Page 449 of 606
PROVISIONAL URBAN COUNCIL
Mr. Chairman, I raise these questions first.
MR. SUEN KAI-CHEONG (in Cantonese):—Ms. Wong has asked 3 questions. The first question concerns the guideline which states that if the filming content has a negative impact on the image of the Council, the Council will reject the application. As for the number of applications rejected on this ground, I do not have the information at the moment. I will ask the Department to sort out the information after the meeting and give a reply to Ms. WONG.
The second question asks whether the guidelines for location filming of the CE Branch are more stringent than those of other government departments. This involves subjective judgment. I am willing to provide information concerning the guidelines for location filming laid down by other government departments for Ms. WONG's judgment.
As regards the third point, Ms. WONG has mentioned that the issue of not allowing commercial location filming in museums has not been discussed by the MUS S/C. I am willing to help Ms. WONG collect the relevant information to see whether the MUS S/C has endorsed the guidelines. Since the Council has a history of over 100 years, there are many things we have not come across, and this issue may or may not have been discussed. I am willing to render assistance to Ms. Wong in this respect.
Ms. Wong has also mentioned that many museums around the world allow filming. As far as I know, some museums do not allow filming, for instance, in China, it is clearly written in many museums that filming is not allowed. I may not have much knowledge in this area, but if we have to review this issue, we may ask the Department to prepare a discussion paper.
Mr. Joseph Lai Chi-keong (in Cantonese):-I opine that we must define clearly the terms 'negative impact' and 'embarrassment' because there is no legal or clear interpretation for them. I think Mr. Suen, Chairman of the Select Committee, should follow up this matter.
Just now we have mentioned that there are things that money cannot buy, so we have to preserve the relics and protect them from theft. In fact, we have seen a lot of TV programmes introducing relics, for example, the crown of the British Queen, gems, the National Treasures-Gems of China's Cultural Relics Exhibition, and even the Heavenly Creation: Gems of Ancient Chinese Invention Exhibition. All these have been shown on TV. Why could they shoot such films with full security? We all understand that to promote relics does not mean to ask everyone to visit the museums. We should not throttle the introduction of relics because of the filming restriction. As members of the public have to work hard for a living, they should at least be given a chance to watch them on TV even if they cannot visit the museums personally. So, I think that money, theft and risk should not be taken as the reasons for barring
Page 449 of 606
Page 449 of 606
119 of 606