HONG KONG LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL -- 22 January 1992 HONG KONG LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL -- 22 January 1992 1 HONG KONG LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL -- 22 January 1992 1
OFFICIAL RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Wednesday, 22 January 1992
The Council met at half-past Two o'clock
PRESENT
THE DEPUTY PRESIDENT
THE HONOURABLE JOHN JOSEPH SWAINE, C.B.E., Q.C., J.P.
THE CHIEF SECRETARY
THE HONOURABLE SIR DAVID ROBERT FORD, K.B.E., L.V.O., J.P.
THE FINANCIAL SECRETARY
THE HONOURABLE NATHANIEL WILLIAM HAMISH MACLEOD, C.B.E., J.P.
THE ATTORNEY GENERAL
THE HONOURABLE JEREMY FELL MATHEWS, C.M.G., J.P. THE HONOURABLE MRS SELINA CHOW LIANG SHUK-YEE, O.B.E., J.P. THE HONOURABLE MRS RITA FAN HSU LAI-TAI, O.B.E., J.P. THE HONOURABLE HUI YIN-FAT, O.B.E., J.P.
THE HONOURABLE MARTIN LEE CHU-MING, Q.C., J.P. THE HONOURABLE DAVID LI KWOK-PO, O.B.E., J.P.
THE HONOURABLE NGAI SHIU-KIT, O.B.E., J.P. THE HONOURABLE NGAI SHIU-KIT, O.B.E., J.P. THE HONOURABLE PANG CHUN-HOI, M.B.E.
THE HONOURABLE SZETO WAH
THE HONOURABLE TAM YIU-CHUNG
THE HONOURABLE ANDREW WONG WANG-FAT, O.B.E., J.P. THE HONOURABLE EDWARD HO SING-TIN, O.B.E., J.P. THE HONOURABLE MARTIN GILBERT BARROW, O.B.E., J.P. THE HONOURABLE MRS PEGGY LAM, M.B.E., J.P.
THE HONOURABLE MRS MIRIAM LAU KIN-YEE, J.P. THE HONOURABLE LAU WAH-SUM, O.B.E., J.P.
DR THE HONOURABLE LEONG CHE-HUNG
THE HONOURABLE JAMES DAVID McGREGOR THE HONOURABLE JAMES DAVID McGREGOR McGREGOR, O.B.E., , O.B.E., , O.B.E., I.S.O., J.P. THE HONOURABLE MRS ELSIE TU, C.B.E.
THE HONOURABLE PETER WONG HONG-YUEN, J.P.
THE HONOURABLE ALBERT CHAN WAI-YIP
THE HONOURABLE VINCENT CHENG HOI-CHUEN
THE HONOURABLE MOSES CHENG MO-CHI
THE HONOURABLE MARVIN CHEUNG KIN-TUNG, J.P. THE HONOURABLE CHEUNG MAN-KWONG
THE HONOURABLE CHIM PUI-CHUNG
REV THE HONOURABLE FUNG CHI-WOOD
THE HONOURABLE FREDERICK FUNG KIN-KEE THE HONOURABLE TIMOTHY HA WING-HO, M.B.E., J.P. THE HONOURABLE MICHAEL HO MUN-KA
DR THE HONOURABLE HUANG CHEN-YA
THE HONOURABLE SIMON IP SIK-ON, J.P.
DR THE HONOURABLE LAM KUI-CHUN
DR THE HONOURABLE CONRAD LAM KUI-SHING THE HONOURABLE LAU CHIN-SHEK
THE HONOURABLE MISS EMILY LAU WAI-HING THE HONOURABLE LEE WING-TAT
THE HONOURABLE GILBERT LEUNG KAM-HO
THE HONOURABLE ERIC LI KA-CHEUNG, J.P. THE HONOURABLE FRED LI WAH-MING
PROF THE HONOURABLE FELICE LIEH MAK, O.B.E., J.P. THE HONOURALBE MAN SAI-CHEONG
THE HONOURABLE NG MING-YUM
THE HONOURABLE STEVEN POON KWOK-LIM
THE HONOURABLE TIK CHI-YUEN
THE HONOURABLE JAMES TO KUN-SUN
DR THE HONOURABLE SAMUEL WONG PING-WAI, M.B.E., J.P. DR THE HONOURABLE PHILIP WONG YU-HONG
DR THE HONOURABLE YEUNG SUM
THE HONOURABLE HOWARD YOUNG
THE HONOURABLE ZACHARY WONG WAI-YIN
ABSENT
THE HONOURABLE ALLEN LEE PENG-FEI, C.B.E., J.P. THE HONOURABLE STEPHEN CHEONG KAM-CHUEN, C.B.E., J.P. THE HONOURABLE LAU WONG-FAT, O.B.E., J.P. THE HONOURABLE RONALD JOSEPH ARCULLI, J.P. PROF THE HONOURABLE EDWARD CHEN KWAN-YIU THE HONOURABLE HENRY TANG YING-YEN, J.P.
IN ATTENDANCE
MR GRAHAM BARNES, C.B.E., J.P.
SECRETARY FOR PLANNING, ENVIRONMENT AND LANDS
THE HONOURABLE EDWARD BARRIE WIGGHAM, C.B.E., J.P. SECRETARY FOR THE CIVIL SERVICE
MR ALISTAIR PETER ASPREY, O.B.E., A.E. MR ALISTAIR PETER ASPREY, O.B.E., A.E., J.P. SECRETARY FOR SECURITY
MRS ELIZABETH WONG CHIEN CHI-LIEN, I.S.O. MRS ELIZABETH WONG CHIEN CHI-LIEN, I.S.O., J.P. SECRETARY FOR HEALTH AND WELFARE
MR CHAU TAK-HAY, J.P.
SECRETARY FOR TRADE AND INDUSTRY
MR MICHAEL SZE CHO-CHEUNG, I.S.O. MR MICHAEL SZE CHO-CHEUNG, I.S.O., J.P. SECRETARY FOR CONSTITUTIONAL AFFAIRS
THE CLERK TO THE LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL MR LAW KAM-SANG
Papers
The following papers were laid on the table pursuant to Standing Order 14(2): Subject
Subsidiary Legislation L.N. No. Subsidiary Legislation L.N. No.
Trade Marks
Rules............................................................ Rules............................................................ ............................................................ 5/92
Road Traffic (Public Service Vehicles) Road Traffic (Public Service Vehicles)
(Amendment) Regulation 1992.................................... (Amendment) Regulation 1992.................................... .................................... 6/92
Specification of Public Office............................................. Specification of Public Office............................................. 7/92
Trade Marks (Amendment) Ordinance 1991
(Commencement) Notice 1992.................................... (Commencement) Notice 1992.................................... .................................... 8/92 Sessional Paper 1991-92
No. 37 -- No. 37 -- Hospital Authority Annual Report 1990-1991 Hospital Authority Annual Report 1990-1991
No. 38 -- No. 38 -- Hong Kong Productivity Council Hong Kong Productivity Council
Annual Report 1990-91
No. 39 -- No. 39 -- Regional Regional Regional Council Annual Report 1990-91 Council Annual Report 1990-91
No. 40 -- No. 40 -- Regional Council, Hong Kong al Council, Hong Kong
Accounts for the year ended 31 March 1991
with report and certificate of the Director of Audit
No. 41 -- No. 41 -- Urban Council Annual Report 1991 Council Annual Report 1991
No. 42 -- No. 42 -- Urban Council, Hong Kong Urban Council, Hong Kong
Accounts for the year ended 31 March 1991
with report and certificate of the Director of Audit
No. 43 -- No. 43 -- Revisions of the 1991-92 estimates approved by the Revisions of the 1991-92 estimates approved by the Urban Council during the second quarter
of the 1991-92 Financial Year
Oral answers to questions
Anti-crime police patrols
1. MRS RITA FAN asked: In the light of the general concern expressed by members of 1. MRS RITA FAN asked: In the light of the general concern expressed by members of the public about the law and order situation, will the Government inform this Council:
(a) whether there are plans to increase the frequency of anti-crime police (a) whether there are plans to increase the frequency of anti-crime police patrols, and
(b) whether there is sufficient manpower for such duties and if not, what action (b) whether there is sufficient manpower for such duties and if not, what action will be taken to solve the shortage problem?
SECRETARY FOR SECURITY: Mr Deputy President, the Police Force has recently increased SECRETARY FOR SECURITY: Mr Deputy President, the Police Force has recently increased its presence on the streets including anti-crime patrols. This has been achieved its presence on the streets including anti-crime patrols. This has been achieved by a number of measures, including the redeployment of training companies of the Police Tactical Unit, extending the deployment of new police recruits to constabulary duties during the final part of their training, the assignment of officers previously engaged in indoor administrative duties to patrol duties, and increased deployment of auxiliary policemen. Stop-and-search operations and anti-crime raids at
blackspots have also been stepped up.
The Force reviews regularly its use of manpower to ensure that adequate officers The Force reviews regularly its use of manpower to ensure that adequate officers are deployed to maintain a sufficient presence on the street and on anti-crime duties. The current shortfall in junior police officers is about 3%. Recruitment in recent months has picked up substantially, and is now well in excess of wastage. We
therefore expect to see the shortfall reduce further during the coming year.
MRS RITA FAN: Mr Deputy President, the Secretary in his answer said that the current MRS RITA FAN: Mr Deputy President, the Secretary in his answer said that the current shortfall in junior police officers is about 3%. In our recent visits to the districts, the OMELCO Security Panel was informed by Police District Commanders that in the New Territories the shortfall between strength and establishment is about 14%, and in the Yau and in the Yau Tsim District where 30% of the crime reported occurs there, the sh Tsim District where 30% of the crime reported occurs there, the shortage is 5%. Can the Secretary explain how he could tally those two different sets of figures?
SECRETARY FOR SECURITY: Mr Deputy President, I cannot entirely reconcile those SECRETARY FOR SECURITY: Mr Deputy President, I cannot entirely reconcile those figures; I do not have figures for individual districts. But what I would say is that the total shortfall in junior police officers throughout the Force is about 3%. The shortfall is more pronounced in the Uniform Branch of the Force because many units such as the CID and the Police Tactical Unit are kept fully up to strength; so there is a greater shortfall in uniformed officers in the districts. PROF FELICE LIEH MAK: Mr Deputy President, in deploying indoor administrative staff to patrol duties, has the Secretary for Security taken into consideration whether efforts are to be made to retrain these officers in the use of firearms?
SECRETARY FOR SECURITY: Mr Deputy President, all police officers receive regular training and practice in the use of firearms.
MR SIMON IP: Mr Deputy President, police strength per 100 000 population has declined over the last four years and the present strength is at the level it was in 1984. Are the terms and conditions of employment adequate to attract people into the Force? If not, are there plans to improve them?
SECRETARY FOR SECURITY: Mr Deputy President, in general, I think that the terms and conditions are sufficient to attract people to join the Force and indeed, as I said in my main answer, we have had much more success in recruiting people at the junior police officer level in recent months. This of course is something that is regularly reviewed.
MRS SELINA CHOW: Mr Deputy President, will the recent savings to be achieved by the police aggravate the problems raised in the main question, and if so, how can this be avoided?
SECRETARY FOR SECURITY: Mr Deputy President, no, I do not believe they will aggravate the situation. The only real constraint on police strength at the moment -- and this has been the case for the last few years -- has been the constraint on the number of people who can be taken through the police training school. There is no intention that we should in any way suppress police recruitment and training during the coming year.
MR MARTIN BARROW: Mr Deputy President, could the Secretary advise how many policemen have been transferred from indoor administrative duties to patrol duties; how many people remain as administrative staff, and what steps are being taken to reduce the size of the Head Office or staff positions that remain?
SECRETARY FOR SECURITY: No, Mr Deputy President, I cannot answer those questions. I will try to give a written reply. (Annex I)
MR HOWARD YOUNG: Mr Deputy President, in view of the incident last week where a tourist was injured and hospitalized, will consideration be given to beefing up patrols in tourist areas given that such incidents are not just of local concern but may also affect Hong Kong's international image?
SECRETARY FOR SECURITY: Mr Deputy President, I think we are all very conscious that part of Hong Kong's attraction as a tourist destination is that it is a very safe city and we are certainly determined that it should remain so. There are obviously certain districts particularly vulnerable to crime especially, I suppose, at this time of the year when Chinese New Year is approaching. These are districts with greater concentrations of high-risk premises such as goldsmith shops and they include Yau Tsim, Mong Kok, Wan Chai and Central Districts. The police are well aware of this and are paying particular attention to those districts.
MISS EMILY LAU: Mr Deputy President, in view of the manpower shortage within the Force, will the Government inform this Council whether there are districts, or parts of districts, in the territory where deployment of police on patrol duty has been reduced or withdrawn?
SECRETARY FOR SECURITY: Mr Deputy President, I believe not, but I do not have with me detailed figures broken down by district. I will perhaps give a written reply to that also. (Annex II)
MR MOSES CHENG: Mr Deputy President, will the Secretary please inform this Council whether the deployment measures mentioned in his reply would hamper normal police work in any manner, and if so, how?
SECRETARY FOR SECURITY: Mr Deputy President, I believe not.
DR LAM KUI-CHUN: Mr Deputy President, in his reply, the Secretary for Security on the one hand said that there was a shortfall in the junior police officers but on the other hand maintained that sufficient officers had been deployed on to the streets. Would the Secretary account for and reconcile the discrepancy of these two statements?
SECRETARY FOR SECURITY: Mr Deputy President, I think that 3% is by any standard a very small shortfall but, as I have tried to indicate in the main answer, the police have in any case taken measures to redeploy other officers on to the streets to make up for this very small shortfall.
DEPUTY PRESIDENT: We have a number of supplementaries outstanding; so I will not be taking any more supplementaries but I will go through the list of all those who have already indicated their interest.
MR EDWARD HO: Mr Deputy President, the shortage the Secretary referred to in his reply is expressed in terms of strength versus establishment; but I do not think he has replied to the latter part of Mrs FAN's question which asks whether, according to the police, there will be sufficient manpower in the Force to carry out its duties even if full establishment is attained. Would the Secretary please reply to that?
SECRETARY FOR SECURITY: Yes, Mr Deputy President. I believe that the establishment of the Police Force is adequate for its duties.
MR JAMES TO (in Cantonese): Mr Deputy President, the Secretary has mentioned in his reply that the police have already increased their presence on the streets; could reply that the police have already increased their presence on the streets; could I ask for specific figures on this? As to the various measures mentioned in the reply, some of them seem to be on a temporary basis; may I ask how long these temporary measures will last?
SECRETARY FOR SECURITY: Mr Deputy President, it is not possible to give daily figures of deployment on the streets; that varies from time to time and from place to place. What I can say is that the police coverage on the streets has increased by about 15
000 man-hours over the two-week period; that is the best figure that can be produced. As regards the second part of the question, clearly some of the increased presence which is traditionally made at this time of the year before the Chinese New Year cannot be maintained on a permanent basis; but many of the measures that have been taken by the police will be maintained for the foreseeable future.
MR JIMMY McGREGOR: Mr Deputy President, will the Secretary working together with the insurance industry institute an examination or a licensing system for security protection of high-risk premises such as jewellers, goldsmiths and watch companies which system will be based on the issue of security certificates by the police without which the premises cannot be properly insured?
SECRETARY FOR SECURITY: Mr Deputy President, this matter has been considered in the SECRETARY FOR SECURITY: Mr Deputy President, this matter has been considered in the past by the Fight Crime Committee but it was decided that such a system should not be pursued. It is something that we can look at again, but I think that the disadvantages probably outweigh the advantages.
REV FUNG CHI-WOOD (in Cantonese): Mr Deputy President, increased deployment of auxiliary policemen was mentioned in the Secretary's reply; could I ask whether the number of hours auxiliary police are deployed on the streets during the past year was subject to any limitation due to financial or funding constraint? What is the present arrangement; in other words, is there any limitation in force at present?
SECRETARY FOR SECURITY: Mr Deputy President, clearly there are limits on all government expenditure including the expenditure on the auxiliary police. But I do not believe that in practice that has been a constraint on the deployment of auxiliary policemen on the street. Given the strength of the Auxiliary Police Force, which I think is about 5 000 men, deployment at its present rate of 850 men each day is a very high level of deployment; and I doubt if that could be significantly increased, given that all auxiliary policemen have full-time jobs.
MR PETER WONG: Mr Deputy President, to what extent will overtime be made use of to ensure that we have adequate strength in our patrols?
SECRETARY FOR SECURITY: Mr Deputy President, overtime payment, that is, the payment of Disciplined Services Overtime Allowance for extra hours worked by junior police officers, will be made use of particularly in the few weeks leading up to the Chinese New Year.
MR MAN SAI-CHEONG (in Cantonese): Mr Deputy President, in his reply, the Secretary has mentioned that the police have increased their presence on the streets and this includes the increased deployment of auxiliary policemen. May I ask whether there includes the increased deployment of auxiliary policemen. May I ask whether there are at present any difficulties in recruiting auxiliary policemen; if so, whether consideration has been given to pitching the pay of an auxiliary policeman at the level of that of his counterpart in the regular force so that more people will be attracted to join the auxiliary force to make up for the shortfall?
SECRETARY FOR SECURITY: Mr Deputy President, there have not been significant difficulties in the recruitment of auxiliary policemen in recent years. The Auxiliary Police Force has remained at a more or less constant size; recruitment is certainly at least keeping up with wastage. The pay package for auxiliary policemen is determined by reference to the pay package for the regular force, that is, an auxiliary policeman on duty is paid at the same hourly rate as his counterpart in the regular force.
