1964 — Page 76

130

HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL

HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL

Page 76 of 312

131

present when the said Mr. RAFEEK was supported as a candidate by a resolution of the Kaifong Research Council. Is this, in any way, an indication that Govern- ment supports Mr. RAFEEK or the S.C.A. Department supports Mr. RAFEEK in the coming Urban Council by- election?

THE SECRETARY FOR CHINESE AFFAIRS replied as follows:-

I was grateful for the opportunity which this question offered, to give, in the first place in this Council, an unqualified assurance that there is no question of Government, of the Secretariat for Chinese Affairs, or of any officer in the Secretariat for Chinese Affairs either supporting or oppos- ing the campaign of any public-spirited person who may consider standing for election to this Council.

I was, however, surprised at having seen yesterday an incorrect extract from a personal letter of mine on this subject which had apparently been released to the Press. This was done without my permission, which I could not of course have given in any case before to-day's Council meeting. I think that the Council is also entitled to know that that letter of mine contained one item not included in my reply to-day—and that that item was my suggestion that Mr. BERNACCHI might care to put down an appro- priate question.

I now turn to a brief explanation of the cause of some apparent misunderstandings that have prompted Mr. BERNACCHI's question.

This Spring, as is customary, the Chairmen of all the 28 lead- ing Kaifong Associations arranged to pay a series of calls, in a body, on each Kaifong Headquarters in turn so as to develop closer personal contacts in the pursuit of their very widespread work for and services to the people of Hong Kong. These 28 Chairmen also particularly asked that, when they made their courtesy Spring calls on Hong Kong Island Kaifong Headquarters, the Assistant Secre- tary for Chinese Affairs for Kowloon should join their party in order, they said, that he should not get into the habit of seeing things too much from a purely Kowloon point of view. (Laughter). Similarly, the Assistant Secre- tary for Chinese Affairs primarily concerned with co- operating with Kaifong Associations on the Island was asked if he would accompany the Kowloon visits. The Happy Valley and Canal Road Kaifong Association, of which Mr. Solomon RAFEEK is the current Chairman, was

of course one of the ones to be visited and there, as else- where, many topics of general interest were talked about. They included, not unreasonably on that occasion, refer- ences to the possibility of their immediate host offering himself for yet further public service on and through this Council. The Assistant Secretary for Chinese Affairs who was present, correctly refrained from making any com- ment for or against this.

The other cause of possible misunderstanding to which Mr. BERNACCHI has referred was the occasion when the Kai- fong Research Council, which consists of all 28 Kaifong Chairmen, agreed to support Mr. RAFEEK's possible can- didacy. Secretariat for Chinese Affairs' officers were present, by invitation, as guests at that meeting of the Research Council. This is a normal occurrence which has proved itself very useful to all concerned in providing a way of liaising directly in the tackling of all manner of practical social problems. What my officers could not foresee on this particular occasion was that a fellow- Chairman of Mr. RAFEEK's would propose and receive unanimous support for Mr. RAFEEK's candidacy as an Elected Member. When that occurred they took the only possible course of remaining silent and neutral. Their presence at the meeting, and their participation in other discussions on matters of public welfare, should not be taken as implying association with 27 Kaifong Chairmen's views with regard to the forthcoming Urban Council by- election.

MR. BERNACCHI:-Mr. Chairman, first, let me make a personal statement, which I am entitled to do under some Standing Order, as to the first part of the Secretary for Chinese Affairs' answer to the question. The original text of the letter from the Secretary for Chinese Affairs has always remained in my chambers. There were no copies made and I did not know that the contents had in any way been released to the Press. But, of course, the letter was not marked "confidential" and was not actually marked "personal", so I had shown it, and/or read the contents of it, to a number of persons. The Organ- izing Secretary of the Reform Club has general authority to make press releases, but I am going into the way that a part of the text of this letter was released in the Chinese Press later. Nevertheless, I would like to express my regrets to the Secretary for Chinese Affairs on his obvious embarrassment and confirm that he did indeed suggest this question by me at this meeting to-day.