Page 156 of 242
292
HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL
sports activities among them in their own neighbourhood. Doing so would certainly help make life happier for them; also, it would take up their leisure time in a healthy way and bring about other social benefits. It serves little purpose to talk about the anti-social behaviour of some of our young people if not much that is permanent and effective is done for them. Granted that having a recreation service is not the only answer but the problem is growing in such an alarming way that all possible measures to help solve it cannot be ignored. Let the Government remember that school sports programmes do not provide for the countless thousands of young people who are not at school. They are definitely not involved in such activities. These young people must be reached in the interest of the community as a whole. So what is the Government going to do without more loss of time?
The White Paper has been published at long last. A careful assessment of the Government's intentions ought to be made; Members are likely to do so in detail later on in our deliberations in committee. Many views are being expressed in public in the interval and no doubt also in this Debate, which is all to the good.
Indeed, the Urban Council has been challenged. It is now up to the Council to respond in a positive manner. The proposals may not be to everybody's liking and they do little or nothing to create an identity and a sense of belonging. Except for the sinister attempt to control our Standing Orders, it must be recognized that virtually nothing startling has been put forward in the White Paper that cannot be found in the Urban Council's recommendations drawn up in 1966 and 1969. The Government has taken up such recommendations as have suited its basic purpose; it has also expediently chopped and changed about the phasing and timing of reforms and left a host of questions unanswered. The White Paper is the result of a protracted exercise by the Government. Its unduly long gestation proves once more that time is of no consequence in the corridors of power here. Perhaps, some might even say, the mountain went into labour and gave birth to a little mouse. Horace put it much more eloquently but I have translated it much more tactfully. On the other hand, the public would not want the Government to throw caution to the winds. So, let us give the White Paper a chance. Of course, the understanding is that doing so does not mean that we are precluded from pressing for more reforms and improvements. In fact, the White Paper anticipates that more changes will come about, but it has not set a time-limit for them. However, what we must not do is to turn our back on the challenge and lose the initiative we took so boldly early in 1966. Government's designs for the future may be said to be implicit in the White Paper. Even so, let us assume that the Central Government is not the villain
HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL
293
in the piece and will not leave in the lurch the virtuous maiden, the Urban Council in this play, whenever the public interest requires more Central Government backing and support than can be foreseen in the present proposals.
My great disappointment is the Government's stand on the vital question of public housing. We have gained much knowledge and experience of the housing requirements of the people ever since this Council instigated the resettlement programme. There is every good reason to ask for a Department of Housing and there can be no misgivings on the Government's part that such a body should be set up directly under the Council control and responsibility. I have said so before and I repeat today that the existing fragmentation of authority is inefficient and uneconomical. It favours a piecemeal approach and holds back the phased development of a full housing programme according to the needs of the people. Perhaps the Government might be persuaded to think out the position very carefully and not vacillate as it does in paragraph 28.
Finally, I hope the White Paper is not an example of HOBSON'S choice, although I suspect it is meant to be.
I second the motion. (Applause).
MR. HILTON CHEONG-LEEN:-Mr. Chairman, as a member of the Joint Resettlement and the Local Administration Select Committees, I will speak today on matters having to do with these two Select Committees.
But with your permission, Mr. Chairman, may I make a few remarks which I had intended to make earlier.
As Members are aware the Joint Resettlement Committees are very much concerned to improve the hawker situation in the resettlement estates as rapidly as possible.
In addition, an equally important matter is the accumulation of and disposal of rubbish in the resettlement estates. There are continuous complaints of insufficient equipment and personnel being available to dispose of rubbish in the resettlement estates.
This is an urgent problem which should be drawn to the attention of the Central Government which is responsible for providing all staff and equipment for the Resettlement and Urban Services Departments.
