Page 576 of 606
2701 606
496
# PROVISIONAL URBAN COUNCIL
occurred on March with time sensitivity. In other words, if we refer this matter to the relevant Select Committee for discussion, this whole thing will be delayed. As we all know, the media has picked up on this and there has been widespread reports. Because of the time element, I think we should discuss it here.
MR. STANLEY NG WING-FAI (in Cantonese): I want to state that I do not support the procedural motion to refer this to the relevant Select Committee. I shall furnish several points as my reason.
First of all, you all know that the motion was moved in accordance with the Standing Orders under the Urban Council Ordinance. I just mentioned that I had sought the advice of the Principal Legal Officer on enforcement of the ordinance. I am saying that if my motion falls outside the scope of this Council, the Principal Legal Officer would advise me not to raise it here. Since this motion can be raised here, it means it is not in conflict with the powers of the Provisional Urban Council.
Mr. Chairman, I shall go on to give my second reason against delaying the motion. All Members of this Council are invited to attend monthly meetings of this Council. There is a timetable, a time frame for Members to raise motions for discussion and make decisions at meetings. If a Member does not understand the content of a motion or disagrees with it, he can propose an amendment. It is unacceptable if an individual Member tries to refer this motion for discussion by the relevant Select Committee because he has not done his homework or has not collected information. Mr. Chairman, I did not hear of any suggestion that the motion was legally questionable. In this case, with the motion legally all right and within the scope of the Council, Members and their political parties should have studied it and if necessary, moved an amendment before today. Or if Members find the motion not acceptable, they can opt to vote against it or abstain from voting.
Mr. Chairman, based on my second point, I cannot see why my motion has to be referred to the relevant Select Committee for handling. I hope Members will, after listening to my two points, debate my motion and cast their votes. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
MR. FRANCIS TANG CHI-HO (in Cantonese): Mr. Chairman, after your ruling, I thought I could queue up to give my views on the procedural motion. I don't know how it has turned into raising my hand to speak.
In fact, at first I agreed with the Chairman's way of handling of this. I thought I was in the line to speak. Some parts of my speech have now been gone over by other colleagues, but let me stress that the Principal Legal Officer has clearly stated our legal backing. I understand that the Department indicated it did not know how to prosecute. To my mind, whoever said this should attend a professional refresher course.
£606
Page 576 of 606