Page 209 of 242
HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL
may be numbered. Unfortunately, the whole tone has been lowered by one Councillor who ignored not only the warning I gave last year about the observance of certain Standing Orders (and about which a reminder appeared in an editorial before this debate started), but also the fact that there has always been this close, friendly and frank relationship between all Councillors—official and unofficial of all brands. This Councillor went beyond the limits of propriety and saw fit to use this forum, which has been created in law for the despatch of specific Government business, as a platform from which to attack colleagues not only in connection with Urban Council affairs but also on certain of their activities as private citizens, which had no connection whatever with this Council. This was most reprehensible and unseemly—and I was glad to see that my feeling was shared among Unofficial Members. It has never been my wish to interfere with what Members say at these far-reaching annual debates, although I have often been privily challenged for my readiness both to accommodate their sincere wishes and, also, to defend them in what have seemed to others to be their excessive claims. Nevertheless, I expect any Councillor worthy of the name to observe the rules and the propriety of public Council debate. Good manners have never stood in the way of genuine reformers or inhibited anybody's free speech.
As regards the White Paper on the future of the Urban Council, Members spoke at some length on this subject and expressed a wide variety of views. It would be inappropriate for me to reply to Members on the individual points raised even if I were in a position to do so, particularly since, as Members are aware, the White Paper is currently under examination by the Local Administration Select Committee of this Council, which will be submitting its findings to the Standing Committee in due course. I have been informed by the Secretariat that the Paper is to be debated in the Legislative Council, probably in January. In the meantime, I have forwarded the views expressed by Members during this debate to the Colonial Secretary.
In clarification of Mr. BERNACCHI's reference to the Secretary's calculation of the Council's financial requirements as being 50% of the rates, I have to say that this was somewhat out of context. The Secretary did indeed produce several costings which he asked to be treated with caution, but in any case his calculation covered other functions, resettlement management for example, which are not covered in the Government's calculation.
Mr. SALES, while riding one of his favourite—but, let me hasten to add, nonetheless worthwhile for that—hobby horses, a Recreation Service, tilts in passing at the time lost in providing major sports installations and also wonders why public housing is built without the play facilities being constructed simultaneously. On at least the latter score, I can set his mind at ease: nowadays, at least, local open space is generally planned and developed simultaneously with the estates. This may not apply to the larger areas intended for district open space, which has to take its place in the Public Works Programme queue, and this perhaps is what he has in mind.
On the other score, the three large and expensive projects Mr. SALES names, the Ho Man Tin Stadium, the Hung Hom Indoor Stadium and the Causeway Bay Sports Centre, are all of fairly recent vintage and are, on the whole, making satisfactory progress. The Indoor Stadium entered direct into Category B of the Public Works Programme in mid-1968, and the Director of Public Works is now almost ready to submit it for upgrading and financial approval. Progress on this particular item has been hindered largely by the necessity of coupling it with the reprovisioning of the railway terminus. The Ho Man Tin Stadium went direct into Category B in November 1970, and only last month the Recreation and Amenities Select Committee approved the Schedule of Accommodation for this project. The Causeway Bay Sports Training Centre and Velodrome has been submitted for direct entry into Category B of next year's Public Works Programme, and we are awaiting the final outcome, the Building Priorities Committee having recommended its inclusion in this category as an investigation item.
As to the creation of a Recreation Service—and a Council for Physical Recreation on which Mrs. SYMONS spoke—the Director of Education's comments on a draft paper prepared by the Department have now been received, and a paper will issue to the Recreation and Amenities Select Committee in the near future.
On the hawker front, we continue our efforts to tackle several important basic aspects of the problem. Our first target must be the acquisition of off-street sites and the building of more markets, modular markets and hawker bazaars in which to provide an adequate service to the public and a legitimate means of livelihood for the hawking community.
Secondly, we must establish good control over on-street hawking, the importance of which has been stressed by a number of Councillors. At the present moment, there are over 220 vacancies in the Hawker Control Force which has an establishment of 531, and it is still far from certain that, even if the Salaries Commission's recommendations are approved, we can recruit new members to the Force. Its expansion is, of course, absolutely necessary, if anything approaching adequate control is to be established, and proposals for this expansion should be ready for submission to the Secretariat shortly. At the same time, efforts are being made to reinforce the Hawker Liaison Unit with additional officers for court work, and the Cleansing Division with more
398
HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL
399