The announcement prompted lawmaker Doreen Kong Yuk-foon to ask whether the suspension would constitute a breach of the contracts signed with the manufacturers and if any compensation would be involved.
“Every bag costs. Residents have to pay for them,” she said. “Will the government consider selling the bags at cost price? Can this help with the losses, at least a little?”
Under the scheme, people would have to buy government-approved bags available in nine sizes, priced from 30 HK cents (3 US cents) to HK$11. A special label priced at HK$11 would be available for large or oddly shaped items.
Environmental authorities last year granted nine tenders totalling HK$1.15 billion to four plastic bag producers, according to Government Logistics Department documents.
Secretary for Environment and Ecology Tse Chin-wan told lawmakers on Monday there was no agreement with the manufacturers regarding the minimum quantity of bags produced.
“We will follow the terms of the respective contracts and discuss the matter with the manufacturers of the bags,” he said. “As for selling the bags, we feel that we may first [concentrate] on publicity and education.
“If we start to, say, sell the bags, it may cause emotions and misunderstanding among the public. I find it not appropriate.”
He said the government planned to hand out 20 bags for free to every household in public rental flats each month for half a year starting in June.
By providing each of the 840,000 households with bags, the government would have given out 100.8 million after six months, leaving 69.2 million in stock.
The government said private residential buildings could also receive free bags if they signed a charter promising to provide recycling facilities and handle the recyclables properly. It would also distribute bags in educational activities.
After the panel meeting, Tse said there would continue to be demand for designated bags for educational purposes.
“Our agreement did not specify how many bags must be produced, so if there are changes in the quantity of bags needed, we can simply discuss with the manufacturers accordingly.”
One of the four manufacturers revealed to local media that its contract stipulated that authorities had the right to “speed up or stop” production, and that their budget, manpower and production lines would be affected by the suspension.
Another supplier said he did not expect production to resume in the foreseeable future, and that it would need to seek legal advice and discuss with authorities how to deal with the situation.
The Environmental Protection Department last month said advertising materials for the scheme had been broadcast on television and radio about 4,000 times, and on more than 9,000 display monitors at public transport stations and vehicles.
It also displayed about 4,000 promotional banners and posters on roadsides, government facilities and public housing estates and placed advertisements on about 100 mobile applications and websites.
The department earlier said the government had earmarked HK$581 million for the current 2024-25 financial year for the scheme, involving 72 government headcounts.
Edwin Lau Che-feng, founder and executive director of The Green Earth environmental group, said the scheme could not be suspended indefinitely and suggested the government launch a trial on its own premises to set an example.
“There are business circles and residents in society who still have so many doubts about this,” he said.
“All government department offices, government-managed premises and government civil servants’ dormitories should do it themselves.
“This can set a good example for all Hong Kong residents.”