1995 — Page 303

Page 303 of 485

of 485

Page 303 of 485

16

HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL

innovative concept of 'one country two systems', the return of Hong Kong to China would still face many obstacles, and the parties involved would still be in the midst of arguments because, as we can all see, the ideology of the people of Hong Kong is very different from that of China. Therefore, both sides understand that Hong Kong can return to China in 1997 only on this basis. However, in these few years, all of us who are concerned have wavered on this point. Because of mutual mistrust and fear, the definition of ‘one country, two systems' has become blurred. On many occasions we exercise unnecessary self-discipline and apply China's standards on ourselves. At the same time, China may not understand Hong Kong's way of doing things and so applies her own thinking to us, resulting in more mistrust and fear. Therefore, when Urban Council faces such pressures in the future, we must insist on using our own standards to judge whether we should and can do a certain thing, instead of accepting that anything that is not allowed in China should not be done in Hong Kong. These are what I called Councillors' responsibilities and what I referred to at the beginning of this speech as practical contributions that we can make towards 'one country, two systems".

Let us take as an example the decision on whether assemblies and demonstrations in memory of the June Fourth Incident should be held in Victoria Park or Chater Garden after 1997. We should understand that under our legal system, assemblies and demonstrations are only a form of ideological expression, intending to voice different views. They are tolerated and permitted under the Basic Law and the Constitution of China. Therefore, under our legal system, such assemblies and demonstrations will never constitute the so-called unlawful activities, and have nothing to do with the crime of plotting to overthrow the Chinese Government. Similarly, to allow our libraries to lend out literary works of Fang Lizhi and Liu Binyan or to allow certain performing groups or organizations disliked by the Chinese government to perform in our Cultural Centre is part of our natural freedom, because freedom of speech includes not only freedom to speak, but also freedom to hear and to see. In view of this, the responsibility of the Urban Council is heavy and its way ahead is long. We must shoulder these responsibilities in the future. So, our motto of 'Enriching City Life' should not be limited to creating a beautiful and green environment in Hong Kong. It should also include endeavours to retain our own ideologies and varied culture, as well as to maintain Hong Kong—the city that we know and love—as it is.

These are my remarks. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

MR. AMBROSE CHEUNG WING-SUM (in Cantonese):-Mr. Chairman, in my speeches made in the past few years' annual conventional debates, I focused on certain district issues and put forward my views and suggestions on how to solve them. This year, however, I wish to talk from a broader social point of view. The Urban Council will be confronted with two major issues in 1996. Unless these two issues are successfully dealt with, I believe that our outlook will be nothing but dismal. The first issue, as I mentioned before, concerns the image and efficiency of the Council. The second is the transition of the Urban Council.