181.
In the light of my findings, I have suggested to the Secretary for Trade and Industry that the funding arrangements for the Trade Development Council should be re-examined. The earmarking of a particular source of the general revenue to finance a particular activity is at variance with sound principles of financial management, which entail the identification of objectives, the setting of performance measures, the allocation of resources to meet those objectives and the evaluation of performance. As indicated by the Working Committee on Export Promotion Organization twenty years ago, the practice of other exporting countries in financing export promotion from public funds was to assess, industry by industry, the amount needed to supplement promotional activities by the private sector and the Government's decision on the importance of export promotion relative to the provision of other public sector services. Although due to the lack of detailed information at that time the Working Committee was of the view that Hong Kong could not adopt such an approach, it appears that no review has since been carried out to see whether the problems then encountered were surmountable.
182.
The Secretary for Trade and Industry has not directly addressed me on the issue of the funding arrangements for the Trade Development Council, but with regard to my other findings he has advised me that he does not see a role for the Government to monitor the detailed operations of the Council. He believes that it was not the intention of the Legislature that he should have this role. He contends that unlike other vote controllers he cannot be expected to remain at all times fully responsible for the proper disbursement of funds provided to the Council. Indeed, he sees his role vis-à-vis the Council as more akin to the relationship between a Government Secretariat branch and an independent department where full accountability for funds disbursed rests with the latter.
183.
Head 186
G
Transport Department. Subhead 104. Light and power. The Airport Tunnel, completed in 1982, uses an average of 350,000 units of electricity a month. At the time of opening, the Commissioner for Transport applied for the electricity supply company's more advantageous bulk tariff rates which were available to any consumer using a minimum of 20,000 units a month. Although the electrical, mechanical and surveillance services contract specified that the electrical installations in the Airport Tunnel should be in
accordance with the electricity supply company's rules, it was found that the Airport Tunnel did not qualify for bulk tariff rates under the rules because the contractor had failed to install a power factor correction capacitor.