HONG KONG LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 11 January 1989
香港立法局 一九八九年一月十一日
44
than exempted as at present, so that they too will be subject to the disciplinary control of the professional boards. However, they will continue to be exempted
from the payment of registration fees, the requirement to display a practising certificate and the requirement to practise in licensed premises.
The remaining amendments in the Bill are of a minor and technical nature.
Sir, I move that the debate on this motion be now adjourned.
Question on adjournment proposed, put and agreed to.
PUBLIC ORDER (AMENDMENT) BILL 1988
Resumption of debate on Second Reading which was moved on 14 December 1988
Question proposed.
MR. CHEONG: Sir, allow me to start by commending the Administration for carrying out the promised review on this very controversial section of the law.
It is encouraging that the Administration has now decided to scrap it.
Encouraging not because the decision coincides with my long-held view about section 27 of the Public Order Ordinance which I had voted against almost two years ago.
After all, the Administration and myself want the section to go for different
reasons.
My concern then was the need for sufficient safeguard for members of the fourth estate to carry out their rightful duties, in that they should not be forced to disclose their source.
The Government still believes in the merit of the law, but out of respect to the public wishes and concerns, it now accedes to their wish. It is this spirit of accommodation and the Administration's concern about the anxiety of the public that I see as encouraging. This spirit and this concern must continue and I hope they will remain as one of the principles in the conduct of future reviews of government policies and practices.