DR YEUNG SUM (in Cantonese): Mr Deputy President, many of our colleagues are worried about the state of law and order on the streets. Recently the filming and performing arts industry has often drawn attention to triad elements infiltrating filming venues to extort protection money from the filming crew for shooting films on "their turf". If the "heroes" on the screen and martial art experts pick up the props around and engage in a fight with the triads, the safety of the passers-by will be at risk. Will the Administration take note of this and will special attention be given to
maintaining law and order on the streets where location shooting is taking?
SECRETARY FOR SECURITY: Mr Deputy President, I think perhaps what I would like to say on this subject is that it is encouraging that the film industry has come out and complained; and I hope that they will follow this up with a willingness to give
information to the police and to assist the police with evidence and identification of culprits. I think that perhaps too often in the past there has been a failure to report and to be willing to assist the police. So I hope that this example will be followed by the rest of the community because the public's assistance to the police will be essential if this problem of intimidation and triad crime is to be effectively tackled.
MR FRED LI (in Cantonese): Mr Deputy President, given that border patrol duties will be handed over by the British garrison to the Hong Kong police force, will the present problem of police manpower shortage further aggravate as a result?
SECRETARY FOR SECURITY: No, Mr Deputy President, the additional staff for the Frontier Patrol Force have been recruited; most of them have completed their training though some are still going through their training. So there will be no additional police required to take over that duty; the Frontier Patrol Force has been included in the police establishment.
DR HUANG CHEN-YA (in Cantonese): Mr Deputy President, given the present shortage of manpower in the police force and the existing deployment of large numbers of policemen to the Vietnamese detention centres, will consideration be given to arranging other officers, correctional services staff for instance, to take over this duty so that the police can be released for redeployment on the streets; if so, when will the arrangement be made?
SECRETARY FOR SECURITY: Yes, Mr Deputy President, it is certainly our intention that we should relieve the police from their duties in Vietnamese camps as soon as possible. We did manage to relieve them a few months ago of their responsibility for the High Island Camp and this, I think, allowed the police to redeploy somewhat over 200 men back on to normal police duties. The police are still heavily involved in the running of Sek Kong Camp and, in a rather more minor way, involved in the running of Lo Wu Camp. It is certainly my hope that some time during the course of this year, provided that the present trends in the number of Vietnamese are maintained, we can release the police from their involvement in those camps. I certainly cannot put a definite date on it, though in the case of Sek Kong, which is a large camp, I doubt if it could
be much before the end of this year.
Inspection of public housing blocks
2. MR FREDERICK FUNG asked (in Cantonese): Will the Government inform this Council 2. MR FREDERICK FUNG asked (in Cantonese): Will the Government inform this Council whether the Housing Authority has conducted a systematic survey on the condition of the public housing blocks (both for rent and for sale) completed in the last six years, and if so:
(a) how many housing units have been surveyed so far and what percentage they (a) how many housing units have been surveyed so far and what percentage they represent among units completed during the same period; when the survey of the remaining units will be completed; and
(b) how many of the housing units surveyed have been found to have defects and (b) how many of the housing units surveyed have been found to have defects and are in need of repair; what the total estimated cost of repair is, and the time frame for commencement and completion of the repair works is?
SECRETARY FOR PLANNING, ENVIRONMENT AND LANDS: Mr Deputy President, the Housing Authority reviews the condition of each of its buildings every year in preparing a maintenance and repair programme, and the budget necessary to implement it. The overall condition of the buildings and their essential services are also regularly inspected and maintained. These include lifts, water pumps and water supplies, fire service installations, underground drainage, and playground equipment. In addition, estate management offices respond to requests for repairs from tenants and owners on a day-to-day basis.
However, these checks and inspections are not flat-to-flat surveys. In the past six years, the Housing Authority has built some 228 000 new flats, and the total stock is now 750 000. Given the large size of the stock, the problem of access and staff resources constraints, it is not feasible to carry out a survey of the interior of each and every flat in the discharge of its maintenance responsibilities. And the Authority does not believe it is necessary because it is possible to gauge the general condition of a block and the flats in it by external inspection, reports by tenants as well as random inspections. So defects within individual flats are well looked after.
The short answers to the two specific questions (a) and (b) are therefore that the surveys and inspections are not geared towards covering individual housing units. So there are no figures on flat surveys and no completion dates for those surveys. MR FREDERICK FUNG (in Cantonese): Mr Deputy President, my question was raised prior to the press release from the Housing Department. According to that release, the Department was going to conduct a systematic survey on public housing blocks completed over the last six years, and I repeat "completed over the last six years"; and it would prepare a report as reference for its own maintenance programme. Now I have the following questions in relation to the reply given by the Secretary. First, why was the question on maintenance and repairs of buildings completed within the period to which I referred expanded to include "all public housing blocks"? I did not ask about all the public housing blocks. Second, may I know why the Secretary has not replied to parts (a) and (b) of my question. Third -- and this is in fact my
supplementary question while the previous two points are by way of follow-up to the reply by the Secretary -- regarding these housing blocks where defects are found, are complaints by tenants mostly about works contracted out, or about repair works carried out by Housing Department staff? In other words, were the unsatisfactory repair works which tenants have complained about mostly works contracted out or
carried out by the engineering division of the Department?
DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Secretary, could you take those two aspects separately?
SECRETARY FOR PLANNING, ENVIRONMENT AND LANDS: Mr Deputy President, it is possibly a problem of translation and I hope that I have got it right as regards the actual question asked. The first part of the question relates to the report of an individual flat survey. The information which I gave in my main answer is up to date and comes from the Housing Authority. The second part of the question relates to the range of defects. I am not quite sure, from the translated question, whether the defects to which Mr FUNG has referred are those purportedly reported in the report or those referred to in my answer. But I will take it that it is the latter that he is referring to. If so, the range of defects has been very wide -- defects of windows and fittings and, to a certain extent, minor structural defects; but they are not, as it were, fundamental construction defects.
MR FREDERICK FUNG (in Cantonese): The Secretary has not answered my supplementary
question.
DEPUTY PRESIDENT: I am sorry, but you will have to take it up elsewhere, Mr FUNG.
DR HUANG CHEN-YA (in Cantonese): Mr Deputy President, will the Administration explain why it is not uncommon for cracks and defects to be found in public housing blocks soon after repair works are completed? Are these repair works under the supervision of the Housing Department, and how are they supervised? May I be advised why this phenomenon is so common and also why further repairs proceed so slowly?
SECRETARY FOR PLANNING, ENVIRONMENT AND LANDS: Mr Deputy President, the Maintenance Defect Repair Programme is under supervision. The occasions on which repair works have to be done again and again are, I understand, reasonably rare; and with so many repair works I do not think the programme can be considered necessarily a failure though some of the defects do recur.
MR LEE WING-TAT: Mr Deputy President, will the Government inform this Council how much the Government will spend in the next five years on the maintenance and repair works in these public housing estates, and whether it will cause problems to the cash flow of the Housing Authority?
SECRETARY FOR PLANNING, ENVIRONMENT AND LANDS: Mr Deputy President, I have figures for one year, which I understand can be taken as fairly representative. In 1991 there were 170 000 individual repair works orders to cover the whole of the Authority's property stock and they cost $37 million.
MR ANDREW WONG: Mr Deputy President, I do not think the Secretary for Planning, Environment and Lands has answered Mr Frederick FUNG's question as to whether complaints were mostly about works contracted out or carried out by the Housing Department staff. Could I ask the question on his behalf?
SECRETARY FOR PLANNING, ENVIRONMENT AND LANDS: Mr Deputy President, I do not have a record of that and I will supply the answer in writing. (Annex III)
MR FRED LI (in Cantonese): Mr Deputy President, I am from the Kwun Tong Constituency. I believe that if my honourable colleagues are familiar with the problems confronting public housing tenants, they will know that most complaints relate to two areas: first,
the serious problem of lift breakdowns in public housing estates; second, the unreliable supply of flush water necessitating the use of fresh water for flushing purpose. How would the Housing Department solve these two problems which have been a constant cause for complaint by tenants?
SECRETARY FOR PLANNING, ENVIRONMENT AND LANDS: Mr Deputy President, I feel sure that the Housing Authority is aware of it; but I will ensure that the Authority will again be made aware of this particular form of defect which has been reported in this Council. I will arrange to make a further reply in writing. (Annex IV)
MR ALBERT CHAN (in Cantonese): Mr Deputy President, broadly speaking, the supervision of the Housing Department's repair works is the responsibility of its engineering division, whereas liaison with tenants is the job of its management staff. However, communication problems have often led to other problems of a more serious nature insofar as repair works are concerned. Will the Administration consider improving the administrative measures in this aspect?
SECRETARY FOR PLANNING, ENVIRONMENT AND LANDS: Mr Deputy President, I will certainly ensure that the matter is brought to the attention of the Authority.
REV FUNG CHI-WOOD (in Cantonese): Mr Deputy President, the Secretary mentioned in the second paragraph of his reply that "checks and inspections are not flat-to-flat surveys", and that "it is not feasible to carry out a survey of the interior of each and every flat". He also mentioned that "reports by tenants as well as random
inspections" would be taken into account. May I be advised whether "random inspections" cover individual housing units, or just the external walls/parts of the buildings? If the random inspections cover housing units, how many units have been
randomly inspected over the last six years, and what are the findings?
SECRETARY FOR PLANNING, ENVIRONMENT AND LANDS: Mr Deputy President, I can confirm that the random inspections which I referred to are for individual housing units because, as I have already mentioned in my reply, the overall blocks are surveyed on a regular basis. So random inspections are certainly referring to units. I am afraid, again, that I must provide written information. (Annex V)
MR WONG WAI-YIN (in Cantonese): Mr Deputy President, a number of new public housing estates have been completed in the New Territories by the Housing Department in the past few years. Take New Territories West, the constituency which I represent, as an example. Many public housing estates have been completed in the area, and among them are Long Ping Estate in Yuen Long and Leung King Estate in Tuen Mun. However, less than half a year after the intake of residents, problems like leaking, seepage, exposure of reinforcements and spalling of cement concrete appeared in several
hundred units in each and every block of these estates. The tenants concerned have petitioned the Housing Department and the OMELCO on many occasions. To our knowledge, it is a usual practice for the Housing Department to divert recurrent maintenance funds for items like estate facilities and amenity plots to rectify the defects found in these housing units. This explains the slow progress of repairs. Could we urge the Administration to consider allocating additional funds for the specific purpose of effecting repairs, so that overall repair works for these several hundred housing units can be completed as soon as possible?
SECRETARY FOR PLANNING, ENVIRONMENT AND LANDS: Mr Deputy President, I am not aware that the shortage of funds is a serious restraint upon major repairs, but again I will have to refer this to the Authority.
MR JAMES TO (in Cantonese): Mr Deputy President, I find it hard to follow the logic of the second paragraph of the Secretary's main reply. Having said that a flat to-flat survey would not be carried out and that it was possible to gauge the general condition of a block and the flats in it by external inspection or through reports by tenants, the Secretary then went on to say "so defects within individual flats are attended to". Would the Secretary elaborate on the logic behind his claim that
there was no need to conduct a flat-to-flat survey, and that the defects found in individual flats could be dealt with through gauging the general condition of a block?
SECRETARY FOR PLANNING, ENVIRONMENT AND LANDS: Mr Deputy President, I think I have made it clear that it is the combination of the three, namely, inspection of the general condition of the blocks, reports of defects by tenants -- which are the best, the most reliable and the most frequent form of reports of defects -- and also random inspections which makes an adequate procedure.
MR FREDERICK FUNG (in Cantonese): Mr Deputy President, will the Administration inform this Council how the Housing Department would oversee the procedures for repair works prior to the implementation of ISO 9000 and how the supervision of maintenance would be conducted? Does the Administration have enough professionals to see to it that the procedures are properly carried out?
SECRETARY FOR PLANNING, ENVIRONMENT AND LANDS: Mr Deputy President, I understand that the Housing Authority has in fact always maintained sets of standards and I can confirm that the Housing Authority has for many years employed competent technical and professional officers to supervise maintenance.
Legislation against discrimination
3. MRS SELINA CHOW asked: Will the Government inform this Council what progress has 3. MRS SELINA CHOW asked: Will the Government inform this Council what progress has been made towards the introduction of specific legislation against discrimination on grounds of race, sex and religion as contained in the Bill of Rights ?
SECRETARY FOR CONSTITUTIONAL AFFAIRS: The Bill of Rights Ordinance does not require the enactment of separate legislation prohibiting discrimination on grounds such as sex, race and religion. The relevant article of the Bill is concerned to ensure that legislation that has been enacted is not discriminatory in its contents or
application.
MRS SELINA CHOW: Mr Deputy President, is the Secretary aware that during the consideration of the Bill of Rights at the Blue Bill stage, the Administration has undertaken to look into the need for specific legislation to address the question of discrimination, especially when inter-citizen rights are not covered by the Bill?
SECRETARY FOR CONSTITUTIONAL AFFAIRS: Mr Deputy President, I am aware that the Administration has undertaken to look into alternative steps to protect individuals from infringement of their rights by other individuals. We have adopted the approach that we will legislate only where obvious discrimination exists and where discrimination can only be dealt with by law.
MR SIMON IP: Mr Deputy President, has the Government undertaken any exercise to ascertain whether any laws of Hong Kong require amendment or repeal because they might discriminate on the grounds of race, sex and religion? If so, what is the result; if not, why not?
SECRETARY FOR CONSTITUTIONAL AFFAIRS: Mr Deputy President, as far as racial discrimination is concerned, there is little evidence that it is a problem in Hong Kong and the Administration does not consider that it is necessary to introduce legislation to deal with this problem. We have not carried out any comprehensive review of laws in the perspective of discrimination but will of course be alert to problems of this nature. If such problems do arise we will bring the necessary amendments to this Council.
MR MAN SAI-CHEONG (in Cantonese): Mr Deputy President, will the Secretary inform this Council if the Administration has strictly enforced the enacted legislation and whether any prosecutions have been instituted against employers who breached the equal pay provision in order that the interests of female employees can be protected and that the human rights spirit of no sexual discrimination is observed?
SECRETARY FOR CONSTITUTIONAL AFFAIRS: Mr Deputy President, as I understand it, the
current Bill of Rights Ordinance only applies to discrimination by the Government or public bodies and does not cover inter-citizenship rights.
MR JIMMY McGREGOR: Mr Deputy President, can the Secretary say whether specifically any legislation affecting women's rights, such as the right of succession to property in the New Territories, is at present in breach of the Bill of Rights; and if so, how will the Government propose to deal with this?
SECRETARY FOR CONSTITUTIONAL AFFAIRS: Mr Deputy President, I am not competent to comment whether the succession right is or is not in breach of the Bill of Rights Ordinance; but as far as sex discrimination is concerned we believe that further study needs to be done in the area of employment. Although the Secretary for Education and Manpower, in answer to a question recently raised before this Council, has ruled out equal pay legislation, it is considered necessary to look into this question in greater depth; an interdepartmental working group under his chairmanship has been formed to look into this.
MR PETER WONG: Mr Deputy President, is the Government satisfied that its own employment policies and practices do not discriminate on the grounds of race, sex or religion?
SECRETARY FOR CONSTITUTIONAL AFFAIRS: Mr Deputy President, I think the Government's employment policies are known to the public and I do believe that it does not discrimate against either sex.
MR MARTIN BARROW: Mr Deputy President, given the acute labour shortage, would the Secretary agree that increasing the female participation rate in the labour force should be a key objective; and can steps be taken to eliminate discriminatory legislation which prevents females from having the same freedom to work overtime as males?
SECRETARY FOR CONSTITUTIONAL AFFAIRS: Mr Deputy President, I certainly subscribe to
the first part of that question, namely, to increase the labour participation rate. As for the second part of the question, as I said, an interdepartmental working group has been formed under the chairmanship of the Secretary for Education and Manpower and I am quite sure that issue will be looked at in that context.
MISS EMILY LAU: Mr Deputy President, in his reply to Mr Simon IP's question the Secretary for Constitutional Affairs has said that there is no need to review laws about racial discrimination. Can I ask the Government whether it is true that under the Immigration Ordinance race is one of the criteria in deciding whether people have the right of abode here; and if so, will this be considered racial discrimination?
SECRETARY FOR CONSTITUTIONAL AFFAIRS: Mr Deputy President, if I may, I would like to call upon my colleague the Secretary for Security to assist in answering this question.
SECRETARY FOR SECURITY: Mr Deputy President, I was expecting that. Miss LAU did ask a question on this very same subject, I think, on 13 November to which I gave a written reply. I have, really, little to add to that. Yes, race is used in the context of the right of abode conferred by the Immigration Ordinance. There are historical reasons for this but the advice we have is that this is fully consistent with the Bill of Rights and with our obligations under the convention relating to racial
discrimination.
MR JAMES TO (in Cantonese): Mr Deputy President, I would like to ask a question on sexual discrimination since Miss LAU has already touched on the aspect of racial discrimination. The Secretary for Constitutional Affairs said there was no need to have another review. But may I give an example here. If an underage person wants to get married, under the existing law, only the father and not the mother, though both are alive, can give consent to the marriage. Is this sexual discrimination? In fact there are a number of similar cases where we can find sexual discrimination. Is the Administration saying that all these have been reviewed and there is no need for any further review?
SECRETARY FOR CONSTITUTIONAL AFFAIRS: Mr Deputy President, I have, in reply to a previous supplementary, said that we will be alert to inconsistencies of this nature, and where this is drawn to our attention, either through our own operation or through other means, we will take action to review the situation to see whether those
inconsistencies should be removed.
MR ANDREW WONG (in Cantonese): Mr Deputy President, I understand that labour shortage is not just a problem for Hong Kong; it is one faced by the Constitutional Affairs Branch too. In fact, a fair measure of work is now under way. May I be advised whether the Administration is prepared to reconsider the setting up of a Human Rights Commission to assist in reviewing the existing legislation and enacting new
legislation so as to offer positive protection to certain rights?
