230
HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL
colonial politics. The people have very weak feelings of state and nation, and know very little about Chinese culture and the history of her development. Furthermore, they are egotistic and pleasure-seeking. As a result, Hong Kong people only place premium on material life but lack communal spirit. To build a society based on the interests of everybody, efforts on education should henceforth be stepped up so as to instill national concepts into the people's minds. In this way, we can easily materialize democratic politics.
On the other hand, I understand that when he met Urbco members in May, Sir Edward YOUDE, the late Governor, intimated that the existing three-tier political system will remain unchanged. The existing structure is suitable for Hong Kong's society. The roles of the three parties are very clear, and do supplement each other. However, good communication amongst them is essential if top effectiveness is to be achieved in the overall operation. Poor communication may lead to the waste of efforts, and misunderstanding. On the contrary, smooth communication may lead to a saving of efforts and mutual understanding. I, therefore, sincerely urge the government to place emphasis on the question of 'communication' and take actual steps accordingly so as not to leave the issue in the discussion stage, which can contribute nothing to the matter.
Social policies
Next, I want to comment on Hong Kong's social policies. In recent years, there has been in Hong Kong rapid progress in the policies of various fields. For example in matters affecting the people's living, such as medical care, housing, education and social welfare, there have been written reports and proposals for discussion and comment by the people. As those policies have far-reaching effects on all people in Hong Kong, naturally there have been keen response and concrete comments from the people. It is just like the beautiful scene of a hundred flowers blooming. Are those public opinions receiving due attention from the government? Today, I want to comment on the government's attitude in dealing with public opinions, with special reference to the question of housing.
Recently, the Housing Authority formally adopted a policy on public housing. The details are, more or less, similar to the points contained in the original Green Paper. Because of such a conclusion, I have much doubt on the methods and attitudes adopted by the Housing Authority in dealing with public opinions. In fact the whole thing smacks of playing tricks on public opinions. What is meant by that! As far as I know, people of various strata, especially residents of public housing estates, gave much attention to that Green Paper. Many organizations set up joint committees one after another to study the rental policy of public housing, raising questions on the contents of the document and enthusiastically putting forward new suggestions. During that period, many rallies of residents and consultation meetings were held; meetings with members of the Housing Authority were arranged; mass gatherings for the hearing of views were convened; even petitions had been staged. All that,
HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL
Page 136 of 201
231
however, only ended up with the Housing Authority accepting all points in the document with a view to implementing them. What does such a conclusion mean? It means that public opinions are totally useless and valueless; isn't it? Or is it that the Housing Authority just ignored public opinions after going through the motion of consulting the people in compliance with administrative formalities? I think it is not advisable to treat the process as an administrative formality in dealing with public opinions as that may reduce the people's confidence in the government and adversely affect their willingness to express their views. It should be noted that the government really needs the people's support and trust. In matters concerning the people's living, it is particularly important to understand the people's personal feelings and views, and to jointly find solution through communication between the two parties. In this way, a society really stable and prosperous can thus be founded. For the sake of the improvement of the people's living and the stability of the society, I hope that the government can face the issue squarely and henceforth deal with public opinions more effectively in handling similar social policies.
Municipal matters
Finally, I want to comment on municipal matters. Hong Kong is a small place, basically an urban society. Furthermore, Hong Kong is in the course of becoming a Special Administrative Region. So urban services should naturally come under the care of one co-ordinating department. It is, therefore, advisable to merge the Urban Council and the Regional Urban Council into one body so as to better co-ordinate urban services, and further pool resources together. To Hong Kong's municipal policies, there are going to be all sorts of gains but no drawbacks.
On the other hand, the internal operation of Urban Council should also be adjusted accordingly. According to my observation, there are some problems between Urban Services Department and Urban Council. In fact the current administrative structure is far too bureaucratic. So are other government departments. Junior officers can only work to the senior officer's instruction, no matter whether it is correct or not. They cannot make their views known. But it should be noted that as they can study the issues right on the spots, they perhaps know their work better than their supervisors do. So I hope the departments concerned can free themselves from long-established bureaucratic practices and let junior officers have the opportunities to express their views or appeal to their seniors in connection with their grievances so as not to let bureaucratism again block the communication between those above and those below. I think such a measure can surely make municipal policies and municipal services more congruent with Hong Kong's social reality. I, therefore, propose that a special group be set up to deal with the aforesaid problems and improve the link between Urban Council and Urban Services Department.
Chairman, with these remarks I support the motion.
(Mr. Joseph Y. S. CHAN and Dr. Ronald D. B. LEUNG left the meeting at 4.56 p.m. and 5.00 p.m. respectively.)
