Page 277 of 606
PROVISIONAL URBAN COUNCIL
271
enforcement levels. We are now facing changes of a policy and legislative nature. In due course, this Council will be notified when rice is cooked. We may hear from them that negotiations have been completed and all that is required is our endorsement. In fact, the Chairman of the Select Committee mentioned that an inter-departmental working group headed by Mrs. Catherine Fox already reached a preliminary conclusion on 23 October. We are left in the dark. Isn't this jumping the gun?
The second question is on whether the situation of behind-the-scene operations exists. The Chairman of the Select Committee quoted the Department and informed that we could download on the Internet the documents of the Healthy Living Steering Committee and its working groups. We did try to download from that website, but so far, the information given in the reply document is not there. If there is no information at this stage, negotiations have been completed and meetings are not to be made public, does it suggest some sort of behind-the-scene operations? Today, the two Municipal Councils are still in being, but central government is already acting this way. When the two municipal councils are abolished, who is to supervise the operation of government departments? Isn't this behind-the-scene operations? Will the food safety or environmental health authorities of government to be set up in future make public the contents of their meetings? I can see the situation of today. I would just like to ask the Chairman of the Select Committee whether behind-the-scene operations will continue as far as environmental health and food safety are concerned.
The third question asks whether there is disregard for human rights. The Chairman of the Select Committee quoted government in saying that penalties to control litter bugs were proposed. You may gloss penalties over as correctional means, they are nothing more than the model of Singapore in making those responsible for littering wear weird clothes and sweep the streets. The whole idea is to go for correction, heavy and strict penalties. It draws in the model of the Cultural Revolution of making the guilty parade the streets. It is an insult to offenders committing minor offences. Mr. Chairman, I would like to quote the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights in order to judge whether such a penalty is an infringement of human rights. Article 7 of the Covenant says, 'No one shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.' How should we interpret insulting treatment or punishment? Is making law offenders wear weird clothes to go around the streets and forcing them to sweep the streets insulting? Is the purpose of enacting legislation to insult people? I would like to have the view of the Chairman of the Select Committee on whether the above constitutes trampling of human rights. The dire consequence of this issue should not be looked as the responsibility of the two Municipal Councils. The responsibility should rest with central government as the one who trigger off the whole issue. Therefore, I remain satisfied whether or not the Chairman of the Select Committee answers my question,
Page 277 of 606
Page 277 of 606
Page 277 of 606