Hong Kong just marked a one-year milestone in its implementation of the expanded smoking ban. This expansion outlawed smoking in enclosed public venues such as bars. While it provided brief relief to non-smokers who frequent these watering holes, the old habit of smoking indoors made a strong resurgence, thanks to the relatively loose guidelines on the implementation of the ban.
Instead of pushing the owners to enforce the law, the smoking ban penalizes only the smokers a fixed HK$1,500 ($193) for any violation. This effectively clears owners or managers from any responsibility in reminding offenders and ensuring the health and well-being of other patrons. In Britain, the smoking ban makes bar owners directly responsible for smokers’ actions by putting their licences at risk if smokers are found repeatedly flouting the ban on their premises. Their counterparts in New Zealand face a fine of up to NZ$4,000 ($2,885). In Queensland, Australia, restaurant owners must stop offering food and service if a customer fails to comply with the smoking ban.
The success of the ban hinges on the performance of 99 tobacco control officers and supplement forces to police the entire city. Some of these officers had balked at the idea of expanding their jurisdiction to public transport interchanges, on top of bars, mahjong houses, private clubs, massage parlours, saunas and nightclubs. With only these enforcers patrolling the territory, smokers have plenty of room to puff cigarettes as they wish. Other agencies are also empowered but there seems to be a lack enthusiasm to do this extra work. For instance, out of 2,200 officers of Leisure and Cultural Services (LCSD), only two prosecutions were made since they were given power to implement smoking ban last September.
One might suspect that this law was made just to show everyone that Hong Kong cares about the health through enforcing a legislated smoking ban. The law’s apparent hands-off policy may be a deliberate attempt to protect the interests of businesses instead of looking at the welfare of non-smokers. So if a customer asks bar staff if it is okay to smoke indoors, they may be eventually allowed, since staff will not be accountable in any way. Otherwise, employees become subject to possible reprisals from clients.
The atmosphere outdoors does not provide much of a relief either. As smokers are pushed out of their previous nooks and have to converge in the sidewalk or surround cigarette bins at the corner, the air is definitely more lethal than before. We often complain of China’s factories as the number one culprit, but I guess we pay little attention on matters that are closer to us — idling engines, smoke inhalation and other forms of pollution generated by Hong Kong people.
Tobacco Control Office head Dr Ronald Lam Man-kin said in an earlier interview that tax earnings and prosecutions were not their main focus in stepping up anti-tobacco efforts. “We just want to motivate more smokers to quit, for the benefit of themselves and others.”
Sorry Dr Lam, I think I see more smokers congregating in every allowable space in the streets, building basements and that’s not a sign smokers are quitting. And I don’t think that these efforts your office is initiating are working. Apart from those poor tobacco control officers who are helpless in enforcing the law, all I see are feel-good TV commercials and glossy posters. In my opinion, that’s not gonna work.
Unless the loophole described above gets corrected, it’s better off scrapping this smoking ban, and focus taxpayers’ money elsewhere.
