Page 373
HONG KONG PROVISIONAL URBAN COUNCIL
369
removed the underlying cause for political contention between China and Britain. The people of Hong Kong can now embark upon a much healthier movement for self-administration as masters of their own on the statutory basis provided for in the Basic Law. The Chief Executive's proposal of assessing the ability of the system in meeting social changes is therefore a very unique and correct objective. Accordingly, we should first of all acquire a full understanding of the history, process of development, present situation, role, functions, effectiveness, merits and demerits of the 2-tier structure of district organizations, and then pragmatically put forth proper advice on improvement and reform. It is only then that practicable recommendations which suit the evolving community can be made. In other words, we must be genuinely pragmatic before the objective of meeting the needs of a changing society can be met.
Lastly, it was mentioned in the policy address that efficient and responsive delivery of services to the community must be ensured. I consider this to be the aim and also the starting point for our examination and review. Both the municipal councils and District Boards are providers of public services and they must be citizens-oriented in everything they do. Hence, the objective underlying the examination and review of their role and effectiveness, as well as improvement to their work must be to enhance efficiency and serve the public better.
In summing up, I consider that a proper attitude towards the review of district organizations as advocated by Mr. TUNG is of paramount importance. We must develop a scientific approach and pursue a serve-the-public-better stance before we can treat the overall review pragmatically and identify the proper ways and ideas for improvement.
At present there are two points of views on the review of district organizations which are formed out of the interests of a few and are therefore not desirable. The first is that the review is called for simply because the Government wants to step up its administrative control. Rather than be subject to the various restrictions imposed by the district organizations, the Government sets off for a centralization of powers under the grand excuse of upholding an executive-led system.
The second view stems from the desire to safeguard one's own role and interests, thereby simplifying and vulgarizing the issue. These voices are very often heard. There are people from the District Boards saying that their power has to be increased. In fact, does the merger of the municipal councils and District Boards necessarily result in an increase in the power of the latter? This is absolutely not the case. There are then people from the two municipal councils objecting to a reduction in power. Indeed, all these views are formed without examining the existing constitutional system from a higher level and a more comprehensive point of view.
Page 373 of 654
Page 373 of 654
Page 373 of 654