今天（12月18日）收到食物環境衛生署的郵件，得知其已派人前往兒子就讀的小學和為學校供應午飯的九至五公司調查午飯質量問題。從11月9日有家長投訴午餐米飯未煮熟，到12月18日獲得政府的調查結果，這件事總算告一段落。現在把這件事的前因後果記錄一下，給其他家長一個交代。

11月9日下午，我在兒子學校家長的微信群里得知有幾位家長義工在做愛心飯盒後和孩子交換食物，發現飯盒里的米飯有部分未煮熟。當時大家在群裡討論很熱烈，主要的擔心是孩子還小（小學二年級）未必能分辨米飯是否煮熟。後來又有家長說米飯是從深圳運到香港的（後來證實是誤會）。我看到大家都很擔心，就把相關的討論截屏發到了小學一年級的家長微信群里，并新建了一個微信群來關注學校的午餐質量。

當天晚上，校長就通過家長教師會的委員發了信函到微信群，表示會跟進事件。接下來的幾天，學校和家長教師會分別發了通告。其實，出了這種事情，學校可以做的也很有限，畢竟飯也不是校長或者老師煮的。但是，我覺得這種事情發生在香港這麼發達的社會是不可原諒的，而最終需要負責的是午餐供應商。所以，我於11月12日致函九至五公司要求他們書面解釋這件事。

九至五飲食有限公司：

本人是李志達紀念學校的一位學生家長，通過家長微信群組得悉有家長義工發現11月9日午餐的部分飯盒米飯未徹底煮熟。就這一事件，學校已經第一時間聯絡貴公司客戶主任跟進。作為家長和午餐的購買者，我希望貴公司能重視本次事件，并在向學校提交的書面解釋和報告中討論以下澄清以下幾點：

1）根據微信群組里家長反映，去年也曾發生類似米飯未煮熟事件，也有家長向學校投訴。請貴公司翻查記錄了解是否屬實，並在書面報告中解釋為何生米飯事件會一再發生；

2）請你在報告中詳細解釋米飯未煮熟的原因，并詳細列舉將採取哪些具體措施保證類似事件不會再發生；

3）請你以書面形式向李志達購買午餐的家長致歉并保證不再出現類似事件，否則將自行退出下一屆的競標。

本人一向熱心公益事務，曾就跨境學童權益、流感疫苗等問題與教育局、衛生署、康樂及文化事務署等政府機構保持緊密聯絡，並經常有評論文章發表在英文南華早報。就這次事件，我將致函食物環境衛生署和食物安全中心了解相關政策和指引，如有需要，我將就事件向食環署作出正式投訴。與此同時，我已建立非官方微信群組，成員包括60多位李志達家長，共同關注李志達午餐質素問題。因此，我強烈建議貴公司在調查本次事件時盡心盡責，務求給各位家長一個滿意的答覆。

李志達家長午餐質素關注小組召集人 王浩

與此同時，我也發郵件給食物環境衛生署，查詢相關事宜。

食物環境衛生署：

本人是北區某小學家長。最近有家長義工發現午餐飯盒出現米飯未完全煮熟的情況，學校已經第一時間與供應商跟進。作為家長，我會在收到學校和午餐供應商就事件的調查結果后決定是否向食環署作出正式投訴。在這裡，我希望食環署能就以下問題提供意見：

1）午餐供應商在徹底煮熟食物包括米飯這件事上有哪些責任，如果未能做到，應該承擔怎樣的後果；

2）食環署在確保學校午餐的安全和健康方面扮演怎樣的角色；

3）家長如果對午餐供應商提供的食品安全和質素存在疑慮可以如何向食環署或者其他政府部門求助。

感謝你的關注。

王浩

第二天，我收到家長教師會的通告，其中摘錄了九至五公司的解釋指出是大米供應商的來料出了問題。我對於這個解釋表示懷疑，所以又發了一封郵件給食環署：

食物環境衛生署：

感謝你對上述事宜的關注。在這裡，我補充以下資料供你參考，希望食環署能積極跟進事件，消除家長的疑慮。

1）11月9日有家長義工到李志達紀念學校做愛心飯盒給學童品嘗，并交換學童的午餐食用。有多位家長義工發現米飯未完全煮熟。由於涉及的學童是小一、小二年級，心智未成熟，不能及時辨認和投訴米飯未煮熟的情況，因此有不少家長對事件十分關注和憂慮。我希望食環署能就如何確保幼稚園、小學低年級學童的午餐質素問題提供清晰的指引，明確午餐供應商和學校的責任，以免類似事件在李志達或全港其他學校發生。