The Joint Resettlement Committees want to see the estates as clean as possible. It is now up to the Central Government through
Page 157 of 242
294
(rest of the text is on the next page)
Page 156 of 242
292
HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL
sports activities among them in their own neighbourhood. Doing so would certainly help make life happier for them; also, it would take up their leisure time in a healthy way and bring about other social benefits. It serves little purpose to talk about the anti-social behaviour of some of our young people if not much that is permanent and effective is done for them. Granted that having a recreation service is not the only answer but the problem is growing in such an alarming way that all possible measures to help solve it cannot be ignored. Let the Government remember that school sports programmes do not provide for the countless thousands of young people who are not at school. They are definitely not involved in such activities. These young people must be reached in the interest of the community as a whole. So what is the Government going to do without more loss of time?
The White Paper has been published at long last. A careful assessment of the Government's intentions ought to be made; Members are likely to do so in detail later on in our deliberations in committee. Many views are being expressed in public in the interval and no doubt also in this Debate, which is all to the good.
Indeed, the Urban Council has been challenged. It is now up to the Council to respond in a positive manner. The proposals may not be to everybody's liking and they do little or nothing to create an identity and a sense of belonging. Except for the sinister attempt to control our Standing Orders, it must be recognized that virtually nothing startling has been put forward in the White Paper that cannot be found in the Urban Council's recommendations drawn up in 1966 and 1969. The Government has taken up such recommendations as have suited its basic purpose; it has also expediently chopped and changed about the phasing and timing of reforms and left a host of questions unanswered. The White Paper is the result of a protracted exercise by the Government. Its unduly long gestation proves once more that time is of no consequence in the corridors of power here. Perhaps, some might even say, the mountain went into labour and gave birth to a little mouse. Horace put it much more eloquently but I have translated it much more tactfully. On the other hand, the public would not want the Government to throw caution to the winds. So, let us give the White Paper a chance. Of course, the understanding is that doing so does not mean that we are precluded from pressing for more reforms and improvements. In fact, the White Paper anticipates that more changes will come about, but it has not set a time-limit for them. However, what we must not do is to turn our back on the challenge and lose the initiative we took so boldly early in 1966. Government's designs for the future may be said to be implicit in the White Paper. Even so, let us assume that the Central Government is not the villain
HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL
293
in the piece and will not leave in the lurch the virtuous maiden, the Urban Council in this play, whenever the public interest requires more Central Government backing and support than can be foreseen in the present proposals.
My great disappointment is the Government's stand on the vital question of public housing. We have gained much knowledge and experience of the housing requirements of the people ever since this Council instigated the resettlement programme. There is every good reason to ask for a Department of Housing and there can be no misgivings on the Government's part that such a body should be set up directly under the Council control and responsibility. I have said so before and I repeat today that the existing fragmentation of authority is inefficient and uneconomical. It favours a piecemeal approach and holds back the phased development of a full housing programme according to the needs of the people. Perhaps the Government might be persuaded to think out the position very carefully and not vacillate as it does in paragraph 28.
Finally, I hope the White Paper is not an example of HOBSON'S choice, although I suspect it is meant to be.
I second the motion. (Applause).
MR. HILTON CHEONG-LEEN:-Mr. Chairman, as a member of the Joint Resettlement and the Local Administration Select Committees, I will speak today on matters having to do with these two Select Com- mittees.
But with your permission, Mr. Chairman, may I make a few re- marks which I had intended to make earlier.
As Members are aware the Joint Resettlement Committees are very much concerned to improve the hawker situation in the resettlement estates as rapidly as possible.
In addition, an equally important matter is the accumulation of and disposal of rubbish in the resettlement estates. There are con- tinuous complaints of insufficient equipment and personnel being avail- able to dispose of rubbish in the resettlement estates.
This is an urgent problem which should be drawn to the attention of the Central Government which is responsible for providing all staff and equipment for the Resettlement and Urban Services Departments.
The Joint Resettlement Committees want to see the estates as clean as possible. It is now up to the Central Government through
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.