SECRETARY FOR CONSTITUTIONAL AFFAIRS: Mr Deputy President, except in cases of obvious inconsistency with the Bill of Rights Ordinance, it is extremely difficult to predict with any certainty how a court will decide if a particular provision is challenged. Hence, we have decided, after reviewing legislation before the enactment of the Bill of Rights Ordinance, that we will amend only the six frozen Ordinances and leave the rest, where inconsistencies with the Bill of Rights Ordinance are less obvious, to face challenge in the courts. To establish a Human Rights Commission, whose
functions include the review of legislation, would not sit well with the Government's approach to review legislation to remove possible inconsistencies with the Bill of Rights.
REV FUNG CHI-WOOD (in Cantonese): Mr Deputy President, since the promulgation of the Bill of Rights Ordinance, there have been several cases in which the court has ruled that certain laws are in violation of the Ordinance. May I be advised why the Administration is not taking the initiative to amend some statutes which are known to be inconsistent with the Bill of Rights Ordinance, such as the Societies Ordinance and the part of the Summary Offences Ordinance relating to political fund raising?
SECRETARY FOR CONSTITUTIONAL AFFAIRS: Mr Deputy President, I think my answer to the last supplementary question has covered this particular question except for one point which I would like to add, and that is that the Societies Ordinance is one of the
six Ordinances which we are reviewing.
MR MICHAEL HO (in Cantonese): Mr Deputy President, I would like to follow up on the question relating to the difference in the right of succession between the two sexes. Just then the Secretary declined to answer, saying that he was not an expert on this matter. Will the Administration ask an appropriate official or one who is
responsible for dealing with the matter to respond to that supplementary?
DEPUTY PRESIDENT: It is a question, I think, which is directed to you, Secretary for Constitutional Affairs.
SECRETARY FOR CONSTITUTIONAL AFFAIRS: Mr Deputy President, I think the question of succession relates mainly to practices under customary law in the New Territories; and, as I said, I do not wish to venture into an area in which I am not professionally competent.
MRS SELINA CHOW: Mr Deputy President, apart from the working group under the Secretary for Education and Manpower which the Secretary for Constitutional Affairs has referred to, are there other administrative actions being taken within the Administration to ensure that safeguards against discrimination are actually introduced?
SECRETARY FOR CONSTITUTIONAL AFFAIRS: Mr Deputy President, perhaps I should explain what the interdepartmental working group will be doing. It will ascertain the extent to which discrimination based on sex is a problem in Hong Kong and, in the light of its findings, determine the measures necessary to address the problems because
legislation in areas such as employment, advertising and so on is very complex and we would like to approach it with the utmost care.
Written answers to questions
Drug abuse
4. DR CONRAD LAM asked: Will the Government inform this Council: 4. DR CONRAD LAM asked: Will the Government inform this Council:
(i) of the (i) of the current number of active drug abusers in Hong Kong with distribution current number of active drug abusers in Hong Kong with distribution by age;
(ii) of the various treatment and rehabilitation programmes available to (ii) of the various treatment and rehabilitation programmes available to assist the drug addicts and what measures are used to evaluate the effectiveness of these programmes;
(iii) whether the Government has evaluated the effectiveness of the Methadone (iii) whether the Government has evaluated the effectiveness of the Methadone Treatment Programme since inception; if yes, what are the findings; if no, will the Government conduct such investigation?
SECRETARY FOR SECURITY: Mr Deputy President, according to information received by the Government's Central Registry of Drug Abuse from a wide range of reporting agencies, the number of active drug abusers in Hong Kong at the end of June 1991 was 41 650. Of these, some 6% were under 21 years of age, 25% aged 21 to 30, 28% aged 31 to 40, 15% aged 41 to 50, and 26% 51 years of age and over.
We have three main treatment and rehabilitation programmes:
(a) the Correctional Services Department's compulsory in-patient treatment (a) the Correctional Services Department's compulsory in-patient treatment programme, provided at Drug Addiction Treatment Centres for drug abusers convicted of offences punishable by imprisonment;
(b) a voluntary in-patient treatment programme operated by the Society for the (b) a voluntary in-patient treatment programme operated by the Society for the Aid and Rehabilitation of Drug Abusers (SARDA); and
(c) a voluntary out-patient Met (c) a voluntary out-patient Met a voluntary out-patient Methadone Treatment Programme managed by the hadone Treatment Programme managed by the Department of Health.
At the end of June 1991, the total number of abusers undergoing treatment, counselling or other aftercare services in these three programmes, was 12 695; of these, about 7 500, or 60%, were part of the out-patient Methadone Treatment Programme. The other two in-patient programmes catered for about 2 500, or 20%, each.
Other, smaller scale programmes are operated by 13 other voluntary agencies, providing detoxification, medical treatment, rehabilitation and aftercare services.
All of these programmes combined cater for an estimated 2 600 drug abusers.
The three major programmes provide a different range of services and their effectiveness must, therefore, be measured in different ways. We also need to bear in mind that drug addiction is a chronic, relapsing condition.
The Correctional Services Department's compulsory in-patient programme provides detoxification treatment and counselling for a period of detention imposed by the courts and a one-year statutory aftercare period. The objective is to persuade drug abusers to say NO to drugs. Since it started in 1969 and up to the end of 1990, a total of 35 792 males and 1 509 females completed treatment. More than 70% of the males and 76% of the females did not relapse or were not re-convicted of any criminal offence during the one-year aftercare period. Thereafter, they are not required to report to anyone and, accordingly, no accurate statistics are available. Many do, however, subsequently relapse.
The SARDA treatment programme is voluntary and, as such, is subject to a large number of drop-outs; however, many subsequently seek re-admission and there are a number of cases of multiple re-admissions. Out of 1 006 male and 63 female cases in 1990-91, 14% of the males and 37% of the females remained drug-free at the end of a voluntary two-year treatment and aftercare period.
The Methadone Treatment Programme is primarily a maintenance programme, designed to block the craving for heroin, enabling the individual to maintain a relatively normal lifestyle and reducing the amount of drug-related crime. Out of the 10 985 patients registered with the programme, 8 004, or 73%, attended daily at the end of last year.
Since the inception of the Methadone Treatment Programme in 1974, we have Since the inception of the Methadone Treatment Programme in 1974, we have regularly monitored its effectiveness. We have also carried out some larger scale evaluations:
(a) A comprehensive review of the programme in 1978 recommended several (a) A comprehensive review of the programme in 1978 recommended several operational improvements, including the provision of both detoxification and maintenance services within each clinic (they had previously been provided in separate clinics), streamlining of the manning scales and improved monitoring of the progress of each patient. These recommendations were implemented.
(b) From 1980 to 1985, a drug treatment specialist was appointed as an adviser (b) From 1980 to 1985, a drug treatment specialist was appointed as an adviser
to the then Director of Medical and Health Services, and made further recommendations for streamlining the operation of the programme. These were also implemented.
(c) A more recent evaluation was carried out in 1990. This reaffirmed the (c) A more recent evaluation was carried out in 1990. This reaffirmed the anti-crime function of the Programme, and also its importance in reducing intravenous drug use and needle-sharing and, therefore, its role in the prevention of AIDS.
The Director of Audit in his report to the Legislative Council on 20 November The Director of Audit in his report to the Legislative Council on 20 November 1991 reviewed the cost-effectiveness of the programme and recommended that the Government review its objectives and the number and geographical distribution of the clinics, so as to ensure their optimal use. The Commissioner for Narcotics has since formed a review group to look into these two recommendations.
Lotteries ticket sale outlets
5. MR HUI YIN-FAT asked: In view of recent reports that under-aged persons can e 5. MR HUI YIN-FAT asked: In view of recent reports that under-aged persons can easily buy lotteries tickets at Hong Kong Telecom CSL Shops, will the Administration inform this Council whether investigation has been carried out into the situation and what remedy has been worked out; and whether further extension of the sale of lotteries tickets will be considered in the near future especially in the light of the said reports?
SECRETARY FOR HOME AFFAIRS: Mr Deputy President, before I answer the Honourable Member's questions, I would like to state the Government's policy on gambling and explain the background to the trial currently underway on the sale of Mark Six tickets in CSL shops.
The Government's policy has always been to restrict opportunities for gambling but to allow controlled outlets for such gambling activities as exist so as to counter illegal gambling. The Mark Six Lottery was introduced in l975 specifically to combat Tse Fa and other forms of illegal lottery which were then prevalent. Over the years since, the lottery has been modified to ensure that it remains an effective weapon against these illegal activities.
In March l990, the Lotteries Board submitted a proposal to expand the sale network of the Mark Six tickets to convenience stores and supermarkets as part of the constant
effort to maintain the viability of the lottery. However, because of a negative reaction to the scheme among certain sectors of the public, the Board subsequently decided to revise the proposal and asked to be allowed to conduct a trial of the sale of Mark Six tickets through a small number of CSL shops. Approval was given to this proposal in May l99l, on condition that the trial was only to be conducted for a period of not more than six months and that public consultation would be carried out before any decision is taken on the further extension of sales outlets.
Turning to reports that a newspaper's investigation showed that teenagers were able to buy Mark Six tickets at Hong Kong Telecom CSL shops : this has come as no surprise. One of the main reasons approval was given to the trial was to allow the Government, the Lotteries Board and the public to assess the advantages and
limitations of making Mark Six tickets more accessible. It is essential that all of the arrangements for the sale of Mark Six tickets should be tested during this period.
In this case, the newspaper clearly wished to test the effectiveness of the In this case, the newspaper clearly wished to test the effectiveness of the controls over sale of tickets to teenagers. The results show that this aspect of the scheme may need review. However, to balance the picture, it must be remembered that the reports refer to only a very small number of teenagers, who appear to have been encouraged to buy the Mark Six tickets from the CSL shops deliberately to test the control system.
The Royal Hong Kong Jockey Club, who act as agent for the Lotteries Board, and Hong Kong Telecom CSL Company Limited have studied the reports very carefully. They have reviewed existing arrangements to the control of the sale of Mark Six tickets to teenagers. They are satisfied that with minor adjustments, these are sufficient to ensure that all but the most determined teenagers will be unable to purchase Mark Six tickets through CSL shops.
Finally, I must repeat that the Government is committed to a review of the trial scheme when it ends in April l992. In preparation for this review a public opinion survey has been commissioned to try to elicit views on the trial. This information, together with comments to be solicited from district boards, written submissions and any other relevant information will be taken into account in reaching a decision on the future of the scheme.
Chek Lap Kok airport reclamation
6. DR SAMUEL WONG asked: In view of recent reports about the revised method for 6. DR SAMUEL WONG asked: In view of recent reports about the revised method for reclamation for the Chek Lap Kok airport, will the Government inform this Council:
(a) what is the cost (a) what is the cost what is the cost difference between the original and revised methods of difference between the original and revised methods of reclamation; and
(b) what is the environmental impact on coastal waters in the handling of the (b) what is the environmental impact on coastal waters in the handling of the dredged marine mud?
SECRETARY FOR WORKS: Mr Deputy President, it is necessary for me to reply at some length to the question in order for my explanation to be complete and unambiguous.
When it was first proposed to build the new airport at Chek Lap Kok more than 10 years ago, the site formation was to be carried out on the basis of a "drained" reclamation. That is to say, the thick layer of soft clay on the seabed was to be left in place and consolidated by means of the installation of vertical drains. This method for the construction of the site formation works was well known, and a trial reclamation produced information for design purposes.
The consultants, selected on a competitive basis for the Masterplan Consultancy, proposed an alternative engineering approach and this was subsequently accepted by the Provisional Airport Authority. By removing the marine mud over the area to be reclaimed, and replacing it with suitable material, the uncertainty of settlement could be minimized. The consultants' estimate showed that reclamation costs for removing the mud or leaving it in place would be similar. The significant advantage was that programme constraints arising from the time needed for the mud to drain and consolidate could be avoided. The mud removal approach was therefore adopted.
At the airport site, a comprehensive environmental impact assessment indicates At the airport site, a comprehensive environmental impact assessment indicates that the environmental impact of the mud dredging will be acceptable under controlled dredging conditions. The situation will be monitored throughout construction. The chosen contractors plant and methods of working will have been carefully specified and agreed before commencement. Modifications in the light of actual working
conditions will be implemented if necessary to ensure that the environmental impact from dredging is contained within an acceptable level.
The location of the gazetted marine dumping ground south of Cheung Chau was c The location of the gazetted marine dumping ground south of Cheung Chau was chosen for its distance from sensitive areas and because it was close to the oceanic currents which pass to the immediate south of Hong Kong. The dumping ground has been used for the disposal of mud for many years, and none of the mud from the airport site is contaminated with heavy metals. Since the volume and rate of disposal from the airport dredging will exceed previous disposal rates at the dumping ground, this aspect is receiving careful study and will be monitored as work proceeds.
Hong Kong Bill of Rights Ordinance
7. MR JAMES TO asked: In view of the enactment of the Hong Kong Bill of Rights 7. MR JAMES TO asked: In view of the enactment of the Hong Kong Bill of Rights Ordinance (BOR) in June 1991, will the Government inform this Council:
(i) of the existing establis (i) of the existing establis of the existing establishment, strength and vacancy position, by number and hment, strength and vacancy position, by number and rank, of professional and general staff deployed in the Legal Department to deal with the work relating to the BOR;
(ii) what recruitment plans, if any, the Legal Department has to fill the (ii) what recruitment plans, if any, the Legal Department has to fill the existing and future vacancies relating to work in connection with the BOR;
(iii) how the Government will ensure that the manpower provided is commensu (iii) how the Government will ensure that the manpower provided is commensurate with the workload?
ATTORNEY GENERAL: Mr Deputy President,
(i) Whilst all Counsel in the Legal Department m (i) Whilst all Counsel in the Legal Department m Whilst all Counsel in the Legal Department may have to deal with legal is ay have to deal with legal issues relating to the Bill of Rights from time to time, two units have been set up within the Department specifically to handle Bill of Rights work. They are in the Legal Policy Division and the Prosecutions Division. The unit in the former is supervised by the Deputy Solicitor General and that in the latter by a Deputy Crown Prosecutor. Positions in these two units are filled by redeployment of existing resources as additional posts have not been created for them in the Department's establishment. The current deployment is set out below:
(a) Bill of Rights Unit in the Legal Policy Division (a) Bill of Rights Unit in the Legal Policy Division
1 Deputy Principal Crown Counsel (note 1)
2 Senior Crown Counsel (note 2)
1 Crown Counsel (note 3)
1 Personal Secretary I 1 Personal Secretary I
1 Personal Secretary II
(b) Bill of Rights Unit in the Prosecutions Division (b) Bill of Rights Unit in the Prosecutions Division
1 Deputy Principal Crown Counsel (note 1)
3 Senior Crown Counsel
1 Personal Secretary I
1 Personal Secretary II
(ii) Positions in the Bill of Rights unit (ii) Positions in the Bill of Rights unit Positions in the Bill of Rights units are normally filled by internal s are normally filled by internal deployment. If vacancies arise in the Department as a result, they will be filled by regular recruitment exercises in accordance with usual practice.
(iii) The Legal Department will ensure that adequate staff is deploye (iii) The Legal Department will ensure that adequate staff is deploye The Legal Department will ensure that adequate staff is deployed to meet d to meet the workload generated by the Bill of Rights.
note 1: These posts are currently being filled by Senior Crown Counsel on an acting note 1: These posts are currently being filled by Senior Crown Counsel on an acting basis. The appointment of officers at substantive Deputy Principal Crown Counsel rank is in process.
note 2: In a note 2: In addition, one Senior Crown Counsel is on a one-year secondment with the ddition, one Senior Crown Counsel is on a one-year secondment with the Centre for Human Rights of the United Nations in Geneva. He is due to return to Hong Kong this summer and will join the unit.
note 3: The Crown Counsel is currently doubling up as note 3: The Crown Counsel is currently doubling up as The Crown Counsel is currently doubling up as Senior Crown Counsel in Senior Crown Counsel in the unit.
School fund-raising activities
8. MR NG MING-YUM asked: Will the Government inform this Council: 8. MR NG MING-YUM asked: Will the Government inform this Council: (a) of the government policy on school fund-raising activities and the criteria (a) of the government policy on school fund-raising activities and the criteria
used in approving applications for such activities;
(b) how many applications in relation to school fund-raising activities were (b) how many applications in relation to school fund-raising activities were received in each of the past three years and how many of them were successful or unsuccessful;
(c) what procedures are used by the Government to monitor the proper (c) what procedures are used by the Government to monitor the proper what procedures are used by the Government to monitor the proper use of t use of these funds for their specified purposes;
(d) how many complaints, if any, in connection with school fund-raising (d) how many complaints, if any, in connection with school fund-raising activities were received by the Government in each of the past three years; whether any investigations into these complaints were conducted; and if so, what the outcome was; and
(e) whether the procedures for monitoring school fund-raising activities would (e) whether the procedures for monitoring school fund-raising activities would be reviewed with a view to ensuring that funds thus raised are used for their specified purposes?
SECRETARY FOR EDUCATION AND MANPOWER: Mr Deputy President, the answers to Mr NG's questions are as follows:
(a) Under present policy, school fund-raising activities are permitted, subject (a) Under present policy, school fund-raising activities are permitted, subject to approval in each case by the Director of Education. The Director will only approve such applications if, in his view, the fund-raising activity is for bona-fide school purposes or is of a charitable nature. Additionally, fund-raising activities by
schools involving the collection of money in public places are subject to an annual quota through the issuance of a Public Subscription Permit administered by the Director of Social Welfare. Fund-raising activities involving public entertainment require separate approval by the relevant authorities.
