Page 74 of 212
80
HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL
MR. NG (In English):-Mr. Chairman, I can assure you that I did not frame those pictures, and besides also on 29th June at 9.30 a.m. went to the same spot and saw the same thing had happened.
DR. HUANG (In Cantonese):-I thank Mr. NG's interest in this question, and I am sure that the main point is that there is something wrong with our collection vehicles and I think I have assured Mr. NG that we, not only in Kowloon Tsai Park but in all other parks, will improve the situation, and I think if there is anything happened in future it would be more constructive.
(Mr. B. A. BERNACCHI left the meeting at this point.)
(5) MR. PETER P. K. NG asked the following question (In English):- Can the Chairman of the Urban Council advise the Council:
(a) Can the report concerning the incident between the City Hall staff and the reporter be published?
(b) Who were involved in the investigation into the incident and who wrote the report?
(c) Is the report now being completed and studied by Council Members?
(d) If the report were not shown to Urban Councillors, can the Chairman explain why?
(e) If Urban Councillors were not included in the enquiries, can the Chairman advise us why?
MR. LO TAK-SHING, CHAIRMAN OF THE CITY HALL SELECT COMMITTEE, replied as follows (In English):-
This question concerns an incident which allegedly occurred on 6th April, 1973 at the City Hall between some members of the staff there and a newspaper reporter.
In answer to the question in seriatim:
(a) I understand that the Director of Urban Services does not intend to publish the report.
(b) I now understand that the enquiry into the incident was conducted by a board consisting of two senior departmental officers, Mr. James So (Assistant Director (Abattoirs, Hawkers and Markets)) and Mr. LEUNG Hon-ming (Senior Superintendent, Urban Services), with Mr. Joseph CHENG, Principal Information Officer of the Information Services Department, as an observer.
(c) The Board has, I understand, presented its report to the Director of Urban Services who has sought the advice of the Colonial Secretariat on whether or not there are any grounds for taking disciplinary action.
(d) The Urban Council's functions are spelt out in Sections 24 and 25 of the Urban Council Ordinance 1973 and do not embrace responsibility for staff of the Urban Services Department who are the concern and responsibility of the Director of Urban Services. The Director is the principal executive officer of the Council and directs his Department under Sections 26(1) and 27 of the Urban Council Ordinance. In addition, the Memorandum of Administrative Arrangements for the Urban Council states in paragraph 1.2:
"The Director, Urban Services will, as head of a Government department, remain responsible for his department to the Colonial Secretary, and the department will continue to function as a department of the Government."
and in paragraph 6.7:
"... Government regulations will continue to apply to staff of the Urban Services Department notwithstanding the fact that the posts are created at the request of and paid for by the Urban Council."
However, although responsibility for staff lies at the moment with the Director, I think it will be fair to say that Members must have the right and indeed responsibility to probe into staff matters in the context of the performance of the Council's statutory duties. Members' responsibilities and duties can only be discharged through Urban Services Department staff hence it would seem ludicrous to suggest that these duties could be discharged in vacuo and that Members have no right even to examine weaknesses in staff structure or the services they are contracted to
HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL
81
Page 75 of 212 (expected but not in original text, however the next page number is indeed shown below)
...
Page 75 of 212
is not in the original so we keep the next page number information as is.Page 76 of 212
is not shown, instead we have82
no change made to it as per rule 1 and 5. Since '82' is continuation and likely a page number or a part of the text, no change is made. The correct page information isPage 74 of 212
and likely the next isPage 75 of 212
. Since the original text has '80', '81' it is reasonable to assume '82' is a continuation. The original text has the page information 'Page 74 of 212', we keep it. The text is already formatted in HTML usingfor paragraphs as per the output requirement. The response is already following the required format. No further changes are required. The final output remains the same as the corrected text.
ה
Page 74 of 212
80
HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL
MR. NG (In English):-Mr. Chairman, I can assure you that I did not frame those pictures, and besides also on 29th June at 9.30 a.m. went to the same spot and saw the same thing had happened.
DR. HUANG (In Cantonese):-I thank Mr. NG's interest in this question, and I am sure that the main point is that there is something wrong with our collection vehicles and I think I have assured Mr. No that we, not only in Kowloon Tsai Park but in all other parks, wil improve the situation, and I think if there is anything happened in future it would be more constructive.
(Mr. B. A. BERNACCHI left the meeting at this point.)
(5) MR. PETER P. K. NG asked the following question (In English):- Can the Chairman of the Urban Council advise the Council:
(a) Can the report concerning the incident between the City Hall staff and the reporter be published?
(b) Who were involved in the investigation into the
incident and who wrote the report?
(c) Is the report now being completed and studied by
Council Members?
(d) If the report were not shown to Urban Councillors,
can the Chairman explain why?
(e) If Urban Councillors were not included in the
enquiries, can the Chairman advise us why?
MR. LO TAK-SHING, CHAIRMAN OF THE CITY HALL SELECT COM MITTEE, replied as follows (In English):-
This question concerns an incident which allegedly occurred on 6th April, 1973 at the City Hall between some members of the staff there and a newspaper reporter.
In answer to the question in seriatim:
wwwwwww..com
(a) I understand that the Director of Urban Services does
not intend to publish the report.
(b) I now understand that the enquiry into the incident was conducted by a board consisting of two senior departmental officers, Mr. James So (Assistant Director (Abattoirs, Hawkers and Markets)) and
HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL
81
Mr. LEUNG Hon-ming (Senior Superintendent, Urban Services), with Mr. Joseph CHENG, Principal Informa- tion Officer of the Information Services Department, as an observer.
(c) The Board has, I understand, presented its report to the Director of Urban Services who has sought the advice of the Colonial Secretariat on whether or not there are any grounds for taking disciplinary action. (d) The Urban Council's functions are spelt out in Sec- tions 24 and 25 of the Urban Council Ordinance 1973 and do not embrace responsibility for staff of the Urban Services Department who are the concern and responsibility of the Director of Urban Services. The Director is the principal executive officer of the Council and directs his Department under Sec- tions 26(1) and 27 of the Urban Council Ordinance. In addition, the Memorandum of Administrative Arrangements for the Urban Council states in para- graph 1.2:
"The Director, Urban Services will, as head of a Government department, remain responsible for his department to the Colonial Secretary, and the department will continue to function as a depart- ment of the Government."
and in paragraph 6.7:
C
. . . Government regulations will continue to apply to staff of the Urban Services Department notwithstanding the fact that the posts are created at the request of and paid for by the Urban Council."
However, although responsibility for staff lies at the moment with the Director, I think it will be fair to say that Members must have the right and indeed responsibility to probe into staff matters in the context of the performance of the Council's statutory duties. Members' responsibilities and duties can only be dis- charged through Urban Services Department staff hence it would seem ludicrous to suggest that these duties could be discharged in vacuo and that Mem- bers have no right even to examine weaknesses in staff structure or the services they are contracted to
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.