326
HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL
The advantage of having another regional council is to enable participation by more local people who have a better understanding of the local affairs. And the cons, as pointed out by other members, as the terms of reference of the new council appear to border on those of the District Boards, there will be duplication as well as possible in-coordination of work, not to mention the waste of resources.
As the regional councils will be financed by public funds, I think the people should have a say in the matter. After all, the people will be paying the price of their choice by sharing the burden of rates.
MR. HOWARD H. W. YOUNG (in Cantonese):-- Mr. Chairman, it is true that the general public wishes the Government to do the most work with the least expenditure.
Therefore, I would like to use the least amount of time to deliver the longest speech of the day. What I have to say have been sent to Members five days ago (as at Appendix A) and today I have also tabled the Chinese version. If you have not read it, you may go back and read it, for I do not intend to go through it word by word here. The spirit of my speech is that I am in favour of the participation of N.T. residents in municipal services. I would also like to take the opportunity to suggest that we ought to review the total framework of district administration. We want to save public funds and we do not want to have duplication. In the speech, I have also used the most conservative method to calculate the amount that Government might have to spend. If we do not manage the situation properly, that amount is a large sum of $40 million. I hope that Members will consider this very carefully, make their own calculations and then decide on whether we should have one council, two councils or even more councils.
Mr. Chairman, I support the motion.
Local Administration
APPENDIX A
If you were to ask what piece of news so far this year has received the most comment and attention from the media and public other than the future of Hong Kong and 1997, I would say it is probably the Government's Proposals for the Further Development of Local Administration. Since the statement by the Chief Secretary in the Legislative Council on 15 February, the subject has indeed aroused a lot of interest, which in itself is a good phenomenon especially in light of the traditional belief that Hong Kong people do not show much interest in local administration and elections.
HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL
Page 181 of 194
327
However, one unfortunate aspect of the issue is that it has been seen, or interpreted, by some media and members of the public as a struggle for power between the Urban Council and the Heung Yee Kuk. I think it is in the best interests of the Council, the Kuk and the people of Hong Kong to correct this view, so that we can all discuss and have a rational look at this matter which not only will affect our daily lives, but our purses as well. Before I comment in more detail on the most controversial of the proposals, that is, the concept of a separate regional council for areas north of the Kowloon foothills, I must point out that there were four points, not one, in the Chief Secretary's proposals. The first three, namely the strengthening of elected elements, the different treatment of certain conurbations in the New Territories and the role of District Boards in local facilities have drawn less publicity, but this does not mean they are less important. The first point of making the composition of District Boards in favour of elected members has met with favourable comment, even from appointed members of the Urban Council and Boards, like myself, with the difference of opinion focussing on the actual ratio rather than the principle itself. I might add that there is also genuine apprehension at the level of quality of candidates we will get for elections, and the potential loss of the contribution of appointed members who have been happy to serve on Boards and Councils provided they did not have to give up time for vote-gathering and campaigning as well. The other side of the argument is of course that unless you give elected members more power in the form of a majority, voters will not be so concerned at the quality of candidates, and good candidates will not be interested in running. This is a real chicken and egg situation that is not quantifiable, and I suppose the only way to find out is to try it, step by step, and see what happens.
I am a strong believer that there are always two sides to an argument, and that one should analyse the pros and cons of all major issues before jumping to a conclusion. That is why I have said up to now that I have reservations about the two councils concept. I must add that saying I have reservations about two councils does not mean I think it is a simple matter between one and two. For instance, if one believes two is the right answer, you should not only be satisfied that two is better than one, you should also be satisfied that two is better than more, say, four or five.
We are seeing a lot of positive reaction, particularly amongst the Heung Yee Kuk in the New Territories, on the concept of a regional council on the other hand, we have seen differing degrees of not so positive reaction, particularly amongst members of the Urban Council on the concept of split and separate councils. These differing degrees range from outright objections to reservations, like myself.
If we look at it rationally and without emotion, the argument is not as simple as one for and the other against. Firstly, no one, including Urban Councillors, is disputing the need to have some sort of council to fill the vacuum in controlling some of the services in the New Territories that the Urban Council has been