230
HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL
colonial politics. The people have very weak feelings of state and nation, and know very little about Chinese culture and the history of her development. Furthermore, they are egotistic and pleasure-seeking. As a result, Hong Kong people only place premium on material life but lack communal spirit. To build a society based on the interests of everybody, efforts on education should henceforth be stepped up so as to instill national concepts into the people's minds. In this way, we can easily materialize democratic politics.
On the other hand, I understand that when he met Urbco members in May, Sir Edward YOUDE, the late Governor, intimated that the existing three-tier political system will remain unchanged. The existing structure is suitable for Hong Kong's society. The roles of the three parties are very clear, and do supplement each other. However, good communication amongst them is essential if top effectiveness is to be achieved in the overall operation. Poor communication may lead to the waste of efforts, and misunderstanding. On the contrary, smooth communication may lead to a saving of efforts and mutual understanding. I, therefore, sincerely urge the government to place emphasis on the question of 'communication' and take actual steps accordingly so as not to leave the issue in the discussion stage, which can contribute nothing to the matter.
Social policies
Next, I want to comment on Hong Kong's social policies. In recent years, there has been in Hong Kong rapid progress in the policies of various fields. For example in matters affecting the people's living, such as medical care, housing, education and social welfare, there have been written reports and proposals for discussion and comment by the people. As those policies have far-reaching effects on all people in Hong Kong, naturally there have been keen response and concrete comments from the people. It is just like the beautiful scene of a hundred flowers blooming. Are those public opinions receiving due attention from the government? Today, I want to comment on the government's attitude in dealing with public opinions, with special reference to the question of housing.
Recently, the Housing Authority formally adopted a policy on public housing. The details are, more or less, similar to the points contained in the original Green Paper. Because of such a conclusion, I have much doubt on the methods and attitudes adopted by the Housing Authority in dealing with public opinions. In fact the whole thing smacks of playing tricks on public opinions. What is meant by that! As far as I know, people of various strata, especially residents of public housing estates, gave much attention to that Green Paper. Many organizations set up joint committees one after another to study the rental policy of public housing, raising questions on the contents of the document and enthusiastically putting forward new suggestions. During that period, many rallies of residents and consultation meetings were held; meetings with members of the Housing Authority were arranged; mass gatherings for the hearing of views were convened; even petitions had been staged. All that,
HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL
Page 136 of 201
231
however, only ended up with the Housing Authority accepting all points in the document with a view to implementing them. What does such a conclusion mean? It means that public opinions are totally useless and valueless; isn't it? Or is it that the Housing Authority just ignored public opinions after going through the motion of consulting the people in compliance with administrative formalities? I think it is not advisable to treat the process as an administrative formality in dealing with public opinions as that may reduce the people's confidence in the government and adversely affect their willingness to express their views. It should be noted that the government really needs the people's support and trust. In matters concerning the people's living, it is particularly important to understand the people's personal feelings and views, and to jointly find solution through communication between the two parties. In this way, a society really stable and prosperous can thus be founded. For the sake of the improvement of the people's living and the stability of the society, I hope that the government can face the issue squarely and henceforth deal with public opinions more effectively in handling similar social policies.
Municipal matters
Finally, I want to comment on municipal matters. Hong Kong is a small place, basically an urban society. Furthermore, Hong Kong is in the course of becoming a Special Administrative Region. So urban services should naturally come under the care of one co-ordinating department. It is, therefore, advisable to merge the Urban Council and the Regional Urban Council into one body so as to better co-ordinate urban services, and further pool resources together. To Hong Kong's municipal policies, there are going to be all sorts of gains but no drawbacks.
On the other hand, the internal operation of Urban Council should also be adjusted accordingly. According to my observation, there are some problems between Urban Services Department and Urban Council. In fact the current administrative structure is far too bureaucratic. So are other government departments. Junior officers can only work to the senior officer's instruction, no matter whether it is correct or not. They cannot make their views known. But it should be noted that as they can study the issues right on the spots, they perhaps know their work better than their supervisors do. So I hope the departments concerned can free themselves from long-established bureaucratic practices and let junior officers have the opportunities to express their views or appeal to their seniors in connection with their grievances so as not to let bureaucratism again block the communication between those above and those below. I think such a measure can surely make municipal policies and municipal services more congruent with Hong Kong's social reality. I, therefore, propose that a special group be set up to deal with the aforesaid problems and improve the link between Urban Council and Urban Services Department.
Chairman, with these remarks I support the motion.
(Mr. Joseph Y. S. CHAN and Dr. Ronald D. B. LEUNG left the meeting at 4.56 p.m. and 5.00 p.m. respectively.)
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.