2）如家教會附件中可見，學校和家長教師會對事件十分關注，并採取了措施監控米飯質素及和午餐供應商跟進。因此，我作為家長滿意學校和家教會對事件的處理。

3）家教會附件中轉載了午餐供應商（九至五飲食有限公司Nine To Five Limited 2667 2790 2667 0877 /2666 9001 contact@ntf.com.hk）的書面解釋，其中一項指出米飯未能徹底煮熟可能是由於原材料問題。由於我缺乏食物烹飪相關專業知識，無法判斷這個解釋是否成立，因此懇請食物安全中心提供專業意見。我希望了解米飯未煮熟究竟是一種無法完全避免的技術問題，還是九至五公司存在專業上的失當。如果是前者，我希望食環署就學校和家長應該如何處理這一問題提供專業意見。如果是後者，我希望食環署能介入調查，確保九至五公司向全港各中小學、幼稚園所供應午餐的質素。

感謝你的關注！

王浩

這封郵件是11月16日發出的，一直到11月30日都沒有回覆。於是我又發了一封郵件跟進。

Dear Sir/Madam

I am writing to follow up with the enquiry (CMIS No.2017200486) made on Nov 12. Please let me know when I could expect a reply. I am a bit surprised that it takes so long for the department to process my enquiry. I wrote to other government departments such as Department of Health, Food and Health Bureau and Office of Chief Executive on other issues and usually I got replies within 1 week. I would appreciate it if you could provide me an update on my case.

Cheers

Simon Wang

當天收到了回覆：

王浩：

有關食物安全的查詢

你11月12日的電郵收悉，現覆如下：

在香港，用以規管食物安全的法律條文載於《公眾衞生及市政條例》(第132章)及該條例的附屬法例。該條例訂明有關食物安全的基本規定，所有在香港出售的食物，不論進口或本地生產，必須適宜供人食用。

學校午餐一般是由食物製造廠預先大量烹製後放在保溫箱或飯盒裏直至用餐時間。如溫度控制不當便容易滋生細菌和產生毒素。為防滋生有害微生物，熱食應存於攝氏60度以上；冷食須存於攝氏4度或以下。食物供應商應確保員工保持良好的個人和環境衞生，並在準備飯盒時遵從食物安全五要點。食物處理人員如出現發燒、腹瀉及嘔吐等症狀，便不應處理食物。學校管理層在挑選午餐供應商時可參考食物安全中心編製的《如何確保學校午餐安全指引》。詳情可瀏覽以下網頁。http://www.cfs.gov.hk/tc_chi/multimedia/multimedia_pub/multimedia_pub_fsf_96_03.htmlhttp://www.cfs.gov.hk/tc_chi/multimedia/multimedia_pub/files/school_lunches_ordered_are_safe.pdf

如發覺所購買的食物有問題，可致電本署24小時熱線2868 0000作出舉報，並提供詳細資料，包括投訴食物樣本、品牌、購買日期、時間、地點和不符的詳情等。調查人員會作出跟進。

多謝你對食物安全的關注。

食物環境衞生署署長

(林妙妍 代行)

收到這樣一封敷衍塞責的回覆我就有點惱火了，於12月2日寫了一封郵件給食環署的上級單位食物衛生局：

Dear Sir/Madam

I am writing to bring your attention to an enquiry I made to Food and Environmental Hygiene Department on Nov 12 (CMIS No.2017200486).

On Nov 9, a few parents at Lee Chi Tat Memorial School found that rice in the lunch boxes for the schoolchildren were not properly cooked. While the school has followed up the matter with the lunch supplier Nine to Five (attached are the memos from the school), I wrote to the department asking if any support and help might be available from the department to ensure the quality of food for schoolchildren. I also sought professional advice from the department on a specific issue: whether it is reasonable for Nine to Five to blame its rice supplier for not being able to fully cook the rice.

