Page 422 of 606
Page 422 of 606
606
410
PROVISIONAL URBAN COUNCIL
the suggestions made by the disabled and the chronic who pressed for improvements to swimming pool facilities last year. Councillors carried out site visits to understand the situation. Consequently, late last year, we made a series of improvements to Kowloon Park Swimming Pool in an effort to look after the interests and meet the needs of these minority and underprivileged groups. Besides, some swimming pool users reflected to us that the water quality of public swimming pools was unsatisfactory. In response to this, we are considering whether adjustments can be made to the opening hours of certain swimming pools in the coming swimming season. As can be seen from these examples, I am certain that elected councillors are far more sensitive to the pulse of the society than bureaucratic officials. Furthermore, we are vested with certain policy-making powers at present. Within the ambit of these powers to formulate municipal policies, our opinions can be highly influential.
Hence, the suggestion to dissolve the two Municipal Councils is, in my opinion, just an immediate over-sensitive reaction to the recent unfavorable news about the Council. There is a lack of in-depth and comprehensive consideration of various factors, for instance, the fact that the two Municipal Councils are the only elected councils with actual administrative power under the present political system of Hong Kong.
I can still recall that at the end of last year, the Home Affairs Bureau organized some consultation meetings under the directive of "dissolving the councils" to solicit the views of recreation and sports organizations on the new structure for recreation and sports services. I attended one of the meetings held in the office of the Sports Development Board (SDB). My original intention was to find out the views and suggestions of the National Sports Associations (NSAs) on the dissolution of the two Municipal Councils. However, it is obvious that the atmosphere of the meeting on that day gave me the impression and feeling that it was an occasion for the public to voice their grievances. Surprisingly, the target of complaints was not the Council. Instead, the spearheads were directed at SDB. At the meeting, 90% of the time was taken up by the majority of the NSAs in questioning the role played by SDB in the development of elite sports and whether resources were allocated evenly and fairly. As I recall, there were several queries raised on that day: firstly, SDB's fund allocation criteria; secondly, SDB's transparency; and thirdly the public acceptance and recognition of SDB's members. In fact, the queries of many NSAs reflected the limitations of quasi-government bodies such as SDB. The appointment system adopted by these bodies has reduced the degree of public acceptance and recognition as members so appointed are not representative. Therefore, the NSAs had obviously taken the opportunity to express their discontent and hoped that their views would be taken more seriously by the Government in the future. I believe the performance of SDB in this aspect is by no means as good as that of the Council because there are many chances for the Council to listen to the opinions of these organizations through open dialogues and consultations with them.
of 606