XN000022-1996-04-03 — Page 37

21 -

We have been criticised for not allocating more of the savings under my control to the Television and Entertainment Licensing Authority for the setting up of more inspection teams to enforce the control of obscene and indecent articles. As I have separately explained in writing, only half of the amount involved was re- deployable. Out of the available and re-deployable resources, we have had to make allocations to other equally justified activities falling under my policy responsibility, such as increasing the Arts Development Council's subvention, providing resources to RTHK to subtitle its television programmes for the hearing impaired and enabling the Antiquities & Monument Office to step up education and publicity activities in respect of heritage preservation. But we have not forgotten the need to ensure that TELA's enforcement capabilities are adequate. In this regard, TELA's inspection teams will be increased from two to three this financial year.

-

The Commissioner for Television and Entertainment Licensing has assured me that, with an additional inspection team, he will have adequate resources in the coming year to increase further the number and frequency of surveillance inspections. I must emphasise that TELA does not just respond to or act on complaints. TELA referred 510 articles to the OAT for classification during the period from 1.1.96 31.3.96. Out of these cases, 83% were results of TELA's own monitoring. Only 17% were cases arising from public complaint. As a matter of fact, a great deal of TELA's staff time is devoted to ensuring that publishers, distributors and newspaper vendors alike are aware of the classification rulings handed down by the Obscene and Indecent Articles Tribunal and that these are duly complied with. Contraventions of OAT classifications or conditions will of course be liable to prosecution, which is also an integral part of TELA's work.

I would now like to turn to criticisms made by two Members on funding for the arts. In this regard, I find it necessary to reiterate and emphasise the funding system involved.

As Honourable Members may recall, the establishment of an independent and statutory Hong Kong Arts Development Council was a direct result of the Government's positive response to strong demands made by the arts community and some members of this Council, during the course of our arts policy review conducted in 1993. The ADC is fully empowered under its own Ordinance, passed by this Council only last year, to disburse grants to organisations and individuals for the planning, development and promotion of the arts in ways which the ADC considers appropriate. It follows that, in accordance with that Ordinance, decisions on how funding support to individual artforms should be given are made by the ADC itself, having regard to the priorities and overall development strategy determined by the ADC itself. The ADC, which is supported by a fully independent Secretariat, has a membership of 24, almost half of which are representatives nominated by the various art forms and arts disciplines, following fair and open elections. The Secretary for Recreation and Culture is but one member out of the 24; and apart from his ability to influence the overall level of each year's Government subvention to the ADC, has little influence over the ADC's decisions on how to make specific allocations from that subvention.