Page 162 of 212
252
# HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL
dollar, or whether it will tackle the real and dangerous problem of organized corruption in various departments? To get rid of one small man at the bottom end of the scale will just mean that another will step into his place and the game continues. Sir Alistair BLAIR-KERR was right when he said that the syndicate in a Department was like a pyramid, with the petty collectors at the broad base of the pyramid, and the big man at the top receiving his large share handed up by the few men at the apex of the pyramid. Unless the whole working from top to bottom of that pyramid is exposed, we shall only be, in Chinese terms, "swatting flies". In my opinion, we still need a thorough investigation by a completely independent commission of enquiry.
While on this subject of corruption, may I say how depressed I am to find this Council doing so little about corruption, though much of its work has been affected by it, but I may add here that I am glad to hear that speakers at this Debate are beginning to mention corruption. Even our elections are apparently not free of this disgusting curse. Nor do we protect our own licensed hawkers from extortion by corrupt persons. I am repeatedly being asked why other Councillors do not join me in the fight against corruption. What can I answer? I hope that my colleagues will show the public that our work is not going to tolerate corruption, either among our members, or in the Department which carries out our policies. And with these words, Mr. Chairman, I support the Motion. (Applause.)
MR. HENRY H. L. Hu (in English): Mr. Chairman, I am very pleased to know that during the course of this debate many of my colleagues will speak Chinese. This move was started in the Urban Council and now bears fruit for the good of the Community. As for myself, I am sorry to say Mr. Chairman, that owing to my personal reason which is well-known I have to deliver my speech in English.
## Urban Council's Reform
This Annual Debate of the Urban Council which originally should have been scheduled for November and December last year, is now taking place. There were fears that in reducing the jurisdiction of the Urban Council, even this conventional privilege of the Council would be taken away from us. I am happy to see that things turned out so well eventually.
This is the First Annual Debate after the reform of the Urban Council. I should perhaps take this opportunity to explain to the public what are the differences before and after such reform.
Before the reform we had some jurisdiction in resettlement, and the Council also constituted the Housing Authority; this is now taken away. At present, one of the Government "overlords" is the Secretary for Housing. Before the reform, we had the right to manage the resettlement estates in the urban areas, and Housing Authority estates throughout Hong Kong including the New Territories, and to advise on matters connected with beaches, in the New Territories. This was also taken away.
253
# HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL
Before the reform, some of the Urban Councillors might ask some questions towards the respective heads of department about matters within the jurisdiction of the Urban Council. They had a duty to reply. The situation has been changed now because no Government Head of Department has any duty to reply in open meeting to any queries raised by the Urban Councillors, even within the limited scope of the Council, because they are no longer members of the Urban Council which should, logically speaking, have certain actual power to deal with matters falling within its scope. But the Urban Council is now a general without soldiers and with very little ammunition. We have only one Secretary and a few assistant secretaries. We have no staff. Even the Director of Urban Services Department is not a member of the Council. His attendance at our meetings is restricted only to the Standing Committee of the whole Council, and other meetings are entirely at his pleasure and depending on his courtesy.
People may also think of the financial autonomy, but as I have said before, we could have at our own disposal about 20 to 30 million dollars. About the other money, the Council is only the pay agent for the Central Government. We are lucky to have been promised that to finance the construction of abattoirs, markets, stadiums, museums, etc. is entirely the responsibilities of the Central Government. At the same time, the Standing Order was also amended in October 1972 to the effect that any matter which is outside the jurisdiction of the Urban Council cannot be debated in the Urban Council meeting even with the consent of the Committee of the Whole Council.
There have been a lot of arguments pros and cons in reaching the above-mentioned decisions in the last 6 to 7 years.
But one thing is now obvious that these measures are taken at the expense of local participation into public affairs which would become less. Two or three weeks ago, we have heard a high Government official comment about Government Advisory Committees. These may be a good interim measure especially as Chinese has become now an official language, but they cannot satisfy our younger generation. Short of gradual and substantial participation, other measures may not be attractive to our young.
At the present, the measures of enlarging the franchise of Urban Council Election and the advisory functions of that body seem to be inevitable. It is still doubtful whether such measures would be too
Page 163 of 212