1997 — Page 147

Urban Council Proceedings 市政局議事錄 All AI Reviewed

Page 147 of 654

150

HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL

important role here. The Council used to do quite well in preserving artistic freedom, but there were certain incidents in recent years. In the last month or two, there appeared to be vetting on the use of our venues. The display of the Pillar of Shame sounded an important message. Hong Kong is embarking on a new era. We are entering from a society that allows for free statements into one with political screening. The incident of the Pillar of Shame produced and directed by this Council has spelled out a full statement. In the past, certain Members often called on colleagues not to politicise the Council. These same people put up this act of political screening. That is why the Democratic Party is moving an amendment.

The Democratic Party feels the words 'protection of artistic freedom' should be included in the motion. After the changeover to the rule of the SAR government in the future, protection of artistic freedom will surely become a new battlefield. We believe patriotic or suddenly patriotic ones among us will do their best to curry the favour of the new master. They will try to suppress opposing views, including views on art. As put by the Chief Secretary, petty people who sell Hong Kong for their own interests are the most frightening,

Finally, let me say that I hope the Urban Council can maintain its unswerving stand on protecting artistic freedom. I hope it can be a mirror to reflect the ugly faces of petty people. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Mr. Wu Chi-wai (in Cantonese): Mr. Chairman, the mover of this motion is Mr. Kwok Bit-chun and the seconder is Mr. Lam Man-fai. In a previous debate on whether the Pillar of Shame should be allowed to be displayed at this Council's venue, Mr. LAM said the act of displaying the pillar would be one of forcing the public to see the exhibit. We get worried about this viewpoint brought up by Mr. LAM. We wonder what is to become of the Council's action to popularise visual art at the end of the day.

Mr. Lam said that since today's motion was not yet carried, there was no way we could tell of their plan. I think after listening to him and reflecting on his previous actions, we know what to expect behind this whole thing. I agree that the Council has not done enough to promote visual art and that we can do a lot more to promote it. However, if after our efforts in promoting visual art, the Council decides that a certain work by an artist for display is a political one, he may be told that his work will not be displayed at one of our venues. If this is the attitude, how can we convince ourselves that the Council will commit wholeheartedly to the promotion of visual art?

During discussions on the Cultural Select Committee's Five Year Plan, people of the art circle mentioned that the Council had not done enough in promoting visual art. I hope today's motion can make up for that. However, if there is no commitment of quality and no guarantee of artistic freedom, we may disappoint artists who find that their work cannot be displayed at venues

Edit History

2026-05-16 03:02:00 · NVIDIA / meta/llama-4-maverick-17b-128e-instruct

Live

View comparison

AI Proofread

Page 147 of 654 Page 147 of 654 150 HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL important role here. The Council used to do quite well in preserving artistic freedom, but there were certain incidents in recent years. In the last month or two, there appeared to be vetting on the use of our venues. The display of the Pillar of Shame sounded an important message. Hong Kong is embarking on a new era. We are entering from a society that allows for free statements into one with political screening. The incident of the Pillar of Shame produced and directed by this Council has spelled out a full statement. In the past, certain Members often called on colleagues not to politicise the Council. These same people put up this act of political screening. That is why the Democratic Party is moving an amendment. The Democratic Party feels the words 'protection of artistic freedom' should be included in the motion. After the changeover to the rule of the SAR government in the future, protection of artistic freedom will surely become a new battlefield. We believe patriotic or suddenly patriotic ones among us will do their best to curry the favour of the new master. They will try to suppress opposing views, including views on art. As put by the Chief Secretary, petty people who sell Hong Kong for their own interests are the most frightening, Finally, let me say that I hope the Urban Council can maintain its unswerving stand on protecting artistic freedom. I hope it can be a mirror to reflect the ugly faces of petty people. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Wu Chi-wai (in Cantonese): Mr. Chairman, the mover of this motion is Mr. Kwok Bit-chun and the seconder is Mr. Lam Man-fai. In a previous debate on whether the Pillar of Shame should be allowed to be displayed at this Council's venue, Mr. LAM said the act of displaying the pillar would be one of forcing the public to see the exhibit. We get worried about this viewpoint brought up by Mr. LAM. We wonder what is to become of the Council's action to popularise visual art at the end of the day. Mr. Lam said that since today's motion was not yet carried, there was no way we could tell of their plan. I think after listening to him and reflecting on his previous actions, we know what to expect behind this whole thing. I agree that the Council has not done enough to promote visual art and that we can do a lot more to promote it. However, if after our efforts in promoting visual art, the Council decides that a certain work by an artist for display is a political one, he may be told that his work will not be displayed at one of our venues. If this is the attitude, how can we convince ourselves that the Council will commit wholeheartedly to the promotion of visual art? During discussions on the Cultural Select Committee's Five Year Plan, people of the art circle mentioned that the Council had not done enough in promoting visual art. I hope today's motion can make up for that. However, if there is no commitment of quality and no guarantee of artistic freedom, we may disappoint artists who find that their work cannot be displayed at venues

