Page 85 of 606
Page 85 of 606
Page 85 of 606
106
2.
3.
# PROVISIONAL URBAN COUNCIL
development. Bent on calling for public support, the authorities distorted facts many times in the consultation document. This Council feels there is need to raise formal objection. As the consultation paper covered very little about the Council's cultural, entertainment, recreation and sports functions, the review is short of being a comprehensive one. This is unacceptable.
On the aspect of democratic accountability, this Council feels that representation of and monitoring by public opinion groups are necessary for any body holding centralised powers. The Provisional Urban Council (PUC) and the Provisional Regional Council (ProRC) (the two municipal councils) have come to a consensus. Both feel that even if Government decides to set up a central body in charge of hygiene matters, public opinion must not be neglected and public monitoring should be brought into the system. This is the spirit of my earlier proposal of One Council One Department and Three Functions. I hope Members support a new structure for the two municipal councils in this general direction.
As for the timing for reform, I find that there are many urgent issues to be taken care of at present, including our financial crisis, our economy, unemployment, housing, medical services, education, airport operations and so forth, all of which affect our international reputation. Before we can handle all these issues properly, if we hastily plunge into petty action in the constitution field, we may increase public resentment and instigate social unrest or adverse public opinion. Is this worth it? I think we should consider a review of district organisations in 2000 to tie in with the Legco election in 2002. That would be more appropriate.
Finally, if Members support the general direction set down in the document submitted by the Working Group, I will beef up the contents and produce a formal position paper to represent our stance for comment by the Executive Council, Legislative Council, the media and other relevant bodies.
Thank you.
Ms. Jennifer Chow Kit-bing (in Cantonese):—Mr. Chairman, I second the motion.
Ms. ADA WONG YING-KAY (in Cantonese):—Mr. Chairman, we can see that since the publication of the Consultation Document on Review of District Organisations, Government has indeed taken the timing well in hand to lead public opinion. Indeed, this is rare for the SAR Government. When we review the future of district organisations, we may complain that Government is misleading the public and introducing the review prematurely, but at the same time, I hope consideration can be given to encouraging participation in the setting up of a district structure and making it the focus of the review. We cannot afford to go backwards in a society in which democracy is developing
Page 85
Page 86