Page 184 of 194
332
HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL
and members of the Heung Yee Kuk have expressed their views on the Government's proposals, and the possibility of setting up a second 'Regional Council' has attracted more comments than the other proposals in the Chief Secretary's speech.
I anticipate that all these cogent comments, and criticisms and also comments made by members of the public must eventually go before the Governor and the Executive Council for study and making of decision. Hence I have refrained from supporting any view, whether it is put further by my Colleagues in this Council or by the Heung Yee Kuk or anyone else because I think it is essential when members of the public are being invited to express their views, I should not join the arena, and play the roles of advocate, Judge and Jury.
However, I do wish to say that it is my personal belief that these proposals are put forth in the spirit of creating greater opportunities for more unofficials, and especially elected unofficials to participate in public administration at different levels. Whatever form the development of our local administration will take it is essential that those who are eligible will go and get registered as voters; and those who believe in helping to make Hong Kong an oasis of freedom and economic success in which we've made our home should stand for elections. Participation is the best way to prove the people's wish to have elected representations and the best arguments for its extensions.
For the reasons that I have stated in the second paragraph and without, in any way, being dis-respectful to the views expressed here today, I am afraid I have to abstain from voting on the motion.
MR. AUGUSTINE S. K. CHUNG (in Cantonese):—Mr. Chairman, in order not to present similar ideas to those already expressed by other members, I would like to supplement what other members have said on the question of having two councils. If the Urban Council is only a consultative body, I believe we can have even more councils. Of course, we have to understand that Urban Council is a partially legislation-making body and most of the By-laws are made by the Urban Council. If we have an additional council, I am afraid we might come up with different and conflicting legislations and policies. Take the example of import and export of goods which are monitored and controlled by the Urban Council. If we are going to have two independent and different councils, there will be two sets of standards, and there are differences between the North and South. If the import standard for the South is more stringent than the North, then it might cause smuggling at the boundaries or the frontier because goods coming to the South might be exported to the North first and smuggled to the South at a later stage. In other circumstances, say for instance, if certain contraventions might not be illegal in the North and those smugglers, if they have gone to the North then we might have to lead them back to the South in order that they could face judgement, so in that case, Hong Kong will be in a chaotic stage. As for the floating refuse and problems caused by rivers, if the refuse are being washed to the North from the South, we might receive complaints from the Northern people and the refuse will even be moved or flowed away by ships to the South from the North. So it will cause a lot of troubles and this is conflicting itself. As for planting, in future, because of the lack of land in the South, we might have to seek help from the North, but our request might be turned down by the Northern people, so again, there could be a problem in planting of trees. Also for restaurant licences, if we have two standards and if people from the South who have been accustomed to regulations of the South, come to the North and set up a restaurant there, then they may be facing troubles when operating in the North, and vice-versa. Under such circumstances, I believe we will have lots of contradictions, mainly because Urban Council is a partially law-making body and we cannot have two different sets of legislation for Hong Kong which might cause unnecessary troubles to the people of Hong Kong. Although there is different legislation for different states in U.S.A., I believe they already realize such differences, but because of historical reasons, they cannot make any changes to those differences. Taking their experience and especially for a place as small as Hong Kong, I think it is unreasonable for us to aim at having two sets of standards. We might be facing political problems as well because people in Hong Kong might be asking why it is necessary for the Government to consider having two sets of standards and two councils in view of all those experiences we have gained from other countries. Now, we have the problem concerning confidence. We have political problems and people may think that the Government is trying to create an entity so that the Northern portion could be taken up by a different government and the Southern part would be controlled by the British in future. So in order to avoid any speculation which is not good in Hong Kong, I think we should avoid having such a mis-conception. I think the most important thing for us to do at the moment is to bring back confidence to the people of Hong Kong and we should not create any trouble in such areas. So I think we should not make any suggestion now concerning an additional council. We should aim at having only one council so that we could have one single set of legislation, policy, etc. As pointed out previously, we have able people from the N.T. and we should try to enlist their support in order to make Hong Kong more prosperous.
HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL
333
The Chairman declared a recess at 4.25 p.m. and the meeting resumed at 4.35 p.m.
(Mr. Stephen M. L. LAU left after the recess.)
THE HONOURABLE Selina Chow (in English):—Mr. Chairman, I can assure you, it is not because I am amused with what I am going to say. Since this is also my last open meeting in this Council, I would like to take this opportunity to thank all my colleagues here for having made my last four years in public office rich and stimulated in the most meaningful way by their kindness and assistance to me as well as by their devotion to the team work on this Council.
