1974 — Page 162

Urban Council Proceedings 市政局議事錄 All AI Reviewed

Page 162 of 187

284

HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL

CHAN, of course, has been consistent in his criticism. However, my good friend, Mr. NG's high moral indignation, leaves me somewhat refused as he has been a constant supporter of the project and a Member of the Exhibition Sub-Committee. But the point that I want to make is that this exhibition, which attracted in excess of 100,000 attendants, a record for a project of its type, did have the unanimous, with an exception of one, full support of the Council and as far as we, the Council, can judge, it has been extremely successful, not only in the number attending, but also in the publicity received with two supplements in the Chinese press and with several television programmes relating to the work and activities of the Council. I think this clarifies our position.

A good proportion of the expenditure was in materials which was taken away. Many of these display-items will, in fact, be utilized on future occasions. Another factor which, I think, perhaps the Council has not really considered is that the effect of this exhibition, as a morale boost to the 18,000 Urban Services employees is a consideration which would affect, I think, decisions regarding future events of this type.

Secondly, on the question of Council accommodation, I think that Mr. NG has raised the point that a Chamber may be necessary, but it is, in his opinion, a "shop-window" luxury and unfortunately, his term has been taken up by the press. These are contradictory terms. If this was a luxury, I would not have lent it the support that I did in my speech today. The fact, I think, on the accommodation question is quite clear. Not only do we operate from unpreposing, inadequate and overcrowded premises which are uncomfortable for the people who are here to see us in action, but unless we have additional space soon, we will have to curtail any further development of our secretariat services. We have reached the point of crises where we desperate need additional space to provide this Council with functional and essential services. Mr. Chairman, I hope I have clarified the Administration Select Committee's point of view and I hope the point of view of the majority of Councillors on these two questions.

(Mrs. E. ELLIOTT left the meeting at this point.)

MR. PETER P. K. NG (in English): -Well, Mr. Chairman, I never expect that this debate, especially Mr. MACKENZIE's clarifications, came to more or less another debate. I've no intention of counteracting it except to reiterate my position. Mr. MACKENZIE made a personal attack on me. In my opinion, I have to clarify it. I have no intention of going back into debate with Mr. MACKENZIE except to say that I still reiterate what I said the day before yesterday is my own opinion and am entitled to it and I do not see anything wrong that needs clarification. That leads to my second point of clarifying one point made by Mrs. E. ELLIOTT on advertising signs. She was saying that we were trying to harm all the small businessmen in charging advertising fees. Now let me reassure the Council and say that there is no intention in the proposed ordinance to tax every single advertisement sign in Hong Kong. We propose to limit the charges under very restricted circumstances and only to sign of over a certain size. Also, the Urban Council has been engaging in considering draft proposals to control advertisement signs for over fifteen years and we are now just finalizing the matter. There is no intention to start imposing any charges at the present moment. We are just completing a full set of regulations and to enact them at a time which is beneficial to Hong Kong as a whole. In any case, a sufficient period of grace will also be allowed.

(Mr. Alex S. C. WU and Dr. P. C. WONG left the meeting at this point.)

MR. CHARLES C. C. SIN (in English): -Mr. Chairman, I am glad to have this opportunity as the Chairman of the Food Hygiene Select Committee to clarify certain points in the speech of Dr. WONG concerning the licensing procedures for restaurants.

I think it is my duty to make it clear that the Select Committee under the very abled chairmanship of Mr. Peter P. K. NG two years ago greatly simplified and streamlined licensing procedures leading to the issue of a general restaurant licences and light refreshment restaurant licences. In fact, the present health requirements are the minimum health requirements and they are not difficult for an applicant to comply with. In fact, if an applicant takes as much trouble of paying as much attention to comply with our health requirements as his declaration, he will have no difficulty in complying with our health requirements within a very short time.

MR. HENRY H. L. HU (in English): -Mr. Chairman, I understand that a lot of the Urban Councillors are interested in hawker matters, we will discuss hawker policy at the next Select Committee meeting which will be scheduled on next Wednesday morning at 8:30. Any Member who is interested is welcome to participate in this discussion.

