Page 208 of 243
328
HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL
about the position of the elected Councillors does not seem to be appreciated by Government and the potential contributions which elected representatives can make do not seem to have received any attention. This is indeed a sad situation. If Government is half-hearted about the Urban Council system either because the members serving on it are incompetent or because of other considerations, let us make no secret about it and do whatever is necessary to improve this system or even to replace it with a new system. However, if the system is considered to be useful and worth keeping, let us do everything possible to make the system effective and the members serving on the Council worthy of the support given by the public.
What I have said so far is self-evident of the proposals I have in mind. I believe and so do many other people that the Urban Council, by virtue of its nature and composition, should be given not only power to exercise control over a wider area of administration including education, medicine, social welfare, and matters affecting the vast majority of people of Hong Kong, but power to make policies and to implement policies in accordance with the priorities determined by this Council with sufficient funds to be placed at the Council's disposal. Very often we have been criticized and stopped by you, Sir, for raising matters outside the so-called jurisdiction of the Council, and yet under the ward system we have been unofficially permitted to see members of the public and to assist them in matters outside our jurisdiction. This somewhat undefined position of the Urban Councillors tends to give the public the impression that the Government would put up with the elected members as long as they are doing things tolerable to Government though not entirely acceptable and outside the Council's jurisdiction. However, Government keeps in ready use an effective weapon with which any Councillor can be ruled out of order if Government is not in a mood of entertaining debates or questions outside the jurisdiction of the Council. I deplore the situation and I earnestly appeal that Government should take early steps to review the standing of the Urban Council, bearing in mind the wishes of the majority of the people of Hong Kong.
I mentioned earlier the need for a supporting staff to do the necessary research and to assist Councillors in the preparation of papers and formulation of proposals to reflect more accurately the feelings of the public. In this connection, we need more than a clerk or a stenographer; we need a supporting staff entirely free from Government control and capable of acting in accordance with the directives of the Councillors. This is not an unreasonable request because without the basic facilities and assistance of a supporting staff capable of acting independently no one, no matter how devoted he may be, can effectively perform his functions as an unpaid elected representative. If there is any Government objection to this suggestion it could only be interpreted by the public as Government's determination to keep the Council as a window-dressing apparatus and to reduce as much as possible the effectiveness of the elected representatives. On the other hand, implementation of my proposal will bring mutual benefits to Government and Hong Kong as a whole and will serve as a concrete demonstration of Government's willingness to pay heed to what the people say.
The third point I would like to touch on by way of proposal is the City District Officer Scheme. You will remember that when the City District Officer Scheme was discussed before its inception repeated assurance was given to this Council that the City District Officers will work closely with the Urban Councillors. I have no doubts that this was and still is the intention of Government and the City District Officers themselves. However, experiences gained in the past six months seem to indicate for one reason or another, that Urban Councillors and the City District Officers have not been as close as they were expected to be. I have no intention of accusing the City District Officers for not making themselves closer to the Urban Councillors; in fact many of them have been very helpful. I do feel, however, that there is room for improvement and the City District Officers can bring the Urban Councillors particularly the elected Unofficials, closer to the district in which they work. I understand that the City District Officers are holding regular study group meetings and monthly meetings with the kaifong associations and other representative bodies, as well as the Police and other interested departments. The usefulness of these meetings can be considerably enhanced by the presence of Urban Councillors because the presence of Councillors, being non-Government servants, is likely to make the C.D.O.'s explanation of Government policies more acceptable to the public and increase at the same time people's confidence in making suggestions to Government for improvements. For this reason I would suggest that the Councillors, if they so wish, be invited to all these meetings without exceptions. I can see a two-way traffic development likely to arise from this arrangement. The City District Officer can of course on one hand help the Councillor to familiarize himself with the problems in his district and to receive complaints and proposals which a Councillor may have. On the other hand, a Councillor can also take up some of the problems which a City District Officer may come across in the course of his duties, particularly problems relating to the work of the Urban Council.
There is no doubt that we all want to see a more democratic and more representative machinery in operation in this prosperous city and the proposals I have put forward for consideration, though not of a drastic nature will definitely go a long way to bringing the people closer to Government and to generating policies more in line with the wishes of the majority of the people of Hong Kong.
329
HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL
Page 243