Page 38 of 107
60
Standing Order No.
10(14)
HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL
Present Wording
When the Chairman is speaking to a motion under debate any Member rising to a point of order may, if he wishes, seek the opinion of the Vice-Chairman on the point of order and the Vice-Chairman shall thereupon tender his opinion direct to the Chairman. If the Vice-Chairman be absent the opinion may be sought from the next senior Official Member present.
Amended Wording
Delete in toto, with consequential renumbering of (15), (16), (17), (18), (19)”.
CHAIRMAN: The motion on the Standing Orders of this Council was proposed and seconded at the last meeting and stood adjourned to this meeting in accordance with Standing Order 24. Members are now invited to speak on the Motion.
MR. A. DE O. SALES- I am glad that the Standing Orders have been revised. The changes now made are certainly an improvement.
When I was first appointed to this Council and was given a copy of the Standing Orders to read, I found certain provisions rather awkward and somewhat out of step with modern practice.
I need not confess in this Council, to be sure, that at that time I derived some satisfaction from the exercise to which I was addicted in my first year: testing the various sections of Standing Orders to see how they would work out in practice. However, Mr. Chairman, I now realize that in so doing I may have been the cause of some chagrin to you and your predecessors in the chair. Need I say that such mortification was caused most unwittingly? And also that the thought now mortifies me, like the proverbial parent, even more? On reflection I am consoled, as you must be likewise, by the conviction that it was all done for a very good cause: to achieve a better understanding between the Chairman and the Members or, as some will prefer rather bump- tiously, between Government and the representatives of the people.
Last year at the Annual Debate I asked that the Standing Orders be overhauled. This has now been carried out satisfactorily by the appropriate Select Committee. They have now become more precise and businesslike as they ought to be. Yet the rights and the privileges of members are in no way restricted; on the contrary, they are expressed in more accurate terms. Nevertheless, these Standing Orders are not the law of the Medes and Persians; to be efficient, they should be reviewed and simplified from time to time.
HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL
61
I find it hard not to speak my mind on the time-limits allowed for speeches on main motions and amendments. Candidly, I think they are far too generous and could well be curtailed.
Even for the Annual Debate the allowance of twenty minutes is ample and permits Members to cover much ground. The only exception of 24 minutes on the last occasion proved the rule, Mr. Chairman. For an ordinary occasion there is hardly the need for us to provide for more than ten minutes at the very most.
To make my point, Mr. Chairman, I hope I will be forgiven if I consult my own experience in this Council. In the last administrative year, when I introduced seven motions at our monthly meetings, I spoke for an aggregate of less than 15 minutes with an average of below 2¼ minutes for each occasion. Thus, only 11% of the allotted time was used to explain the aim and purpose of my motions. Yet they were all adopted, perhaps, as some would like to suggest, more for this reason than for their importance to the community, as I would like to think.
Anyway, in examining these Standing Orders, I am simply appalled by the possibility of 22 Members exercising their right in a debate to speak for a total of nearly 7½ hours. Of course, the position becomes worse if someone moves an amendment at the end. Furthermore, there is nothing in Standing Orders really to prevent the right of reply from becoming a filibustering device. This veritable Councillors' Nightmare could come to pass.
May I then suggest that the Select Committee take note of my remarks and consider them in the months ahead?
With these remarks, Mr. Chairman, I have much pleasure in supporting your motion.
CHAIRMAN:- I have the right of reply, but all I wish to say is Mr. Sales' remarks will be conveyed to the appropriate Select Committee.
The question was put.
The Motion was carried unanimously.
Resumption of the following motion by Chairman, Urban Council:
"That this Council accepts the Statement of Progress and Policy tabled on 7th April, 1959, and in particular endorses the summary of the Council's main aims for the year 1959-60 as set out in the final paragraph of the Statement."
Page 38 of 107
107
UJE
Page 38 of 107
Page 38 of 107
60
Standing Order No.
10(14)
HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL
Present Wording
When the Chairman is speak- ing to a motion under debate any Member rising to a point of order may, if he wishes, seek the opinion of the Vice- Chairman on the point of order and the Vice-Chairman shall thereupon tender his opinion direct to the Chair- man. If the Vice-Chairman be absent the opinion may be sought from the next senior Official Member present.
Amended Wording
Delete in toto, with con- sequential renumbering of (15), (16), (17), (18), (19)”.
CHAIRMAN: The motion on the Standing Orders of this Council was proposed and seconded at the last meeting and stood adjourned to this meeting in accordance with Standing Order 24. Members are now invited to speak on the Motion.
MR. A. DE O. SALES-I am glad that the Standing Orders have been revised. The changes now made are certainly an improvement.
When I was first appointed to this Council and was given a copy of the Standing Orders to read, I found certain provisions rather awkward and somewhat out of step with modern practice.
I need not confess in this Council, to be sure, that at that time 1 derived some satisfaction from the exercise to which I was addicted in my first year: testing the various sections of Standing Orders to see how they would work out in practice. However, Mr. Chairman, I now realize that in so doing I may have been the cause of some chagrin to you and your predecessors in the chair. Need I say that such morti- fication was caused most unwittingly? And also that the thought now mortifies me, like the proverbial parent, even more? On reflection I am consoled, as you must be likewise, by the conviction that it was all done for a very good cause: to achieve a better understanding between the Chairman and the Members or, as some will prefer rather bump- tiously, between Government and the representatives of the people.
Last year at the Annual Debate I asked that the Standing Orders be overhauled. This has now been carried out satisfactorily by the appropriate Select Committee. They have now become more precise and businesslike as they ought to be. Yet the rights and the privileges of members are in no way restricted; on the contrary, they are ex- pressed in more accurate terms. Nevertheless, these Standing Orders are not the law of the Medes and Persians; to be efficient, they should be reviewed and simplified from time to time.
HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL
61
I find it hard not to speak my mind on the time-limits allowed for speeches on main motions and amendments. Candidly, I think they are far too generous and could well be curtailed.
Even for the Annual Debate the allowance of twenty minutes is ample and permits Members to cover much ground. The only excep- tion of 24 minutes on the last occasion proved the rule, Mr. Chairman. For an ordinary occasion there is hardly the need for us to provide for more than ten minutes at the very most.
To make my point, Mr. Chairman, I hope I will be forgiven if I consult my own experience in this Council. In the last administrative year, when I introduced seven motions at our monthly meetings, I spoke for an aggregate of less than 15 minutes with an average of below 24 minutes for each occasion. Thus, only 11% of the allotted time was used to explain the aim and purpose of my motions. Yet they were all adopted, perhaps, as some would like to suggest, more for this reason than for their importance to the community, as I would like to think.
Anyway, in examining these Standing Orders, I am simply appalled by the possibility of 22 Members exercising their right in a debate to speak for a total of nearly 71⁄2 hours. Of course, the position becomes worse if someone moves an amendment at the end. Furthermore, there is nothing in Standing Orders really to prevent the right of reply from becoming a filibustering device. This veritable Councillors' Nightmare could come to pass.
May I then suggest that the Select Committee take note of my remarks and consider them in the months ahead?
With these remarks, Mr. Chairman, I have much pleasure in sup- porting your motion.
CHAIRMAN:-I have the right of reply, but all I wish to say is Mr. Sales' remarks will be conveyed to the appropriate Select Committee.
The question was put.
The Motion was carried unanimously.
Resumption of the following motion by Chairman, Urban
Council:
"That this Council accepts the Statement of Progress and Policy tabled on 7th April, 1959, and in particular endorses the summary of the Council's main aims for the year 1959-60 as set out in the final paragraph of the Statement."
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.