Last week, the Office of The Ombudsman (The Ombudsman) released the Direct Investigation Reports on the Government’s Handling of Four Stonewall Trees along Bonham Road, and the Government’s Tree Management Regime and Practices. Regarding the incident involving the stonewall trees along Bonham Road, The Ombudsman, after careful examination, commented that the Highways Department (Hy D)’s decision to remove the stonewall trees that day was not unreasonable, and accepted the Hy D’s justifications given to the public last year, namely there were signs of imminent deterioration within a short period of time, showing that the trees might collapse anytime; no other feasible proposals were available to mitigate risks; and the weather as forecast by the Hong Kong Observatory was continually unstable. I hope the public will understand that the Government treasures trees as much as anyone. Every decision on removing trees is difficult. On the premise of protecting lives and ensuring public safety, however, tree management departments sometimes have to make difficult yet responsible decisions. The conclusion drawn by The Ombudsman on the stonewall tree incident along Bonham Road has upheld the decisions made by the colleagues of all departments concerned.
Over the past year, the Government has in fact implemented many of the measures proposed in the reports. For instance, we have enhanced the requirements under the notification mechanism for tree removal: (i) under non-emergency circumstances, the tree management departments are required to inform the Tree Management Office (TMO) if Old and Valuable Trees, stonewall trees and trees of public interest have to be removed. If the TMO agrees with the proposed removal, it will consult the Expert Panel on Tree Management (EPTM); (ii) as for emergency circumstances, the tree management departments will notify the EPTM as far as practicable without compromising public safety, and submit tree removal reports to the EPTM afterwards. The Greening, Landscape and Tree Management Section (GLTMS) will continue to have regular meetings with the EPTM on tree management issues, and key points of the meetings will be uploaded onto the GLTMS’ websites for public reference to enhance transparency.
In addition, a TRIAGE system was introduced in the revised Guidelines for Tree Risk Assessment and Management Arrangement last year for early identification and handling of trees with high risks to ensure public safety. Besides, we will consider attaching TRIAGE tags to trees with serious health or structural problems and uploading the data onto the Tree Register so that the public can identify such trees with high risks.
On enhancing the human resources of the arboriculture industry, the GLTMS of the Development Bureau (DEVB) is facilitating the industry to raise the professional standards of the arboriculture and horticulture industries, and to standardise the training and practices of the industries in accordance with the Qualifications Framework platform in Hong Kong. Meanwhile, the DEVB launched a human resources and competences survey for the relevant industries last year, which will enable us to make longer-term, more holistic planning for tree management in general, so as to prepare for the potential demand and supply in the market.
As regards The Ombudsman’s recommendation that the Government should make it clear its intention to introduce legislation to regulate tree management and conservation, we do not think we should make any rash decisions. While the Government has been keeping an open mind towards the introduction of tree legislation, we must consider the legislative support required and the impact on all stakeholders in a comprehensive manner, which will inevitably involve the human resources of the arboriculture profession and public awareness of tree safety and conservation. Furthermore, we should also ponder and analyse in a scientific manner the intent of the legislation, the effects anticipated, the impact on the community and stakeholders, enforceability, cost-effectiveness, unintended consequences of legislation, possible alternatives, etc. There are at present a number of ordinances in Hong Kong governing the protection and management of trees, including those targeting the vandalising, felling and theft of trees on government land. There have also been guidelines for tree removal and compensation in public works projects over the years, and the Government has also put in place administrative measures to strengthen the co-ordination of tree maintenance and management on government land. As for trees on private land, some of the land has already been regulated by the relevant land lease clauses or planning measures covering issues such as the removal of trees for development, compensation and responsibility for maintenance in future. This April, we published the Handbook on Tree Management, which will be incorporated into the relevant codes of practice under the Building Management Ordinance in the second half of this year, so as to remind private owners clearly of their responsibility for properly maintaining the trees on their property, and the liability for any casualties in case of accidents.
In fact, when looking at some of the tree legislation of overseas countries, we may notice that their intents and coverage differ. Many of them focus mainly on the preservation of woodlands or natural landscapes covering a large area, but not necessarily on the protection of every single tree. Furthermore, as pointed out by many local tree experts and industry practitioners, if the Government intends to impose overly stringent legal restrictions on all trees (including those on private land), some private owners may respond in a passive manner before or after the legislation, such as reducing the number of trees planted or only planting bushes with lower risks. Some may simply “chop off the toes to fit in the shoes” by not planting anything at all, which will not be conducive to the overall greening of our living environment and Hong Kong as a whole. It is not what the public would like to see, is it? Therefore, we should not over-simplify the issue and simply regard tree legislation as the panacea for all problems. When considering whether or how to introduce tree legislation, we not only have to examine carefully the intents and specific practices of tree legislation in different places and the best practices for urban greening and tree conservation around the world, but also take into consideration specific local circumstances so as to make decisions that best serve the overall interests of Hong Kong.
There is a Chinese saying that “It takes ten years to grow trees but a hundred years to nurture people”. To carry out tree management work properly, in addition to legislation, we certainly should not neglect training for people. We will maintain an open mind towards the introduction of tree legislation, carry out detailed researches and analyses, and make earnest efforts to exchange ideas with the community and the industry. Besides, we will continue to work to increase the human resources of the arboriculture and horticulture industries, raise their professional standards and increase awareness of tree safety and conservation in the entire community, so as to achieve “People, Trees and Harmony” in Hong Kong.
19 June, 2016
Back