Page 577 of 606
PROVISIONAL URBAN COUNCIL
497
What is strange to me is that we have in fact agreed that the above mentioned obstruction activities affect the daily activities of the public. At the MTR station exit at Tung Yan Street in my constituency, three or four telecommunication companies set up stalls to persuade people to join their networks or buy cards. There is even a scanner set up there. Such activities really cause obstruction. Maybe the greater problem is that when they push and struggle for space outside the MTR station, they do more harm than just obstructing passers-by in that they are creating a shield for illegal activities, such as the selling of illicit cigarettes.
I think that since we need to deal with the matter and we have legal backing for it, we may as well make a decision here and now. As the Chairman put it, the conclusion made at today's meeting will be referred to the relevant Select Committee for follow-up. Why do we need to go through a procedural motion today?
I hope Members can face up to what we should do. We should not give chances for other sections of the Department to push bad deal back to us. We should handle the works which the Provisional Urban Council should do. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Wong Kwok-hing (in Cantonese):—Mr. Chairman, I suggest you deal with matters impartially and consistently. I raised a motion at the current term of the Council and it was deferred by other Members through the moving of a procedural motion. The Chairman accepted the deferment and put it to the vote at once. If a procedural motion is carried, the matter will be referred to the relevant Select Committee for discussion. If it is not carried, the debate will go on. The Chairman should not let Members speak and debate before putting the dilatory motion to the vote. Mr. Chairman, such an arrangement will be meaningless. We are expressing our views on your handling of the matter. Thank you.
MR. IP Kwok-CHUNG (in Cantonese):—Concerning the procedural motion, I think Mr. Albert LAI has a point. In his speech, Mr. Stanley NG said that legally, Section 4A of the Summary Offences Ordinance could be invoked. There was another version from the Department that invoking that section to take out prosecutions would affect the daily control of unlicensed hawking or the operation of licensed hawkers. Other aspects may be involved and it is a pity that no one from the Department is here to explain the situation for us to consider. If we make a decision today, of course I do not know what kind of decision it is going to be, we should be aware that decisions of our monthly meetings are final decisions to be implemented by the Department. What is involved may be more than what was just described. So I think the procedural motion by Mr. Albert LAI to refer the matter to the relevant Select Committee may be more appropriate. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Page 577 of 606
Page 577 of 606
Page 577 of 606