Next point, Mr. Chairman, I think in future programme, you should reconsider whether you should let the Chairmen of the Select Committees clarify certain matters after the debate. (Laughter).

285

HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL

Page 163 of 187

Edit History

2026-05-15 00:00:46 · NVIDIA / meta/llama-4-maverick-17b-128e-instruct

Live

View comparison

AI Proofread

Page 162 of 187 284 HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL CHAN, of course, has been consistent in his criticism. However, my good friend, Mr. NG's high moral indignation, leaves me somewhat refused as he has been a constant supporter of the project and a Member of the Exhibition Sub-Committee. But the point that I want to make is that this exhibition, which attracted in excess of 100,000 attendants, a record for a project of its type, did have the unanimous, with an exception of one, full support of the Council and as far as we, the Council, can judge, it has been extremely successful, not only in the number attending, but also in the publicity received with two supplements in the Chinese press and with several television programmes relating to the work and activities of the Council. I think this clarifies our position. A good proportion of the expenditure was in materials which was taken away. Many of these display-items will, in fact, be utilized on future occasions. Another factor which, I think, perhaps the Council has not really considered is that the effect of this exhibition, as a morale boost to the 18,000 Urban Services employees is a consideration which would affect, I think, decisions regarding future events of this type. Secondly, on the question of Council accommodation, I think that Mr. NG has raised the point that a Chamber may be necessary, but it is, in his opinion, a "shop-window" luxury and unfortunately, his term has been taken up by the press. These are contradictory terms. If this was a luxury, I would not have lent it the support that I did in my speech today. The fact, I think, on the accommodation question is quite clear. Not only do we operate from unpreposing, inadequate and overcrowded premises which are uncomfortable for the people who are here to see us in action, but unless we have additional space soon, we will have to curtail any further development of our secretariat services. We have reached the point of crises where we desperate need additional space to provide this Council with functional and essential services. Mr. Chairman, I hope I have clarified the Administration Select Committee's point of view and I hope the point of view of the majority of Councillors on these two questions. (Mrs. E. ELLIOTT left the meeting at this point.) MR. PETER P. K. NG (in English): -Well, Mr. Chairman, I never expect that this debate, especially Mr. MACKENZIE's clarifications, came to more or less another debate. I've no intention of counteracting it except to reiterate my position. Mr. MACKENZIE made a personal attack on me. In my opinion, I have to clarify it. I have no intention of going back into debate with Mr. MACKENZIE except to say that I still reiterate what I said the day before yesterday is my own opinion and am entitled to it and I do not see anything wrong that needs clarification. That leads to my second point of clarifying one point made by Mrs. E. ELLIOTT on advertising signs. She was saying that we were trying to harm all the small businessmen in charging advertising fees. Now let me reassure the Council and say that there is no intention in the proposed ordinance to tax every single advertisement sign in Hong Kong. We propose to limit the charges under very restricted circumstances and only to sign of over a certain size. Also, the Urban Council has been engaging in considering draft proposals to control advertisement signs for over fifteen years and we are now just finalizing the matter. There is no intention to start imposing any charges at the present moment. We are just completing a full set of regulations and to enact them at a time which is beneficial to Hong Kong as a whole. In any case, a sufficient period of grace will also be allowed. (Mr. Alex S. C. WU and Dr. P. C. WONG left the meeting at this point.) MR. CHARLES C. C. SIN (in English): -Mr. Chairman, I am glad to have this opportunity as the Chairman of the Food Hygiene Select Committee to clarify certain points in the speech of Dr. WONG concerning the licensing procedures for restaurants. I think it is my duty to make it clear that the Select Committee under the very abled chairmanship of Mr. Peter P. K. NG two years ago greatly simplified and streamlined licensing procedures leading to the issue of a general restaurant licences and light refreshment restaurant licences. In fact, the present health requirements are the minimum health requirements and they are not difficult for an applicant to comply with. In fact, if an applicant takes as much trouble of paying as much attention to comply with our health requirements as his declaration, he will have no difficulty in complying with our health requirements within a very short time. MR. HENRY H. L. HU (in English): -Mr. Chairman, I understand that a lot of the Urban Councillors are interested in hawker matters, we will discuss hawker policy at the next Select Committee meeting which will be scheduled on next Wednesday morning at 8:30. Any Member who is interested is welcome to participate in this discussion. Next point, Mr. Chairman, I think in future programme, you should reconsider whether you should let the Chairmen of the Select Committees clarify certain matters after the debate. (Laughter). 285 HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL Page 163 of 187

