Page 23 of 194
30
HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL
be pointed out that promotion from one grade to another is not automatic: they can only be promoted to the higher grade if a vacancy occurs. Thus, if my calculation is correct, a street-cleaner has to be in Government service for at least 32 years (or longer if no vacancy occurs in the higher grade) before he can have a handsome salary of $360, which is just sufficient for a family of five at to-day's high cost of living. At present in the Urban Services Department, quite a number of the low-grade staff have remained in the same grade after reaching the maximum: 1,147 for five years, 186 for ten years, and 22 for fifteen years. This is a very unfair state of affairs. How these people manage to live on with their families at such low salaries is beyond our imagination. I strongly urge Government to take immediate steps to revise the scale and give these poor but useful workers a fair deal.
I must also say a few words on health education. In spite of the anti-fly campaign, there is no decrease in its menace, especially in Kowloon and the New Territories. A more forceful campaign should be organized to eradicate its existence, and the same should also be done to mosquitoes whose menace has not shown any sign of diminishing. Moreover, I would like to see a health education campaign on food to be given in the Resettlement Estates. Settlers should be taught to buy the right kind of food with their limited income. People are inclined to think that costly food would have higher caloric value. In fact, while an egg may cost 20-30 cents, the caloric value of an egg is equal to some other commodities, the cost of which is only 5 cents or 10 cents. This campaign on the choice of food would be useful not only to the settlers in the Resettlement Estates, but also to those who have very limited income and yet have to support large families. By buying the right kind of food, they can save some of their money for other useful purposes.
With these remarks, I have much pleasure in supporting the motion before Council.
(At the suggestion of the Chairman, a brief recess was held at this point)
THE HONOURABLE LI FOOK-SHU: Mr. Chairman, twelve months ago, on the occasion of the last Annual Debate of this Council, I spoke on the subject of food premises and related aspects of environmental hygiene, and I make no apology for returning to it again this year. This Council will be too well aware of the paramount importance of this subject, in regard to the health of the people, to need any detailed elaboration from me. I do not wish on this occasion to deal with the statutory powers of this Council and whether they are adequate or not. I propose to confine my remarks to the much narrower field of administration. The two main issues here are licensing and inspection. The
HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL
31
maintenance of high standards, in regard to the suitability and cleanliness of food premises, depends clearly upon taking all steps to see that the required conditions are fulfilled before a licence is granted, and that they are subsequently adhered to. Much also depends upon the willing co-operation of all concerned, based upon the full realization of the necessity for high standards being demanded and maintained.
From information which has come to my notice, there are complaints over administrative delays in the granting of licences. I know very well the difficulties confronting you, Sir, as Director of Urban Services, arising from the number of Government Departments that may be involved in this; the Fire Services Department, the Labour Department and the Building Authority are all vitally concerned. I do not, of course, criticize this, because each Department has its important role in maintaining the public well-being. But I think it must be admitted that there is a great deal of administrative delay, and I would like to make a strong plea to the authorities concerned to make every effort to reduce such delays to the absolute minimum. This point was made by more than one speaker at the recent Budget Debate in the Legislative Council. The reason for public concern over this matter is obvious. As long as serious delays are known to exist, so long will people seek illicit means of bypassing these delays, by holding out illegal financial inducements to those whom they think can help them. It is notoriously difficult, of course, to get evidence as to how extensive this is. I can only say that I believe that procedural delays in the granting of licences are a fruitful source of corruption. At least, I think it safe to say that any cutting down in administrative delays would at least help to remove one potent cause of temptation to engage in illegal practices. In this connexion, it may be possible for the Government Organization and Methods Office to deal with the problem of administrative overlapping. This Office has now a permanent place in the overall administrative machine, and it is to be hoped that it will find the necessary ways and means of bringing about some improvement in administrative co-operation.
Turning now to the question of Inspection, this must in the long run depend upon the efficiency, conscientiousness and integrity of the 348 Health Officers of all grades who, according to the Annual Report for 1962, are presently employed in the Urban Services Department, and for whom this Council is in some degree responsible. Here, it is fear of prosecution which leads to the possibility of corrupt practices. Again, it is very difficult to say how far corrupt practices are defeating the aims of efficient administration, but such evidence as I have suggests that these exist. It may be possible for us to do more to win the co-operation of the general public by a series of health campaigns which in