170
HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL
at the Council; and the Council, being a mere "employee", could only say, "Even so small a sum as five thousand dollars is not easy to earn."
Over the past years, the Council has constantly asked the Government to extend the scope of jurisdiction of the Council so that we can render a better service to people of all walks of life. Apart from not meeting our request, Government even took back from the Council the power of managing public housing estates last year and now it is contemplating the taking back of the power of managing public car parks from us. This is a matter which Council Members cannot ignore.
The general public are not interested in the Urban Council Election and are also not keen to get registered as voters. One of the reasons for this is that the Council has limited jurisdiction, yet it is to be further cut. This is something really deplorable. If Government really wants to take back this power from the Council, it can be sure that the public will show an even poorer response to the next election. As an elected councillor, I find this act of the Government totally unacceptable. It is not the Council's loss of an income of several thousand dollars that matters but it is the cut on the Council's power that concerns us. I earnestly hope the Government will give the matter second thoughts before putting it into effect.
There are quite a number of Clerks of various classes working in the Urban Services Department of this Council. They are now striving for a more reasonable pay. While this Council has no authority to interfere with Government's action or take part in any negotiation in connection with the issue, it must be borne in mind that any pay rise for Clerks will mean an increase in the Council's expenditure. My opinion is that even if the increase would make it difficult for the Council to meet its expenditure or even run into a deficit we should still gladly accept such an increase. We may have to find other remedial measures but let's think about it later. The clerical staff have to "keep their wives and children”, and they need a reasonable salary to maintain their living. It is only when they are provided with a reasonable salary that they will work with their mind at ease in the Urban Services Department and serve the Council loyally.
Mr. Chairman, I support the motion.
MR. B. A. BERNACCHI (in English): Mr. Chairman, in support of your motion, and as a Member of the Finance Select Committee, I also would wish to be associated with your thanks to Mr. WESTLEY for all his help to this Council and it has been, in the past year, tremendous. I might also say that I agree entirely with Mr. CHAN's speech, and would
HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL
Page 103 of 187
171
call upon all Members to bury their disagreements and to unite in making this Council a body that can usefully serve the public to the whole extent of our jurisdiction.
I would also point out that although this Council has lost the prime control over public housing, it still has eight Members appointed as Members of the Urban Council to the Housing Authority and I hope that no Member of the Council thinks that public housing is now no concern of this Council. It is of no direct concern, but it is still very much the concern of this Council in the well-being of the citizens of Hong Kong.
MR. JOHN MACKENZIE (in English): Mr. Chairman, in supporting the motion, I would like to endorse the proposal made by Mr. Hilton CHEONG-LEEN that we should enter into discussions with Government in order to establish a phased programme for the completion of outstanding work. The fact that we have outstanding something in the nature of 300 projects, at Government expense of $700,000,000 reflects against the actual performance of this year where we have had two projects of £1.7M, and really constitutes somewhat to my mind a dreadful situation. The virtual embargo that the Government placed from Finance Branch on all our expenditure and development of our construction programmes should be quite unacceptable to this Council. We must gain an understanding from Government, not merely evasive replies, so that we are not fobbed off and left with this amount of unfinished work, uncompleted for many years to come. With regard to the Cultural Complex, it was told to me at the last meeting, if I remember correctly, that this site would be available in the summer of 1975. If this site is to be available in the summer of 1975, a site which is lying in the heart of prime land in Kowloon, what is to be done with it between now and 1980? I think it would be scandalous and a disgrace if this was left lying unused and undeveloped when the community has a desperate need for a museum and art gallery and the other cultural amenities that this Council is hoping to provide. I regard this as a matter of the greatest principle; I think this Council should adopt a unanimous position and make a representation to the highest quarters of Government to ensure that this Cultural Complex in fact is not completed in the 1980s, but that it is completed within two or, maximum, three years.
With regard to Mr. CHAN's comments, I endorse the view - if in fact the management of the car parks has been removed from this Council's jurisdiction without consultation and it reinforces my constant reminder to this Council that the communication processes