Page 135 of 174
230
HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL
a serious view of these facts, lest hundreds of millions of the tax-payers' money will be wasted. All in all, Hong Kong is in urgent need of elected and appointed bodies of a supervisory nature to deal with the public affairs by joint efforts. The problems cropping up between the people and the Government or even between the Government and its subordinates, the civil servants, cannot be solved simply by entrusting the task to some advisory councils; nor can we rely on a delegated commissioner like the Commissioner Against Corruption and the staff appointed by him to work out the solutions.
Hong Kong is a city which is lacking in resources. Her prosperity and stability can only be maintained through co-operation between the Government and the people. If any party is not sincere in working towards common good, it will lead to grave losses to both parties. So it is the duty of both the elected and appointed Councillors to try to bridge the gap between the Government and the citizens.
Mr. Chairman, with these words, I support this year's Statement of Aims of the Urban Council.
MR. EDMOND W. H. CHOW (in Cantonese): -Mr. Chairman, the financial estimates of this Council are carefully handled by us each year. We put forth the budget estimates for open discussion and debate. On this day every year, all Urban Councillors are allowed to comment freely on all government measures, no matter if such matters concern the Urban Council or not.
It is correct for us to be cautious because it involves public money. We are responsible to Government for its application and have to account for it to the public. Any negligence would mean a failure in our responsibility. The recent storm in a teacup over the 'Dome of the Planetarium" is an example. Despite "satisfactory" explanations given by the Council, it still could not avoid being the target of certain public criticisms. One rather authoritative editorial even points out specifically that "elected Councillors" have the responsibility to ensure that public money would not be misused and that the public should be informed before a decision is made.
I believe all "elected Councillors" would be proud of such a proposal although it smacks of "censure". This is because such a proposal would help to clear them of the doubt of whether they are genuine "representatives of public opinion". It shows that "elected Councillors" do not merely represent the opinion of some ten thousand or so voters.
HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL
Page 135 of 174
231
From the point of view of an "elected Councillor" and as a representative of public opinion, I feel that our Council is fairly cautious in the appropriation of public money. This could be seen from the fact that even the Director of Audit only directs criticisms at four minor items in his recent audit.
Since it is a question of public revenue, public comments are absolutely welcome. The public should also be allowed to pass judgment on whether our Council is handling their money with prudence.
Apart from some slight dissatisfaction with the purchase of "hawking meters", I am generally satisfied with the Council's present policies and measures. As for buying a better "Dome" for the Planetarium, I think Hong Kong can afford doing so. We should purchase the best equipment for the enjoyment of the public, with the hope of earning a better reputation for Hong Kong in the international circle.
But the part of the Director of Audit's criticisms which I find most distressing and which I am most concerned with is the licensing of advertising neon signs. Obviously, the issue could not be carried out smoothly if Government refuses to provide the necessary professional and technical support. Personally, I think this refusal has an ulterior motive as Government might think "neon sign licences" could bring in a considerable amount of profit for the public. Hence it might wish to have a share in it and make things difficult for us. When the Council is forced to abandon the scheme, it will then be wholly "taken over" by Government. If Government wishes to administer the "Licensing of Advertising Signs" by itself because the licences will bring in considerable revenue, then it should not have made a deal with the Urban Council some time ago in exchange for the management of the car parks. However, what the Urban Council should be most concerned about at present is not the question of gain, but rather the old and dilapidated signboards which may endanger the public. No control or lack of control will certainly jeopardize public safety, especially in the event of typhoons or fires. These dilapidated advertising signboards must be put under some form of control and licensed, otherwise they will sooner or later cause serious incidents of death or injury. I therefore wish to take this opportunity to call on Government to reconsider giving us professional and technical assistance in this matter. If Government still insists on its position, then I hope the Council will consider "self-reliance" and employ, as far as the law permits, professional and technical personnel to solve the problem. It will protect the public on the one hand, while on the other, enable the Council to have additional income for developing various recreational or cultural entertainment
Page 135
Page 136
Page 136 of 174
Page 135 of 174
230
HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL
a serious view of these facts, lest hundreds of millions of the tax-payers' money will be wasted. All in all, Hong Kong is in urgent need of elected and appointed bodies of a supervisory nature to deal with the public affairs by joint efforts. The problems cropping up between the people and the Government or even between the Government and its subordinates, the civil servants, cannot be solved simply by entrusting the task to some advisory councils; nor can we rely on a delegated commissioner like the Commissioner Against Corruption and the staff appointed by him to work out the solutions.
