1983 — Page 177

Page 177 of 194

318

HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL

The north and south are often in conflict and although the nomenclatures are changed, they are still divided, one in the south and the other in the north. The two separate regional councils will each hold discussions on the provision of regulations and facilities and will naturally arrive at different conclusions. Because if you discuss them in different venues, you will not have the same results. Ultimately, therefore, the public and the staff involved will suffer.

There is no denying the fact that the power of the Urban Council will be broken up. I think it is more appropriate to have only one policy-making body to provide a comprehensive range of urban services to the public. If two separate bodies with similar functions are set up, differing policies and contradictions will result. It is analogous to the anarchy in a country with divided leadership.

Reconstitution of the Urban Council with New Territories residents included in the membership

At present, the Urban Council craves for the service of people from different walks of life with good knowledge of and connections with the various districts so as to strengthen its future platform. The participation by people who are both familiar and concerned with the New Territories in the Urban Council will surely be more useful and constructive than the formation of another body in opposition. It is of course much better to work hand in hand which will benefit all concerned. If we look further, we will realize that the purpose of the U.C. is not to expand its power, but rather we want to take care of the interests of the people of the New Territories and provide them with adequate recreational facilities so that both the city folks and N.T. residents will enjoy much prosperity and stability. In fact, the railway, mass transit, highways, telecommunication, water supply, electricity system and all these systems work as a network, and they have all linked the whole of Hong Kong together as a single entity on the basis of city economy. As the Government also aims at a balance between urban areas and the New Territories in matters of social services and political administration, it is therefore reasonable and conforms to the principle for the Urban Council to look after the whole territory instead of having 2 councils.

No matter how large this Council is, our supreme goal is to serve the public of Hong Kong. We shall try our very best to do all things for the good of the people of Hong Kong.

Moreover, the number of indigenous residents of the New Territories is decreasing while on the other hand, that of the urban residents moving to live in the New Territories ever increasing, with the latter ten times more than the former in future. Even if the membership of the Urban Council is expanded to 50, it will not be unwieldy. Indeed, it will only put the Council on a stronger footing. The conclusion I have drawn is that I am against the establishment of regional councils.

HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL

Page 177 of 194

319

MR. EDMUND W. H. CHOW (in Cantonese):-Mr. Chairman, I am strongly opposed to the central government's proposal to set up a 'regional council' modelled on the Urban Council.

Although in all likelihood, our opposition would come to naught, we must nevertheless register our objection as we know that our standpoint is right and the reasons for our objection justified. Since our opposition is doomed to failure, I would only speak on a few points here because the more one dwells on the matter, the more he would become disappointed when government finally implements the scheme. Because the more I speak, perhaps the more tears will flow in future. (laughter)

Generally speaking, the structure of government should be kept as simple as possible to avoid duplication and wasting of public money. Government policies should be uniform in order to achieve high efficiency. These cardinal rules are certainly well known to the high-level officials in the central government, but why do they, all of a sudden and departing from common sense, propose setting up a separate 'regional council' to split the urban services management body into two? The design is obvious to all.

The excuse the government gives is to further improve local administration and its reason for doing so is to avoid making the Urban Council too large and unwieldy. As no logical explanation is given for the proposed scheme, government's intention becomes all the more puzzling. My conjecture is that the following may be government's aims:

(1) To divide and rule-Government has clearly stated its fear that 'the Urban Council would thus become too large and unwieldy' and 'it is contrary to the concept of the central government. Therefore, in government's view, to 'divide and rule' would be most desirable and in line with Hong Kong's tradition. This is perhaps the real aim of setting up a separate regional council modelled on the Urban Council.

(2) To create a balance of power--Once the proposed 'regional council' is established, it would balance the power of the Urban Council and the central government would wield more control.

(3) To create 'regionalism'--There would be an increase in conflicts between different regions from which government would reap benefits. Having two independent councils, there would surely be contradictions and conflicts such as adopting different policies in regard to the same issues. Then government would have an excuse to set up another department to co-ordinate matters.

(4) If necessary, government could easily take back the executive power from the two councils and finally relegate them to consultative bodies only.

If my conjecture is 'a small man's suspicion of a noble intention', then what could be the reasons for the central government's proposal to set up another council to deal with the same kind of public services, disregarding duplication?

Page 177 of 194