HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL
69
who have not discharged their duties thoroughly. Because of such people, more than half of our population lives in a dirty environment.
From yesterday's newscast, I heard that the Housing Department fined the contractors 4 times at $4,000 each. Also, about 10 contractors had their contracts terminated. Those were things of the past, of course. But from yesterday's coverage, we can see that the situation in many places is still disappointing. Yes, the Housing Department did enforce disciplinary actions, but we question their competence and determination. I am afraid if we pass the amended motion, it will deal a great blow to and undermine the powers vested by law. The Council will find it hard to enforce the law all over Hong Kong and our determination to provide Hong Kong with a clean environment will be lost.
I call upon Members belonging to different political parties to set aside prejudices. This is not a political forum, but one on the livelihood of the people. Don't tie our powerful limbs and discard our trump card for political reasons. We want to make the Housing Authority supervise the Housing Department in monitoring contractors and their performances. We should do more useful and constructive work. We can even strengthen our work by exercising control of the law to supervise contractors and cleaning staff. That will be the way to deal with the root of the problem. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Eric Wong Chung-ki (in Cantonese):—Mr. Chairman, I just want to state my stand simply. I find that neither the original nor the amended motions is rejective. The question is which one is more effective. In fact, I have more reservations on the amendment because if we ask the Housing Authority to announce the results of classification, they can easily make a lot of excuses such as contractual terms etc. From past experience, the Housing Authority is one organization difficult to cooperate with. I may have reservations on the enforceability of the original motion. In particular, I hope the original mover can explain clearly the intention of the proposed classification system. If it is for announcing to the public, educating the public and encouraging public participation, then I find it meaningless. If the classification can lead to action against the hygiene situation in certain food establishments, say inspections every two months or in worse areas once a month, then it may be meaningful to set criteria for enforcement. If not, it would be a waste of the resources of the Urban Services Department.
In fact, in exercising the laws of Hong Kong and in particular those on cleanliness and hygiene, the sphere of the Council's authority covers all over Hong Kong including contractors of estates managed by the Housing Authority. In fact, we all know that many cleaning contractors have not done a thorough enough job. For example, rubbish bins are often left uncovered. I think our staff should take action and prosecute those responsible.
Page 71 of 654
Page 71 of 654
Page 71 of 654