(b) The number of applications for fund-raising acti (b) The number of applications for fund-raising acti The number of applications for fund-raising activities in schools in each vities in schools in each of the past three years was -
1989 1990 1989 1990 1991
121 119 121 119 170
All but three of the applications were successful.
(c) To facilitate monitoring of the use of the funds for their specified purp (c) To facilitate monitoring of the use of the funds for their specified purposes, the school is required to submit a financial statement to the District Education Officer concerned for examination within two months following each fund-raising activity. Where collections are organized for approved school purposes, funds so collected, as well as all expenditure, must be properly reflected in the school's accounts which are examined by the Audit Section of the Education Department. In the case of funds collected for approved charitable purposes, official receipts must be obtained from the organizations concerned. Following a recent review of procedures, schools are now required to display these receipts on their notice boards for a reasonable period of time and retain them for record purpose thereafter.
(d) The Education Department has not received any formal compla (d) The Education Department has not received any formal compla The Education Department has not received any formal complaints in connec ints in connection with school fund-raising activities in the past three years. We are aware, however, of a recent complaint lodged with OMELCO against a charitable organization which has been the beneficiary of an approved school fund-raising activity. The allegation was not directed at the way the fund-raising activity was organized but the subsequent use of the proceeds by the charitable organization over which neither the school nor the Government had any control.
(e) The procedures for monitoring s (e) The procedures for monitoring s The procedures for monitoring school fund-raising activities have just been chool fund-raising activities have just been reviewed with a view to closing any loopholes for abuse. Apart from the change mentioned in (c) above, the revised guidelines to schools on fund-raising activities now make it explicitly clear that prior approval of the authorities must be sought for every such activity organized by schools and that the intended purpose of the activity as well as the disposal of funds collected must be clearly stated in the application.
Industrial accidents and burns treatment facilities
9. MR LAU CHIN-SHEK asked: The recent incident in which an explosion occurred on 9. MR LAU CHIN-SHEK asked: The recent incident in which an explosion occurred on a dredger in Hung Hom Bay has aroused public concern over the burns treatment facilities in our hospitals and the assistance offered to victims of industrial accidents. In this regard, will the Government inform this Council:
(1) whether there are plans to set up burns treatment units in the United (1) whether there are plans to set up burns treatment units in the United
Christian Hospital and Queen Elizabeth Hospital to take care of workers and residents in Kowloon; and
(2) after (2) after the occurrence of an industrial accident, whether the Social Welfare the occurrence of an industrial accident, whether the Social Welfare Department will reach out to the victims and their families as soon as possible, so as to help them overcome any financial difficulties and other problems concerning their accommodation and livelihood ?
SECRETARY FOR HEALTH AND WELFARE: Mr Deputy President, the
answers are as follows, seriatim:
(a) There are adequate medical expertise and facilities in our acute hospitals (a) There are adequate medical expertise and facilities in our acute hospitals to treat patients suffering from burns. Nevertheless, plans are in hand to better cater for the needs of these patients by setting up special burns treatment units both at Queen Elizabeth Hospital as a continuation to its Block-B extension and at United Christian Hospital in the present hospital extension project.
(b) On the welfare side, Social Welfare Department will react promptly to On the welfare side, Social Welfare Department will react promptly to emergency situations, including fires and accidents, and see whether the victims and their families require assistance. Staff of the Department will approach the victims and their families in the hospital or clinic or at home as soon as possible. This was the case in the recent dredger explosion incident at Hung Hom Bay. Financial and housing assistance, counselling and other supporting services will be offered to the victims and their families according to their needs.
Foreign workers
10. MR LAU CHIN-SHEK asked: Will the Government inform this Council, apart from t 10. MR LAU CHIN-SHEK asked: Will the Government inform this Council, apart from those imported under the "1989 and 1990 Schemes on Importation of Labour", how many foreign workers have entered Hong Kong for employment in the past two years, what their professions/trades and posts are, and what criteria were used by the authorities concerned in approving their entry into Hong Kong?
SECRETARY FOR SECURITY: Mr Deputy President, under normal immigration policy, foreign nationals can come to Hong Kong for employment provided that:
(a) they possess a special skill, knowledge or experience of value to and not (a) they possess a special skill, knowledge or experience of value to and not readily available in Hong Kong;
(b) they are unlikely to become a burden on Hong Kong; and (b) they are unlikely to become a burden on Hong Kong; and
(c) they meet normal immigration requirements. (c) they meet normal immigration requirements.
Under this policy, a total of 11 350 persons were admitted in 1989, 12 941 in 1990 and 6 068 in the first six months of 1991. A breakdown is attached.
In addition, a total of 20 537 foreign domestic helpers were admitted in 1989, In addition, a total of 20 537 foreign domestic helpers were admitted in 1989, 24 116 in 1990 and 14 738 in the first six months of 1991.
Statistics on Entry of Foreign Nationals for Employment
Categories 1989 Categories 1989 1990 1991(up to 1991(up to
end of June)
Professional 1 916 Professional 1 916 2 563 1 216
and technical
Administrative Administrative 6 126 6 884 3 190
and managerial
Teachers, 590 Teachers, 590 599 274
professors and
members of
religious orders
Sportsmen, 889 Sportsmen, 889 1 010 671
musicians and
entertainers
Others 1 829 Others 1 829 1 885 717
Total 11 350 Total 11 350 1 2941 6 068
BDTC and BNO passports
11. MR ERIC 11. MR ERIC MR ERIC LI asked: Will the Government inform this Council of the following: LI asked: Will the Government inform this Council of the following:
(a) the respective number of persons presently holding BDTC passports and BN(O) (a) the respective number of persons presently holding BDTC passports and BN(O) passports;
(b) whether the Administration anticipates a large number of BDTC passport (b) whether the Administration anticipates a large number of BDTC passport holders to apply for BN(O) passports by the first half of 1997; and if so, what steps will be taken to handle the situation; and
(c) whether the Administration will consider encouraging BDTC passport holders (c) whether the Administration will consider encouraging BDTC passport holders to make early applications for BN(O) passports in order to avoid a last minute rush of applications and a possible delay in the issue of passports?
SECRETARY FOR SECURITY: Mr Deputy President, BDTC passports were first introduced on 1 January 1983; in the nine years since then, we have issued 1 529 722 BDTC passports. BN(O) passports were first introduced on 1 July 1987; in the four and a half year since then we have issued 273 036 BN(O) passports.
We are aware of the possibility of a late rush for BN(O) passports which, under the terms of the Joint Declaration, must be issued before 1 July 1997. We wish to avoid such a situation, which would put a great strain on the Immigration Department's resources. We therefore intend to launch a publicity programme in the near future to remind BDTC passport holders of the need to apply in good time if they want BN(O) passports.
Airport railway facilities for the elderly and handicapped
12. MR ERIC LI asked: In view of the Government's proposed injection of capital into 12. MR ERIC LI asked: In view of the Government's proposed injection of capital into the MTRC for the construction of a railway linking the urban area and the distant Chek Lap Kok Airport and the considerable proportion of elderly and handicapped persons in the population of Hong Kong, will the Government inform this Council:
(a) whether adequate facilities will be provided on the Airport (a) whether adequate facilities will be provided on the Airport whether adequate facilities will be provided on the Airport Railway to aid Railway to aid
those persons; and if so, what those facilities are; and
(b) in designing such facilities, whether concerned bodies such as the (b) in designing such facilities, whether concerned bodies such as the Rehabilitation Development Co-ordinating Committee will be consulted?
SECRETARY FOR TRANSPORT: Mr Deputy President,
(a) The Airport Railway will have two elements: the Airport Express, designed to (a) The Airport Railway will have two elements: the Airport Express, designed to handle airport traffic; and the Lantau Line, a domestic service similar to existing MTR services but running at higher speed.
The Airport Express will have facilities catering for the handicapped and the The Airport Express will have facilities catering for the handicapped and the elderly. Interchange with other transport modes will have convenient same-level connections, and space will be provided within Airport Express carriages for wheel chairs. Where restrooms are provided within stations, special arrangements will be made for the handicapped. Consideration is also being given to the needs of partially sighted and blind people.
It is however not possible to make special provision for the elderly or handicapped on the domestic service (the Lantau Line) as it interconnects with existing MTR lines, which do not have such provision.
(b) The MTRC will consult concerned bodies when considering the detailed design of (b) The MTRC will consult concerned bodies when considering the detailed design of the Airport Railway, including the Rehabilitation Development Co-ordinating Committee.
Suicide by young people
13. MR NG MING-YUM asked: Will the Government inform this Council: 13. MR NG MING-YUM asked: Will the Government inform this Council:
(a) of the respective number of cases dealt with in the past three years with (a) of the respective number of cases dealt with in the past three years with regard to suicides or attempted suicides committed by young people of the age from 7 to 21 in the following administrative districts: Tuen Mun, Yuen Long, Shatin, Tai Po;
(b) which departments are responsible for dealing with this problem, and what (b) which departments are responsible for dealing with this problem, and what
the services provided and resources deployed by each of them in this respect are;
(c) what programmes provided by the Government are available to help teachers (c) what programmes provided by the Government are available to help teachers and social workers gain a better understanding of the problem, and the progress of their implementation;
(d) whether the "whole school approach" recommended in the Edu (d) whether the "whole school approach" recommended in the Edu whether the "whole school approach" recommended in the Education Commission cation Commission Report No 4 would help to alleviate the problem; and what the progress of its implementation is;
(e) what kinds of counselling services are available to youngsters and their (e) what kinds of counselling services are available to youngsters and their parents in dealing with this problem; and
(f) whether the G (f) whether the G whether the Government has carried out in the past three years any in- overnment has carried out in the past three years any in-depth studies into the causes of the problem and ways to prevent and solve it; if so, what the findings of these studies are; if not, whether consideration will be given to carrying out such a study in the foreseeable future?
SECRETARY FOR EDUCATION AND MANPOWER: Mr Deputy President, the answers to Mr NG's questions are as follows:
(a) The best available figures on attempted suicides in the past three years, (a) The best available figures on attempted suicides in the past three years, committed by young people aged 7-21 in Tuen Mun, Yuen Long, Shatin and Tai Po, are:
1989 1990 1989 1990 1991 Total
Tuen Mun Tuen Mun Tuen Mun 4 6 21 31
Yuen Long Yuen Long Yuen Long 4 4 6 14
Shatin Shatin 6 3 12 21
Taipo 1 0 3 4
----
70
==
Of these, two were fatal cases (in 1991), one in Shatin and one in Taipo.
(b) The problem of youth suicides is the prime concern of the Education and Social (b) The problem of youth suicides is the prime concern of the Education and Social Welfare Departments. As the bulk of the affected age group attend school, the Education Department is responsible for co-ordinating action between schools, the Social Welfare Department and voluntary agencies. The services provided include counselling, psychological assessment and treatment, and small group therapy. Social workers in secondary schools and Student Guidance Officers in primary schools provide the initial support to students under stress. All students known to have suicidal tendencies are given professional support services by educational or clinical psychologists, counsellors or medical social workers. Severe cases are brought to the attention of the government psychiatrists or child psychiatrists. It is not possible within the time available to quantify the resources deployed by the departments and agencies involved since the support network is complex and includes a range of professional and other staff in a variety of situations and with differing degrees of involvement.
(c) The Education Department runs seminars for teachers on a district basis on the (c) The Education Department runs seminars for teachers on a district basis on the subject of helping pupils cope with stress. A Guidance Teachers Resource Book containing suggested techniques in managing student behaviour in schools was published and distributed in November 1991 to Guidance Teachers and Student Guidance Officers. The Education Department will also be issuing in the near future a circular to both primary and secondary schools to encourage a positive approach in the management of student problems, which will emphasize the importance of improving communication among teachers, parents and students.
As regards social workers, training programmes at tertiary institutions or As regards social workers, training programmes at tertiary institutions or in-service training courses organized by the Social Welfare Department include the subjects of mental health and the social and psychological development of youths. Courses on stress management and intervention skills are also organized regularly by the training section of the Department.
(d) The "Whole School Approach" recommended in Education Commission Report No. 4 aims (d) The "Whole School Approach" recommended in Education Commission Report No. 4 aims at creating an environment in schools in which student problems are responded to quickly and in a positive and constructive manner. Although the causes of suicide are usually multi-faceted, a sympathetic and positive school environment proposed by the "Whole School Approach" should alleviate pressures experienced by students. To introduce the concept of the Whole School Approach to school heads and teachers, and to set the climate for its implementation, intensive workshops for trainers and
school heads have been provided in the 1990-91 and 1991-92 school years. The trained personnel will assist schools in launching the "Whole School Approach". Implementation in primary schools is planned for September 1992.
(e) Counselling to parents and young people is provided by family services centres (e) Counselling to parents and young people is provided by family services centres of the Social Welfare Department, medical social workers, school social workers, youth workers and outreaching social workers. Therapeutic group sessions and activities are also organized by group workers.
In response to recent concerns expressed about a breakdown of communication between parents and children, the Education Department has increased the number of programmes organized to promote awareness among parents of the importance of communication between themselves and their children. Increased publicity on the availability of counselling services to youngsters and parents will be made through the distribution of a full colour leaflet on good parenthood to parents of primary and junior secondary students around February 1992. All these aim to draw parents' attention to the need to give due care and support to their children to help them face frustration and handle stress positively and realistically.
(f) No in-depth study has been carried out in the past three years into the causes (f) No in-depth study has been carried out in the past three years into the causes of the problem of youth suicides. The situation, however, is being monitored closely by the departments concerned. Further remedial measures, including an in-depth study, will be considered if the situation so warrants.
Harbour traffic control for the fireworks display
14. MR GILBERT LEUNG asked: 14. MR GILBERT LEUNG asked: MR GILBERT LEUNG asked: In relation to vessel traffic control in the harbour In relation to vessel traffic control in the harbour during the firework display in the coming lunar new year, will the Government inform this Council:
(a) whether any restriction will be imposed on the number of vessels moving to (a) whether any restriction will be imposed on the number of vessels moving to the central part of Victoria Harbour for the purpose of watching the firework display; if so, what control measures are available to ensure the number of such vessels would not be excessive; and
(b) whether a plan has been drawn up for the dispersal of the large number of (b) whether a plan has been drawn up for the dispersal of the large number of vessels gathered in the harbour after the firework display or in the event of
unforeseen accidents?
SECRETARY FOR ECONOMIC SERVICES: Mr Deputy President, the Administration does not intend to restrict the number of vessels which may be allowed to move to the central part of Victoria Harbour for viewing the forthcoming Lunar New Year Fireworks Display but has made a number of other arrangements in order to reduce the number of vessel movements and hence reduce the possibility of marine accidents. The following
measures will be taken on the day of the display to control the congregation of vessels:
(a) a closed area, where the fireworks display barges are located, will be (a) a closed area, where the fireworks display barges are located, will be established. All vessels will be prohibited from entering this area between 2:00 pm and 9:00 pm without authorization;
(b) all scheduled ferry services using the central harbour (using ferry piers (b) all scheduled ferry services using the central harbour (using ferry piers between Causeway Bay and the Macau Ferry Terminal) will be suspended from 7:30 pm to 9:00 pm. Hong Kong/Macau and Hong Kong/China ferry services and foreign-going vessels in Victoria Harbour will be re-scheduled or diverted, as the case may be, during this period;
(c) small vessels, especially those without decking such as sampans, will be (c) small vessels, especially those without decking such as sampans, will be advised to stay away from Victoria Harbour between 7:00 pm and 9:00 pm since they are difficult to detect and vulnerable to the wash from larger vessels; and
(d) large viewing vessels operated by the ferry companies will be positioned well (d) large viewing vessels operated by the ferry companies will be positioned well to the east of the closed area to keep them away from other viewing vessels in the central harbour; and
(e) all vessels navigating in Victoria Harbour between 7:45 pm and 9:00 pm will (e) all vessels navigating in Victoria Harbour between 7:45 pm and 9:00 pm will be expected to observe a speed limit of 5 knots.
As regards the dispersal of the vessels, masters, owners and operators will be obliged to disembark their passengers at landings away from the central harbour as the public landings in the area will be closed from 6:00 pm to 8:30 pm for better crowd control on land. They will also be reminded:
(a) of the International Regulations for (a) of the International Regulations for of the International Regulations for Preventing Collisions at Sea, in Preventing Collisions at Sea, in particular, the importance of maintaining proper look-out and proceeding at safe
speed; and
(b) of the means of communication with the authorities and the use of distress (b) of the means of communication with the authorities and the use of distress signals in the event of emergency;
(c) to ensure (c) to ensure to ensure that all persons on board are familiar with the location of all that all persons on board are familiar with the location of all life saving appliances and how to use them;
(d) to ensure that all children on board wear lifejackets at all times; (d) to ensure that all children on board wear lifejackets at all times; (e) to keep a list of all passengers and crew on board; and (e) to keep a list of all passengers and crew on board; and
(f) to co (f) to comply strictly with the maximum carrying capacity of their vessels. mply strictly with the maximum carrying capacity of their vessels.
These measures have been widely promulgated. Marine Department Notices will be published in the press and issued to the relevant clubs, associations and commercial concerns. Some 30 Marine Police, Marine Department and Fire Services Department vessels will supervise orderly dispersal and respond rapidly to any unforeseen incidents.
Review on hospital services
15. MR TIK CHI-YUEN asked: Regarding the availability of hospital beds and th 15. MR TIK CHI-YUEN asked: Regarding the availability of hospital beds and th MR TIK CHI-YUEN asked: Regarding the availability of hospital beds and the construction of new hospitals, will the Government inform this Council:
(a) whether the Hospital Authority is carrying out a detailed review in these (a) whether the Hospital Authority is carrying out a detailed review in these respects;
(b) if so, what the areas of the review, actual plans and schedule of work are; (b) if so, what the areas of the review, actual plans and schedule of work are; whether delay or change will be caused to the medical development programmes which have been drawn up, for example, construction of the Tai Po Hospital and North District Hospital; and
(c) whether the Hospital Authority will be required to consult the Legislative (c) whether the Hospital Authority will be required to consult the Legislative Council, district boards and the public while carrying out the review ? SECRETARY FOR HEALTH AND WELFARE: Mr Deputy President, the answers, seriatim, are as follows:
(a) Yes, the Hospital Authority is carrying out a comprehensive review on the Yes, the Hospital Authority is carrying out a comprehensive review on the requirement for public hospital beds in the whole territory for the coming decade.
(b) This review involves an assessment of the current and future requirement for This review involves an assessment of the current and future requirement for public hospital beds and a prioritization of the Capital Works Programme for the coming decade. The review may result in changes to the scope and timing of the various projects currently in the Government's hospital development programme.
(c) On completion of the review, the Hospital Authority will recommend to the On completion of the review, the Hospital Authority will recommend to the Government the scope and programme priorities of the projects in the Government's hospital development programme. These recommendations will be processed in the
normal way and, where appropriate, due consultation will be undertaken before decisions are made.
Second Reading of Bills
PENSIONS (SPECIAL PROVISIONS) (HOSPITAL AUTHORITY) BILL
Resumption of debate on Second Reading which was moved on 4 December 1991 Question on Second Reading proposed.
DR CONRAD LAM (in Cantonese): Mr Deputy President, the Pensions (Special Provisions) (Hospital Authority) Bill 1991 was introduced into this Council on 12 November 1991. An ad hoc group was formed to study the Bill. As Convener of the ad hoc group I would like to discuss briefly for Members' consideration the scope and intent of this Bill.
This Bill seeks to provide for pension arrangements in respect of those professional and departmental staff who transferred from service under the Government to service under the Hospital Authority. It enacts the legislation necessary to ensure that civil servants transferring to the Hospital Authority can preserve or continue to earn pension benefits in accordance with the provisions of the existing pension legislation: the Pensions Ordinance and the Pension Benefits Ordinance. The intention is not to alter any of the existing statutory provisions but rather to extend the present legislation where appropriate.
The ad hoc group comprised nine members. It held three meetings, including one with the Administration. The group also wrote to concerned staff associations to seek their views on the Bill and a written representation from the League of the Hospital Services Department and the Department of Health Staff Associations was received. Staff concern was on the provisions in the pension packages which deal with Hospital Authority's administrative execution of disciplinary procedures which may lead to a staffer's dismissal from Hospital Authority and forfeiture of his
previous pension entitlements in government service. The Honourable Michael HO, a member of the ad hoc group, will soon be giving his views on this. After deliberation, members of the ad hoc group support the Bill. Members' consideration was centred on the following:
(1) technically the Bill succeeds in providing the necessary (1) technically the Bill succeeds in providing the necessary technically the Bill succeeds in providing the necessary comprehensive comprehensive statutory linking with the existing statutory provisions of the Pensions Ordinance and Pension Benefits Ordinance;
(2) Members understood that the existing Pensions Ordinance applied to all (2) Members understood that the existing Pensions Ordinance applied to all officers on transfer to statutory bodies, and not the HA staff alone;
(3) Members were also given the reassurance by the Administration that the (3) Members were also given the reassurance by the Administration that the Hospital Authority had a well-publicized appeal system to deal with disciplinary cases and dismissal of any staffer would not be slightly taken;
(4) Members (4) Members Members noted that by clause 1, the provisions contained in the Bill are noted that by clause 1, the provisions contained in the Bill are deemed to have come into operation on 1 December 1991 to validate any transfer of officers to the Hospital Authority which may have taken place before the enactment of the Bill. In this way, the staff are protected even before the Bill's enactment.
With these remarks, Mr Deputy President, I support the Bill.
MR MICHAEL HO (in Cantonese): Mr Deputy President, in the course of examining the Bill, we received from the League of the Hospital Services Department and the Department of Health Staff Associations a written submission. The league expressed the hope that transferred staff would still be entitled to the pension benefits earned during their service with the Hong Kong Government, their former employer, should
they be dismissed by the Hospital Authority. I would say that this request for amendment is indeed very reasonable.
In the present circumstances, given the inextricable link between this Bill and various other statutes on pension benefits, a transferred staffer to the Hospital Authority who happens to retire or die within the period before the present Bill is passed may not be able to get the pension benefits he/she is entitled to if the Bill founders. Since I would not want any transferred staff to be denied of their pension benefits I would not block the passage of the Bill even though I am against it.
I will abstain from voting.
SECRETARY FOR THE CIVIL SERVICE: Mr Deputy President, I am grateful to Members for their support for the Bill and for comments made this afternoon. This is a technical Bill which seeks to extend existing pension provisions to civil servants transferred to the Hospital Authority.
Some concern has been expressed that transferred staff, who may be dismissed by Some concern has been expressed that transferred staff, who may be dismissed by the Hospital Authority for gross misconduct, will forfeit their retirement benefits. Members may wish to note that the Hospital Authority has laid down clear disciplinary policies for dealing with both minor offences and gross misconduct. Procedures on gross misconduct include investigation of the alleged offences and the setting up of a Committee of Inquiry which will recommend an appropriate course of action. These principles are set out in the Hospital Authority Personnel Policies which have been well publicized among staff. Additionally, there are provisions for appeal and for decisions to be reviewed independently.
I believe these measures should safeguard the legitimate interests of staff.
At this point Mr Peter WONG, Dr LEONG Che-hung, Mr LAU Wah-sum and Prof Felice LIEH MAK declared interest as members of the Hospital Authority.
Question on the Second Reading of the Bill put and agreed to. Bill read the Second time.
Bill committed to a Committee of the whole Council pursuant to Standing Order 43(1).
CONSUMER COUNCIL (AMENDMENT) BILL 1991
Resumption of debate on Second Reading which was moved on 20 November 1991 Question on Second Reading proposed.
DR PHILIP WONG: Mr Deputy President, as convener of the Legislative Council ad hoc group to study the Consumer Council (Amendment) Bill 1991 dealing with consumer protection, I feel that I have the responsibility to protect the precious product that Honourable Members are consuming here in this Council every Wednesday afternoon, that is, TIME. With this in mind, I will try to keep my speech as short as possible, and I will speak on only three of the many issues that have been discussed by the ad hoc group which I think are comparatively more important.
First, the proposed new power for the Consumer Council to inspect immovable First, the proposed new power for the Consumer Council to inspect immovable property under clause 3 of the Bill. Realizing how important home ownership means to every family in Hong Kong, the ad hoc group has no objection to entrusting the Consumer Council with this new power. The ad hoc group was a bit concerned, however, about the circumstances under which an inspection of property will be conducted by the Consumer Council and whether the proposed amendment will itself create a right of entry into private premises. I am glad to inform Members that these concern are now over.
According to the Administration, the Consumer Council will contemplate checking saleable floor area, finishes and fittings of a complainant's property, or inspecting development projects to check accuracy of saleable areas advertised, and so on. An inspection will only be conducted upon receiving complaints and the prior consent of both the owners and the occupants has been obtained.
The Administration has also confirmed that the new power does not itself create The Administration has also confirmed that the new power does not itself create a right of entry into private premises and does not in any way purport to displace the requirement to obtain owner's consent.
The second issue concerns the new section 20 proposed by clause 5 of the Bill which seeks to strengthen the prohibition on making reference to the Consumer Council for advertisement purposes. I would like to point out that in order to satisfy itself
that the provisions of this new section are appropriate and realistic, the ad hoc group has spent a lot of time comparing the provisions of the existing and the new section 20. Questions posed to the Administration include, among others:
(a) Will the newly inserted phrase in the new section 20 "without written con (a) Will the newly inserted phrase in the new section 20 "without written consent of the Council" lead to appeal from applicants against the Consumer Council's refusals?
(b) How is the proposed maximum fine of $100,000, which represents a very (b) How is the proposed maximum fine of $100,000, which represents a very large increase over the existing maximum fine of $5,000, justified?
Thanks to the Administration, sufficient information was efficiently provided to the ad hoc group for a decision to be made and I am confident to inform Members that the provisions of the new section 20 are found to be appropriate and realistic.
The third and also the last issue which I will speak on concerns clause 6 of the Bill which seeks to update the Schedule of bodies whose goods and services do not come within the Consumer Council's jurisdiction.
The ad hoc group has noted from the Legislative Council Brief of the Bill that the Hong Kong and China Gas Company has objected to its being excluded from the Schedule. The ad hoc group is of the view, however, that if a company is not subject to any form of government control or public monitoring, it is not in any way different from other commercial entities and should therefore be brought within the Consumer Council's purview for the sake of better consumer protection. Adopting the same view, since Star TV will ultimately be monitored by the Broadcasting Authority, the ad hoc group has suggested, and the Administration has agreed, that it be added to the Schedule. I understand an amendment on this addition will be moved by the Administration later at the Committee stage.
Mr Deputy President, with these remarks, I support the motion.
SECRETARY FOR TRADE AND INDUSTRY: Mr Deputy President, I am most grateful to Dr Philip WONG and the other Members of the ad hoc group for their thorough and helpful examination of this Bill.
Dr WONG has referred to three of the more important issues discussed by the ad hoc group. I would like to confirm Dr WONG's understanding of the clarification
provided by the Administration. I would also like to confirm that I shall move an amendment at the Committee stage to add Hutchvison Hong Kong Limited, the operator of Star TV, to the Schedule.
At this point Mr Moses CHENG declared interest as partner of a firm of solicitors who act as legal advisers to the Consumer Council.
Question on the Second Reading of the Bill put and agreed to. Bill read the Second time.
Bill committed to a Committee of the whole Council pursuant to Standing Order 43(1).
Committee stage of Bills
Council went into Committee.
PENSIONS (SPECIAL PROVISIONS) (HOSPITAL AUTHORITY) BILL
Clauses 1 to 7 were agreed to.
CONSUMER COUNCIL (AMENDMENT) BILL 1991
Clauses 1 to 5 were agreed to.
Clauses 6
SECRETARY FOR TRADE AND INDUSTRY: Mr Chairman, I move that clause 6 be amended as set out in the paper circulated to Members.
Proposed amendment
Clause 6
That clause 6 be amended, in the proposed Schedule, by adding "Hutchvision Hong Kong
Limited" after "Hospital Authority".
Question on the amendment proposed, put and agreed to.
Question on clause 6, as amended, proposed, put and agreed to. Council then resumed.
Third Reading of Bills
THE ATTORNEY GENERAL reported that the
PENSIONS (SPECIAL PROVISIONS) (HOSPITAL AUTHORITY) BILL
had passed through Committee without amendment, and
CONSUMER COUNCIL (AMENDMENT) BILL 1991
had passed through Committee with amendment. He moved the Third Reading of the Bills. Question on the Third Reading of the Bills proposed, put and agreed to. Bills read the Third time and passed.
Member's motions
APPOINTMENT OF THE NEXT GOVERNOR OF HONG KONG
3.41 pm
DEPUTY PRESIDENT: We now come to Member's motions of which there are two. I propose to take a short break for the reason that on the first motion, namely, the appointment of the next Governor of Hong Kong, there is an amendment proposed to Mr Howard YOUNG's motion, that amendment being proposed by Mr Martin LEE. Additionally, Mr CHIM
Pui-chung has proposed an amendment to Mr Martin LEE's proposed amendment and his amendment will require to be debated. I propose to adjourn for a few minutes and
in that interval the Clerk will table the full text of Mr Howard YOUNG's proposed motion, the full text of the motion as amended by Mr Martin LEE's amendment and the full text of the motion as amended by Mr Martin LEE's amendment as amended by Mr CHIM Pui-chung's amendment. So Members will have the benefit of the full text of each of the three possible motions at the end of the day. At the same time, the prepared script needs to be slightly revised because of the extra amendment that will be before Council and the revised text will be likewise tabled in the interval. My final point is that Members have in their In-House agreed that as there are two motion debates this afternoon, they will limit their speeches on each of the two motion debates to two hours exclusive of the time for government speeches. I will for the benefit of all Members and as a matter of convenience arrange for the text of the letter setting out these arrangements sent to me by the Convenor of the Legislative Council In House to be tabled. So all these will be tabled for Members to read and for their benefit. We shall take a short break of about 10 minutes.
4.00 pm
DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Council will now resume.
MR HOWARD YOUNG moved the following motion:
"In view of the wide interest expressed by the public on the subject of the appointment of the next Governor of Hong Kong, this Council requests the Government to convey the views of the general public to Her Majesty's Government for consideration".
MR YOUNG HOWARD (in Cantonese): Mr Deputy President, I move the motion standing in my name on the Order Paper.
I wish to state clearly, in order to avoid illusion, that choosing a Governor I wish to state clearly, in order to avoid illusion, that choosing a Governor for Hong Kong is currently the prerogative of Her Majesty's Government. According to the Letters Patent and Royal Instructions, the Governor is the representative of the Queen to govern Hong Kong. Therefore, constitutionally, Hong Kong people have no say in the matter.
It is only when it comes to selecting the Chief Executive of the Hong Kong Special
Administrative Region that Hong Kong people will have a say in the matter. Even then, the Chief Executive will be appointed by Beijing. However, according to the Basic Law, a Selection Committee of 400 Hong Kong permanent residents shall recommend the candidate for the first Chief Executive to the Central People's Government for
appointment, prior to 1997 through local consultation or through consultation, nomination and election. Constitutionally, that will be the first time Hong Kong people will have the right to take part in and to decide on the choosing of the candidate. Admittedly, by that time, the power will still not be extensive as it will be confined to 400 Hong Kong permanent residents. Today, we only have the right to exercise our freedom of speech to express whatever views we have, but no legal right to ensure that these views will be listened to. However, I trust decision makers in the United Kingdom will note the views expressed by Hong Kong people, including those expressed by Members of this Council.
Are we overstepping the mark in debating the subject in the Hong Kong Legislative Council when Lord CAITHNESS has made it quite clear during his last trip here in response to the Honourable Emily LAU's inquiry that neither the Legislative Council nor Hong Kong would be consulted and that the Governor will be appointed by the Queen on the advice of the British Prime Minister? Is this debate useless?
My motion is in very broad terms, aiming at letting everyone speak his or her own mind. The scope of discussion can range from one extreme, that is the type of person who you think can be the Governor, to another extreme that you think the issue should not be debated in this Council at all which is also a valid view.
My constituents did not elect me because I could have a say in choosing a Governor -- in fact I do not. They elected me so that I could reflect the views of the tourism industry to the Government and monitor the work of the Government. Then why should I raise the subject for debate?
The answer is that the retirement of the Governor and the way it was announced by Her Majesty's Government are so extraordinary that wide interest has been expressed by the public. Questions have been asked, and I feel that they should be asked.
In carrying out the duty of reflecting public opinion, a Legislative Councillor has an obligation to speak his or her mind. After all, "Yee" of "Yee Wui", the Chinese characters for Council, contains the radical "Yin" meaning to speak. Whether it makes any difference to the decision or not, we at least have the right and duty to
speak. Criticisms of Her Majesty's Government's action may not be to its liking. The fact that we are speaking about it also may not be to the liking of the Chinese Government. However, we Hong Kong legislators have made oaths or affirmations that we will serve the people of Hong Kong; so we have the obligation to speak our mind.
The least I can say is that I consider it most irresponsible of Her Majesty's Government to announce the retirement of the Governor without, as traditionally, naming a successor. This has created uncertainty for the future, and also aroused suspicion that the United Kingdom is shirking its responsibility of administering Hong Kong in the final five years before sovereignty reverts to China in 1997.
Some might even suspect an attempt by the United Kingdom to create a lame duck Some might even suspect an attempt by the United Kingdom to create a lame duck image for the Hong Kong Government. Responsible people in Hong Kong do not wish to see this happen.
Even though many of us have expressed the hope that the Governor and the United Kingdom will treat Hong Kong's interest as a matter of priority, the statement that naming a successor will have to await the result of the election in the United Kingdom holds local feelings up to mockery. Obviously Her Majesty's Government accords
priority to its own politics and domestic issues, and choosing a Governor for Hong Kong is merely a small sideshow in comparison.
Recently, there have been plenty of comments on the motives of Her Majesty's Government's announcement and much speculation on the choice of candidate. These comments, to a great extent, are highly unfair to the Governor and his successor. Some even comment that the Governor has worked hard but achieved nothing. I think this is quite groundless. In fact, according to a number of surveys, Hong Kong people are well satisfied with the Governor. These debates, however well intended and
interesting, are in a way quite unfair to both Sir David WILSON and his successor.
The MacLehose years saw many reforms, in particular in housing. During Sir Edward YOUDE's administration, a lot of time was spent on negotiations, resulting in the signing of the Joint Declaration. Progress in housing and the Joint Declaration are tangible achievements. I firmly believe that after some years when we look back at Sir David's performance, we will find that he has done many things beneficial to Hong Kong. Investment in tertiary education and Hong Kong's relation with China are two examples.
Manpower, I think, is the only resource we have. Some years later, we will feel that we have been fortunate that the Government has made the decision to invest heavily in tertiary education.
As 1997 draws near, I believe that more and more Hong Kong people are aware of the need and the importance to strengthen our communications and liaison with China and to improve our relation. In this respect, Sir David has been able to bring it to people's attention, albeit many might not always like to be reminded of this. I am sure that in future we will realize that he is a man of foresight.