Baseline (Original)

Page 162 of 187 284 HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL CHAN, of course, has been consistent in his criticism. However, my good friend, Mr. NG's high moral indignation, leaves me somewhat refused as he has been a constant supporter of the project and a Member of the Exhibition Sub-Committee. But the point that I want to make is that this exhibition, which attracted in excess of 100,000 attendants, a record for a project of its type, did have the unanimous, with an exception of one, full support of the Council and as far as we, the Council, can judge, it has been extremely successful, not only in the number attending, but also in the publicity received with two supple- ments in the Chinese press and with several television programmes relating to the work and activities of the Council. I think this clarifies our position. A good proportion of the expenditure was in materials which was taken away. Many of these display-items will, in fact, be utilized on future occasions. Another factor which, I think, perhaps the Council has not really considered is that the effect of this exhibition, as a morale boost to the 18,000 Urban Services employees is a consideration which would affect, I think, decisions regarding future events of this type. Secondly, on the question of Council accommodation, I think that Mr. NG has raised the point that a Chamber may be necessary, but it is, in his opinion, a "shop-window" luxury and unfortunately, his term has been taken up by the press. These are contradictory terms. If this was a luxury, I would not have lent it the support that I did in my speech today. The fact, I think, on the accommodation question is quite clear. Not only do we operate from unpreposing, inadequate and overcrowded premises which are uncomfortable for the people who are here to see us in action, but unless we have additional space soon, we will have to curtail any further development of our secretariat services. We have reached the point of crises where we desperate need additional space to provide this Council with functional and essential services. Mr. Chairman, I hope I have clarified the Admini- stration Select Committee's point of view and I hope the point of view of the majority of Councillors on these two questions. (Mrs. E. ELLIOTT left the meeting at this point.) MR. PETER P. K. NG (in English): -Well, Mr. Chairman, I never expect that this debate, especially Mr. MACKENZIE's clarifications, came to more or less another debate. I've no intention of counteracting it except to reiterate my position. Mr. MACKENZIE made a personal attack on me. In my opinion, I have to clarify it. I have no intention of going back into debate with Mr. MACKENZIE except to say that I still HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL 285 reiterate what I said the day before yesterday is my own opinion and am entitled to it and I do not see anything wrong that needs clarifica- tion. That leads to my second point of clarifying one point made by Mrs. E. ELLIOTT on advertising signs. She was saying that we were trying to harm all the small businessmen in charging advertising fees. Now let me reassure the Council and say that there is no intention in the proposed ordinance to tax every single advertisement sign in Hong Kong. We propose to limit the charges under very restricted circum- stances and only to sign of over a certain size. Also, the Urban Council has been engaging in considering draft proposals to control advertisement signs for over fifteen years and we are now just finalizing the matter. There is no intention to start imposing any charges at the present moment. We are just completing a full set of regulations and to enact them at a time which is beneficial to Hong Kong as a whole. In any case, a sufficient period of grace will also be allowed. (Mr. Alex S. C. WU and Dr. P. C. WONG left the meeting at this point.) MR. CHARLES C. C. SIN (in English): --Mr. Chairman, I am glad to have this opportunity as the Chairman of the Food Hygiene Select Committee to clarify certain points in the speech of Dr. WONG concern- ing the licensing procedures for restaurants. I think it is my duty to make it clear that the Select Committee under the very abled chairmanship of Mr. Peter P. K. No two years ago greatly simplified and streamlined licensing procedures leading to the issue of a general restaurant licences and light refreshment res- taurant licences. In fact, the present health requirements are the minimum health requirements and they are not difficult for an applicant to comply with. In fact, if an applicant takes as much trouble of paying as much attention to comply with our health requirements as his declaration, he will have no difficulty in complying with our health requirements within a very short time. MR. HENRY H. L. Hu (in English):-Mr. Chairman, I understand that a lot of the Urban Councillors are interested in hawker matters, we will discuss hawker policy at the next Select Committee meeting which will be scheduled on next Wednesday morning at 8.30. Any Member who is interested is welcome to participate in this discussion. Next point, Mr. Chairman, I think in future programme, you should reconsider whether you should let the Chairmen of the Select Committees clarify certain matters after the debate. (Laughter).