Baseline (Original)

Page 147 of 654 Page 147 of 654 150 HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL important role here. The Council used to do quite well in preserving artistic freedom. but there were certain incidents in recent years. In the last month or two, there appeared to be vetting on the use of our venues. The display of the Pillar of Shame sounded an important message. Hong Kong is embarking on a new era. We are entering from a society that allows for free statements into one with political screening. The incident of the Pillar of Shame produced and directed by this Council has spelled out a full statement. In the past, certain Members often called on colleagues not to politicise the Council. These same people put up this act of political screening. That is why the Democratic Party is moving an amendment. The Democratic Party feels the words 'protection of artistic freedom' should be included in the motion. After the changeover to the rule of the SAR government in the future, protection of artistic freedom will surely become a new battlefield. We believe patriotic or suddenly patriotic ones among us will do their best to curry the favour of the new master. They will try to suppress opposing views, including views on art. As put by the Chief Secretary, pelty people who sell Hong Kong for their own interests are the most frightening, Finally, let me say that I hope the Urban Council can maintain its unswerving stand on protecting artistic freedom. I hope it can be a mirror to reflect the ugly faces of petty people. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Wu Chi-waI (in Cantonese):-Mr. Chairman, the mover of this motion is Mr. Kwok Bit-chun and the seconder is Mr. Lam Man-fai. In a previous debate on whether the Pillar of Shame should be allowed to be displayed at this Council's venue, Mr. LAM said the act of displaying the pillar would be one of forcing the public to see the exhibit. We get worried about this viewpoint brought up by Mr. LAM. We wonder what is to become of the Council's action to popularise visual art at the end of the day. Mr. Lam said that since today's motion was not yet carried, there was no way we could tell of their plan. I think after listening to him and reflecting on his previous actions, we know what to expect behind this whole thing. I agree that the Council has not done enough to promote visual art and that we can do a lot more to promote it. However, if after our efforts in promoting visual art, the Council decides that a certain work by an artist for display is a political one, he may be told that his work will not be displayed at one of our venues. If this is the attitude, how can we convince ourselves that ther Council will commit wholeheartedly to the promotion of visual art? During discussions on the Cultural Select Committee's Five Year Plan, people of the art circle mentioned that the Council had not done enough in promoting visual art. I hope today's motion can make up for that. However, if there is no commitment of quality and no guarantee of artistic freedom, we may disappoint artists who find that their work cannot be displayed at venues

2026-05-16 03:02:00 · Baseline

View content

Page 147 of 654

150

HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL

important role here. The Council used to do quite well in preserving artistic freedom. but there were certain incidents in recent years. In the last month or two, there appeared to be vetting on the use of our venues. The display of the Pillar of Shame sounded an important message. Hong Kong is embarking on a new era. We are entering from a society that allows for free statements into one with political screening. The incident of the Pillar of Shame produced and directed by this Council has spelled out a full statement. In the past, certain Members often called on colleagues not to politicise the Council. These same people put up this act of political screening. That is why the Democratic Party is moving an amendment.

The Democratic Party feels the words 'protection of artistic freedom' should be included in the motion. After the changeover to the rule of the SAR government in the future, protection of artistic freedom will surely become a new battlefield. We believe patriotic or suddenly patriotic ones among us will do their best to curry the favour of the new master. They will try to suppress opposing views, including views on art. As put by the Chief Secretary, pelty people who sell Hong Kong for their own interests are the most frightening,

Mr. Wu Chi-waI (in Cantonese):-Mr. Chairman, the mover of this motion is Mr. Kwok Bit-chun and the seconder is Mr. Lam Man-fai. In a previous debate on whether the Pillar of Shame should be allowed to be displayed at this Council's venue, Mr. LAM said the act of displaying the pillar would be one of forcing the public to see the exhibit. We get worried about this viewpoint brought up by Mr. LAM. We wonder what is to become of the Council's action to popularise visual art at the end of the day.

Mr. Lam said that since today's motion was not yet carried, there was no way we could tell of their plan. I think after listening to him and reflecting on his previous actions, we know what to expect behind this whole thing. I agree that the Council has not done enough to promote visual art and that we can do a lot more to promote it. However, if after our efforts in promoting visual art, the Council decides that a certain work by an artist for display is a political one, he may be told that his work will not be displayed at one of our venues. If this is the attitude, how can we convince ourselves that ther Council will commit wholeheartedly to the promotion of visual art?

1997 — Page 147

Edit History

Comments

Private Research Note