I feel that the debate is focussing too much attention on guessing who or what I feel that the debate is focussing too much attention on guessing who or what sort of person will be the next Governor. It may not be very fruitful. Firstly, we are not familiar with the candidates from Britain and, secondly, any speculation will be unfair to the successor. I consider that we should direct our energies to examining what we expect the new Governor to do for Hong Kong. As regards what we expect him or her to do, each one of us may hold a different view. The findings of a recent opinion poll indicate that the people of Hong Kong hope that the future Governor can do a good job in five areas, which in order of importance are (1) people's livelihood; (2) smooth transition; (3) strengthening of relation with China; (4) investors' confidence and (5) democracy. Of course, any one has the right to object to this order of importance.
I for one pay particular attention to smooth transition. It is because while livelihood is very often the foremost concern, it is not exclusive to Hong Kong. People in all countries and territories over the world also aspire after improvement to their livelihood, including social welfare, economy, anti-inflation, housing and transport. I believe that the people of Hong Kong will have the same aspirations beyond 1997. As for investors' confidence, relation with China and democracy, they are not subject to a definite time frame.
However, when it comes to smooth transition, there is a time frame, that is, 30 June 1997. Whether a smooth transition can be achieved then is everybody's concern. As such, I put it as my number one requirement.
I hope that we will be able to hear different views during this debate. As far as I know, there are also proposed amendments to my motion. For instance, a political body is going to move an amendment on the basis of their long-cherished objectives. I do not object to the things they ask for, but I doubt whether these encompass all
our requirements. And their priorities, are they the same as mine? I do not think so. I heard just now that the amendment will be followed by another one to be moved by the Honourable CHIM Pui-chung. I find that Mr CHIM's amendment motion also touches on the issues of smooth transition and the Basic Law which I have mentioned just now. Of the two amendments, I consider Mr CHIM's more substantial. Yet, I still maintain my original motion since it is so broadly worded that people will have a chance to speak out freely and express their views without constraint.
Thank you, Mr Deputy President.
Question on Mr Howard YOUNG's motion proposed.
DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Mr Martin LEE has given notice to move an amendment to the motion. Mr CHIM Pui-chung has also given notice to move an amendment to Mr Martin LEE's proposed amendment. Both amendments have been circulated to Members and have also been tabled. I shall first call upon Mr LEE to move his amendment to the motion. After Mr LEE has moved his amendment I shall then call upon Mr CHIM to move his amendment to Mr LEE's proposed amendment. After Members have debated Mr CHIM's amendment, we will vote on his amendment first. I now call Mr Martin LEE to speak and to move his amendment.
MR MARTIN LEE moved the following amendment to Mr Howard YOUNG's motion: To add after "consideration" the following:
", and stresses that it believes the next Governor should be a person who is committed to defending the Joint Declaration, establishing a democratic political system in Hong Kong, working on behalf of all citizens to improve our standard of living, and placing the interests of Hong Kong first and foremost at all times."
MR MARTIN LEE (in Cantonese): Mr Deputy President, in principle, the United Democrats of Hong Kong (UDHK) do not object to holding a motion debate on the question of the next Governor. However, we think that the content of the debate must have a substantive meaning. Unfortunately, the motion which Mr Howard YOUNG moves today does not have any concrete meaning. It can only be regarded as an empty gesture.
Not only that, if we pass Mr YOUNG's motion, we would give the British Government the wrong impression that Hong Kong's concern with the question of the next Governor stops here and that the Legislative Council does not even have a stand at all except a response out of courtesy.
Basically, what the colonial government is required of in Mr YOUNG's motion is Basically, what the colonial government is required of in Mr YOUNG's motion is no more than sending some of the local press-cutting information to London. What the people of Hong Kong wish to see is certainly not this kind of perfunctory act of clipping newspapers. Rather, they would like to see this Council convey to the British Government in a responsible manner their expectations for the next Governor and convey to the British Government the stand of this Council clearly. This is a responsibility which this Council cannot shirk.
The Governor is the leader of the Hong Kong Government, and he is also a public servant of the people of Hong Kong. In addition, the Governor's remuneration is borne by Hong Kong and not British taxpayers. While we may not decide who is to be the next Governor, we must actively voice our opinions on the requirements for the
governorship. And such opinions will not constitute any restraint on Britain's constitutional power in appointing a colonial Governor in the capacity of a sovereign state.
Members in this Council will definitely have diverse views on the requirements for the next Governor of Hong Kong. My amendment to the motion, therefore, is confined to an inclusion in broad terms of the various basic principles we commonly accept. These principles are in fact nothing but the basis of many other requirements. I will briefly explain the stance of the UDHK towards these four principles. Later, Dr Conrad LAM and Dr YEUNG Sum will explain these principles in greater detail.
The first principle we put forward is that the new Governor must defend the The first principle we put forward is that the new Governor must defend the Sino-British Joint Declaration. I must point out with emphasis that the people of Hong Kong found the Joint Declaration acceptable when it was signed in 1984 because at that time they believed that the Joint Declaration would be strictly abided by and that all the undertakings for the people of Hong Kong could be realized. Unfortunately, the Joint Declaration has constantly been undermined ever since 1984. The recent agreement on the Court of Final Appeal is an example. It shows that the Chinese and British Governments have failed to go strictly by the Joint Declaration and yet time and again have claimed that they have fully complied with the Joint Declaration in letter and in spirit. The people of Hong Kong are caught in between,
with no way to seek redress. As Members of the Legislative Council, we indeed have the responsibility to reflect the views of the people of Hong Kong. Therefore, we demand that the new Governor must defend the Joint Declaration. This is the only way that Hong Kong can sustain its success.
Our second principle is that the new Governor should be able to establish a democratic political system in Hong Kong. In fact, the British Government promised the people of Hong Kong such a system as early as 1984. This Council has repeatedly urged the British Government to ensure that their promise will be honoured and in 1989, an OMELCO consensus was reached regarding the democratization of Hong Kong. Up to now, we still insist that we should proceed in the direction of the OMELCO consensus. The direct elections to the Legislative Council held last September clearly demonstrated the enthusiastic pursuit of democracy of the people of Hong Kong. The people of Hong Kong have already made their historic choice in the realization of democracy. The establishment of a democratic political system in Hong Kong is not only the honouring of promise and assumption of responsibility by the British Government to the people of Hong Kong, but also an indisputable right of the people of Hong Kong. Any attempt to take away or evade establishing such political right is an enormous insult to those people of Hong Kong who have strived hard to fight for democracy and actively participated in voting in the elections. Therefore, we demand that the new Governor must secure a greater degree of democracy for Hong Kong.
Our third principle is that we wish the new Governor would improve the standard of living of the people of Hong Kong. In fact, according to a recent survey mentioned by Mr Howard YOUNG just now, it has been revealed that the majority of the people consider that the new Governor's top priority should be making good efforts to improve the people's standard of living. Therefore, we think that the new Governor, whilst promoting our future economic development, should also make sure at the same time that improvements can be made to the standard of living of the people of Hong Kong.
Our fourth principle, which is also the most important one, is that in our op Our fourth principle, which is also the most important one, is that in our opinion the new Governor should be committed to placing the interest of Hong Kong first and foremost at all times. In the past, when dealing with issues such as the shouldering of financial burden in respect of the Vietnamese boat people, the new airport project or the agreement on the Court of Final Appeal, there emerged a phenomenon that whenever there was a conflict of interest between Hong Kong and Britain, the interest of Hong Kong was always sacrificed.
In fact, this is also a conflict we are faced with. How can we ensure that a In fact, this is also a conflict we are faced with. How can we ensure that a colonial government -- one which is appointed by the British Government and is required constitutionally to be accountable to the British Government only --will safeguard the interest of Hong Kong people? Even if the British Government appoints a new Governor whom we deem perfect, the problem will not be resolved right away because it involves the issue of acceptability and accountability of the colonial government as a whole. Therefore, I hope this Council will make use of this opportunity to reflect clearly to the British Government our stance on this issue. Eventually, as stated in the 1984 White Paper on Representative Government, the British Government must "develop progressively a system of government the authority for which is firmly rooted in Hong Kong and which is able to represent authoritatively the views of the people of Hong Kong and which is more directly accountable to the people of Hong Kong".
In order that the Hong Kong Government can administer Hong Kong effectively and In order that the Hong Kong Government can administer Hong Kong effectively and win the support and trust of the Hong Kong people, a system must be instituted in Hong Kong under which the Government is held accountable to the people. It is only by so doing can we ensure the smooth transition of the system of government in Hong Kong in 1997 and beyond. This is because the Joint Declaration has clearly stated that after 1 July 1997 the executive authorities of Hong Kong shall be accountable to the legislature and that "Hong Kong shall be administered by Hong Kong people and shall enjoy a high degree of antonomy". If this system is not established in Hong Kong before 1997, smooth convergence will be virtually out of the question. In that event, 1997 would see chaos and instability.
Therefore, I hope that the British Government will take this opportunity of the Therefore, I hope that the British Government will take this opportunity of the change of governorship to review the policy towards Hong Kong and establish a government which is able to better represent the people of Hong Kong and is accountable to the people of Hong Kong. On the other hand, in order to show clearly that the Governor will be committed to placing the interests of the people of Hong Kong first and foremost at all times, I hope that when the new Governor is sworn in, he can pledge his allegiance to the people of Hong Kong instead of pledging allegiance to Her Majesty the Queen as previous governors of Hong Kong did.
These are my remarks (on my amendment to the motion).
Regarding Mr CHIM Pui-chung's counter amendment to my amendment, the UDHK support his objectives of ensuring the smooth transfer of sovereignty and promoting the social
stability and economic prosperity of Hong Kong. However, I find it difficult to understand his call for "establishing a democratic system in accord with the Basic Law and the actual circumstances". During the last Session of this Council, a motion moved by Mr Allen LEE, which registered disappointment at the undemocratic Basic Law, was passed on 28 February 1990. In addition, another motion moved by me which urged the Chinese and British Governments to amend, at a suitable time, the relevant clauses of the Basic Law according to the recommendations in the OMELCO "Comments on the Basic Law (Draft)", was passed by this Council on 4 April 1990. At that time, this Council had already reached a consensus, that is, we had to strive to amend the Basic Law in accord with the wishes of the people of Hong Kong.
I do not know whether the Basic Law mentioned in Mr CHIM's unexpected counter amendment is one which is acceptable to this Council, which is subject to amendment in accordance with the wishes of the people of Hong Kong and which would speed up the development of a democratic system in Hong Kong. If it is so, the UDHK will give their full support. But if the Basic Law mentioned by Mr CHIM is the one which imposes restriction on the system of government in Hong Kong and which cannot be amended, then it apparently runs counter to the consensus reached by this Council, and we cannot accept that. I hope Mr CHIM could clarify this point. I do not mean that we cannot overturn the decisions made by this Council in the past, but in doing so we must be in line with the spirit of the proceedings. Our motion debate today is on the question of the next Governor of Hong Kong. Mr CHIM really should not take this opportunity to move a counter amendment in an attempt to overturn the decisions made by this Council in the past without giving our colleagues sufficient time for preparation. This is unfair to our colleagues. If some other Councillors also take the opportunity of today's debate on the new governorship of Hong Kong to move counter counter
amendment, demanding that the next Governor of Hong Kong .....
MR CHIM PUI-CHUNG (in Cantonese): Mr Martin LEE is attacking my motives of proposing an amendment. I should like him to clarify, Mr Deputy President.
MR MARTIN LEE (in Cantonese): Speaking in Cantonese as I did, I do not understand why Mr CHIM failed to understand it. I only wanted him to clarify his point with regard to the Basic Law. Which set of Basic Law was he referring to? Was he referring to a piece of Basic Law that can be changed? I did not attack his motives. I respect and appreciate his humour.
MR CHIM PUI-CHUNG (in Cantonese): Mr Deputy President, I am to move an amendment in accordance with Standing Orders. As a long serving Member of this Council, Mr Martin LEE should be well familiar with Standing Orders; if not, he should, given his position as a barrister, buckle down to studying them.
DEPUTY PRESIDENT: We cannot have personal remarks of that nature in this Chamber, Mr CHIM. You have not taken a point of order that I can uphold and I will invite Mr Martin LEE to continue. You will have of course your chance to reply fully to Mr LEE.
MR MARTIN LEE (in Cantonese): .... should abolish the policy of importation of labour introduced by the present Governor, then would that be regarded as fair?
Therefore, if Mr CHIM does not clarify the point mentioned above, Mr Deputy President, I would call upon the colleagues in this Council to vote against the counter amendment moved by Mr CHIM.
Mr Deputy President, with these remarks, I conclude my speech. Question on Mr Martin LEE's amendment to Mr Howard YOUNG's motion proposed.
DEPUTY PRESIDENT: As Mr CHIM has given notice to move an amendment to Mr Martin LEE's amendment, I now call upon Mr CHIM to move his amendment.
MR CHIM PUI-CHUNG moved the following amendment to Mr Martin LEE's amendment: To delete all that follow "Joint Declaration" and substitute the following: To delete all that follow "Joint Declaration" and substitute the following:
", ensuring a smooth transfer of sovereignty in 1997, promoting social stability and economic prosperity in Hong Kong and establishing a democratic political system for the territory in accord with the Basic Law and the actual circumstances, working on behalf of all citizens to improve our standard of living, and placing the interests of Hong Kong first and foremost at all times."
MR CHIM PUI-CHUNG (in Cantonese): Mr Deputy President, first I would like to take this opportunity to thank our Governor, Sir David WILSON, for his service and devotion to the territory in the last five years or so. I am not boot-licking; it is the actual fact. Given the present political circumstances, the success in maintaining
stability and prosperity is already a commendable achievement. I sincerely hope that our present Governor will, in the months before he leaves office, continue to lead his officials in discharging their duties faithfully in the service of Hong Kong people.
The Honourable Howard YOUNG's motion, which fits the trend and pays full respect The Honourable Howard YOUNG's motion, which fits the trend and pays full respect to public opinion, does not only embody the spirit of modern-day democracy but also gives full expression to the efficiency and effectiveness of our legislature. The Honourable Martin LEE however proposes in his amendment to add the following to the Honourable Howard YOUNG's motion, which he has described as without substance:
"stresses that it believes the next Governor should be a person who is committed to defending the Joint Declaration, establishing a democratic political system in Hong Kong, working on behalf of all citizens to improve our standard of living, and placing the interests of Hong Kong first and foremost at all time."
I do admire the able leadership of Mr Martin LEE as head of the United Democrats but allow me to say that Mr LEE's amendment only gives full expression to the views of the United Democrats. In order to reflect more accurately the full range of views of the public, I am therefore proposing before this Council an amendment to Mr LEE's amendment motion which will preserve Mr Howard YOUNG's original motion yet rewording Mr LEE's amendment as follows:
"stresses that it believes the next Governor should be a person who is committed to defending the Joint Declaration, ensuring a smooth transfer of sovereignty in 1997, promoting social stability and economic prosperity in Hong Kong and establishing a democratic political system for the territory in accord with the Basic Law and the actual circumstances, working on behalf of all citizens to improve our standard of living, and placing the interests of Hong Kong first and foremost at all times."
The four points relating to the requirements the next Governor should meet as proposed in Mr Martin LEE's amendment essentially represent the views of the United Democrats. In this respect I would say that Mr LEE has basically fulfilled his duty
towards his party. But I am afraid that some Members will find it hard to agree to Mr LEE's amendment. What is glaringly absent from the four points, which accentuates the amendment's lack of general representativeness, is the regard to a smooth transfer of sovereignty. Members should be aware that, according to the public opinion survey Mr Howard YOUNG has mentioned in his speech, ensuring a smooth transfer of soverignity ranks second among the expectations Hong Kong people have of the next Governor. So I really do not understand why the United Democrats should leave out this point. Moreover stability and prosperity are what make Hong Kong tick; they form also the hope most cherished by the Hong Kong public; why then should the United Democrats ignore this point? Democratic system or structure can be very wide in scope with no set definition as to its bounds. The United States of America has its unique system of democracy; the same applies to the United Kingdom. I believe the future Governor of Hong Kong will, in accord with the Basic Law and the actual circumstances, establish for the territory a democratic political system which should well reflect the wishes of the people of Hong Kong. I do hope that the United Democrats will, in a spirit of resignation perhaps, support my amendment and I am looking forward also to the substantive support of other Members of this Council. Regarding the democratic
political structure which Mr Martin LEE mentioned a while ago, I would say that this should not be the subject of today's debate. Were it to be true that the Basic Law would not be in the interest of the people of Hong Kong, could I ask why the Honourable Martin LEE, while he was still a member of the Basic Law Drafting Committee, did not bring this to the attention of other members of the Committee? Was there any official record of this point having been raised given that Mr LEE did raise it at the meetings of the Basic Law Drafting Committee. It would be a gross dereliction of duty if Mr LEE waited until this present moment to voice his objection to the Basic Law. On the other hand, if his objection were not heeded, the rejection could well be good evidence of the impracticability of his views in the context of actual circumstances.
Mr Deputy President, the appointment of the Governor for Hong Kong is in fact the prerogative of Her Majesty's Government. We, Members of the Hong Kong Legislative Council, should under no circumstances deprive Her Majesty's Government of its right; indeed we cannot so deprive no matter how hard we may try. We should only voice the concern, on behalf of the people of Hong Kong, that Her Majesty's Government should fulfil its duty and obligation as a sovereign government and that it will understand and be sympathetic to the needs of the people of Hong Kong.
Mr Deputy President, with these remarks, I move to amend the amendment proposed by Mr Martin LEE.
Question on Mr CHIM Pui-chung's amendment to Mr Martin LEE's amendment proposed.
MRS SELINA CHOW: Mr Deputy President, I rise to support Mr Howard YOUNG's motion. I do so because it offers me the latitude in scope to express my views freely on the issue without being hampered by the arbitrary selection of specifics which may not fully represent the sentiment of our community.
