Page 449 of 498
HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL
493
The arts and cultural circles are very concerned about arts development and the Urban Council is the largest venue manager. Venues under its management include the Hong Kong Coliseum, Queen Elizabeth Stadium, Hong Kong Stadium, Cultural Centre and so on. As we can see, Hong Kong has over the last few years developed into an international performing, cultural and entertainment centre. There has been a boom in our performing trade in past years. Many foreign singers come here to perform and local singers have a lot of chances to perform too. There is this new trend of popularisation of musicals. On top of it, the Tourist Association puts a great deal of emphasis on multi-faceted entertainment programmes.
As the provider and management body of venues, the Urban Council must not confuse the two roles and there should not be a pre-censorship system. You can see tabled before you here today signatures of famous personalities of the cultural and performing circles. They are in support of my motion today and they include the Director of the Academy for Performing Arts and ex-Deputy Chairman of the Urban Council Mr. Lo King-man, ex-Urban Councillor and current Chairman of the Art Development Council Mr. Chow Wing-shing, some of our advisers Ms. Barbara Fei, Mr. Chan Wing-wah, Mr. Yu Hong-yung, Mr. Cheung Ping-kuen and others.
Mr. Chairman, I hope Members can see the importance of this discussion and also the concern of the cultural, arts and performing circles towards our stance.
I have prepared a lot of ideas to talk to you today about the reason for my motion. My stand is that we should not, must not and cannot have a pre-censorship system. After listening to the reply by Mr. Wen and coming to the realization that the Council stands clear on it, I don't want to waste any more of your time.
I would like to speak about some of the problems brought by the amended motion. Mr. Pao's amended motion is for the Council to reaffirm that bookings for activities and programmes organized by hirers of any Council venue must comply with the terms and conditions of hire of the Council venue and the laws of Hong Kong'.
Mr. Chairman, the amended motion just avoids and evades the question. The amended motion does not point to any direction and it is of no significance. It merely reiterates indisputable facts to the same effect as reiterating that this Council must comply with the laws of Hong Kong. I think we all understand this and there is no need to elaborate and debate. With the clear reply from Mr. Wen that we should not be held liable for the programmes staged by hirers of venues, why can't we face the problem squarely instead of evading it? Is it because the issue of pre-censorship is sensitive? I feel that if we do not discuss the issue and later on the amended motion is carried resulting in no need to put the original motion to vote, it would be even more sensitive. A question mark will be left for outsiders to ask
Page 449 of 498
Page 449 of 498
HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL
493
The arts and cultural circles are very concerned about arts development and the Urban Council is the largest venue manager. Venues under its management include the Hong Kong Coliseum, Queen Elizabeth Stadium, Hong Kong Stadium, Cultural Centre and so on. As we can see, Hong Kong has over the last few years developed into an international performing, cultural and entertainment centre. There has been a boom in our performing trade in past years. Many foreign singers come here to perform and local singers have a lot of chances to perform too. There is this new trend of popularisation of musicals. On top of it, the Tourist Association puts a great deal of emphasis on multi-faceted entertainment programmes.
As the provider and management body of venues, the Urban Council must not confuse the two roles and there should not be a pre-censorship system. You can see tabled before you here today signatures of famous personalities of the cultural and performing circles. They are in support of my motion today and they include the Director of the Academy for Performing Arts and ex- Deputy Chairman of the Urban Council Mr. Lo King-man, ex-Urban Councillor and current Chairman of the Art Development Council Mr. Crow Wing-shing, some of our advisers Ms. Barbara FEI, Mr. CHAN Wing-wah, Mr. Yu Hong-yung, Mr. CHEUNG Ping-kuen and others.
Mr. Chairman, I hope Members can see the importance of this discussion and also the concern of the cultural, arts and performing circles towards our stance.
I have prepared a lot of ideas to talk to you today about the reason for my motion. My stand is that we should not, must not and cannot have a pre- censorship system. After listening to the reply by Mr. WEN and come to the realization that the Council stands clear on it, I don't want to waste any more of your time.
I would like to speak about some of the problems brought by the amended motion. Mr. PAO's amended motion is for the Council to reaffirm that bookings for activities and programmes organized by hirers of any Council venue must comply with the terms and conditions of hire of the Council venue and the laws of Hong Kong'.
Mr. Chairman, the amended motion just avoids and evades the question. The amended motion does not point to any direction and it is of no significance. It merely reiterates indisputable facts to the same effect as reiterating that this Council must comply with the laws of Hong Kong. I think we all understand this and there is no need to elaborate and debate. With the clear reply from Mr. WEN that we should not be held liable for the programmes staged by hirers of venues, why can't we face the problem squarely instead of evading it? Is it because the issue of pre-censorship is sensitive? I feel that if we do not discuss the issue and later on the amended motion is carried resulting in no need to put the original motion to vote, it would be even more sensitive. A question mark will be left for outsiders to ask
Page 449 of 498
Pac
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.