XN000022-1995-06-01 — Page 16

14

-

Governor: Can I add to soon, we would have liked to have been able to bring the Bill to this Council a great deal earlier. I would have liked to have brought the Bill to the Council back in February or March. The reason that we haven't is because, and I had the impression from the debate recently that this is perhaps an objective which most Honourable Members share, we didn't bring the Bill to the Council because we hadn't yet got the endorsement of the Chinese side for a Bill which in our judgement faithfully reflects the 1991 agreement. I would greatly prefer, the Chief Secretary would greatly prefer, the whole community would greatly prefer to be in a position in which we can legislate on a basis of consensus. But what I think this Chamber and I hope the community feels, is that we can't go on like this indefinitely and that's why we've made it absolutely clear that we intend to put legislation before this Council in this session.

On the Honourable Member's other point. In all the legislation that we bring forward we take account of views that are put by this Legislative Council and we don't always need a formal exchange with the Council in order to have a pretty clear idea of what its views are. We had, I'm bound to say much to my predecessor's and my chagrin, the initial views of the Council on the 1991 agreement in 1991. We've had the views of the Council more recently. We've taken account of the views of the legal profession which have often reflected the views of some individual Legislative Council Members. So I don't think that we can be accused of having closed our ears and eyes to the debate that's been going on in the community about the Court of Final Appeal. At the end of the day I hope that we can go ahead with a Bill which has the broadest possible support in ensuring that Hong Kong continues to enjoy a jurisdiction similar, the same, as that at present discharged by the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council. That's my simple objective. Working within the context of the agreement between Britain and China in 1991.

Mrs Peggy Lam: (through interpreter) Thank you Mr President. Mr Governor, all along you have been saying that the Hong Kong Government is an open and fair government that treats people fairly and equally. But recently, some residents feel that that is not borne out by certain facts. The question is: in Hong Kong we do have cottage areas I don't know whether the areas of cottage areas should be included in this session but a moment ago, the Governor allowed Mr Ho to ask a question outside the five topics, so my question is as follows.

In Ching Man Tsuen and Wesley Village we have cottage areas, and recently, because of dangerous slopes in the vicinity, the Government asked the occupiers to move out. But when they move out they don't get compensation. For these people, they purchased their accommodation several decades ago. Their accommodation was put up by churches to accommodate fire victims and so on but then the residents purchased their accommodation but now the Government asked them to move out, but no compensation will be paid and therefore many occupiers were not happy; they have been lodging complaints with us. So my question to the Governor is:

·