Page 195 of 241
HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL
Urban Council forms an important part of this system of public consultation; therefore, the opinions expressed by Urban Councillors must be examined and analyzed very carefully and where they are seen to be clearly in the interest of the public they should be put into practice. By putting into practice, I am not suggesting, Sir, that there need be a lapse of ten or more years before these programmes are implemented. A notable example is found in your own speech; you said that we are on the threshold of a break-through in our markets policy. If so, we seem to have stood there for a long time. I recall, as Chairman of that Select Committee ten years or so ago, that the policy of building new markets was then endorsed, not put up for the first time, and yet we hear now that there are only 17 on the programme. More than ten years have passed; at that time the policy was for at least two markets to be built each year. Again, Sir, another example I cite from your own speech—the post of a Public Information Officer for the Council. I recall that more than ten years ago Mr. CHEONG-LEEN and I were invited by the then Director of Information Services to lunch. We thought that that might have been in response to our strong appeal for a special Public Relations Officer for the Council and that as a result he would like to probe into our views on the subject, instead of which we discovered we were subjected to dissuasion. He tried to persuade us that it wasn't really necessary for the Council to have its own Public Relations Officer. This happened more than ten years ago and is a matter of record. I have only quoted two examples. It is easy enough to give others—about public recreation, public entertainment and the cultural services; the same experience. It is true that we have achieved much in certain fields of human endeavour in Hong Kong; yet, such achievement could have been realized far sooner so that the people, who it was intended would be served, would have benefitted from any such progress then, rather than that a whole generation should pass.
In public housing, which is a subject very dear to this Council, we hear today that there are 400,000 units—persons—to be housed in the next six years. In the Public Housing Debate not so many months ago, I gave figures adding up to 750,000 people living in abject misery. Even so, I did not include the countless families who pay inordinately high rents in Hong Kong and whose incomes cannot afford such high rents at the present time because some other aspect of their living condition is bound to suffer. These people are not served by a prosperous community. Why does not Government declare a speed-up of the public housing programme so that we can also reach, as we intended all along, the white-collar classes in a far more effective manner? Incomes have risen but our qualifying ceiling has not been put up to keep pace with the increase.
HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL
371
We have listened today to a schoolmasterly dissertation on the facts of economic life in Hong Kong. All I can say is that I am most impressed; but, I cannot pass judgment—at least not until I go home this evening and consult my Amah whether such views on rudimentary economics are true or not (Laughter) as to their effect on our daily life in Hong Kong. What we want to know is not by what percentage the statistics show that incomes have risen or the cost of living has gone up; what we want to know is whether, in net dollars and cents, the living condition of the people is today better by comparison with what it was last year. He may have more money in his pocket now but he has to pay far more for rent, and no one can argue that this is not the case.
What impresses me over the years is the fact that our official Colleagues, backed by all the resources of their departments for research before rebutting the points which Unofficials make—by carefully analyzing each and every argument before drawing up a reply—our official Members today, last year, the year before, in Select Committees can argue, with equal sincerity and conviction, both for and against the same point provided it is expedient to do so to meet Government policy. This is not what the Unofficials are here for, whether they are appointed or elected. And, Mr. Chairman, my Colleagues have drawn up copious notes for me to make on various points; they have done so both today and in the interval since the meeting was adjourned; these notes will be made available to you at our next "summit meeting" when the next host realizes it is his turn to convene and pay for the lunch. (Laughter).
