334
HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL
(Mr. Lo King-man arrived at 3.50 p.m.)
(The Chairman declared a recess at 4.00 p.m. and the meeting resumed at 4.10 p.m.) (Mr. Peter C. K. CHAN, Dr. Philip C. K. Kwok, Mr. L. H. KWAN, Mr. Joseph Y. S. Chan, Mr. PAO Ping-wing, Mr. FAN Kam-ping, Mr. Marvin K. T. CHEUNG, Mr. CHAN Kwok-ming and Miss Victoria Y. CHAN left the meeting after the recess.)
Mrs. NELLIE FONG (in English):—Mr. Chairman, I would like to make a brief comment on the increased functional constituencies seats. I have to declare an interest that as an accountant, I am very glad that the government has recognized the importance and the contributions of accountants to Hong Kong as a financial center and have granted the accounting profession a place in the Legislative Council.
However, the fundamental issue is that we would like to have a representative government for our future legislature. A representative government is interpreted by some as direct election whereas I would view a representative government as one made up of people represented by different interests and backgrounds, different function and professions. In this respect, I feel that there is a need to gradually expand the functional constituency seats to include as many functional interests in Hong Kong, covering the widest possible areas of interest.
The District Board is having its direct election in 1988, the Municipal Councils in 1989. Introducing direct election to the Legislative Council in 1991 is a major move. A move that must be handled with caution and with care and taking reference to the experience earned in the district and municipal elections. I am of the opinion that direct election will not only not provide us with a representative government but more damagingly will create party politics and the grabbing of power of special interests groups. The two up-coming elections may well awaken us to this fact. I therefore appeal to those in power to be very cautious when gradually introducing direct election to the Legislative Council.
MR. TONG KAM-BIU (in Cantonese):—Mr. Chairman, in the past few years, a lot of people have talked about the development of representative government to see whether there is direct election or democracy. The discussion has been going on for several years. Today, many experienced colleagues have spoken on the White Paper. What I would like to say have been covered by many of my colleagues. Perhaps I ought to only touch on some of the points and I am sure Members will fully understand. I need not resort to the use of the chart as Mr. K. K. FUNG has used. In my family, my friends and relatives said that the Chinese Officials have two mouths. It is difficult for the poor to fight with the wealthy groups who in turn cannot argue with the Government. In my years of social services and the Council, I found that it was not really true. A lot of things could be discussed and consulted at the district and municipal levels. As 1997 is approaching, a lot of constitutional and other issues such as public order ordinance, central provident fund, Daya Bay and even the local issues such as
HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL
Page 172 of 185
335
the resettlement of the people after the Chu Ku Chai fire have however indicated to me that the belief that officials have two mouths is not really untrue. The Chinese character for 'mandarin' or 'official' has two mouths as part of its radical. In the White Paper, It is said on the one hand by Government that 1988 direct elections should not be introduced too hastily, but the Government have hastily introduced changes in respect of the Urban Council. That is no good sending the Urban Council onto the District Board, so it is much better sending district board members to the Urban Council. Many district board members fully support that but the Urban Council is 100 per cent against the proposal. I am sure that our percentage predominate the percentage of District Boards. Some say that the Hong Kong Government is already on the decline. At first, I disbelieve this notion because in ten years time a lot of things can happen but I tend to agree now. In fact, after the sun set is the night, after the night is the dawn and bring day light which can again illuminate and light the people. As far as the UC is concerned and from the traditional Chinese point of view, the proposals in the White Paper should satisfy many people because 50 to 50 ratio between appointed and elected members is maintained and even in 1991 we can still elect among ourselves someone to the Legislative Council. Apart from having no ex-officio membership on the district boards, we do have ten members elected from the district boards. In other words although a daughter is married away, we get a son-in-law back. I sincerely hope that the sunset Government would soon pass away and bring daylight to us again. I support your motion.
(The Hon. Hilton CHEONG-LEEN left the meeting at 4.25 p.m.)
MR. MAN SAI-CHEONG (in Cantonese):—Mr. Chairman, since I heard our colleagues' comments on the White Paper, I wish to take a macro-view and supplement what they have said. In 1984, when the White Paper was published many people who had been uninterested in politics before became more enthusiastic. They thought that in the coming thirteen years they would be able to do something about the political system in Hong Kong so that it could really develop into an autonomous and a special administrative region after 1997. Thirteen years is not a long time. We will not be able to get direct elections in 1988. We have spent a lot of time in talking. Do we really have sufficient time to put things in practice? I hope Members sitting in this Chamber will really think about that. It has been said that the Government had never promised direct elections in 1988. It is now put in black and white that we will have direct elections in 1991. Will that promise materialize and what sort of direct elections will that be? Will it mean that certain type of specified candidates will be nominated? I fully agree with the Bar Association in saying that such commitment must be put down in legislation so that other factors cannot be made use of as excuses to make further change. We hope the review in 1990 will not be the same as this time. We should not do it in the way we did the review this time. We should not spend so much money on it and at the same time if public opinion