XN000022-1995-07-28 — Page 52

- 5-

There is also a problem of possible inconsistency with existing laws. For example, some provisions of the employment legislation provide for differential treatment of a person of a certain family status. How would such provisions be affected? An extensive review of existing legislation is needed to identify possible conflicts so as to determine how best to resolve them.

There are similar problems of uncertainty with respect to the Equal Opportunities (Race) Bill. If it is passed, would it be unlawful for a company to implement a "localisation policy"? This is unclear, yet it has been the consensus of this Council that such policies are justified and necessary. Only two weeks ago there was a Legislative Council question asking for an account of the progress made by the MTRC in localising senior management. It would be eccentric, to say the least, for this Council two weeks later to throw such policies into doubt by passing this Bill.

It should also be borne in mind that the Bill is based on legislation enacted in a foreign jurisdiction the social and political background of which is very different from that of Hong Kong. No reasonable person would say that Hong Kong has deep-seated problems of racial intolerance. Is there any urgency to legislate against this type of discrimination? Would any Member put it at or near the top of the Administration's legislative priorities?

The Equal Opportunities (Religious Conviction, Political Conviction, Trade Union Activities and Spent Conviction) Bill also throws into doubt well justified practices and policies. A financial institution, quite rightly, takes into account the integrity of clients, including whether they have previous convictions, in granting credit, and a person, forming a partnership, may not wish to do so with someone who has a spent conviction. Can they continue to do so after passage of this Bill? Does this Council wish to interfere unduly with such decisions by passing this Bill?

The Hon Anna Wu gave notice during the last two weeks of Committee Stage amendments that I understand aim to remove some of the uncertainties and excesses of her Bills through the provision of exceptions. However, we do not believe that the proposed exceptions adequately address the many problems left unanswered by the Bills. In fact, some of the exceptions were drafted in exceedingly wide and imprecise terms. Uncertainties and controversies are swept conveniently under blanket exception provisions, and the Government is asked to come up with solutions to the problems that will arise after the Bills are enacted. Is this a responsible way to legislate?