Hong Kong is a city which is lacking in resources. Her prosperity and stability can only be maintained through co-operation between the Government and the people. If any party is not sincere in working towards common good, it will lead to grave losses to both parties. So it is the duty of both the elected and appointed Councillors to try to bridge the gap between the Government and the citizens.
Mr. Chairman, with these words, I support this year's Statement of Aims of the Urban Council.
MR. EDMOND W. H. CHOW (in Cantonese): -Mr. Chairman, the financial estimates of this Council are carefully handled by us each year. We put forth the budget estimates for open discussion and debate. On this day every year, all Urban Councillors are allowed to comment freely on all government measures, no matter if such matters concern the Urban Council or not.
It is correct for us to be cautious because it involves public money. We are responsible to Government for its application and have to account for it to the public. Any negligence would mean a failure in our responsibility. The recent storm in a teacup over the 'Dome of the Planetarium" is an example. Despite "satisfactory" explanations given by the Council, it still could not avoid being the target of certain public criticisms. One rather authoritative editorial even points out specifically that "elected Councillors" have the responsibility to ensure that public money would not be misused and that the public should be informed before a decision is made.
I believe all "elected Councillors" would be proud of such a pro- posal although it smacks of "censure". This is because such a proposal would help to clear them to the doubt of whether they are genuine "representatives of public opinion". It shows that "elected Councillors" do not merely represent the opinion of some ten thousand or so voters.
HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL
Page 135 of 174
231
From the point of view of an "elected Councillor" and as a repre- sentative of public opinion, I feel that our Council is fairly cautious in the appropriation of public money. This could be seen from the fact that even the Director of Audit only directs criticisms at four minor items in his recent audit.
Since it is a question of public revenue, public comments are ab- solutely welcome. The public should also be allowed to pass judgment on whether our Council is handling their money with prudence.
Apart from some slight dissatisfaction with the purchase of "hawking meters", I am generally satisfied with the Council's present policies and measures. As for buying a better "Dome" for the Plane- tarium, I think Hong Kong can afford doing so. We should purchase the best equipment for the enjoyment of the public, with the hope of earning a better reputation for Hong Kong in the international circle.
But the part of the Director of Audit's criticisms which I find most distressing and which I am most concerned with is the licensing of advertising neon signs. Obviously, the issue could not be carried out smoothly if Government refuses to provide the necessary professional and technical support. Personally, I think this refusal has an ulterior motive as Government might think "neon sign licences" could bring in a considerable amount of profit for the public. Hence it might wish to have a share in it and make things difficult for us. When the Council is forced to abandon the scheme, it will then be wholly "taken over" by Government. If Government wishes to administer the "Licensing of Advertising Signs" by itself because the licences will bring in consider- able revenue, then it should not have made a deal with the Urban Council some time ago in exchange for the management of the car parks. However, what the Urban Council should be most concerned about at present is not the question of gain, but rather the old and dilapidated signboards which may endanger the public. No control or lack of control will certainly jeopardize public safety, especially in the event of typhoons or fires. These dilapidated advertising signboards must be put under some form of control and licensed, otherwise they will sooner or later cause serious incidents of death or injury. I therefore wish to take this opportunity to call on Government to reconsider giving us professional and technical assistance in this matter. If Government still insists on its position, then I hope the Council will consider "self- reliance" and employ, as far the law permits, professional and technical personnel to solve the problem. It will protect the public on the one hand, while on the other, enable the Council to have additional income for developing various recreational or cultural entertainment
Page 135Page 136
Page 136 of 174
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.