HONG KONG LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 18 May 1988
1429
people will not be exposed to stress or get into troubles in their schools. Instead what they get will be care and guidance from the school social workers. The above is not only my personal view but is shared by several members of the ad hoc group. I hope that this proposal will be given careful consideration by the authorities concerned.
Sir, with these remarks, I support the motion.
MR. ANDREW WONG: Sir, I rise in support of the motion that the Film Censorship Bill 1988 be read a Second time. On the outset, may I congratulate all parties concerned, that is, the Administration, the film industry, various public-spirited organisations such as the Journalist Association, the Law Society, the Bar Association and so on, and the Legislative Council ad hoc group on the Bill of which I have the honour to be a member, for their contribution and for their spirit of co-operation, if not also compromise, but all done in the pursuit of the public interest.
I have been told that politics is the art of the possible, that the world is imperfect, and that any attempt towards imposing a perfect blueprint brings about even greater imperfections. It is in this light that I lend my support to the present Bill. However, this does not mean that I am in total agreement with all the provisions, and it is important for me, or anyone who has other strong views to have them registered, and registered in public, so that in future and on reflection, such provisions could be further improved.
Sir, I do not propose to go into all provisions. My strong views relate to only one provision, and in fact to only one aspect of that particular provision, in which censorship which is the heart of the matter and after which the Bill is so named.
Sir, you will recall that during the debate on 8 July 1987 on Mr. Martin LEE'S Motion to amend the Film Censorship Regulations 1987, which were meant to be an interim measure pending the passage of the present Bill and which would be revoked if and when the present Bill were enacted, I said to the effect that for censorship, a negative approach should be adopted, that is, a film should not be banned unless it contravenes one or more of the censorship criteria or standards. I said this was in line with the spirit of British Law and with article 19 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. I did not elaborate though, Sir, but went on to tell you and hon. Friends in this Council, Prof. Samuel FINER's joke that 'in England, whatever is not prohibited by law is permitted; in Germany, whatever is not permitted by law is prohibited; in France, whatever is prohibited by law is still permitted, and in Russia, whatever is permitted by law is still prohibited'.
Sir, I now wish to elaborate my thoughts further and hope that you will bear with me as they are of relevance not only to the present Bill but also to the Draft Basic Law which the Basic Law Consultative Committee of the People's
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.