Before each and every speaker in this debate launches into his or her own list of qualities which he or she may regard as essential or desirable in our next Governor, perhaps we should ask why Hong Kong is placed in such a predicament. Have our people called for a change of Governor at this rather critical period of our development when we have just experienced our first ever direct election and are still not quite settled in the workings of a new style legislature? Have our people voiced discontent over the successful conclusion of the airport talks? Have our people complained about the freedom we have all enjoyed in demonstrating our anguish and sorrow for the events of June 4 in spite of the extremely sensitive displeasure displayed by Beijing? Are our people not generally appreciative of the difficult job that the Governor had to steer Hong Kong through in the last four or so years and would have been quite happy to see him continue in the job for sometime yet?
The rumour that there was a campaign staged in London to bring about a change of appointee has been circulated for over a year. It was said that some British businessmen took the view that their interests have not been adequately looked after by this Governor, and pressure has been brought to bear for a replacement who may be more sympathetic to British interests in Hong Kong. If such rumours were true, then this speaks more loudly than anything else that this Governor has not compromised the interests of Hong Kong in favour of British interests as some critics have us believe.
But then in spite of all the political and financial ups and downs of Hong Kong during his term of office, Sir David WILSON has enjoyed the support and goodwill of this community. He might have been the target of harsh criticisms both in this Council and in the media over a number of issues, but one could not but be impressed by the immense popularity he enjoys wherever he visits. It has often amazed me to see how people here warm up to him and vice versa. He has been accepted as one of us here, and the robust way he spoke for and on behalf of Hong Kong after June 4,
especially in fighting for British passports, travelling the world to rebuild investors' confidence, and taking the initiative to re-establish a dialogue with Beijing, have demonstrated his integrity, courage and commitment to Hong Kong.
Since the announcement of his undated departure, this community has been Since the announcement of his undated departure, this community has been uncharacteristically vocal about its dissatisfaction with Britain over the way she has handled the whole affair. The announcement has been regarded to be premature since no choice of successor has been made. Hong Kong just could not understand why it was necessary to create this kind of uncertainty by making half a decision and leaving the other half unsettled. Many of us also resent the way that someone who has served Hong Kong wholeheartedly has been so shabbily treated. The conferment of a Peerage may be viewed as a generous gesture in the United Kingdom but it is
considered, in Hong Kong, as well earned but hardly enough to make up for the embarrassment the announcement has caused.
From the wide range of views that have been voiced ever since the announcement, From the wide range of views that have been voiced ever since the announcement, it is clear that Hong Kong is not particularly keen to have a change of Governor yet. And to us, there is no relevance between the General Election in the United Kingdom and the change of Governor in Hong Kong. The speculation as to whether a politician, a diplomat or a general is preferable is even more puzzling to Hong Kong. Surely, the starting point must be the job itself and what it requires. The governorship of Hong Kong must be one of the most complex jobs of its kind, demanding tremendous political and administrative skill while familiarity with Hong Kong must be a
preference, given the intricacies of circumstances and the very limited time he would have to settle into the job. After all, the entire term, presuming he stays until 1997, is only five years and those five years will be highly pressurized, bearing in mind the constitutional changes that are likely to take place, the massive
infrastructural developments that have been planned, and the internal and external forces that affect Hong Kong.
In choosing the new Governor the British Government must satisfy itself and Hong Kong that the voice of Hong Kong will be heard, and must show its sensitivity and responsiveness to the views of our people. Let us hope that the next announcement that the British Government will make on the governorship will be a well considered one that would not only eradicate some of the harm done by the last one but would be welcome here as a decision that would serve Hong Kong well in the next five years.
The key question arising out of this must be whether the final choice is good
and acceptable from the Hong Kong perspective, whether the new appointee will serve the entire period until 1997, and whether a local appointee, either now or further down the line, is envisaged in the scheme of things, given the advantage such an arrangement may offer to smooth transition.
I am grateful to Mr Howard YOUNG for proposing the motion in the first place; it gives us an opportunity to speak our mind on the one subject which will have a major influence on Hong Kong's future.
I am also thankful for this chance to pay tribute to Sir David WILSON for his dedication and service to Hong Kong through a very difficult period of our history. I hope the words of Theodore ROOSEVELT will help put his enormous contribution to Hong Kong in the right perspective:
"It is not the critic who counts, not the man who points out where the strong man stumbled or where the doer of deeds could have done better, the credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena, whose face is marred by dust and sweat and blood, who strives gallantly, who errs and comes short again and again, who knows the great enthusiasms, the great devotions, and spends himself in a worthy cause; who at the best, knows in the end the times of high achievement, and who at the worst, if he fails, at least fails while daring greatly, so that his place shall never be with those cold and timid souls who know neither defeat nor victory."
MRS RITA FAN: Mr Deputy President, at lunch time today I thought we might not have a debate after all because a former Member of the Legislative Council told me that he knew the name of the next Governor. I asked enthusiastically for the name and he said the new Governor would be named "Soon". So here I am, taking the floor and speaking in this debate.
I had not intended to speak in this debate. It was not until after I heard that Mr Martin Lee would be moving an amendment and actually saw and read his amendment that I intended to speak. I had been prepared to support Mr Howard YOUNG's motion because I thought that would not only give an opportunity to Members of this Council to express their views but also allow the people of Hong Kong, who after all are the most important people in Hong Kong, to express their views which will be reflected to the British Government which is going to make the decision. But after I had sight of Mr Martin LEE's amendment and found the wording of the amendment not sufficiently comprehensive, I felt obliged to speak to make a few comments.
My first comment is about our present Governor. Members might have learned from our recent survey that our Governor scored 67 out of one hundred percent. To a schoolmaster, it is Grade B, and that means it is far better than average. So in my view, if the new Governor is as good as the incumbent or can achieve even a higher score at the end of his service, then I think many people including myself will be satisfied, irrespective of whatever criteria set by politicians, commentators and the others.
Secondly, I would like to comment on the survey which was conducted by a newspaper on what the people of Hong Kong consider as the most important thing that the next Governor should do. This survey has been referred to in the speeches of Mr Howard YOUNG and Mr Martin LEE, and interesting enough, 59.8%, that is nearly 60%, said that they were more concerned about livelihood, law and order, housing and so on. I
presume these are the standard of living and livelihood. While 35.6% felt that it was important to have a smooth transition in 1997, 23.4% thought that the relation with China was important. As for the pace of democracy, it had 30.2%. Of course, the survey does not necessarily mean that it is sacrosanct. However, it shows what the people of Hong Kong are looking for and that to the people of Hong Kong, smooth transition and relation with China are matters of great weight. I assume that smooth transition means that there will be no confrontation and that there should be a
political system in accord with the Basic Law. Yet Mr Martin LEE's amendment does not incorporate such important elements as indicated by the findings of the survey. However, I am glad that Mr CHIM Pui-chung's amendment has included them. Mr Deputy President, if I am to choose between the two, I would go for Mr CHIM's amendment. And, if I am to vote, I think I would vote for Mr Howard YOUNG's original motion.
Lastly, I would like to say something about the Joint Declaration. The Joint Lastly, I would like to say something about the Joint Declaration. The Joint Declaration, in fact, has it clearly stated that the British Government is responsible for the economic prosperity and social stability of Hong Kong. So it is the responsibility of whoever appointed the next Governor to ensure that Hong Kong is economically prosperous and socially stable. And whatever move made by the British Government or the next Governor that does not meet those two basic criteria would not be in accord with the Joint Declaration.
With these words, Mr Deputy President, I would support Mr Howard YOUNG's motion. With these words, Mr Deputy President, I would support Mr Howard YOUNG's motion. I would vote against Mr Martin LEE's amendment and I would accept Mr CHIM Pui-chung's amendment to Mr Martin LEE's amendment.
MR PANG CHUN-HOI (in Cantonese): Mr Deputy President, I support the motion moved by the Honourable Howard YOUNG but now would like to speak for the amendment motion by the Honourable Martin LEE as well. I shall give my views on the appointment of the new Governor. These views should be conveyed through the Legislative Council to the British Government.
Although I agree that we should debate on the new governorship in this Council, I believe that Members who speak do so in the hope that their views will be accepted by the British Government. As it is so, we must be fully aware of the objective circumstances and take a realistic point of view when we speak. There is no point in indulging in empty talk about the qualities of the new Governor. I trust that no one will speak today just for record purpose. This will be too meaningless. We hope that our views will be fully accepted. Therefore, we should refrain from being too high-sounding.
I think all of us will subscribe to the view that the new Governor should safeguard the interest of Hong Kong people. But what actually is the interest of Hong Kong? Different people may have different interpretations: some may think that it means democracy and freedom; some may take it to mean improved relation with China; the man in the street will perhaps yearn for a curb on inflation; employers will hope to continue doing business and making money in Hong Kong; and employees will look for better job opportunities and reasonable wage increases.
Different people may take different stands on this issue. But to put it bluntly, Different people may take different stands on this issue. But to put it bluntly, I believe only when Hong Kong can maintain its prosperity and stability will everybody be satisfied. In other words, only when the interests of all parties concerned are taken into account and when the candidacy is acceptable to all can Hong Kong remain stable. The situation in Hong Kong today is such that we must balance the political interests of China and Britain while at the same time ensuring that our existing structure can continue to operate smoothly and effectively. In view of this, I think it is of paramount importance that Hong Kong should continue to maintain its
prosperity and stability.
Mr Deputy President, I am not prepared to comment on what requirements there ought to be for the next Governor of Hong Kong, because these are all subjective and parochial. What I hold out for the new Governor is that whatever his background,
he must be able to maintain the territory's prosperity during his tenure of office while at the same time looking after the interest of Hong Kong when this is in conflict with Britain's. But I must emphasize that when talking about the interest of Hong Kong, one must be free from any bias and genuinely take into account the livelihood and the interest of the people of Hong Kong. Meanwhile, the feelings and livelihood of the lower middle classes must not be treated with indifference because they are the broad social base on which our stability can truly depend.
To be sure, one cannot entirely brush aside principles when there is prosperity and stability at stake. But principles are not just something to talk about and one will certainly look to colleagues in this Chamber to bring about their gradual realization. I trust that Honourable Members in this Council are all aware of what Hong Kong people think and what they want. Such being the case, I urge that we should go forward hand in hand to have this accomplished since too much empty talk will get us nowhere.
With these remarks, Mr Deputy President, I support the Honourable Howard YOUNG's motion and also the amendment by the Honourable Martin LEE.
DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Before I call the next speaker, I would just point out that if we continue at this speed of delivery we shall not finish this debate in two hours.
MR ANDREW WONG (in Cantonese): Mr Deputy President, I shall try to watch my time. I support Mr Howard YOUNG's motion. Recently at a forum there were comments, and in fact I was one of the speakers, that the British Government's arrangement was not fair to Hong Kong, nor to Sir David WILSON. It is unfair to Hong Kong because it has been announced that the Governor is to retire and yet will remain in post for some time without a successor named. In the meantime, Hong Kong will be in a state of vacuum, and it is not known whether such a situation will last a long time or a short time. The leadership may not be weakened, but there will be many conjectures about the reasons for the arrangement. What is the background? Is it compelled by British commercial interests, the interests of Britain itself or the need to ensure the success of the Conservative Party at the coming General Election? All these will create uncertainties and arouse unfavourable problems in Hong Kong during the period. Then it is unfair to Sir David WILSON because people are now wondering if his
leadership is in doubt or if he has done something wrong. However, from my personal
analysis, from 1987 to the present time, Hong Kong has come through a lot of hardships. He is therefore not a Grade B Governor but a Grade B+, Grade A- or even Grade A Governor. Everyone is now talking about the requirements and qualities of the next Governor, and our debate is also on this subject.
I am not too pleased with the motion itself. We are discussing the next Governor. In other words, we do not trust the incumbent. At this motion debate, I would like to say something about the British arrangement and whether it is appropriate. If the arrangement is not appropriate, then we should lodge a strong protest with the British Government instead of discussing the next governorship. Today's motion, its amendment, and amendment to amendment, are indeed unprecedented. There has never been an amendment to an amendment before.
Mr Martin LEE has been talking about counter-amendment. But it is wrong. It is only an amendment to an amendment. This is different from counter-amendment. If the amendment departs from the original motion, then the Deputy President will rule that it is against the Standing Orders. The right thing to do then is to cast a negative vote, and not to propose an amendment.
An interesting issue has arisen on this occasion: an amendment to an amendment and where will it end? It may not be possible because of the time limit. Mr Deputy President, I suppose advance notice has been given for the amendments. But an amendment is made to an amendment and if there are numerous amendments, a lot of problems will crop up as the motion debate on this occasion. The problem is that if I cannot reject the conditions proposed by you and if you cannot reject those proposed by me, at the end of the day all the acceptable conditions will be included in the motion. These will become the requirements of the future Governor of Hong Kong. If there are so may conditions laid down, there will be only one candidate who can qualify for the job, and that must be God and not a human being, or it must be a man who is tailor-made by us as our Governor. I therefore consider that there is not much significance in the present debate. Even my youngest daughter, who was born in the year of the Monkey, recognizes that. When we went to Sunday School, there was a story from the Bible in which Jesus said "The last would become the first and the first, the last." Thereupon she said: "There will be no end to this numbers game." Is it what we wish to do now? If it is, then it may be better for us to have a mathematics lesson!
I have considered whether or not to put forward an amendment in this debate. With
the amendment, the wording after the words "In view of" would be changed and "the Governor ....." would be added. It would be couched in the same terms as Mr CHIM's. (I am not shining his shoes). If you consider that something is not quite right in the present arrangement, then the motion should be amended to read "This Council, being dissatisfied with the British arrangement, urges that the Governor should
remain in office." Mr Deputy President, with these remarks, I support the motion.
MRS MIRIAM LAU (in Cantonese): Mr Deputy President, under British rule for over 150 years, Hong Kong has had many Governors, but the people of Hong Kong have never shown so much concern over the appointment of Governor as is now the case. It is because the next Governor could well be the last before sovereignty over Hong Kong reverts to China. He or she will have to assume, during this latter part of the transitional period and at a critical turning point in the history of Hong Kong, the onerous duty of bridging over from the past to the future. He or she must ensure a smooth
transition towards 1997 for Hong Kong. The way he/she accomplishes this historic mission, with Hong Kong's interests always in the foremost of his/her consideration, will be of paramount importance to Hong Kong's development, both before and after 1997.
In view of the unprecedented level of concern of members of the public over the appointment of the next Governor, I must express my unqualified support for Mr Howard YOUNG's motion. This Council should ask the Administration to relate to Her Majesty's Government the views of the general public so that they will serve as reference material for Her Majesty's Government in the process of selecting a new Governor for Hong Kong. It is true that Her Majesty's Government is not bound to carry out the wishes of Hong Kong people in making such a decision, but we must have the right to express our views, the Administration must have the responsibility to convey them, and Her Majesty's Government must also give them careful consideration. The advantage of Mr Howard YOUNG's motion lies in its greater capacity to accommodate and reflect views from different quarters. Only in so doing will the varied requirements or expectations the public has of the new Governor be met. Mr Martin LEE's amendment sets out a number of conditions the new Governor must fulfill. I feel that it would seem to exclude other views and would fail to serve the purpose of urging the Administration to reflect the full range of views of Hong Kong people.
Mr CHIM Pui-chung's amendment motion serves to demonstrate the restrictive, Mr CHIM Pui-chung's amendment motion serves to demonstrate the restrictive, narrow nature of Mr Martin LEE's amendment motion, though Mr CHIM's own amendment
motion is encumbered by the same flaw. He adds a few more conditions, but the accommodative spirit is still lacking. Therefore, I cannot support either Mr LEE's or Mr CHIM's amendment motion. I believe we should adopt a motion that imports a wider capacity to encompass and accommodate in order to reflect more fully the views of the general public. I support Mr YOUNG's original motion.
DR LEONG CHE-HUNG: Mr Deputy President, many many years ago, as a fresh medical graduate I had the misfortune, or perhaps, you can say, the fortune of requiring a surgical operation myself. Whilst lying in a hospital bed, waiting as if to be "slaughtered", the following thoughts did flow through my mind:
To start off, I feel aggrieved that my parents brought me to this world without my consent to suffer this surgical feat. I feel frustrated that I have no say on the type of illness that I have to face. My only hope is that the surgeon who is to carve me up would only be doing it for my interest and my interest alone.
Many many years after, Hong Kong people are facing a similar situation: The Joint Declaration was signed without Hong Kong people's input, let alone consent. We are being tossed from one sovereign to another, not by choice nor by will, like an unwanted pair of old shoes.
We in Hong Kong swallowed all these except for a few grumble. Pragmatism has always been the order of the day for Hong Kong people. And in the last few years, after the signing of the Joint Declaration, we have tried to make the best out of a bad situation.
But alas at this final hour, we are told that we will have to change our commander-in-chief without so much as to be told who our next leader will be -- a move that puts Hong Kong people in "limbo" and shows how unconcerned Her Majesty's Government is towards Hong Kong.
Mr Deputy President, to the 5.5 million people who call Hong Kong their home, who have established roots here, who have built up this territory and who cannot leave or rather who do not want to leave Hong Kong, their only hope which hangs on a thin string is to have a leader for the next five years who will be with them, who will only work with their interest at heart and who will help to deliver them with their rights intact as promised to 1997 and beyond.
This, Mr Deputy President , then is our pledge and I do not think it is too much to ask for from Her Majesty's Government who has been so eager to hand us over from a capitalist regime to a communist one.
Mr Deputy President, the Joint Declaration and the Basic Law did promise "Hong Kong people ruling Hong Kong". Surely it is not too early to start training Hong Kong people how to rule Hong Kong and to understand the intricacy of the whole government.
