- 5-
At no stage in this process did the Administration intend any disrespect to the important role that this Council plays in the law-making process, as has been suggested. On the contrary, we have always placed great weight on the views expressed by Honourable Members, in this Council, in Bills Committees and elsewhere. So I am naturally disappointed that some Honourable Members should seek to reprove the Administration for the withdrawal of the Employment (Amendment) Bill simply because we made the prudent decision to consult the recognised advisory body on labour issues before reverting back to this Council, significantly with an improved package.
We have never denied the constitutional right of Honourable Members to amend our legislative and expenditure proposals. The suggestion that the Administration sees this Council as a "rubber stamp" is simply wrong. This is a travesty of the truth. We know better than that. We know that we have no divine right to expect Members to support our proposals automatically, and that it is up to us to persuade Members that they are in the best interests of the people of Hong Kong. Indeed, Honourable Members have on many occasions amended or rejected our proposals in the past. The recent example is the Residential Care Homes (Elderly Persons) Bill which was passed by this Council on the twelve of October last. We supported the Third Reading of that Bill, even though it contained a committee stage amendment which we had opposed.
Mr President, it is however true that the Administration and the Members of this Council have different roles to play and different spheres of responsibility in the law-making process. This is an executive-led government. When the Administration considers policy issues, our primary concern is the overall interest of Hong Kong. This may, on certain occasions, mean that some sectional interests advocated or represented by Honourable Members cannot be fully satisfied. It is no disrespect to this Council to say that we cannot afford to allow sectional interests to be put above the overall interests of Hong Kong. The fact that on a few occasions other considerations do not allow us to accept the views of this Council does not in any way undermine the role of this Council in the law-making process. The fact that the Administration decides to withdraw a proposal does not mean that there can be no further discussion on it. On the contrary, in the case of the Employment (Amendment) Bill we made great efforts to refine and improve our package. If we were practising "some form of dictatorship", as alleged by some Members, we would surely not bother to go to such trouble.