1967 — Page 178

330

HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL

the relations between the Government and the people. This need is recognized, I should say, by both the Government and the people interested in the future of Hong Kong.

The Government must not be complacent about what it has done and, if I may sound a note of warning here, it must face the reality that in spite of the unswerving support given to the Government in time of trouble, the people in this community are not always in agreement with all government policies. There is, in fact, a great deal of dissatisfaction, particularly from the poor, and the relationship between the Government and the people is not entirely harmonious.

In my opinion, the lack of communication between the Government and the people has long been and still is the basic evil in our present form of the Government, and I should like to discuss today one of the ways this poor communication may be improved—a simple, inexpensive but important way which has often been discussed but always ignored and yet is capable of improving very effectively the relationship between the Government and the people. I refer to the need for reform of civil servants' attitude and behaviour towards the general public—their lack of courtesy and a true spirit of public service which in turn tends to give rise to corrupt practices.

I do not believe that I need to cite any specific examples to substantiate my accusation that the manners of some civil servants, particularly those who are in frequent contact with the general public, are impolite and quite often contemptuous. The impression given to the public by these civil servants often creates resentment and tends to bring, very unfortunately, the entire civil service into disrepute and widen the gap between the Government and the people. In my opinion, the Government we have in Hong Kong, with all its weaknesses and shortcomings, is basically a sound and healthy one. It has, with the co-operation and industry of the people of Hong Kong, achieved in the past 20 years more than, I would say, any country in the South East Asian Region, if not in the world. It has successfully solved the many and terribly complex problems which Hong Kong alone could have faced. In order to illustrate my point, all I have to do here is to quote some statistics relating to the population and industrial growth in the post-war period. Our population expanded at an astonishing rate from 600,000 in 1945 to 3.8 million. Against this population explosion, our industry grew from a total of 1,203 registered and recorded industrial undertakings in 1948 to a total of 11,180 in September 1967. Our exports increased from $765 million in 1946 to $7,563 million in 1966. Resettlement housing accommodating a total of over 1 million persons has been provided. Although there is still plenty to be done, one must admit that the Government and the people have done an admirable job for which considerable credit must be due to the Government. This being so, is it not a pity to see the good image of the Government being impaired by a number of irresponsible officers through their unhelpfulness, rudeness, and haughtiness?

HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL

331

fulness, rudeness, and haughtiness? The man in the street looks upon the Government as one comprising thousands of clerks, messengers, policemen, inspectors, nurses, and what have you. They do not have much opportunity to come into contact with senior administrators. What matters to them most is the treatment they get from the junior officers who, after all, form the bulk of the civil service, and the attitude of these officers accounts to a large extent for the popularity or otherwise of the Government as seen through the eyes of the man in the street. If this is the case, how could a citizen think highly of the Government when, after a visit to a Government department, he feels that he is rudely treated and has not been given the minimum courtesy and assistance which a citizen is entitled to have from a Government officer? How could a citizen feel that the Government is for the people if he cannot obtain the services needed by him and genuinely provided by the Government merely because of the unfriendliness and unco-operation of the officer dealing with his request? How could a citizen have a good impression of the Government if all he has in mind about the Government is one full of unpleasant and angry faces who do not, in the least, appear to be willing to help when the public comes forward for advice? Also, how could the relationship between the Government and the people be improved if not a single word of apology comes from the mouth of a Government officer after he has kept a member of the public waiting for hours before seeing him? I can go on, Sir, listing circumstances of this kind, but I suppose what I have said is more than capable of illustrating the points I would like to put across.

What then is the reason for the discourteous attitude of the civil servants? The answer to this is not an absolute one, but I venture to suggest that the root of the problem lies in the fact that many Government officers do not have pride in their jobs. They have neither a sense of devotion nor a spirit of public service. They consider their jobs as nothing other than a means of making a living. They do not have a sense of belonging to the community and do not have any idea whatsoever of the important role they can play, no matter how junior they may be, in the promotion of good relations between the Government and the people. To improve all these is, of course, not the sole responsibility of the Government, but the joint responsibility of the Government, parents, teachers, and, in fact, the responsibility of everyone of us in our community.

At this juncture, it is only fair for me to point out the other side of the picture in the relations between the Government and the people. Despite my criticism of the civil servants, I must say that the blame does not go to them alone. There are times at which members of the public are clearly inconsiderate, demanding, and sometimes unjustifiably rude to the civil servants. People of this kind are particularly common among those who consider themselves "important" and expect to be given special treatment whenever they call at a Government department. Obviously, this is most unfortunate and should be resisted strongly.

Page 178 of 259