HONG KONG LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 11 May 1988
1367
our youth. Sir, I believe that the approach of integrating youth needs and social development is not only uncommon in the youth policies in other countries, but would certainly be an uncommon achievement in Hong Kong's history. Herein lies the value and significance of the report.
Furthermore, in the course of drafting the report, the committee has carefully considered several important issues. The first issue is the balance between com- prehensiveness and flexibility in policy. A youth policy must be substantial and specific in content, as a document outlining future direction, but if there is excessive detail, initiative of relative departments may be stifled and the policy would have to be amended time and again to suit changing circumstances. In order to strike a balance, the committee feels that the focus of such a policy should be to lay down clear objectives and specific direction for youth work.
The second issue is the balance between central leadership and public participation. Youth policy is to be formulated centrally and the Government must remain committed to youth development work, but that does not mean that there must be central leadership in every respect. Hong Kong is a plural society and all along youth work has depended on shared commitment and effort by both government and non-government bodies. Such a partnership should not change with the advent of a policy on youth. Therefore, the proposed youth policy is not a set of rules but rather a document for guidance. To ensure that government and non-government bodies follow and support that policy, there must be ample opportunities for consultation in formulating the policy and for non-government participation in its implementation. Therefore, the committee has, in the course of drafting the report, been in frequent contact with non-government bodies, listening to their views. We have arranged for a three-month consultation period from the publication of the report, to receive public criticism. The committee has also proposed the establishment of a commission on youth, comprising directorate officers and members of a cross-section of our community, to be in charge of the implementation of the policy. The committee emphasises the need for the commission to maintain close links with voluntary agencies, local organisations and other advisory bodies, for greater co-operation and co-ordination.
The third issue on which the committee gave careful deliberation, is the effect of 1997 on the policy itself. As I have said, changes on Hong Kong's political horizon are certain to prove a challenge for the young people of today and tomorrow. 1997 cannot be ignored in formulating policy. On the other hand, the challenges of our political future is by no means the only factor determining the needs of our youth. Urbanisation, economic development, advancement in information technology, are equally significant challenges on the budding generation. Therefore, the committee has avoided either playing down or playing up the 1997 factor. We have attempted to arrive at broad objectives. The report has given full treatment to the 1997 factor but has also balanced that against other factors. Recommendations in the report include those made with