HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL
which will bring cars and people from point A to point B without interruption. As a start, one such highway may be introduced from Star Ferry Pier and Yau Ma Tei Vehicular Pier in Kowloon to the Lion Rock Tunnel passing over Salisbury Road, Chatham Road for the former and Jordan Road, Gascoigne Road for the latter joining at Princess Margaret Road and continuing over Waterloo Road to the tunnel entrance. This will eliminate or combine with several existing flyovers which are no more than a series of bumps with congestions still occurring at the several major junctions of Waterloo Road.
The Numbering of Floors in a Building in Chinese
Now, I turn to my last subject today, the Chinese numbering of floors in a building, which is a constant source of confusion, inconvenience and time-wasting to the local Chinese population. Anybody whose mother tongue is Chinese or who is a linguist in the Chinese language knows only too well the annoying fact that the English 1st floor of a building may mean the Chinese 1st floor or the 2nd floor. Therefore, when the address of a company is given as being on the 5th floor of a building in Chinese to an inquirer, the latter has either to ask whether it is the 5th floor or numeral 5 meaning the English 5th floor; or to find out the exact location after arriving in the building. This applies to office, domestic, industrial and all other buildings alike. It is obvious even to the uninitiated how much time is unnecessarily wasted. This situation, which has existed for years, need not have occurred and can in fact be easily corrected by official action.
I have no strong personal preference as to calling the English 1st floor the Chinese 1st floor or 2nd floor. However, I do feel that the numbering of floors in Chinese should be standardized in all buildings in Hong Kong.
(Mr. Peter C. K. CHAN arrived at this point).
The Commissioner of Rating and Valuation, being the Competent Authority for the numbering of houses, perhaps not the Competent Authority for numbering of floors may look into this matter. As it concerns the Chinese population, it would be wise to solicit their opinion before making a decision. In any case, this is a relatively simple matter that will not, I trust, require months of deliberation before action is taken. Or, do we have again to wait until the wider use of Chinese in official business becomes a reality?
Mr. Chairman, I support the motion. (Applause).
MRS. C. J. SYMONS:- Mr. Chairman, I should like to preface my remarks this afternoon by thanking you and members of your staff for the very efficient and friendly way in which you have helped me personally, both within this Council chamber and on the many occasions you have provided me with information I needed. I am equally grateful to my colleagues, the Unofficials, for being so patient with me.
HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL
This is only my second Annual Debate so I'm neither disillusioned nor resigned: not disillusioned because some good must come when over 20 men and women have set their minds to some of the problems of our city; nor resigned to the assumption that nothing ever happens after the Annual Debate despite the flights of oratory, thanks to Mr. RAFEEK, in 2 languages, or words of wisdom.
There is nothing particularly meritorious in what I shall have to say; no one has any monopoly of unique correctness or clairvoyance; and one can only do one's best. Perhaps I speak only because I must.
On
So much for my motive - now for the topics that interest me. On the distinct understanding that there is a comprehensive range of subjects within one's legitimate grasp on such an occasion, for in the words of a fellow-councillor "You are allowed to talk about anything", which is very tempting, it is my intention to concentrate on three aspects of our work for youth in this city. One - the question of providing legislation for children under the age of six in child care institutions, appears to be in the words of an old song - "nobody's baby". The second, a comprehensive scheme for post-primary education is not within the purview of this Council, but it is a subject very dear to me. The third - recreation and leisure is strictly speaking our business, and I contend, an area of activity that may be further developed.
(Dr. Denny M. H. HUANG left at this point).
Last year I suggested that a Youth Select Committee should be set up, and I never anticipated that within a year I'd ask for a "Baby Select Committee". Seriously, can someone, somewhere in Government, look into the whole question of the needs of a quarter of a million children under the age of six. And not just consider, but act. We may or may not claim to be a civilized city, but to me it is almost shocking that no Government department is responsible for the registration, inspection and general overall policy with regard to profit-making crèches or nursery schools. I agree with Government's contention that no large-scale aid to kindergartens and day nurseries can be considered in the near future. I know that discussions are apparently going on about an increase to the $10 now allowed per child per month in the 40 or so non-profit making nurseries that now cater to 6,000 poor children.
