Page 119 of 146
194
HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL
It is a common scene in recent months that travel agencies have closed down or failed to keep their promises. These have incurred unnecessary losses on the part of the holiday-makers. Some of them are consumers of the middle-income group who have to save up their money for years before they have enough to join a tour, thinking that they will soon be able to enjoy themselves as well as broaden their outlook. However, they soon find themselves being swindled by the unscrupulous agencies and all the money paid has come to nothing. They have nowhere to turn to for help except expressing their disappointment for 'poor lucks' because the existing legislation offers them no safeguard whatsoever. If they resort to civil proceedings, they might win the case but in the end, they might find themselves spending much more on litigation cost than the damages they can claim. Should the Government bring out criminal proceedings against these agencies, the chance of winning the case is fifty-fifty.
1.
I think the Government should not refuse to put travel agencies under control through legislation or shift its responsibilities. My reasons being:
A travel agency holds a position similar to that of a fiduciary nature. Principals (holiday-makers) entrust the trustee (travel agencies) with money hoping that they will get reasonable service and achieve a legitimate goal (travelling abroad). But some unscrupulous businessmen use the trust money for other purposes or even embezzle it, thus in breach of trust. It is the responsibility of the Government to ensure that all those in the trust business do duly observe and respect the 'Laws of Trust'.
2.
The travel agencies serve not only a group or a minority group of people but the masses. Anything which affects the interest of the broad masses of people should become the concern of the Government who should try to take preventive measures. Trust establishments such as banks, deposit-taking finance companies, stock brokers, solicitors' firms serve the general public. As they are controlled by regulations, people can then entrust their affairs to or have transactions with them with hearts at ease.
Perhaps it is due to the numerous troubles and obstacles which may arise in administration and in the course of drafting regulations that the Government simply indicates that it has no intention to control travel agencies. However, this can hardly be accepted.
I am of the opinion that the Government only regards such agencies as ordinary business establishments and that it has ignored the fact that travel agencies should hold a position similar to that of a fiduciary nature. Such an attitude not only has a detrimental effect on the dignity and legal standing of the 'Laws of Trust', but creates more loopholes for swindlers. The public will then incur greater loss. I therefore urge the Government to reconsider the matter so that travel agencies may be put under control through legislation.
Now I wish to turn to matters which are within the jurisdiction of the Council.
HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL
195
The 'Clean Hong Kong Campaign', besides being the largest scale campaign ever launched in Hong Kong, is also one of the most important. Although we have achieved a little something so far, yet nothing is significant. On the one hand, this is, of course, due to the fact that people so used to this bad habit cannot refrain from littering. On the other hand, re-educating the residents, to be effective, is a time-consuming process. However, we have neglected one important question, i.e., can we manage 'to arrest those who actually litter?' From my point of view, only if we can arrest 'those who actually litter' and prosecute them can we achieve a truly deterrent effect. It has come to my notice that some members of the U.S.D. are so irresponsible that they, perfunctorily arrest and prosecute people, and then urge them to plead guilty, as if it were part of their routine. Of course, it takes some ignorant residents who, in their muddle-headedness, plead guilty of the things they did not do, just to save both time and trouble at the cost of 'unjust verdict'. One staff member under me has had such an encounter. Also, I have read about similar complaints. Therefore, I think the Council should forbid its U.S.D. staff to pervert the course of justice. It is not until then that the 'Clean Hong Kong' Campaign can really reap its desired benefit.
Finally, I would like to raise a few more points concerning the Council's intention to have an upward adjustment of the existing rates to cover its deficit. I hope, Mr. Chairman, that you will further negotiate with the Central Government to see if we can have any other alternatives. We may ask the Central Government to allocate more funds to us to cover the deficit, so that the Council may avoid having its existing rates adjusted upward to the relief of the people.
Mr. Chairman, with these remarks, I support the motion.
ADJOURNMENT—4.56 p.m.
CHAIRMAN (in English): Ladies and Gentlemen, the Chairman's right of reply will take place in the next regular meeting of the Council on Tuesday, 9 February 1982 at 4.00 p.m. Council therefore stands adjourned until that day.
