318
HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL
exercise which some of us might have believed 20 years ago. But phoney consultation will not wash with the present generation.
The authors of the White Paper show a remarkable ignorance of facts and logic. For example, they graciously concede that the Urban Council need not change its committee structure, apparently totally ignorant of the fact that we frequently change our Committees and expect to do so this year, without consulting the Government. I even wonder if the authors of the White Paper read it as a whole to see whether it was logical and consistent. If they did read it, they should have noticed that in chapter 3 it says: (and I quote in para. 29) 'It is difficult to see any advantage in having two parallel systems of geographical representation in the Legislative Council, operating both directly and through District Boards.' So continuing to quote "That would mean having Members elected on a geographical basis both by direct and indirect methods.' It is indeed, as the White Paper says, difficult to see any advantage in having directly and indirectly elected members from the same constituencies. And that is exactly what they are proposing to do for the Urban Council, to have both directly and indirectly elected members from the same geographical constituencies. Where is the logic? Obviously the right hand doesn't know what the left hand is doing.
The White Paper proposes to reduce the appointed members of the Legislative Council by two, and increase the functional constituencies by the same number. That makes sense to me, though I would prefer to see the base of some of the functional constituencies widened to a larger electorate.
I am also in favour of replacing the electoral colleges by a directly elected system. In fact, I made this proposal when we debated the Green Paper recently. However, I see no reason why this could not take place in 1988, or perhaps as the CUC has just said it better in 1989 instead of 1991. The present system which puts a person on the Legislative Council with only a dozen votes is quite shameful, and has split the District Boards into factions. Some of these Legislative Councillors from the electoral colleges are Government appointees, and accountable to no one in their constituencies.
Chapter 1 of the White Paper urges prudent and gradual development. Yet this is totally contradicted by the hasty and imprudent jump taken with regard to the Urban Council. Urban Councillors and District Board Members have been thrown into chaos, laws have to be changed unofficially, and the public will have to pay for enormous changes in the building, personnel and administration, for this untimely decision. No final goal has been set, before this mindless and unprogrammed step has been introduced without warning. In summary, the White Paper reminds me of a bully who cowers at the water's edge afraid of jumping in, but who kicks a small child into the deepend and enjoys watching the child struggling. The faceless Government is afraid to take a small step by introducing election to the geographical constituency seats now, but it has kicked the Urban Council into deep water. Bravo, Government! Enjoy the fun!
HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL
Page 164 of 185
319
THE HON. HILTON CHEONG-LEEN (in English): Mr. Chairman, after studying the White Paper which was released yesterday I am more convinced than ever that the Urban Council's strong criticism of the Government's piecemeal approach on the question of Urban Councillors' ex-officio seats on District Boards was more than fully justified.
The secret is out at last: the White Paper proposed to cancel in 1991 all District Board electoral college seats to the Legislative Council in 1991, so why not as a sop give the District Boards seats on the Urban Council, and the earlier the better in order to keep District Board criticism of Government to the minimum. And the sacrificial lamb would be the Urban Councillors. The Government is 'robbing Peter to pay Paul'.
Mr. Chairman, I am more convinced than ever that the Government's action in rushing through the Electoral Provisions (Amendment) Bill was hasty, ill-timed and not at all wise.
The Government could have been more convincing, and more consensus-oriented in its approach instead of acting like a bull-in-a-china shop, by waiting until after the publishing of the White Paper before initiating measures to implement the proposals therein.
I would therefore urge the Urban Council to keep on making representations to the Government to retain the ex-officio link of Urban Councillors on the District Boards until at least 1991, and that the inclusion of District Board representatives on the Urban Council be postponed from 1989 to 1991 if that is inevitable. There are very practical reasons for doing so involving financial costs and providing the physical facilities, such as committee rooms and expanding the supporting staff services, etc. These arrangements have to be properly planned in advance, otherwise the end-result will be even more disharmony all round.
MR. PETER C. K. CHAN (in Cantonese): Mr. Chairman, although I am not highly educated, I have read a number of books. The White Paper published by the Government is the most controversial and contradictory book which I have ever read. Part of its incorrect reasoning has been mentioned by Mrs. Elsie Tu. Firstly, the Government regards that the ten seats elected from the Electoral College to the Legislative Council are not representative enough and should therefore be replaced by elected seats. However, the Government has proposed to introduce ten indirectly elected members in the Urban Council. I think it is a retrogressive and contradictory step. Perhaps the Government has learned something from the Jockey Club. If a horse comes second, instead of losing all money, you can get a consolation prize. Since the district boards cannot directly elect members to the Legislative Council, they are now allowed to elect members to the Urban Council as consolation prizes. In this connection, the Urban Council has to suffer needlessly and pointlessly and that is really regrettable. It is said in the White Paper that the Government has listened public opinion i.e.
