Page 83 of 187
134
HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL
that is not right. In fact, I would go so far as to say that everything is hidden except that which the Chairman, usually the Chairman, sometimes other people, but usually the Chairman, wants to disclose on the order paper of the public meeting. All the main work of the Council is now done in Select Committees, Standing Committee and not even reported at the public meeting.
Now Mr. MACKENZIE said “we have been very busy issuing pamphlets that disclose anything". The pamphlet that we have just adopted, page 12—Hawkers. Now there is no statement in the subject matter, half a page on hawkers, that's wrong. But it does not in any way give an inclination of the urgency of the problem, of the magnitude of the problem, of the steps that we are taking to solve the problem. I think, perhaps, some almost useless steps at present and it speaks of 4 General Duties Teams. To be effective, there needs to be 40 and not 4, we can't afford 40 and that doesn't really disclose the problem of hawkers or what the Urban Council is doing to solve it. It is a very brief report and, therefore, in fact, misleading because of its briefness. I attended the Magistrate Court today in the morning and, before my case came on, the magistrate had a lot of hawker cases—Mr. A. B. WONG, obstruction, fined $5, $10, $5, $10, $5, $10 and so it went on. Tens of tens, upon tens—that's no solution. So I don't know what's the solution, but that isn't the solution and, therefore, I say it might be alright for parks and playgrounds which the Urban Council shines at, but it's not very effective for those parts of the Urban Council's work that are not popular.
Then Mr. CHAN said that the motion has merit. I think he said "a little merit." Perhaps there is no surer way of damning a motion than to say that it has "a little merit". But his final stand was against voting either way. But we should remember the motion, and sort of be inclined to agree with it except that small things should not be brought up in the public meeting. I just say go back to the position before. The position before August 1943 was the Urban Council made it a public meeting, opened, laid papers on the table, any other business. Now it was the same position in 1952, and stands to be the position if we go on the same way in 1974.
Now the Chairman's clarification from the chair: he said we've always been taking legal opinion in our actions. I quite agree. We've always taken. He quotes legal opinions at me from time to time. I am not denying that, and I am not even disagreeing with the legal opinions. I am saying that the legal opinions show that what we decided in August 1973 went too far. Then he said, signing documents, that is for the clerks to do except on special occasions like the contract for the planetarium which was signed at a ceremony at the City Hall. Nevertheless, he cannot get out of the fact that that motion that he should sign it was objected to by a minority in Standing Committee but never debated in public. I supported it, I would have supported it, and I do support it, but it was never debated in public although there was opposition to the fact that he signed on behalf of the whole Urban Council. And he said that the Standing Committee of the Council of the Whole meets very frequently. Any Member can bring up any subject. Yes, I know, in camera, not in public. And then he said "I have frequently asked the Chairman of individual Select Committees to put up a report in public."
Yes, when it is a good report that reflects some credit on the Urban Council, but why should he decide why should it not be a normal thing for the Chairmen of Select Committees to report in public, not every month, but at reasonable intervals. Therefore I ask Members to support this motion.
The question was put.
The motion was lost with three votes for, fifteen against and two abstentions.
(Messrs. LO Tak-shing, Edmund CHOW, Dr. Denny HUANG and Dr. P. C. WONG left at this point.)
(3) MR. B. A. BERNACCHI moved the following motion:
"RESOLVED that no motion which falls within the jurisdiction of the Council should be prevented from being placed on the order paper for debate in open Council by the Standing Committee, without prejudice to the right of the Chairman to refer any matter to the Standing Committee for advice."
He said (in English): —This is the second motion that I am moving today. Mr. Chairman, I now formally move that "Resolved that no motion which falls within the jurisdiction of the Council should be prevented from being placed on the order paper for debate in open Council by the Standing Committee, without prejudice to the right of the Chairman to refer any matter to the Standing Committee for advice." I will not repeat myself in this motion. I have already said all that I need to say in my earlier speeches. The last part of the motion is recognizing the right of the Chairman to take the advice of the Standing Committee on any matter, although I do hope that the Chairman will, in future, sparingly exercise that right in respect of a
135
HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL
Page 84 of 187