Page 157 of 182
304
HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL
of taxation on the luxury goods only, particularly on cigarettes and alcohol, thereby also indirectly promoting public health.
On the subject of health, much more should be invested to alleviate the unsatisfactory state of public health care in Hong Kong. I am informed that the administration has allotted $3 billion to the Medical and Health Department for this financial year and about half that much to subvented hospitals with another $500 million set aside for capital projects. This sounds like a lot of money but in real terms, it is less than 10% of the total public expenditure. Hong Kong is the home of about 6 million people and the existing spending is clearly insufficient in dispensing proper health service to the masses here, who, according to statistics, have access to only 25,000 hospital beds. This chronic and alarmingly shortage of hospital beds should be relieved as soon as possible by an immediate injection of funds to improve hospital facilities, particularly as we can now well afford to do so. A stable society is a society where its people are properly cared for in times of need and sickness. It is certainly not beyond Hong Kong's means at this time to provide at least this security to its citizens.
Finally, a word on Urban Council cultural presentations, I have had friends commenting to me and asking why it is that all the more popular and exciting shows staged in Hong Kong are presented by private concerns of impresarios and not by the Urban Council. There have also been complaints that the shows presented by such impresarios are expensive and mostly not at affordable prices to the general public. Now, this is not entirely true because, to wit, the Council has been presenting some very popular and exciting performances which have proved a tremendous success. There is, however, always room for improvement.
I note that in our Council's Statement of Aims for 1989/90 relating to Cultural Presentations, a completely new provision has been introduced which reads:
'(v) To complement, as far as possible, programmes organized by outside hirers at various centres;'
I am afraid that I cannot find myself in agreement with the inclusion of this particular aim for the reasons hereafter stated.
It is not my wish to stifle or even to suppress the entrepreneur spirit of the impresarios in Hong Kong. They ought to be encouraged. Without entrepreneurs, Hong Kong would not be what it is today. The Urban Council should, however, bear in mind to whom its duty lies. The duty of this Council is to the public at large since it uses taxpayer's money and it is therefore our definite duty to use our best endeavours to present artists and performances which the Hong Kong people would enjoy at affordable prices. It is not the duty of this Council to play second fiddle to the private concerns of impresarios here and to ensure that their ventures will be profitable. There is no reason why there could not be more than one first violin in an orchestra but playing in different concerts. Our duty to the impresarios, whom I congratulate for having done a good job of assisting this Council to promote the cultural and entertainment standard in Hong Kong, is to provide them with world-standard venues for their presentations. This our Council has fulfilled by providing the Coliseum, the various stadia, and cultural complex in Tsim Sha Tsui at management on-costs rentals to the impresarios to make their presentations viable.
I wish to make it quite clear that I am not criticizing the performance in this respect by the Urban Council Department. The staff has tried very hard and conscientiously, which accounts for the tremendous success of this Council in the promotion of culture in Hong Kong. No one in his right mind can honestly call Hong Kong a cultural desert again. Every night there are cultural presentations by or at a venue of our Council, from local artists to internationally acclaimed performers. We have put in a lot of money and effort to promote culture and I trust that this Council will continue to do so.
With these words, Mr. Chairman, I support your motion.
(Mr. PAO Ping-wing arrived at 4.00 p.m.)
(The Chairman declared a recess at 4.02 p.m. and the meeting resumed at 4.12 p.m.)
(Mr. Walter M. SULKE, Dr. Ronald LEUNG, and Mr. Marvin K. T. CHEUNG left the meeting after the recess.)
MRS. ELEANOR C. M. LING (in English): Mr. Chairman, in this Council's 1989-1990 budget, the item 'Personal Emoluments' takes up 55% of the total expenditure, a reduction from the about 61% share in this current year. Such a welcome change is made possible mainly due to the long-overdue reduction of the 16% staff on-costs charged by the Central Government.
Nonetheless, wages and fringe benefits for our Urban Services Department staff are still the biggest item of expenditure. Their annual pay adjustments, which have to be in line with those of the civil service, continue to be an area of grave concern.
Civil Service Pay Rises
Civil service pay rises have always been a controversial and emotional subject. 1988 was no exception, apart from the fact that the community was 'reminded', even more frequently, of the danger of a demoralized civil service. I am, however, worried that the Government may have conceded too much without seriously considering what this community can afford. The radical revision by the Government in last December of the 1988 Pay Adjustment may be a case in point.
Let me recap the events leading to this. Based on the 1987-1988 Pay Trend Survey (PTS), the Government announced in May 1988 that the 1988 Pay Adjustment for non-directorate level civil servants would be between 6.5% and 8.5%. This had led to strong protests by civil service unions who were not happy with the level of increase. For the first time, I believe, an independent Committee of Inquiry was established to review the issue.
Page 157 of 182
305
HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL