HONG KONG LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 18 May 1988
1421
wording of relevant provisions in the Bill so that the Chief Secretary will only be empowered to 'refer' requests from aggrieved parties to the board. An amend- ment will be moved in Committee in accordance with this agreement.
There is one issue on which I would like to allay the film industry's anxiety. Concern has been expressed by the industry on the abolition of the existing censorship mechanism for advertising material related to films, with the intention that individual film producers should bear their own risks for prosecution under the Control of Obscene and Indecent Articles Ordinance. The industry is worried that the new arrangement, which represents a departure from existing practice, would result in a tighter control on advertising material related to films and cause operational problems. After seeking clarification with the Administration, the group is satisfied that the existing standards governing advertising material related to films will not change. Although it is the Administration's intention to remove the inconsistency whereby censorship principles drawn up having regard to the impact of films on the audience are applied without modification to film advertisements published through various media, existing standards will be maintained by way of a special arrangement which ensures that the Commis- sioner for Television and Entertainment Licensing acts as the only authority for referrals of film advertisements to be made to the Obscene Articles Tribunal.
One of the most debated topics in the Bill is the three-tier classification system which gives rise to a category of films limited to audience over 18. Cinema operators charged with enforcement responsibilities are naturally concerned with possible practical difficulties. Whilst there is a defence in the Bill for cinema operators should they be able to demonstrate that they have taken ‘reasonable precautions' to prevent underage people from entering their premises, the group is sympathetic with the industry's concern. As a compromise, therefore, an agreement has been reached with the Administration that a set of guidelines listing out what constitutes 'reasonable precautions' will be worked out in consultation with the industry before the system is put into operation. I am sure that Members of this Council will be kept informed of progress in this regard.
Sir, the Bill has broken at least two records. It is the first piece of legislation, as far as I am aware, which has been preceded by two White Bills; and it is the first Bill which necessitated a total of 37 meetings, including discussion on 12 occasions with the Administration and on six occasions with the film industry, before the ad hoc group could reach full agreement. Although some people may well
say that the group could have finished its work much earlier, I believe the time taken for the group to complete its task simply reflects the importance and complexity of the Bill. In any event, the important point is whether we are fulfilling effectively our role as lawmakers to scrutinise and improve legislation. I am confident that the Bill before us today represents a package which not only takes into account the interests of all parties, but is also acceptable to the great majority of the people of Hong Kong. I have no hesitation to recommend it to our colleagues in this Council.
With these remarks, Sir, I support the motion.