I am very disappointed with the way your colleagues at Food and Environmental Hygiene Department dealt with my enquiry (attached please find their reply). To begin with, it took the department more than two weeks to process my enquiry. I did not get a reply until I wrote to them again to follow up on Nov 30. In their reply, they did not answer my questions but refer me to web pages that are barely relevant to my concern.

I hope your colleagues can review my enquiry again and consider the following requests:

1) Given that Nine to Five has repeatedly failed to cook the rice properly for schoolchildren in Lee Chi Tat, I hope the department could look into the matter and make sure that Nine to Five would take necessary measures to avoid making such mistakes in future. Since Nine to Five supplies lunch boxes for many schools in Hong Kong, I think such an investigation is necessary not just for the schoolchildren at Lee Chi Tat but many more children and parents in the city.

2) Since the schoolchildren (especially primary one and primary two pupils) may not be able to detect bad food with their limited cognitive skills, it is necessary for the department to provide more information and guidelines for schools to ensure the quality of food served to small children. In the guidelines provided by the department (http://www.cfs.gov.hk/tc_chi/multimedia/multimedia_pub/files/school_lunches_ordered_are_safe.pdf), the issue of detecting food of poor quality for small children was not adequately addressed.

3) please respond to my question about whether it is reasonable for Nine to Five to blame the rice supplier.

4) Since the quality and safety of lunch food for schoolchildren is a very important matter, I suggest that the department should have a team dedicated to routinely reviewing the production of food for schoolchildren.

Thanks in advance for your attention.

Yours sincerely

…

Simon Wang

食物衛生局把我的郵件轉給食物及環境衛生署跟進，就有了今天的回覆：

Dear Mr. Wang,

Enquiry on Food Safety of School Lunches

I refer to your emails of 2 Dec and 16 Nov 2017 concerning the subject and would like to furnish you with the following reply.

Staff of Food Environmental Hygiene Department (FEHD) has conducted inspection on food processing and post-cooking handling steps in the food premises (lunchbox supplier, Nine to Five Ltd.) and serving process at Lee Chi Tat Memorial School. The lunchbox supplier, Nine to Five Ltd., situated at Unit A-B, G/F & M/F (portion), Tai Ping Industrial Park,51 Ting Kok Road, Tai Po, New Territories is covered by a valid food factory licence (supply lunch box). Food processing and post-cooking handling steps from purchase of raw material from supplier, on-site storage, food preparation, cooking and packing of lunch box; and hygienic condition of "Nine to Five Ltd." were checked and no irregularities were detected. Nevertheless, our staff gave health education on food, environmental and personal hygiene to the responsible person on the spot. Besides, we have reminded the lunch supplier to stay vigilant particularly cooking food thoroughly, conducting quality assurance inspection (including any sign of undercooked rice) before delivery to school and storing lunch boxes in hygienic insulation boxes at proper holding temperature during transportation with a view to ensuring food safety and quality.

With regard to meal serving in the school, the vice-principal revealed that the teachers perform regular inspection to check the quality and holding temperature of the lunch boxes. Sign of undercooked rice in lunch box was not detected recently. Our staff checked the hygienic condition of transporting vehicle, lunch box distribution area and insulation boxes and found satisfactory. In addition, the holding temperature of lunch boxes at time of serving reached 60oC that observes hygiene practice.

In the course of our investigation, it was noticed that the lunchbox supplier has changed the source of rice recently. The same cooking process as adopted before may result in different texture of the finished product. It is also worth mentioning that different rice varieties are expected to absorb water and expand differently upon cooking, resulting in cooked rice of different hardness, whiteness and dullness. Also, long-grain rice is generally more fluffy and firm after cooking, while cooked medium and short-grain rice is more soft, moist and sticky in texture.

To build a healthy school environment, caterers have the responsibility to serve safe food. Meanwhile, the FEHD appreciates collaborative effort of school, food trade and government to promote safe lunch box in schools. Apart from regular inspections to lunch box supplier by our staff, great importance is attached to safe and quality meal at school through school management. To this end, the Centre for Food Safety has been organising food hygienic talks and developing guidelines for the trade and school.

