HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL
the wilderness. (Laughter) The other member who appears to be under false pretences is none other than the Freshman Senator from Aberdeen, Mr. K. S. Lo, who has expressed the fear that as an Official Member of this Council he may appear to the public as a personality with eyes of glass and a heart of stone. But I would like to assure him—and I believe I am sharing the sentiments of the ladies in this Council Chamber as well as other members—that he could not be more wrong. I have known Mr. K. S. Lo for a long time and all I can say is that he happens to be in the right trade, and if anyone wants to be fresh and as young as he looks to me all he has to do is take the right drink.
To-day, Mr. Chairman, much of what has been said by the Appointed Members I find that I agree with, so much so that there are points which have been raised by Elected Members on which I disagree. For instance, our friend Mr. WATSON has made reference to the Museum, together with Mr. BERNACCHI, and Mr. Wilson WANG has made an eloquent plea for more library service. I could not agree with them more. I think the time has come when we should begin thinking of having a separate museum and library building in the next three to five years.
(At this point, Mr. SALES interrupted)
MR. SALES: On a point of clarification, will that building be in Hong Kong or Kowloon? (Laughter).
MR. CHEONG-LEEN: I think that would be decided at the right time Mr. SALES, but I believe that a suggestion has been made previously, Mr. Chairman, that it should be somewhere near Garden Road, opposite the Hilton Hotel.
(Mr. CHEONG-LEEN then continued:) As I was saying, Mr. Chairman, there is so much that the Appointed Members have said with which I agree, I would like to suggest to Mr. WATSON that should the time come for more Elected Members and Appointed Members, I for one would consider that from the point of number, two Elected Members are as good as one Appointed Member. (Laughter).
With regard to the points with which I disagree with our Elected Members, let me say right away that while I agree with Mr. BERNACCHI that we must change the date of the Annual Conventional Debate, I do not think it should be in the summer. After all, we have one month's holiday. I would suggest, for Council's consideration, that the right time for the Annual Debate should be in January, so that matters which are raised by the Councillors and which are not answered by the Chairman at the subsequent meeting could be answered in Legislative Council. (Laughter).
Page 37 of 194
HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL
57
My good friend, Dr. LEE, has spoken on the subject of "Keep Our City Clean." He has suggested that Miss Ping On should be followed by Mr. Hop Tsok, but I would like to remind him that two years ago I suggested that Miss Ping On should have a Mr. Ping On; and then if he wishes we could have a Mr. Hop Tsok, everything in its logical order.
Another Elected Member, Mr. Chairman, has said that he believed Hong Kong should have universal suffrage. I would like to put on record that the Coalition of the Reform Club and Civic Association have made it quite clear previously, and still maintain that position, that we do not believe that there should be universal suffrage in the immediate future. But we have stated that we would like to see an expansion of the electorate by categories and Dr. LEE has suggested that registered nurses and tax and rate payers who own their own property could be included.
Hong Kong's future
As Members who have been following the newspapers are aware, the subject of Hong Kong has in recent months been thrown into the arena of Communist international politics in a manner which has prompted responsible opinion in Hong Kong to ponder upon its portents for the future.
It has been fashionable to ignore, and even to deprecate, any open discussion on Hong Kong's future. Whether or not this is a deliberate policy on the part of the powers-that-be is not for me to say. But this much I can and will say: we can no longer complacently bury our heads only in the sands of the present—we must raise our sights and think and speak confidently and forcefully of the future.
Apart from London, it now seems that the United Nations Committee on Colonialism has evinced a certain interest in the future of Hong Kong. Perhaps this is the inexorable trend of history and it is time to realize that besides our million refugees, our very status as a great city is becoming a matter of international interest.
I recently read in an influential weekly publication a statement that the future of Hong Kong may be determined in Moscow, Peking, Taipei, London and even in Hong Kong. My reaction to that statement was: Who knows when the time will come for the people of Hong Kong to register in the forum of world opinion their personal convictions and faith in their way of life? But whether it is tomorrow, or ten, twenty years hence, it is simple prudence that we set about preparing ourselves for whatever the future may bring our way.
Now, how do we go about preparing ourselves? A forward step would be the strengthening of the institutions of democracy which exist