318
HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL
exercise which some of us might have believed 20 years ago. But phoney consultation will not wash with the present generation.
The authors of the White Paper show a remarkable ignorance of facts and logic. For example, they graciously concede that the Urban Council need not change its committee structure, apparently totally ignorant of the fact that we frequently change our Committees and expect to do so this year, without consulting the Government. I even wonder if the authors of the White Paper read it as a whole to see whether it was logical and consistent. If they did read it, they should have noticed that in chapter 3 it says: (and I quote in para. 29) 'It is difficult to see any advantage in having two parallel systems of geographical representation in the Legislative Council, operating both directly and through District Boards.' So continuing to quote "That would mean having Members elected on a geographical basis both by direct and indirect methods.' It is indeed, as the White Paper says, difficult to see any advantage in having directly and indirectly elected members from the same constituencies. And that is exactly what they are proposing to do for the Urban Council, to have both directly and indirectly elected members from the same geographical con- stituencies. Where is the logic? Obviously the right hand doesn't know what the left hand is doing.
The White Paper proposes to reduce the appointed members of the Legisla- tive Council by two, and increase the functional constituencies by the same number. That makes sense to me, though I would prefer to see the base of some of the functional constituencies widened to a larger electorate.
I am also in favour of replacing the electoral colleges by a directly elected system. In fact, I made this proposal when we debated the Green Paper recently. However, I see no reason why this could not take place in 1988, or perhaps as the CUC has just said it better in 1989 instead of 1991. The present system which puts a person on the Legislative Council with only a dozen votes is quite shameful, and has split the District Boards into factions. Some of these Legislative Councillors from the electoral colleges are Government appointees, and accountable to no one in their constituencies.
Chapter 1 of the White Paper urges prudent and gradual development. Yet this is totally contradicted by the hasty and imprudent jump taken with regard to the Urban Council. Urban Councillors and District Board Members have been thrown into chaos, laws have to be changed unofficially, and the public will have to pay for enormous changes in the building, personnel and administra- tion, for this untimely decision. No final goal has been set, before this mindless and unprogrammed step has been introduced without warning. In summary, the White Paper reminds me of a bully who cowers at the water's edge afraid of jumping in, but who kicks a small child into the deepend and enjoys watching the child struggling. The faceless Government is afraid to take a small step by introducing election to the geographical constituency seats now, but it has kicked the Urban Council into deep water. Bravo, Government! Enjoy the fun!
HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL
Page 164 of 185
319
THE HON. HILTON CHEONG-LEEN (in English): Mr. Chairman, after studying the White Paper which was released yesterday I am more convinced than ever that the Urban Council's strong criticism of the Government's piecemeal approach on the question of Urban Councillors' ex-officio seats on District Boards was more than fully justified.
The secret is out at last: the White Paper proposed to cancel in 1991 all District Board electoral college seats to the Legislative Council in 1991, so why not as a sop give the District Boards seats on the Urban Council, and the earlier the better in order to keep District Board criticism of Government to the minimum. And the sacrificial lamb would be the Urban Councillors. The Government is 'robbing Peter to pay Paul'.
Mr. Chairman, I am more convinced than ever that the Government's action in rushing through the Electoral Provisions (Amendment) Bill was hasty, ill-timed and not at all wise.
The Government could have been more convincing, and more concensus- oriented in its approach instead of acting like a bull-in-a-china shop, by waiting until after the publishing of the White Paper before initiating measures to implement the proposals therein.
I would therefore urge the Urban Council to keep on making representations to the Government to retain the ex-officio link of Urban Councillors on the District Boards until at least 1991, and that the inclusion of District Board representatives on the Urban Council be postponed from 1989 to 1991 if that is inevitable. There are very practical reasons for doing so involving financial costs and providing the physical facilities, such as committee rooms and expanding the supporting staff services, etc. These arrangements have to be properly planned in advance, otherwise the end-result will be even more disharmony all round.
MR. PETER C. K. CHAN (in Cantonese):---Mr. Chairman, although I am not highly educated, I have read a number of books. The White Paper published by the Government is the most controversial and contradictory book which I have ever read. Part of its incorrect reasoning has been mentioned by Mrs. Elsie Tu. Firstly, the Government regards that the ten seats elected from the Electoral College to the Legislative Council are not representative enough and should therefore be replaced by elected seats. However, the Government has proposed to introduce ten indirectly elected members in the Urban Council. I think it is a retrogressive and contradictory step. Perhaps the Government has learned something from the Jockey Club. If a horse comes second, instead of losing all money, you can get a consolation prize. Since the district boards cannot directly elect members to the Legislative Council, they are now allowed to elect members to the Urban Council as consolation prizes. In this connection, the Urban Council has to suffer needlessly and pointlessly and that is really regrettable. It is said in the White Paper that the Government has listened public opinion i.e.
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.