Page 184 of 194
Page 184 of 194
Page 184 of 194
332
HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL
and members of the Heung Yee Kuk have expressed their views on the Government's proposals, and the possibility of setting up a second 'Regional Council' has attracted more comments than the other proposals in the Chief Secretary's speech.
I anticipate that all these cogent comments, and criticisms and also comments made by members of the public must eventually go before the Governor and the Executive Council for study and making of decision. Hence I have refrained from supporting any view, whether it is put further by my Colleagues in this Council or by the Heung Yee Kuk or anyone else because I think it is essential when members of the public are being invited to express their views, I should not join the arena, and play the roles of advocate, Judge and Jury.
However, I do wish to say that it is my personal belief that these proposals are put forth in the spirit of creating greater opportunities for more unofficials, and especially elected unofficials to participate in public administration at different levels. Whatever form the development of our local administration will take it is essential that those who are eligible will go and get registered as voters; and those who believe in helping to make Hong Kong an oasis of freedom and economic success in which we've made our home should stand for elections. Participation is the best way to prove the people's wish to have elected representations and the best arguments for it's extensions.
For the reasons that I have stated in the second paragraph and without, in any way, being dis-respectful to the views expressed here today, I am afraid I have to abstain from voting on the motion.
MR. AUGUSTINE S. K. CHUNG (in Cantonese):—Mr. Chairman, in order not to present similar ideas to those already expressed by other members, I would like to supplement what other members have said on the question of having two councils. If the Urban Council is only a consultative body, I believe we can have even more councils. Of course, we have to understand that Urban Council is a partially legislation-making body and most of the By-laws are made by the Urban Council. If we have an additional council, I am afraid we might come up with different and conflicting legislations and policies. Take the example of import and export of goods which are monitored and controlled by the Urban Council. If we are going to have two independent and different councils, there will be two sets of standards, and there are difference between the North and South. If the import standard for the South is more stringent than the North, then it might cause smuggling at the boundaries or the frontier because goods coming to the South might be exported to the North first and smuggled to the South at a later stage. In other circumstances, say for instance, if certain contraventions might not be illegal in the North and those smugglers, if they have gone to the North then we might have to lead them back to the South in order that they could face judgement, so in that case, Hong Kong will be in a
refuse are
HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL
333
chaotic stage. As for the floating refuse and problems caused by rivers, if the being washed to the North from the South, we might receive complaints from the Northern people and the refuse will even be moved or lowed away by ships to the South from the North. So it will cause a lot of troubles and this is conflicting itself. As for planting, in future, because of the lack of land in the South, we might have to seek help from the North, but our request might be turned down by the Northern people, so again, there could be a problem in planting of trees. Also for restaurant licences, if we have two standards and if people from the South who have been accustomed to regulations of the South, come to the North and set up a restaurant there, then they may be facing troubles when operating in the North, and vice-versa. Under such circumstances, I believe we will have lots of contradictions, mainly because Urban Council is a partially law-making body and we cannot have two different sets of legislation for Hong Kong which might cause unnecessary troubles to the people of Hong Kong. Although there is different legislation for different states in U.S.A., I believe they already realize such differences, but because of historical reasons, they cannot make any changes to those differences. Taking their experience and especially for a place as small as Hong Kong, I think it is unreasonable for us to aim at having two sets of standards. We might be facing political problem as well because people in Hong Kong might be asking why it is necessary for the Government to consider having two sets of standards and two councils in view of all those experiences we have gained from other countries. Now, we have the problem concerning confidence. We have political problem and people may think that the Government is trying to create an entity so that the Northern portion could be taken up by a different government and the Southern part would be controlled by the British in future. So in order to avoid any speculation which is not good in Hong Kong, I think we should avoid having such a mis-conception. I think the most important thing for us to do at the moment is to bring back confidence to the people of Hong Kong and we should not create any trouble in such areas. So I think we should not make any suggestion now concerning an additional council. We should aim at having only one council so that we could have one single set of legislation, policy, etc. As pointed out previously, we have abled people from the N.T. and we should try to enlist their support in order to make Hong Kong more prosperous.
The Chairman declared a recess at 4.25 p.m. and the meeting resumed at 4.35 p.m.
(Mr. Stephen M. L. LAU left after the recess.}
THE HONOURABLE Selina Chow (in English):-Mr. Chairman, I can assure you, it is not because I am amused with what I am going to say. Since this is also my last open meeting in this Council, I would like to take this opportunity to thank all my colleagues here for having made my last four years in public office in rich and stimulated in the most meaningful way by their kindness and assistance to me as well as by their devotion to the team work on this Council.
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.