- 3 -
Motion debate on withdrawal of Employment (Amendment) Bill 1994
Following is the speech by the Attorney General, the Hon Jeremy Mathews, in the Legislative Council motion debate on withdrawal of the Employment (Amendment) Bill 1994 today (Wednesday):
Mr President,
It is a pity that some Honourable Members have chosen to use strong language in their speeches today. When they criticised the Administration for withdrawing the Employment (Amendment) Bill 1994, I would have hoped that they would have considered the impact that there would have been on our system of consultation through advisory boards and committees, had we taken a different course of action. We need to see the wood for the trees.
Contrary to the allegations made by some Honourable Members, the Administration did not withdraw this Bill because we felt that our authority was being challenged nor because we had little regard for the welfare of employees in Hong Kong. We withdrew the Bill because we considered it essential that we should first consult the Labour Advisory Board, the well recognised and long established advisory body on labour issues, on the substantial amendment that Members had made to the original proposal on which the Board had achieved a broad consensus.
As Honourable Members know, the members of the Labour Advisory Board are elected by employers and employees. Because of their conflicting interests, any agreement reached in the Board is inevitably a compromise that has been achieved through serious and often lengthy negotiations. The Board has an excellent record in reaching agreements on important labour issues. To ignore the views of the Board, or to overturn its proposals lightly, would not only damage the credibility of the Labour Advisory Board as a forum where a reasonable balance between employers' and employees' interests can be struck, but would also put our labour relations at risk. A harmonious relationship between employers and employees is an integral part of Hong Kong's economic success.