HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL
CHAIRMAN (in English):---I must say that the Council is raising to new poetic height.
(Dr. Ronald LEUNG left the meeting at 2.50 p.m.)
'An Outlook on District Administration in Hong Kong' A speech by Mr. LEE Chik-yuet on 4 May 1986 at a public seminar on 'Political Reform-Towards Democratic Self-government' organized by the Meeting Point
The Basis for an Outlook on District Administration--Selfish Departmentalism vs Overall Consideration
There have been cries for an expansion of the Urban Council's terms of reference with the District Boards serving in a subordinate position, and also demands for the abolition of the Urban Council in order to widen the powers of the District Boards. But none of these arguments is meaningful if it does not take into consideration the system of government as a whole and ignores the convergence problems.
Recently many a District Board member suggested that the Urban and Regional Councils be disbanded and their powers and functions transferred to the District Boards. Meanwhile some Urban Councillors raised again the old issue of having the Council's terms of reference expanded. One should not be blamed for raising different political views if they are conclusions of rational analysis. However, some of the opinions are out of departmentalism aiming at expansion of power. It is most dangerous to consider the council one belongs to as the centre of the entire government. If the Legislative, Executive, Urban and Regional Councils, the 360 or so Central Advisory Boards and the District Boards all refuse to take into consideration the overall situation, the entire government will be thrown out of balance and rendered less efficient. Weak trunk with strong branches would make the government too cumbersome to be effective, resulting in a confrontation between the central and the local governments.
In view of these, the following principles must be followed when working out the future district administration system: (1) to bear in mind as a basis for consideration the overall situation and the convergence of systems, i.e. relations between the central (including the Central Advisory Boards) and local governments, among local governments, and between local governments and government departments; (2) to maintain the merits of the existing district administration while improving on the shortcomings step by step; (3) to work out an efficient system of local government that conforms with principles of democracy, is representative and accountable directly to the people while allowing public supervision.
Functions and Shortcomings of Existing District Administration
In Hong Kong, no accurate official definition has been given to the term 'district administration'. According to the Green Paper on 'A Pattern of District Administration in Hong Kong' published in June 1980 and the White Paper on 'District Administration in Hong Kong' published in January 1981, the Urban Council is not included in the scope of district administration. But since district administration and the work of the Urban Council are closely related, the latter is not totally left out (Please refer to Chapter 1 paragraph 4, Chapter 4 and Appendix II (C) of the Green Paper, and Chapter 5 paragraphs 41 and 47, Chapter 6 paragraphs 56, 57 and 60, Chapter 7 paragraphs 64, 65, 66 and 69 of the White Paper). In an important speech entitled 'The Further Development of District Administration in Hong Kong' delivered in the Legislative Council on 15 February 1984, former Chief Secretary Sir Philip Hadden-Cave had pushed the Urban and Regional Councils further towards district administration, though keeping a certain distance. So, on the functions and shortcomings of district administration, I shall concentrate on the District Boards while touching on the Urban and Regional Councils alongside.
According to paragraph 21 of the White Paper on 'District Administration in Hong Kong' and 'The District Board Regulations', the District Boards' terms of reference, in black and white, include six points which fall into two categories:
(1) to serve as the government's district consultative body and advise on public facilities, policies, services and construction projects affecting residents. (2) to organize community activities, recreational and cultural programmes and minor environmental improvement projects if funds are allocated.
Generally speaking, District Boards have been quite active in promoting recreational and cultural activities within the districts, although it has been criticized that 'these activities are just like carnivals' and that funds for various activities are allocated in improper ratio. However, with the constraints in finance, experience and staff, the District Boards' performance is quite satisfactory on the whole.
The more important function of a District Board is, of course, to serve as a district consultative body. But the performance of individual District Boards, especially individual District Board members has been uneven. If one cares to attend some District Board meetings or scan through the minutes of meetings, one may notice some contrasting conditions. While some members sit through meetings holding their tongues others may talk nonsense repeatedly. There are, of course, members who make well-prepared, convincing speeches with silver tongues. Furthermore, differences also exist among District Boards.
As to the role of consultation, although it has been stated that the District Boards are to discuss and advise on matters affecting district residents only, many territory-wide issues like the electronic road pricing system, the report of the Broadcasting Review Board and the draft British (Hong Kong) Nationality Order are discussed by the DBs. In fact, the situation is brought about by the government itself. While the Sino-British negotiations were going on, both sides
Page 145 of 201
Page 146 of 201
Page 145
Page 146