Mr. Chairman, the thought that I would like to leave with this Council is that the unofficial Members have been elected or appointed to serve the public interest. They must work in Select Committees. It is also their duty, according to their lights, to criticize when they think criticism is needed. If criticism has been stronger this year than previously, it is perhaps the fault of the Government in not defining certain issues as clearly and quickly as such issues call for prompt clarification. If there is resentment on your part and that of the official Colleagues, please, Sir, remember that there is also frustration on our part, increasingly so. Be that as it may, I would assure you, Sir, and your Colleagues, that never have we for one moment doubted that you have worked with great dedication and sincerity. Your departments are of varying sizes, some of them so complex that it is not humanly possible for the heads of the departments to know what is going on all the time and for that reason, if for that reason alone, the heads of such departments should welcome any information that we might be able to pass on in order to help them administer their departments even better, and not resent that information or take it as undue criticism. Frankly, if we did not conduct ourselves in this
Page 195
Page 196
241
Page 195 of 241
370
HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL
Urban Council forms an important part of this system of public con- sultation; therefore, the opinions expressed by Urban Councillors must be examined and analyzed very carefully and where they are seen to be clearly in the interest of the public they should be put into practice. By putting into practice, I am not suggesting, Sir, that there need be a lapse of ten or more years before these programmes are implemented. A notable example is found in your own speech; you said that we are on the threshold of a break-through in our markets policy. If so, we seem to have stood there for a long time. I recall, as Chairman of that Select Committee ten years or so ago, that the policy of building new markets was then endorsed, not put up for the first time, and yet we hear now that there are only 17 on the programme. More than ten years have passed; at that time the policy was for at least two markets to be built each year. Again, Sir, another example I cite from your own speech-the post of a Public Information Officer for the Council. I recall that more than ten years ago Mr. CHEONG-LEEN and I were invited by the then Director of Information Services to lunch. We thought that that might have been in response to our strong appeal for a special Public Relations Officer for the Council and that as a result he would like to probe into our views on the subject, instead of which we discovered we were subjected to dissua- sion. He tried to persuade us that it wasn't really necessary for the Council to have its own Public Relations Officer. This happened more than ten years ago and is a matter of record. I have only quoted two examples. It is easy enough to give others-about public recreation, public entertainment and the cultural services; the same experience. It is true that we have achieved much in certain fields of human en- deavour in Hong Kong; yet, such achievement could have been realized far sooner so that the people, who it was intended would be served, would have benefitted from any such progress then, rather than that a whole generation should pass.
In public housing, which is a subject very dear to this Council, we hear today that there are 400,000 units-persons-to be housed in the next six years. In the Public Housing Debate not so many months ago, I gave figures adding up to 750,000 people living in abject misery. Even so, I did not include the countless families who pay inordinately high rents in Hong Kong and whose incomes cannot afford such high rents at the present time because some other aspect of their living condition is bound to suffer. These people are not served by a pros- perous community. Why does not Government declare a speed-up of the public housing programme so that we can also reach, as we intended all along, the white-collar classes in a far more effective manner? Incomes have risen but our qualifying ceiling has not been put up to keep pace with the increase.
HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL
371
We have listened today to a schoolmasterly dissertation on the facts of economic life in Hong Kong. All I can say is that I am most impressed; but, I cannot pass judgment—at least not until I go home this evening and consult my Amah whether such views on rudimentary economics are true or not (Laughter) as to their effect on our daily life in Hong Kong. What we want to know is not by what percentage the statistics show that incomes have risen or the cost of living has gone up; what we want to know is whether, in net dollars and cents, the living condition of the people is today better by comparison with what it was last year. He may have more money in his pocket now but he has to pay far more for rent, and no one can argue that this is not the case.
What impresses me over the years is the fact that our official Colleagues, backed by all the resources of their departments for re- search before rebutting the points which Unofficials make-by carefully analyzing each and every argument before drawing up a reply-our official Members today, last year, the year before, in Select Committees can argue, with equal sincerity and conviction, both for and against the same point provided it is expedient to do so to meet Government policy. This is not what the Unofficials are here for, whether they are appointed or elected. And, Mr. Chairman, my Colleagues have drawn up copious notes for me to make on various points; they have done so both today and in the interval since the meeting was adjourned; these notes will be made available to you at our next "summit meeting" when the next host realizes it is his turn to convene and pay for the lunch. (Laughter).
Mr. Chairman, the thought that I would like to leave with this Council is that the unofficial Members have been elected or appointed to serve the public interest. They must work in Select Committees. It is also their duty, according to their lights, to criticize when they think criticism is needed. If criticism has been stronger this year than previously, it is perhaps the fault of the Government in not defining certain issues as clearly and quickly as such issues call for prompt clarification. If there is resentment on your part and that of the official Colleagues, please, Sir, remember that there is also frustration on our part, increasingly so. Be that as it may, I would assure you, Sir, and your Colleagues, that never have we for one moment doubted that you have worked with great dedication and sincerity. Your departments are of varying sizes, some of them so complex that it is not humanly possible for the heads of the departments to know what is going on all the time and for that reason, if for that reason alone, the heads of such departments should welcome any information that we might be able to pass on in order to help them administer their departments even better, and not resent that information or take it as undue criticism. Frankly, if we did not conduct ourselves in this
Page 195Page 196
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.