PRINTED AND PUBLISHED BY THE GOVERNMENT PRINTER, HONG KONG
Page 119 of 146
Page 119 of 146
194
HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL
It is a common scene in recent months that travel agencies have closed down or failed to keep their promises. These have incurred unnecessary losses on the part of the holiday-makers. Some of them are consumers of the middle-income group who have to save up their money for years before they have enough to join a tour, thinking that they will soon be able to enjoy themselves as well as broaden their outlook. However, they soon find themselves being swindled by the unscrupulous agencies and all the money paid has come to nothing. They have nowhere to turn to for help except expressing their disappointment for 'poor lucks' because the existing legislation offers them no safe guard whatsoever. If they resort to civil proceedings, they might win the case but in the end, they might find themselves spending much more on litigation cost than the damages they can claim. Should the Government bring out criminal pro- ceedings against these agencies, the chance of winning the case is fifty-fifty.
1.
I think the Government should not refuse to put travel agencies under control through legislation or shift its responsibilities. My reasons being:
A travel agency holds a position similar to that of a fiduciary nature. Principals (holiday-makers) entrust the trustee (travel agencies) with money hoping that they will get reasonable service and achieve a legitimate goal (travelling abroad). But some unscrupulous businessmen use the trust money for other purposes or even embezzle it, thus in breach of trust. It is the responsibility of the Government to ensure that all those in the trust business do duly observe and respect the 'Laws of Trust'.
2.
The travel agencies serve not only a group or a minority group of people but the masses. Anything which affects the interest of the broad masses of people should become the concern of the Government who should try to take preventive measures. Trust establishments such as banks, deposit- taking finance companies, stock brokers, solicitors' firms serve the general public. As they are controlled by regulations, people can then entrust their affairs to or have transactions with them with hearts at ease.
Perhaps it is due to the numerous troubles and obstacles which may arise in administration and in the course of drafting regulations that the Government simply indicates that it has no intention to control travel agencies. However, this can hardly be accepted.
I am of the opinion that the Government only regards such agencies as ordinary business establishments and that it has ignored the fact that travel agencies should hold a position similar to that of a fiduciary nature. Such an attitude not only has a detrimental effect on the dignity and legal standing of the 'Laws of Trust', but creates more loopholes for swindlers. The public will then incur greater loss. I therefore urge the Government to reconsider the matter so that travel agencies may be put under control through legislation.
Now I wish to turn to matters which are within the jurisdiction of the Council.
HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL
Page 119 of 146
195
The 'Clean Hong Kong Campaign', besides being the largest scale campaign ever launched in Hong Kong, is also one of the most important. Although we have achieved a little something so far, yet nothing is significant. on the one hand, this is, of course, due to the fact that people so used to this bad habit cannot refrain from littering. On the other hand, re-educating the residents, to be effective, is a time-consuming process. However, we have neglected one important question, i.e., can we manage 'to arrest those who actually litter?' From my point of view, only if we can arrest 'those who actually litter' and prosecute them can we achieve a truly deterrent effect. It has come to my notice that some members of the U.S.D. are so irresponsible that they, perfunctorily arrest and prosecute people, and then urge them to plead guilty, as if it were part of their routine. Of course it takes some ignorant residents who, in their muddle-headedness, plead guilty of the things they did not do, just to save both time and trouble at the cost of 'unjust verdict'. One staff member under me has had such an encounter. Also I have read about similar complaints. Therefore, I think the Council should forbid its U.S.D. staff to pervert the course of justice. It is not until then that the 'Clean Hong Kong' Campaign can really reap its desired benefit.
Finally, I would like to raise a few more points concerning the Council's intention to have an upward adjustment of the existing rates to cover its deficit. I hope, Mr. Chairman, that you will further negotiate with the Central Government to see if we can have any other alternatives. We may ask the Central Government to allocate more funds to us to cover the deficit, so that the Council may avoid having its existing rates adjusted upward to the relief of the people.
Mr. Chairman, with these remarks, I support the motion.
ADJOURNMENT—4.56 p.m.
CHAIRMAN (in English):-Ladies and Gentlemen, the Chairman's right of reply will take place in the next regular meeting of the Council on Tuesday, 9 February 1982 at 4.00 p.m. Council therefore stands adjourned until that day.
PRINTED AND PUBLISHED BY THE GOVERNMENT PRINTER, HONG KONG
Page 119 of 14
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.