I call for the appointment of a Hong Kong citizen, at least as a Deputy Governor, so that he/she can in the next few years learn the art of governorship to ensure that the spirit of the Joint Declaration can be set in concrete.
Mr Deputy President, I support the amendment motion put forward by the Honourable Martin LEE, but cannot and I will not be able to support the further amendment put forward by Mr CHIM. For as a Member of this Council who has been a strong party to the OMELCO consensus I cannot agree to the pace of democratization in accord with the Basic Law as it falls far short of the expectation of this Council and that the people of Hong Kong have endorsed. I also urge Members of this Council, especially those who stood by the OMELCO consensus, to do likewise; and that is to reject Mr CHIM's further amendment.
With these words, Mr Deputy President, I support Mr Martin LEE's amendment motion.
MR JIMMY McGREGOR: Mr Deputy President, why did the British Government choose to announce the retirement of our present Governor when it did? Why did the British Government not announce his successor at the same time and the approximate date of the assumption of post by the new Governor? Who, in fact, will be the new Governor and what is his background? Does the present British Government have someone else in mind with both nominees having to wait until after a general election in Britain?
There are at present no answers to these important questions. The lack of There are at present no answers to these important questions. The lack of information is alarming and, frankly speaking, disgraceful and insulting to Sir David WILSON and to the people of Hong Kong. How can any British Government not understand the anxiety that exists in Hong Kong about our future and the crucial role played by the Governor in the maintenance of public confidence? Who on earth in the British Government decided to announce Sir David's retirement and not his successor? I
believe that this was a real blunder and that it has seriously reduced Sir David's standing and credibility during his remaining months of office. It also suggests that the British Government is insensitive to the very delicate situation in Hong Kong where six million people ponder their future. It seems clear that China had nothing to do with the British decision; so it must be assumed that the Foreign and Commonwealth Office provided the impetus if not perhaps, as yet, the name of the successor.
The guessing game has begun and Sir David must find some amusement in hearing The guessing game has begun and Sir David must find some amusement in hearing of the many fine qualities necessary for a Hong Kong Governor. He can perhaps take comfort in the fact that he has a solid record of achievement behind him and does not have to measure himself against the God given standards of excellence that we shall no doubt set out today for our new Governor.
I have only one criterion to suggest. It is that the new Governor, like the one we have now, shall have only the interest of Hong Kong at heart. It does not really matter if he is a Sinologist, biologist or trapeze artist so long as he cares only for Hong Kong. It would also be very helpful if he were a liberal.
Mr Deputy President, with these words, I support the motion as amended by Mr Martin LEE.
MR FREDERICK FUNG (in Cantonese): Mr Deputy President, before I give my speech, I would like to raise two points which are related to Mr Howard YOUNG's and Mr CHIM Pui-chung's motions. I have always felt that it is a waste of time for Members of this Council to spend hours giving speeches and debating on motions when such motions are noncommittal and give no guidance or advice whatsoever to the Hong Kong Government. Secondly, a noncommittal motion will not bring out different points of view towards an issue. Even when such a motion is carried, the standpoint of the Council remains obscure. Thirdly, an adopted or unadopted motion on policy or administration
unrelated to public finance or legal matters is to the central government only a reflection of the Council's opinions. Such a motion has of course its influence and carries weight but is not a binding decision. So, I have always thought that noncommittal motions are not worth debating. Mr YOUNG's motion is to me a noncommittal one for he has not mentioned anything about what we should expect in respect of the announcement or appointment of the new Governor of Hong Kong. He is merely asking the Government to convey the views of the general public to the British
Government. In fact, I understand that the Hong Kong Government is regularly sending news clippings and commentaries to the British Government. The Hong Kong Government will do it anyway, whether we have this motion or not. So, why should we spend so much time discussing the motion to call on the Government to convey the views of the public to Britain for consideration?
As regards the amendment moved by Mr CHIM Pui-chung, I find that part of it, especially the first part, is acceptable. However, the latter part is open to question; in fact, the amendment to Mr Martin LEE's motion even gives rise to more problems. The amendment moved by Mr CHIM Pui-chung carries the requirement of establishing a democratic political system in accord with the Basic Law and the actual circumstances. Basically I find that there is nothing wrong with it. However, the people of Hong Kong had expressed diverse views on the political system and its development in particular during the discussion of the Basic Law; in fact I myself hold a different view on the timetable for the development of political system. Although there is the concern that before 1997 the people of Hong Kong may not have sufficient channels under the local legal framework to have the Basic Law revised, no one can deny that we can still express our views on the Basic Law and pass them to China in the hope of having the Basic Law revised by the People's Congress or even by the Special Administrative Region Government upon its establishment in 1997. Originally Mr LEE's amendment mentioned the need for the new Governor to work for the people's livelihood; in other words the new Governor should be working on behalf of all citizens to improve their living standard. But this requirement seems to have been omitted in the amendment moved by Mr CHIM Pui-chung. I cannot see in his amendment any mention of the improvement of living standard. I feel that it is most significant for the motion to attach importance to people's livelihood and indeed that is the kind of motion I expect to see. Now I am going to put forward my views and state my position in respect of the appointment of the new Governor.
If you ask now what, in my opinion, should be required of the new Governor, I would take a practical approach, trying first to find out what problems Hong Kong is facing and in what ways the general public are being troubled. I believe we all admit that Hong Kong is suffering from a high inflation rate and aggravating problems associated with the uneven distribution of wealth. The living standard of the
general public is on the downturn. Although Hong Kong now has the lead among the "Four Little Dragons", when compared with western countries, we are still some way behind. With the inflation rate rising to a two-digit figure, the living standard of the grassroots has dropped. The Government, however, has not taken any remedial
measures to redress the situation. Worse still, it has approved the importation of more workers from other places, thus seriously undermining the employment opportunities and job security of local workers. At a time when livelihood of the general public is at risk, measures have been taken by the Government to protect the interests of some British companies and large consortia so that with the rich resources of the community, they could make more profits. All these reflect that the Hong Kong Government has not reckoned with the problems concerning the livelihood of the people, so much so that in future the rich may become richer still whilst the poor may become more impoverished. Regarding the basic requirements the new Governor should meet, I would think that the foremost and essential thing is that he or she must place due regard on the livelihood of the people of Hong Kong and is experienced in solving related problems. We strongly believe that the most senior official of the territory must meet this requirement and treat the people's livelihood as an important issue. If he or she cannot understand the problems of the people, cannot solve the problems and has no experience in solving the problems, he or she is not a good Governor. Even an excellent diplomat, a China expert or an all-rounder is not comparable to somebody who can maintain a stable society and raise the standard of living of the people. It is believed that many people feel there is nothing they can do. They feel that they have no say, but can only hope that the new Governor will turn out to be a good one. However, as Members of the Legislative Council, especially during the transitional period in the run-up to 1997, we should take the initiative and help them shake off such ideas and fight for a Governor who meets our requirements. It is of great importance that Hong Kong people behave positively and have initiatives during the transitional period. I therefore would like to suggest that the Hong Kong Government should conduct a scientific opinion survey to find out from the people of Hong Kong what they consider should be required of the new Governor and reflect these opinions to Britain so that the British Government knows what kind of Governor the people of Hong Kong want. This will not only keep Britain informed of the opinions and concerns of the people of Hong Kong, but also stimulate discussions among the public through the survey which will serve as a good opportunity for civic education.
To sum up, I have two points to make on choosing our new Governor. Firstly, the To sum up, I have two points to make on choosing our new Governor. Firstly, the Governor must be a person who places due regard on the livelihood of the people of Hong Kong and he or she must have experience in solving problems in relation to people's livelihood. Secondly, I request the Government to conduct a scientific opinion survey to collect the opinions of the Hong Kong people on the new Governor, and reflect the opinions to the British Government. With these remarks, I support
Mr Martin LEE's motion.
MR SIMON IP: Mr Deputy President, as Hong Kong approaches 1997, few issues can be more important than its leadership during the next five years.
Of the many responsibilities of the new Governor, none can be more important than continuing to encourage Hong Kong people to take responsibility for themselves and allowing them to govern Hong Kong.
The new Governor must ensure that the promise for Hong Kong's autonomy as provided in the Joint Declaration and the Basic Law is respected. He must be a person of vision who can translate that promise into reality.
The new Governor must promote Hong Kong's interests even though they may conflict with those of Beijing or London. He must build a relationship between Hong Kong and China of mutual understanding, trust and respect. He must remove China's doubts and suspicions of Hong Kong's motives and actions as Hong Kong asserts its high degree of autonomy.
The new Governor must maintain the initiatives in the areas of environmental protection, improved educational opportunities and social welfare programmes while promoting the economic well being of Hong Kong.
What skills and experience must an individual possess to meet the high expectations of the Hong Kong people and to manage successfully the challenging responsibilities that lie ahead?
First and foremost the new Governor must be an effective and skillful leader. His leadership skills will be invaluable in gaining the trust of Hong Kong people and carrying their hearts and minds across the threshold of transition to a future with China. He must have influence in London and respect in Beijing.
He must possess a flair for diplomacy, politics and administration. He must sense the changing local political landscape and know how to handle a more democratic and at times adversarial legislative body without reducing the efficiency of governance. He must be able to unite different interest groups at times of conflict in pursuit of the common good.
He should possess extensive knowledge about Hong Kong, China and the region. He should possess extensive knowledge about Hong Kong, China and the region. This will allow him to be immediately effective without a long learning curve.
The skills required to face the tasks ahead will be difficult to find in any one individual. In choosing a new Governor, the search must be wide. The skills are not just those of a career diplomat, or of a respected Sinologist, or of a politician. The new Governor must be a convincing figure at a business conference, at a market place or in the Great Hall of the People.
Whether our new Governor be appointed from Britain or Hong Kong, whether he be Whether our new Governor be appointed from Britain or Hong Kong, whether he be a diplomat, a politician or an administrator, he must possess the skills and qualities required to lead Hong Kong successfully towards 1997.
Mr Deputy President, I prefer the general wording of Mr YOUNG's motion to the more specific wording of Mr LEE's or Mr CHIM's proposed amendments. Being specific in wording in my view is unnecessary and has the disadvantage of being limiting at the same time. It also leads to unnecessary disagreement and debate over wording. The general wording of Mr YOUNG's motion allows all Members of this Council to express their views as they wish which views will then be conveyed to Her Majesty's Government if the motion is passed. I support Mr YOUNG's motion.
DR LAM KUI-CHUN: Mr Deputy President, Paragraph 1 of Article 7 of the Letters Patent defines the role of the Legislative Council as one of providing the Governor with advice and consent in making laws for the peace, order and good government of the Colony. That does not include offering advice to the Queen on the choice of person to be Governor. Therewith I believe this motion for debate including the amendments is outside the ambit of this Council.
DR CONRAD LAM (in Cantonese): Mr Deputy President, to put into effect the Sino British Joint Declaration and to set up a democratic political system are tasks which the Governor of Hong Kong should undertake. The Communist regimes in Eastern Europe and the Soviet Union, after decades of practice, have ultimately turned out to be a failure and crumbled. This has proved that a political system without a human base is full of shortcomings and incompatible with the times. From a nationalistic point of view, the return of Hong Kong to China after 1997 is an extremely happy event. The Chinese can finally join their big family. However, Hong Kong people, who are used to a capitalist way of life, will find it very difficult to accept or adapt to the change if they suddenly have to live under an outdated socialist system. It was
to solve this problem that the Sino-British Joint Declaration was instituted. In 1984, the Joint Declaration was happily accepted by the majority of Hong Kong people because they believed that the Chinese Government and the British Government would implement the Joint Declaration they had jointly signed. What happened later was that we saw both Governments giving interpretations on issues touched upon in some grey areas of the Joint Declaration and this has given us a feeling that the primary spirit of the Sino-British Joint Declaration, that is "one country two systems and Hong Kong people ruling Hong Kong" is seemingly fading away. No doubt we are all striving for the stability and prosperity of Hong Kong. Our main aim in fighting for a democratic political system is to enable the public to have greater
participation in their own affairs under fairer circumstances. A democratic political system and stability and prosperity complement rather than contradict each other. If we conduct an opinion survey, I am sure it would show that the absolute majority of the citizens of Hong Kong are in favour of maintaining the capitalist lifestyle and are against a dictatorial government. Hence, the new Governor must be able to implement the Sino-British Joint Declaration impartially, introduce a democratic political system, improve people's livelihood, enhance the transparency of the government and strengthen the confidence of the people of Hong Kong. I believe citizens expect the new Governor to be able to speak to them from the bottom of his heart. This would avoid repeating history as after the Sino-British Memorandum of Understanding was signed, the Governor still said no progress had been made on the airport project.
Today, having heard the three motions in this Council, I have the feeling that Today, having heard the three motions in this Council, I have the feeling that we can draw a parallel between choosing a governor and choosing a wife. Regarding Mr Howard YOUNG's motion, it seems as if any woman would do for a wife and that one may freely choose and freely take what one likes. For the United Democrats, the wife must also conform to four principles apart from the requirement that she has to be a woman. Mr CHIM Pui-chung wants to add one more condition, and that is the consent of her rich and powerful mother. Everyone has the freedom to express his criteria for choosing a wife; therefore I shall not speak against any motion. However,
regarding the establishment of a democratic political system in accord with the Basic Law and the actual environment as mentioned by Mr CHIM Pui-chung, there are two points that I would like to discuss with him. Firstly, regarding the actual environment, in the event of the recurrence of the June 4 incident with over a million citizens going to the New China News Agency to protest and demonstrate, would there be
suggestions that the Governor should go together with them or head them? This is the actual environment. Of course, when Mr LU Ping visits Hong Kong, it will be
another actual environment, and in actual fact such an actual environment has become a reality. The other point is the relation between the Joint Declaration and the Basic Law. As a matter of fact, the Joint Declaration was made prior to the Basic law. The Joint Declaration is a foundation. Therefore, I believe that we would have attained our major principle if we require the future Governor to be able to carry through the Joint Declaration. A point to be noted is that the Governor is the
representative of the Queen in Hong Kong and directs the administration of Hong Kong. The Basic Law can be amended through the National People's Congress. Suppose the Basic Law is amended again and again, does that mean the Queen's representative will dance elegantly to the tune of music played by the Chinese Government? Mr Deputy President, members of the United Democrats have principles. That is why Mr SZETO Wah and Dr YEUNG Sum are still single. I believe members of the United Democrats will support the principled motion of our leader Mr Martin LEE.
MISS EMILY LAU: Mr Deputy President, I rise to speak in support of Mr Martin LEE's amendment to Mr Howard YOUNG's motion. I do not support Mr YOUNG's motion because I regard it as too vague and empty. I think we should use today's motion debate to send a clear and strong message to London of our concern and displeasure at the way that the whole matter has been handled.
I do not support Mr CHIM Pui-chung's amendment because I hope the political system laid down in the Basic Law regarding the number of directly elected seats in the Legislative Council can be increased to more than 20. I for one, Mr Deputy President, have always supported one hundred percent democracy.
First of all, Mr Deputy President, I want to express my feeling of frustration and concern at the way that the British Government has handled the retirement of the present Governor. The announcement was made by Number 10 Downing Street on New Year's Eve without naming a successor. It is difficult to imagine that a business
corporation would handle the change of chief executive in such a cavalier and thoughtless manner. Thus it is amazing and insulting that the governorship of Hong Kong should be handled in this way. Consequently, it is not surprising that the British Prime Minister's decision has caused confusion and dismay.
I regard London's unfortunate handling of this important matter as the epitomy I regard London's unfortunate handling of this important matter as the epitomy of the British Government's lack of concern and regard for the interests of the people of Hong Kong. In cases of conflicts of interests -- and I regard this current
controversy as one of them since I think Mr John MAJOR's decision was probably prompted by domestic political reasons in the United Kingdom -- we can see that the British Government has no hesitation in sacrificing the interests of the Hong Kong people.
When I was in London last week, Mr Deputy President, British Government offic When I was in London last week, Mr Deputy President, British Government officials and Members of Parliament told me they were surprised by Hong Kong's negative reaction. This indicates they do not have their finger on Hong Kong's pulse, nor did they bother to ascertain the local situation before they made such an important decision.
British Government officials and Members of Parliament also confirmed that the next Governor will not be appointed until after the British General Election. This indicates that the political parties, and the major ones, meaning Labour and the Conservatives, I think have already got their own candidate in mind, and of course it is not the same person so that is why they cannot make the appointment now; and they have agreed that whoever wins the election will make the appointment.
British Government officials and Members of Parliament told me, if we think the present arrangement is unsatisfactory, we may be in for a nasty surprise because if the British General Election results in a hung parliament, and there is every chance of this coming about, the coalition government may want to go to the country again very soon in order to try to get a majority in Parliament. Should that happen, Hong Kong will most likely remain in limbo for goodness knows how many more months until the political scene sorts itself out.
I also got the distinct impression in London that both major parties intend to use the post of the Hong Kong Governor to pension off a senior politician whom they do not want to appoint to the Cabinet, or to an ex-politician who may have some political advantage to offer a particular political party. I have good reason to believe that my fears are well founded and if that is the case, Hong Kong is in danger of ending up with a Governor who knows little about the Colony and cares even less.
I want to use today's occasion to voice my anger and revulsion at Hong Kong being treated in such an irresponsible manner.
When I was in London, Mr Deputy President, I was asked whom I would like to see as Governor. I replied that I would like to see a local person, directly elected by the people of Hong Kong. I support such an arrangement to select our Governor now, and I hope that after 1997, the people of the Special Administrative Region of Hong Kong can elect their Chief Executive by a universal suffrage.
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.