Thank you for your concern on food safety.

Yours faithfully,

(Ms. LAM Mui-yen)

for Director of Food and Environmental Hygiene

在我的堅持下，食環署終於派人去九至五公司的生產地實地檢查，并提醒負責人確保食物徹底煮熟。雖然米飯未煮熟的事情告一段落，但是我對九至五公司還有更高的要求。12月7日我又寫了郵件給香港衛生署、教育局等部門聯合成立的健康飲食在校園運動督導委員會，針對九至五公司的午餐飯盒提出兩點質疑：

1）該公司向衛生署提交的文件指出為100%的學校提供減鹽的午餐飯盒，但是我兒子的餐單上沒有看到減鹽餐的選項；

2）衛生署建議學校午餐包含一份水果，該公司提交的文件顯示有提供水果，但是我兒子的午餐沒有水果。

From: Simon H Wang <simonwang@hkbu.edu.hk>

To:health_cheuweb@dh.gov.hk,"enquiries@dh.gov.hk" <enquiries@dh.gov.hk>

Cc:"contact@ntf.com.hk" <contact@ntf.com.hk>,"lctms@ymail.com" <lctms@ymail.com>

Date: 07/12/2017 21:27

Subject: Is Nine to Five Limited offering healthy lunch food to schoolchildren?

DearEatSmart@School.hkCampaign Steering Committee,

I am writing to bring your attention to the issue of whether Nine to Five Limited, the lunch supplier of my son's primary school (Lee Chi Tat Memorial School), is offering healthy lunch food to its customers.

According to this document (http://school.eatsmart.gov.hk/files/pdf/salt_reduction_scheme_for_school_lunches_1718_participating_lunch_suppliers_en.pdf), 2-8% of the lunches from Nine to Five Limited contain a reduced amount of salt and such lunches are offered to 100% of the client schools. Yet, in the lunch order form for my son, I cannot find any indication of which lunches contain less salt. Since I agree with the committee that the amount of salt should be kept small in children's diet, I am disappointed that Nine to Five does not provide information that I need to help my son make the right choices.

According to Nutritional Guidelines on Lunch for Students (http://school.eatsmart.gov.hk/files/pdf/lunch_guidelines_bi.pdf), it is recommended that primary 1-3 pupils should have at least one serving of fruit (p. 32). In Lunch Suppliers' Operation Information, it is suggested that Nine to Five provides fruit in its lunches. Nevertheless, no fruit is available in my son's lunches.

You may think that I should have first contacted Nine to Five to clarify the matter. Unfortunately, the company was not very forthcoming in answering my email. Therefore, I hope the committee can look into the matter and make sure that Nine to Five Limited, which seems to a major lunch suppliers for schools in HK, provide accurate information about the food it supplies. Offering misleading information about how healthy the food is through Department of Health website would not help advance the cause of promoting healthy food among our children.

I hope this message could be passed to all committee membershttp://school.eatsmart.gov.hk/files/pdf/ESS_Campaign_SC_member_list_bi.pdfand look forward to your reply. I also copy this message to Nine to Five and Lee Chi Tat Memorial School for their reference.

Yours sincerely,

Simon Wang

衛生署已經承諾跟進事件：

Dear Mr WANG,

Thank you for your email.

Your enquiry is receiving attention and under processing. We will get back to you as soon as possible.

Regards,

(CHEUNG Yin-ting)

for Director of Health

做了這麼多事情，一方面是希望孩子們能吃的安全健康；更重要的是，我在積極探索一種在香港的維權模式，通過手中的筆和政府溝通，由政府部門出面保護老百姓的基本權益。以我近年與香港政府各部門郵件往來的經驗來看，香港有一套較成熟和有效的機制處理市民的投訴。如果這次食物衛生局的跟進無效，我還可以寫信給行政長官辦公室、立法會秘書處、申訴專員以及各大媒體。也正是因為普通老百姓手上也有牌可以打，食物衛生局才會給壓力讓食環署積極跟進。希望有一天這種政府與老百姓合作的維權模式能在神州大地發揚光大。