalties for clear and easily verifiable offences – such as obstructing escape routes or neglecting annual inspections – send a strong deterrent message. This shift discourages the wait-and-see mentality that has plagued building management practices, and instead promotes a culture of accountability where safety violations carry immediate consequences.
Efficiency is another key benefit. Streamlining straightforward violations allows professional resources to focus on complex fire safety issues, such as systemic risks in high-risk buildings. This mirrors practices in cities like Singapore and Sydney, where fixed penalties have proven effective in improving fire safety compliance.