-
27
-
We believe that this creates a proper balance in the non-official membership of the Council. However, since we also need to accommodate four ex officio members, these changes have resulted in the need to increase the size of the Council's membership from 20 to 22 in total.
These changes have been worked out and agreed by all parties concerned after many rounds of detailed discussions. They have produced a practical and workable solution to a difficult problem. I would like to thank both the Bills Committee and the arts community for their contributions to this process.
In order to help the arts community in the selection of nominees, the Government has prepared a set of guidelines, on which we have consulted the HKADC, the arts community and the Recreation and Culture Panel of this Council. We have now analysed the feedback obtained and have fine tuned the guidelines accordingly. We are now working out an implementation programme. We have already issued the guidelines and it is our intention to issue the implementation plan when it is ready, so that the arts community can start organising themselves and preparing for the nomination process to start once this Bill is passed into law.
The third element of the package which I want to discuss is the method of meeting the calls that have been made for the operations of the HKADC to be more open and transparent in future. During the final stage of our discussions with the Bills Committee, the Honourable Christine Loh proposed a series of amendments to the Bill to require Council meetings to be opened to the public, except in certain circumstances. Let me state here firmly that the Government is totally opposed to these proposed amendments. We believe them to be inappropriate, unnecessary, inflexible and motivated by broad political objectives rather than by the particular needs of the arts community. We have stated that whilst we have no objection in principle to the concept of Council meetings being open, we believe strongly that this matter should be addressed by the HKADC administratively through the use of standing orders, rather than by enshrining such provisions in the law. This is the norm for all other statutory bodies including the Legislative Council, the two Municipal Councils, and the District Boards.
To agree to Miss Lob's amendment would be to subject the HKADC to additional and unnecessary restriction to those of other statutory bodies. It may also imply mistrust of the HKADC. And I see no justification in fettering the HKADC in this way. Miss Loh's proposal would also have potentially far-reaching implications for other statutory and advisory bodies in Hong Kong. Her proposed amendments are not germane to the HKADC Bill. It is therefore not appropriate to consider them in the context of this Bill.