HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL
Page 53 of 194
which are going to be laid on us in the future in our chosen fields, then I am all for it. In any case I do not think that events will leave us much choice. But if it means going outside our province into new fields, where we would only be duplicating the work of other agencies, then I am not for it.
As regards the second part of aim 25, representation of the Urban Council on committees and boards where it is not at present represented. I am authorized to say two things. The first is that Government does not contemplate any further extension of the representation of the Council, as such, on bodies whose functions do not lie within the acknowledged responsibilities of the Council. The second thing that I am authorized to say is that Government is very conscious of the claims of Councillors to be recognized for what they are; namely persons who have acquired experience of a considerable range of public affairs and an insight into Government procedures and the requirements and problems of public administration. These factors, as well as the personal qualities and capabilities which Councillors, each in their own way, contribute to the public service, establish them as a group from within which Government can expect to find individuals well suited for appointment in a personal capacity to various boards and committees, standing or ad hoc, as occasion requires. I can assure you that these claims for consideration are, and will continue to be, borne in mind when names are submitted to His Excellency for inclusion in committees.
In view of the foregoing, although I shall vote for the motion now before Council as a whole, Members will understand that I must reserve my position, with that of the Official Members, on aim number 25.
Before I leave this subject I must mention two committees which were named in Members' speeches last month. Mr. CHEUNG Wing-in mentioned the Advisory Committee on Public Transport. Three members of the Committee who happen to be also members of this Council are Mr. FUNG Hon-chu, Mr. WATSON and Mr. WRIGHT. The total membership of the Committee, excluding the Secretary, is eleven. Mr. MARDEN mentioned a Marine Department committee on Harbour Pollution. This committee was an ad hoc working party which surveyed the problem of harbour pollution and submitted a report to the Director of Marine last year. It no longer exists as such but a Pollution Control Sub-Committee has recently been established to carry on day-to-day surveillance of the problem. This is a four-man, technical committee, consisting of two representatives of the Marine Department and one each from the Public Works and Urban Services Departments.
I am grateful to Mr. BERNACCHI for his suggestion that the Annual Conventional Debate be held later in the year than at present. In my opinion, there is a great deal to be said for this proposal. Firstly, at present we debate in April and May a statement of progress, the drafting of which begins in January, although it is a progress report relating to the financial year ending 31st March. This document, as Members will be aware, is considered in Standing Committee of the Whole Council, and is then laid on the table at the April meeting, just in time for the debate. This is tight timing. Secondly, this time-table results in any newly elected or appointed Members, who begin their terms of office on 1st April, being confronted with a statement of policy which they have had no hand in framing. Thirdly, as some Members have said, our debate follows closely upon that in Legislative Council. I should therefore like to suggest that in 1964 the statement of progress and policy be laid on the table at the June meeting and debated at that meeting and at the July meeting. If we do this we shall avoid the objections to which I have just referred, and yet we shall have completed our debate before our so-called August holiday, and in time for the department to take the statement of policy into account in framing the following year's draft estimates, since work on these falls mainly in the months of July, August and September. This matter will be placed on the agenda for next month's meeting of the Standing Committee of the Whole Council, so that Members may discuss the question further.
Turning now to individual points, Mr. SALES underlined the need for better public relations in order to remove misunderstanding about the Council and to win the co-operation of the public.
I would say in reply that recently there has been no lack of publicity on matters relating to the Council, and that the Information Services Department has produced a large amount of publicity material on our behalf. My friend the Director of Information Services informs me that though it is difficult to define clearly where local publicity ends and overseas publicity begins, there is no doubt that the majority of his departmental effort and expenditure is devoted to those services which are directed towards the people in Hong Kong. Nonetheless I agree that there is a need to concentrate on better publicity for controversial subjects. The initiative for this must come from ourselves, and I am preparing a paper on the subject which I shall submit to the Standing Committee of the Whole Council.
Mr. K. S. Lo spoke on courtesy to the public. The importance of courtesy is recognized by Government, and last year the Information Services Department produced a film emphasizing this. The film is in Cantonese, lasts 20 minutes, and is primarily directed at those Government servants who come into direct contact with members of the public in their day-to-day work. By 1st March this year over 11,000 had seen the film. It is intended, however, to show it to all in Government's employ, regardless of rank and grade. The film has so far been shown