HONG KONG LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL
47
terms of reference of the Committee whose Report has been reflected in the Bill before Council did not permit of the Committee going so far as to make recommendation for the reservation of accommoda- tion for a class of guests. Further, he found or he could locate in the Committee's Report no guiding principle which led the Committee to formulate the suggestion that accommodation in hotels should be reserved. And further, notwithstanding that hotels are not being deprived by this legislation of the right to receive payment for reserved accommodation, the Honourable Member suggests that, by this legislation, there is an invasion of the rights of private property without compensation paid. Now, Sir, I suggest that in point of fact the recommendation made by the Committee was within their terms of reference. Sir, they were appointed to enquire into and advise Government concerning rates to be charged for accommodation, food and service by Hotels and Boarding Houses throughout the Colony.
Now, Sir, on those terms of reference it would have been per- fectly open to the Committee to have suggested rates chargeable by the various types of hotels and to make those controlled rates apply universally, that is to any type of guests staying in the hotel there should attach a controlled rate. But here emerges a principle which I see implicit in the Report. They thought to themselves our aim is that if we must agree that there should be control it should be only such control as is strictly necessary and we should therefore evolve the Hong Kong resident and make any controlled rates which we recommend apply only to Hong Kong residents. Thus there has emerged a principle as to the absence of which my Honourable Friend made complaint, and having done this was it to be the case that they would merely say that the rates which they recommend should apply to the Hong Kong resident, and do no more? No, they logically had to go further, in my submission, because were they to declare that controlled rates should apply only to Hong Kong residents and do no more, the way would be clear, anyway to certain hotels, to make quite sure that no Hong Kong residents would figure in their lists of guests.
For these reasons, Sir, I suggest that the point which my Honourable Friend, Sir Man-kam Lo. has advanced that there is an absence of principle or a question of principle deeply involved, which would enforce any member of this Council to give or refuse to give a Second reading to this Bill is not an argument which should appeal to or be accepted by this Council, and it is for this reason and with soine confidence that I feel this Council will give to this Bill its Second reading.
The Bill was read a Second Time.
Council then went into Committee to consider the Bill clause by clause.
65