44
і
(a) The S.W.0. would lose much of its standing;
(b) Sooner or later Chinese public opinion would force the two together
again, if only because it would then be natural for Chinese to refer to the S.C.A. on any important suggestions or policies coming from the S.W.0. thus introducing delays through such cross-checking, increasing the possibility of temptation to try and play off one department against the other, and reducing the S.W.0.'s original effectiveness to a minimum. (At present they do not have to do this they know that the two organisations are working closely together:)
In amplification of (4) Mr. McDouall emphasized again that the S.W.0. was completely unhampered by the S.C.A.'s position as his superior. The S.7.0. corresponded direct with the central and all other government departments, his own name, and dealt direct and in his own name with the financial secretariat in the preparation and administration of his estimates.
in
In conclusion Mr. McDouall stated again that from his point of view as the substantive Social Welfare Officer, any separation from the S.C.A. could bring no advantages to the S.W.O. but would on the contrary reduce its standing, its prestige and its effectiveness.
MR. CHINN said that in 1948, when he raised the question of forming a separate Social Welfare Department, he had felt that social welfare work, somewhat restricted by its association with the S.C.A., but in view of the considerable development of the social welfare section since that time he now felt that this criticism had lost its force. The Reports Sub-Committee had, however, been concerned with the status of social welfare; he himself felt that under existing conditions and staff arrangements there the status of the social welfare section was high and was not now adversely affected by association with the S.C.A. He therefore suggested that the committee should make no definite recommendation for separation at this stage.
After discussion, the Committee
(1) re-affirmed the general principle that the Social Welfare Department
should be independent but recognised that local circumstances were not at present favourable to this. The Committee recommended that the situation should be kept under review.
Before passing to the second question in the paper before them, the Committee considered the constitution of the Hong Kong Social Welfare Advisory Committee in the light of Mr. McDouall's answers to certain questions and e subsequent intimation why he proposed to recommend that the Hong Kong Government should consider changing the present set-up by excluding official members and appointing the Social Welfare Officer as Chairman of an entirely unofficial Committee. The Committee
(2) expressed concern at Mr. McDouall's report that the Social Welfare
Advisory Committee was not entirely fulfilling its purpose, and supported in principle his proposals for its reorganisation.
(ii)
Co-ordination between voluntary social welfare organisations.
Mr. McDouall underlined and amplified the statements quoted from the Governor's despatch (in paragraph 3 of C.S.W.A.C. 19/51), and mentioned that co-ordination of activities for the welfare of visiting seamen was also being undertaken through the Port Welfare Committee. He was planning that similar work with regard to orphanages and foundling homes would be started in 1952 when the nucleus of suitably trained staff would be available. that hitherto in Hong Kong any general attempts at co-ordination had in
overall co-ordination part failed because they had been aimed at imposing an
He believed
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.