338
HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL
question that the Urban Council works well under the present arrangements. Does the Government think that since we are functioning so well that they will have to add something to us by increasing ten indirect elected members? It is said that with the increase of ten indirectly elected members, it will be for the Council itself to consider whether any changes to its committee structure will be necessary in the light of this. In para. 29, it says that two parallel systems of geographical representation will create chaos. But why should it be introduced in the Urban Council? In conclusion, regarding the relationship between UC and DBs, their intention is to create chaos. I doubt whether the proposed ten directly elected members to the Legislative Council will materialize or not. It is repeated in the White Paper that there will be reviews at regular intervals and future development will depend on the 1990 Basic Law and there must be convergence. If the Basic Law promulgated in 1990 says that there should be no direct elections in order to have interface with Basic Law, there is no guarantee that the ten direct elected members in 1991 will appear. Furthermore, I would like to stress what I said at the annual conventional debate. Again, I would like to appeal to Hong Kong Government, the Chinese Government and the British Government, they should not put Hong Kong interests at stake in the political game because history will be the final judge. I hope the Government should no longer do any unnecessary matters rather they should do something concrete in order to make sure that Hong Kong can continue to be stable and prosperous. Therefore I support your motion, Mr. Chairman.
MISS CECILIA L. Y. YEUNG (in Cantonese):---Mr. Chairman, I apologize for being late because of traffic problems. My speech has already been distributed to the press (Appendix). I just want to supplement some points. I agree with what is said by Mrs. CHOW. The operation of Urban Council will suffer if the district boards are going to elect members among themselves to the Urban Council. From 1973 to now, the majority of citizen are of the view that the Urban Council has turned the territory from a cultural desert into a very prosperous cultural place. If we cannot do the good job, neither can the ten members elected from the District Boards. On the proposed policy of not allowing Urban Councillors from becoming ex-officio district board members, I am afraid that it is a fait accompli. During a tea break a moment ago, some Members have said that many Elected Councillors have already stood for district board election and there is nothing more to say but to refrain oneself in sadness and grief. I fully support what have been said against the White Paper by my colleagues at such a short notice and with such a courage. Mr. K. K. FUNG said that many people in Hong Kong are not courageous enough but he for one is a very courageous man who is not afraid of being dismissed the next day. I hope that you, Mr. Chairman, will continue to fight for our interests. I support the motion.
The question was put.
The motion was carried with 13 votes for and 1 abstention.
Page 174 of 185
HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL
339
ADJOURNMENT
- 4.45 p.m.
CHAIRMAN (in English):-That concludes the business of today's meeting. The Council stands adjourned until Tuesday, 8 March, 1988 at 2.30 p.m.
APPENDIX
Urban Council Extraordinary Meeting Debate on the White Paper: The Development of Representative Government: The Way Forward Speech by Miss Cecilia YEUNG 11 February 1988
Mr. Chairman, over the years, favourable comments have been made on the work of the Urban Council. Being responsible for sharing the important job of constructing Hong Kong, the Council has played a contributive role in the success of Hong Kong's ranking among the major metropolis. To one's surprise, recently the government has greatly reduced the power of Urban Councillors the most obvious instance is that Urban Councillors are not allowed to play the concurrent role of ex-officio District Board members. In so doing, the government would be ignoring public opinion if it is to make decisions according to public opinion and if the Councillors are elected ones. Moreover, cooperation has been going on well between the Urban Council and District Boards ever since the Urban Councillors, who serve as a bridge between the two bodies, began to sit as ex-officio District Board members. Although relationship between the two is a distance away from being imperfect, at least they are not resisting one another, and are performing in quite a satisfactory way. I don't understand why the government is always changing its policies? Is it because it wants to set at variance between the Urban Council and District Boards? Though not sure enough to draw a conclusion, I believe great influence would be brought about by such a move of the Government. It is really unacceptable since it is the consensus of public opinion to have progressive changes and a smooth transfer. Greater wedge would be driven if District Boards are allowed to send representatives to the Urban Council in the future. It is even more confusing because in this way, the government is virtually dallying with public opinion and encouraging struggles. As to the issue of electing Legislative Councillors through direct election, which is the consensus of public opinion, the government always avoid talking about it and refuses to set the time of implementation. I do not agree if the government intends to establish its prestige by making unpredictable changes to policies.
If District Boards are to elect representatives to join the Urban Council, it is better to increase the number of seats of the Council for more talents so as to collect more valuable opinions.