Page 124 of 136
214
# HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL
## ADDRESS BY CHAIRMAN
CHAIRMAN (in English):-Good afternoon, Ladies and Gentlemen. Council is called to order.
## MINUTES
The minutes of the meeting held on 5 February 1980 were confirmed.
## STATEMENT BY CHAIRMAN
CHAIRMAN (in English):-The system of public administration by which Hong Kong lives at present seems designed for its own mixed purpose. It takes into account expediently the geopolitical circumstances. Be that as it may, the best interest of the greatest number must be served in a practical manner in all matters.
The conditions are not the same today as a generation ago or even a decade back. Things change fast here in the private sector. But the evolution of our public institutions goes on by fits and starts. It is argued that nothing should be done in haste to change the structure radically as irreparable damage might be caused to the ability to survive as a going concern. A sop is thrown now and again to still a jarring voice. Anyway, the pace and manner of political change must accord logically with the overall development of the place and the wishes of the people for whom it is home, come what may.
It is said that the form of government is not representative of the people. It may seem so at first sight. But it need not be so in reality even in the present set-up were perspicacity shown consistently in the appointments made to public office and the people's interest made the guiding factor in selection. No change should ignore pertinent historical experience and the temperament of the people. In any case, how is genuine representation to be determined in prevailing local conditions? Here is primarily a mercantile community, transformed into an industrial and financial centre in addition. There is besides a dichotomy of loyalty, economic and political. What should be done in such a society seemingly always in rapid transition?
The tendency is to stick to a time-tested process all can understand. Is it because it does away with the need to think? Whatever happens, let the discussion go on to find a new way of governing Hong Kong if it makes the people happier ultimately. There must be compelling arguments nevertheless to convince a pre-eminently materialistic society to turn its back on its tried-and-true progression towards a better life. Can a case be put together to change its course out of time? Anyhow, there is no mandate to stand still.
Page 124 of 136
215
Those who hold public office here by appointment have different contributions to make with competence and integrity. It is believed that their participation and involvement would be beneficial and productive for the community as a whole, either immediately or in the future. Their own or their clear potential to serve the common good is the reason for their presence. This is a simple question of job selection transferred to the public sector and is a familiar procedure in the daily life of Hong Kong for decades on end. In the event, Hong Kong has been well served on balance.
At the same time, every opportunity ought to be given to young people whose local background, dedicated enterprise and clear honesty of purpose together hold the promise of useful community service in the years ahead. If the potential is there, it should be encouraged. For, tomorrow is their world.
There is no claim that those who are asked by the Government to join the many boards, panels, councils and committees engaged in public affairs represent anybody. There is no need to argue that they do or, much less, to justify the system. Success is its best vindication. And, the facts of success cannot be contradicted.
What is the alternative? The ballot box without universal franchise? Even supposing it was workable here, it would still not ensure the election of the best local talent. Would the vote be discriminating in its choice in favour of those with a good record of community service or otherwise qualified to hold public office? The experience elsewhere suggests the contrary might well happen: power play, political machinations, a candidate faute de mieux, or the intervention of sectional interests. Also, local election experience spanning a few decades now should be taken into account in any assessment in order to reach a true and fair view altogether. Besides, there are emerging factors beyond the powers here to control and perhaps also the ken of those pushing such changes.
To be fair, there is also the other side of the coin when it comes to the system of appointments. It depends on the quality of the appointments made and the acumen of the powers making them. This is the acid test. How deep is the pool from which the selection is drawn? Is the net cast out far enough? Moreover, what are the attributes? The ability to use one's judgement sensibly and the competence to perform the given task adequately? Even so, what value have such qualities without strength of character and the courage of one's convictions? Is selection made on merit alone, without discrimination of any sort?
Then, there is the vexed question. To whom are they beholden? Certainly, it must be to their own integrity. It entails the personal acceptance that their one and only duty is to the community. Of course, they must have also the courage to live up to it. And not, blind commitment to the policies of...
