- 2 -
The Administration's position on the confidentiality of ExCo memoranda and records is well known and I have stated it many times in my letters to the Chairman of the PAC. We believe that it is essential to uphold the long-standing principle of keeping ExCo proceedings confidential in order to ensure that there is no inhibition in the free exchange and presentation of views in ExCo. It would be against the public interest to compromise this principle. This view is not unique to Hong Kong. It is in line with the practice in the UK where the courts have, as a general rule, held that Cabinet papers are as a class immune from disclosure, and where I understand there is no precedent for Cabinet papers being made available to the UK PAC. As ExCo papers are equivalent to UK Cabinet papers, they should, by analogy, be immune from disclosure in Hong Kong. Indeed, this argument has been accepted on a number of occasions by the courts in Hong Kong. The suggestion that a claim of confidentiality for ExCo papers should be based on the contents rather than the class of the documents concerned is clearly not in line with this principle. Furthermore, this approach would be likely to lead to endless disputes between the government and this Council over whether the contents of particular documents were sensitive in nature. We believe that the public interest is fully protected by the fact that the Director of Audit is allowed access to ExCo papers and can form his own independent judgment as a result of this.
The Honourable Albert Chan had argued that the rule regarding confidentiality should be relaxed since the other cardinal rule regarding collective responsibility can be applied flexibility. I wish to clarify that whilst there is a rule of responsibility can be applied with flexibility that in no way reduces ExCo members' commitment to collective responsibility. To ensure the proper functioning of the ExCo the confidentiality rule has to be maintained. We will continue to provide the PAC with full details of the relevant parts of ExCo papers but not the papers themselves. That already reflected flexibility in the exercise of the confidentiality rule.
Let me reassure Members that the Administration fully recognises the role of the PA as a 'watchdog' over public expenditure and that we will continue to co-operate with it fully in order to help it perform its duties efficiently and effectively. In the particular case of the Hospital Authority staff's housing benefits, the PA has produced its Report and the Administration will soon complete its review of the Hospital Authority remuneration package. Although the Honourable Emily Lau will not agree, I have to advice that in my view we should now point the way forward rather than dwell on what happened in the past. I hope Honourable Members will recognise the responsible and co-operative attitude that the Administration has taken in this case, and that you will reject the motion.