2026-05-15 00:00:46 · Baseline

View content

Page 162 of 187

284

HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL

CHAN, of course, has been consistent in his criticism.

However, my

good friend, Mr. NG's high moral indignation, leaves me somewhat refused as he has been a constant supporter of the project and a Member of the Exhibition Sub-Committee. But the point that I want to make is that this exhibition, which attracted in excess of 100,000 attendants, a record for a project of its type, did have the unanimous, with an exception of one, full support of the Council and as far as we, the Council, can judge, it has been extremely successful, not only in the number attending, but also in the publicity received with two supple- ments in the Chinese press and with several television programmes relating to the work and activities of the Council. I think this clarifies our position.

Secondly, on the question of Council accommodation, I think that Mr. NG has raised the point that a Chamber may be necessary, but it is, in his opinion, a "shop-window" luxury and unfortunately, his term has been taken up by the press. These are contradictory terms. If this was a luxury, I would not have lent it the support that I did in my speech today. The fact, I think, on the accommodation question is quite clear. Not only do we operate from unpreposing, inadequate and overcrowded premises which are uncomfortable for the people who are here to see us in action, but unless we have additional space soon, we will have to curtail any further development of our secretariat services. We have reached the point of crises where we desperate need additional space to provide this Council with functional and essential services. Mr. Chairman, I hope I have clarified the Admini- stration Select Committee's point of view and I hope the point of view of the majority of Councillors on these two questions.

(Mrs. E. ELLIOTT left the meeting at this point.)

HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL

285

reiterate what I said the day before yesterday is my own opinion and am entitled to it and I do not see anything wrong that needs clarifica- tion. That leads to my second point of clarifying one point made by Mrs. E. ELLIOTT on advertising signs. She was saying that we were trying to harm all the small businessmen in charging advertising fees. Now let me reassure the Council and say that there is no intention in the proposed ordinance to tax every single advertisement sign in Hong Kong. We propose to limit the charges under very restricted circum- stances and only to sign of over a certain size. Also, the Urban Council has been engaging in considering draft proposals to control advertisement signs for over fifteen years and we are now just finalizing the matter. There is no intention to start imposing any charges at the present moment. We are just completing a full set of regulations and to enact them at a time which is beneficial to Hong Kong as a whole. In any case, a sufficient period of grace will also be allowed.

(Mr. Alex S. C. WU and Dr. P. C. WONG left the meeting at this point.)

MR. CHARLES C. C. SIN (in English): --Mr. Chairman, I am glad to have this opportunity as the Chairman of the Food Hygiene Select Committee to clarify certain points in the speech of Dr. WONG concern- ing the licensing procedures for restaurants.

I think it is my duty to make it clear that the Select Committee under the very abled chairmanship of Mr. Peter P. K. No two years ago greatly simplified and streamlined licensing procedures leading to the issue of a general restaurant licences and light refreshment res- taurant licences. In fact, the present health requirements are the minimum health requirements and they are not difficult for an applicant to comply with. In fact, if an applicant takes as much trouble of paying as much attention to comply with our health requirements as his declaration, he will have no difficulty in complying with our health requirements within a very short time.

MR. HENRY H. L. Hu (in English):-Mr. Chairman, I understand that a lot of the Urban Councillors are interested in hawker matters, we will discuss hawker policy at the next Select Committee meeting which will be scheduled on next Wednesday morning at 8.30. Any Member who is interested is welcome to participate in this discussion.

Next point, Mr. Chairman, I think in future programme, you should reconsider whether you should let the Chairmen of the Select Committees clarify certain matters after the debate. (Laughter).

1974 — Page 162

Edit History

Comments

Private Research Note