Page 124 of 136
214
HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL
ADDRESS BY CHAIRMAN
CHAIRMAN (in English):-Good afternoon, Ladies and Gentlemen. Council
is called to order.
MINUTES
The minutes of the meeting held on 5 February 1980 were confirmed.
STATEMENT BY CHAIRMAN
CHAIRMAN (in English):-The system of public administration by which Hong Kong lives at present seems designed for its own mixed purpose. It takes into account expediently the geopolitical circumstances. Be that as it may, the best interest of the greatest number must be served in a practical manner in all matters.
The conditions are not the same today as a generation ago or even a decade back. Things change fast here in the private sector. But the evolution of our public institutions goes on by fits and starts. It is argued that nothing should be done in haste to change the structure radically as irreparable damage might be caused to the ability to survive as a going concern. A sop is thrown now and again to still a jarring voice. Anyway, the pace and manner of political change must accord logically with the overall development of the place and the wishes of the people for whom it is home, come what may.
It is said that the form of government is not representative of the people. It may seem so at first sight. But it need not be so in reality even in the present set-up were perspicacity shown consistently in the appointments made to public office and the people's interest made the guiding factor in selection. No change should ignore pertinent historical experience and the tempera- ment of the people. In any case, how is genuine representation to be deter- mined in prevailing local conditions? Here is primarily a mercantile com- munity, transformed into an industrial and financial centre in addition. There is besides a dichotomy of loyalty, economic and political. What should be done in such a society seemingly always in rapid transition?
The tendency is to stick to a time-tested process all can understand. Is it because it does away with the need to think? Whatever happens, let the dis cussion go on to find a new way of governing Hong Kong if it makes the people happier ultimately. There must be compelling arguments nevertheless to convince a pre-eminently materialistic society to turn its back on its tried- and-true progression towards a better life. Can a case be put together to change its course out of time? Anyhow, there is no mandate to stand still.
HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL
Page 124 of 136
215
Those who hold public office here by appointment have different con- tributions to make with competence and integrity. It is believed that their participation and involvement would be beneficial and productive for the community
as a whole, either immediately or in the future. Their own or their clear potential to serve the common good is the reason achievements for their presence. This is a simple question of job selection transferred to the public sector and is a familiar procedure in the daily life of Hong Kong for decades on end. In the event, Hong Kong has been well served on balance.
At the same time, every opportunity ought to be given to young people whose local background, dedicated enterprise and clear honesty of purpose together hold the promise of useful community service in the years ahead. If the potential is there, it should be encouraged. For, tomorrow is their world.
There is no claim that those who are asked by the Government to join the many boards, panels, councils and committees engaged in public affairs represent anybody. There is no need to argue that they do or, much less, to justify the system. Success is its best vindication. And, the facts of success cannot be contradicted.
What is the alternative? The ballot box without universal franchise? Even supposing it was workable here, it would still not ensure the election of the best local talent. Would the vote be discriminating in its choice in favour of those with a good record of community service or other- wise qualified to hold public office? The experience elsewhere suggests the contrary might well happen: power play, political machinations, a candidate faute de mieux, or the intervention of sectional interests. Also, local election experience spanning a few decades now should be taken into account in any assessment in order to reach a true and fair view altogether. Besides, there are emerging factors beyond the powers here to control and perhaps also the ken of those pushing such changes.
To be fair, there is also the other side of the coin when it comes to the system of appointments. It depends on the quality of the appointments made and the acumen of the powers making them. This is the acid test. How deep is the pool from which the selection is drawn? Is the net cast out far enough? Moreover, what are the attributes? The ability to use one's judgement sensibly and the competence to perform the given task adequately? Even so, what value have such qualities without strength of character and the courage of one's convictions? Is selection made on merit alone, without discrimination of any sort?
Then, there is the vexed question. To whom are they beholden? Certainly, it must be to their own integrity. It entails the personal acceptance that their one and only duty is to the community. Of course, they must have also the courage to live up to it. And not, blind commitment to the policies of
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.