1979 — Page 88

Page 88 of 136

142

HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL

general revenue towards providing a facility, and would otherwise seek to recoup expenditure from the user of the facility, it may charge the Council. Paragraph 5.10 says that where the Government has spent funds from general revenue towards providing a facility, and would otherwise seek to recoup expenditure from the user of the facility, it may charge the Council.

It is important to note that the word 'facilities' is substantially different from the term 'capital works'. It was meant that the two terms are mutually exclusive.

In one instance, the Government wanted to claim the costs of land in addition to claim of capital expenditure. It was, however, happily resolved that since the land is 'free', therefore it did not constitute a cost for that purpose.

One thing I must say is that no matter who pays, the capital works or facilities would be to the community's benefit but the responsibility must be clearly defined. Sir Philip wrote to the Council, before his knighthood, to the effect that the Council must not expect itself to be subsidized and he wrote that 'it would be wrong for the activities of the Council to be subsidized by the Government' and 'payment of on-cost by the Council at a rate less than current costs is a subsidy'. With this abundantly clear statement, it is not a good policy to adopt what one member of the Council said, 'give and take' attitude.

What we owe to the Central Government, we must pay our obligation. What we are entitled to (especially where the Central Government agreed) we must bring into account. The Director of Audit will be most unhappy if we do not. Further, we must run the Council from the Council's point of view and in the interest of the Council. We must resist a claim which is not due.

Earlier, I mentioned that the interpretation of the Memorandum of Administrative Arrangement may affect our long-term financing. I must say, also, it will affect our immediate term financing to the extent of over $20 million, being the on-cost on salaries from 1977.

While negotiating for the Memorandum of Administrative Arrangement in 1972 and 1973, the 26% on-cost was an arbitrary figure. In paragraph 2.10 it was mentioned as 'an appropriate figure' and for the purpose of adding to the 'expenditure estimate'. The components were never discussed but it was agreed that the components would include medical treatment, leave, pensions, etc. Normal commercial interpretation of the word 'etc' must bear reference to expenditures of similar nature. In dollars and cents, when the payroll increases, the dollars and cents on on-cost would also increase. We never enquired into how these components were based and the exact calculation of the percentage. It was a package deal which must be binding and it would be unfair to the Council if additional components of different nature are added.

I do wish that the Government will in due course drop this claim and where there is an element of doubt, the benefit must go to the Council. If the Government can make out a case about the increase in percentage (not in dollars and cents) of on-cost, any agreed increase should be effective in a future date and not retrospectively.

My remarks probably will indicate that the Council does have political and financial problems of a nature as described. I think all members must work together to face these problems to make the Council a council as we like it to be—not by quitting but by working together.

As the chairman of Markets & Abattoirs Select Committee, I like to report to the Council that all appears well. With an increase of population, the abattoir expansion programme must go ahead with full steam and, as abattoir services are not and can never be political, the abattoirs to be built in the New Territories should come under the wings of the Council for efficient and productive administration.

The market building programme, though very ambitious, should also go ahead as top priority. With due respect, it appears to me that this is the only possible solution to move hawkers (now upgraded rightly to 'street traders') away from the streets, thereby converting them to contractees or lessees. Financially, the subsidy to them will be reduced in time and ultimately abolished.

With the recent microcomputer revolution, microcomputers are now available at a price like sophisticated typewriters. I think at least a greater part of the Council work should go computerized. We probably may not save in terms of dollars and cents but the quality of services must be improved. The honorary advisers to the Computerization Sub-committee have provided us with top-grade professional advice, and I hope that the Council will benefit from them in the years to come.

With these remarks, I support the motion before Council.

(Mr. Augustine S. K. Chung arrived during Mr. Peter P. F. Chan's address.)

MR. CHAN CHI-KWAN, PETER (in Cantonese):

Crisis of the Rocketing Prices of Flats

I take the topic 'Crisis of the Rocketing Prices of Flats' today as it is a current abuse that has to be countered and censured. Even though the issue cannot be changed by the authority of the Urban Council, as an elected member having the responsibility to act as the voice of the people, I feel that I have to speak up. So I would like to take this opportunity to express my views here.

I believe that everyone of you has noticed that the degree of price soar for domestic premises during the year has reached a state of insanity. Prices increase two or three fold in a year and double in three or four months. Now the price for domestic premises in the suburbs off the city centre, the

Page 88 of 136

143

HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL