Just recently Beijing Metro deleted the "No Eating" law. Surprisingly I agree with this, and I agree with the reasons for doing so.

Eating and drinking on public transport is not just a problem in China. In England we do not have this law and selfish people are really a menace. I hate getting on the bus when the kids leave school because they all head to the fast food shops, (mostly fried chicken establishments) and then get on the bus with their stinking boxes of chicken, which incidentally if you are the one eating it, no doubt it smells delicious, but if you are not, it does not smell appetizing, but rather nauseating. Then what do they do with their empty boxes? Of course they do not take them with them, but thoughtfully leave them on their seat for someone else to remove.

However the laws in England on littering are quite rigorous and incur heavy fines for the culprits who throw their rubbish on the floor. There was even one extreme case where a lady kindly took pity on a pigeon and threw it a piece of her lunchtime pie. An eagle eyed (pardon the bird pun) government worker swooped (pardon the bird pun again) upon her and issued an instant fine. The lady argued that the pigeon had already eaten the evidence so there was in fact no litter. She was still issued with a £75 (750 yuan) fine which was only withdrawn because the public complained to the government agency concerned. So despite the fact that we have these stringent laws, the reason we do not have the no eating on public transport law is because such a law is pointless as it is unenforceable. In fact having such a law does more harm than good because people know that they can break it with impunity and there will be no consequences, thereafter they may be encouraged to break more laws.

Just think about it, surely passing a law that cannot be enforced shows up flaws in the legal system. Imagine how difficult it must be to implement this law in China. It would need lots of manpower to patrol the metro, and upon catching someone they would have to deal with them, perhaps by fining them. If the perpetrator refused to pay, what then? Take them to the police station? What then?

What has been decided on is to appeal to people’s sense of morality, i.e. not to encroach upon the rights of others by eating on the metro. Hmmm, let me repeat an experience I had with a friend on the metro in Tianjin. She took out an orange to eat so I pointed out the sign which clearly said "Please do not eat or drink on the metro". She said "But it has a picture of a hamburger and a cola. I am not eating or drinking those things". I told her that no eating and drinking meant exactly that. I also pointed out that they could not pin up pictures of every single item of food and drink that exist in the world. She wasn’t convinced, so using her logic I asked her if it would be alright for me to bring a portable hob on board and start cooking hotpot as there was no picture of that pinned up. I couldn’t believe I was actually having that conversation with her.

My friends also say on a hot day they will bring water with them and drink it, as surely the signs are not referring to a ban on water. And what about babies, does this ban mean that mothers cannot feed their babies? What about older children, is it wrong for loving parents and grandparents to give the little darlings a snack or two, or a little sip of liquid? How about people that have an illness that necessitates the need for them to eat in order to keep their blood sugar levels up, surely they cannot be included in the ban? How about the poor little old lady that takes a sip of her tea, or eats some sunflower seeds, no matter that the husks drop on the floor, seeds cannot be constituted as food, can they? What about people that suddenly feel sick and need to drink something? Oh dear it is getting complicated.

This situation raises interesting questions. Should we need a law that forces people to have a sense of civic responsibility, or makes people consider their fellow man? Does the Law really have the right to do that?

I wrote a previous article about how in some places in China there was a fine system in place for people who disobeyed the no eating and drinking regulations, and the very people that complained it was oppressive and unfair were passengers, many of whom did not eat or drink on the train, but who upheld the rights of others to do so if they wished. When explaining why the law had been revoked a spokesman said "The public will see a pragmatic government attitude, which is also a kind of political wisdom".

The same article also quoted English jurist, Herbert Hart, who was of the opinion "that law is premised on the notion of duty as the support of civic and societal existence and that law is not based on any moral code, so it is improper to legislate on matters of private morality". He has a point. It can also be argued that the Law exists to punish wrongdoers. Chinese people will not agree that any great wrong is caused by someone stinking out the train carriage, or dropping their greasy food on the floor. Eaters and drinkers on the go have rights too.

Also, has having such a law stopped people eating and drinking on the metro? No. Will reminding people that they have a responsibility to care about their fellow travelers work? No. On public transport in China you will often see people with their bags on the seat next to them and they will defy anyone to ask them to move them so that they can sit down. On the metro a man asked a lady to remove her bags occupying a seat. She refused point blank as her bag contained frozen food, she could not put it on her lap as it was too cold, and she did not want to put it on the floor. The man accepted her explanation and moved down the carriage. If someone wants to eat and drink they will regardless of whether or not it conveniences other passengers. Nevertheless you will start to see polite notices on the Beijing metro gently encouraging people to remember their fellow passengers.

It has to be admitted that in Hong Kong, most people adhere to the no eating rule on the metro, although I did notice several people ignoring the rule when I was there last. It is a sad indictment of our times that we need to be reminded to think about other people. Wouldn’t the world be a much better place if we all did that naturally? Unfortunately there is a distinct lack of application of the Golden Rule, not just in China, but globally.