I know that legislation is being contemplated governing standards in child care institutions, and I agree that all this is not as simple as it may appear. But, I for one am not satisfied with the present state
241
Page 167 of 241
0
314
HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL
which will bring cars and people from point A to point B without interruption. As a start, one such highway may be introduced from Star Ferry Pier and Yau Ma Tei Vehicular Pier in Kowloon to the Lion Rock Tunnel passing over Salisbury Road, Chatham Road for the former and Jordan Road, Gascoigne Road for the latter joining at Princess Margaret Road and continuing over Waterloo Road to the tunnel entrance. This will eliminate or combine with several existing flyovers which are no more than a series of bumps with congestions still occurring at the several major junctions of Waterloo Road.
The Numbering of Floors in a Building in Chinese
Now, I turn to my last subject today, the Chinese numbering of floors in a building, which is a constant source of confusion, incon- venience and time-wasting to the local Chinese population. Anybody whose mother tongue is Chinese or who is a linguist in the Chinese language knows only too well the annoying fact that the English 1st floor of building may mean the Chinese 1st floor or the 2nd floor. Therefore, when the address of a company is given as being on the 5th floor of a building in Chinese to an inquirer, the latter has either to ask whether it is the 5th floor or numeral 5 (7) meaning the English 5th floor; or to find out the exact location after arriving in the building. This applies to office, domestic, industrial and all other buildings alike. It is obvious even to the uninitiated how much time is unnecessarily wasted. This situation, which has existed for years, need not have occurred and can in fact be easily corrected by official action.
I have no strong personal preference as to call the English 1st floor the Chinese 1st floor or 2nd floor. However, I do feel that the numbering of floors in Chinese should be standardized in all buildings in Hong Kong.
(Mr. Peter C. K. CHAN arrived at this point).
The Commissioner of Rating and Valuation, being the Competent Authority for the numbering of houses, perhaps not the Competent Authority for numbering of floors may look into this matter. As it concerns the Chinese population, it would be wise to solicit their opinion before making a decision. In any case, this is a relatively simple matter that will not, I trust, require months of deliberation before action is taken. Or, do we have again to wait until the wider use of Chinese in official business becomes a reality?
Mr. Chairman, I support the motion. (Applause).
MRS. C. J. SYMONS:-Mr. Chairman, I should like to preface my remarks this afternoon by thanking you and members of your staff for the very efficient and friendly way in which you have helped me per-
HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL
315
sonally, both within this Council chamber and on the many occasions you have provided me with information I needed. I am equally grateful to my colleagues, the Unofficials, for being so patient with me.
This is only my second Annual Debate so I'm neither disillusioned nor resigned: not disillusioned because some good must come when over 20 men and women have set their minds to some of the problems of our city; nor resigned to the assumption that nothing ever happens after the Annual Debate despite the flights of oratory, thanks to Mr. RAFEEK, in 2 languages, or words of wisdom.
There is nothing particularly meritorious in what I shall have to say; no one has any monopoly of unique correctness or clairvoyance; and one can only do one's best. Perhaps I speak only because I must.
On
So much for my motive-now for the topics that interest me. the distinct understanding that there is a comprehensive range of subjects within one's legitimate grasp on such an occasion, for in the words of a fellow-councillor "You are allowed to talk about anything", which is very tempting, it is my intention to concentrate on three aspects of our work for youth in this city. One-the question of providing legisla- tion for children under the age of six in child care institutions, appears to be in the words of an old song-"nobody's baby". The second, a comprehensive scheme for post-primary education is not within the purview of this Council, but it is a subject very dear to me. The third -recreation and leisure is strictly speaking our business, and I contend, an area of activity that may be further developed.
(Dr. Denny M. H. HUANG left at this point).
Last year I suggested that a Youth Select Committee should be set up, and I never anticipated that within a year I'd ask for a "Baby Select Committee". Seriously, can someone, somewhere in Government, look into the whole question of the needs of a quarter of a million children under the age of six. And not just consider, but act. We may or may not claim to be a civilized city, but to me it is almost shocking that no Government department is responsible for the registra- tion, inspection and general overall policy with regard to profit-making crèches or nursery schools. I agree with Government's contention that no large-scale aid to kindergartens and day nurseries can be considered in the near future. I know that discussions are apparently going on about an increase to the $10 now allowed per child per month in the 40 or so non-profit making nurseries that now cater to 6,000 poor children.
I know that legislation is being contemplated governing standards in child care institutions, and I agree that all this is not as simple as it may appear. But, I for one am not satisfied with the present state
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.