Page 188 of 654
HONG KONG PROVISIONAL URBAN COUNCIL
189
eryes and see for themselves who are responsible for taking away their freedom. Mr. Chairman, with these remarks, I so move.
Mr. Kam Nai-wai (in Cantonese):—Mr. Chairman, I second the motion.
Chairman (in Cantonese):-The motion has been moved and there is a seconder. I have received an amendment from Mr. Albert LAI Wing-lin in accordance with Section 21(12A) of the Standing Orders. Will Mr. Lai move his amendment and speak please?
Mr. Albert LAI Wing-lin moved an amendment under Standing Order 21(12A) as follows:-'In order to promote the development of arts and freedom of expression, RESOLVED that the Council reaffirm that it should, according to the existing criteria and with a supporting attitude, rent its venues to hirers for holding activities and assemblies and for display of works of art.'
He said (in Cantonese):-Mr. Chairman, on the hiring criteria of Urban Council venues, there has been no political, religious, racial, sexual, age, employment, commercial or educational consideration so far. As long as an activity is permitted by law and suited to the benefit and needs of the general public, the Urban Services Department approves the hiring of venue accordingly.
In art, there is no time restriction, political or spatial limitation. Art is not to serve a particular sector. Art is not to serve specific matters and objects. Art rides on top. Each artist has his own style. Objects of art are most valuable. Take the example of the famous painting Mona Lisa. Can you think of a country or place that bans exhibiting it? Are Beethoven's orchestral works banned in any country at all? The calligraphy of Liu Gongquan and Yan Zhenqing were greatly admired by royalties of past dynasties.
As to whether works admired by the artist himself only and those to attain certain benefits like commercial benefits can be called works of art, I am not a professional and therefore I cannot attest to it. In Hong Kong, we have a professional accreditation body. The objective opinions of this body should be respected. Art should not be polluted by politics.
The original motion by the Democratic Party links art with politics. It is dangerous and it is an insult to art workers. There are no prerequisites in the existing hiring criteria for Council venues, but the original motion singles out politics and at the same time fails to mention race, religion, sex, age, occupation, ability and education. The original motion asks for protection of the freedom of arts and expression and urges the Council not to refuse to hire out venues on political grounds without mentioning other conditions. Is this tantamount to saying that a refusal on racial ground is all right? Or, a refusal on religious, sexual or other grounds? Mr. Chairman, I find the original motion a clear discrimination in the aspects of religion, race, sex, age etc.
Page 188 of 654
Page 188 of 654
Page 188 of 654
Page 188 of 654
HONG KONG PROVISIONAL URBAN COUNCIL
189
eryes and see for themselves who are responsible for taking away their freedom. Mr. Chairman, with these remarks, I so move.
Mr. Kam Naj-wai (in Cantonese):—Mr. Chairman, I second the motion.
Chairman (in Cantonese):-The motion has been moved and there is a seconder. I have received an amendment from Mr. Albert LAI Wing-lin in accordance with Section 21(12A) of the Standing Orders. Will Mr. Lai move hiis amendment and speak please?
Mr. Albert LAI Wing-lin moved an amendment under Standing Order 21(12A) ais follows:-'In order to promote the development of arts and freedom of expression, RESOLVED that the Council reaffirm that it should, according to the existing criteria and with a supporting attitude, rent its venues to hirers for holding activities and assemblies and for display of works of art.'
He said (in Cantonese):-Mr. Chairman, on the hiring criteria of Urban Council venues, there has been no political, religious, racial, sexual, age, e:mployment, commercial or educational consideration so far. As long as an activity is permitted by law and suited to the benefit and needs of the general public, the Urban Services Department approves the hiring of venue accordingly.
In art, there is no time restriction, political or spatial limitation. Art is not to sierve a particular sector. Art is not to serve specific matters and objects. Art rides on top. Each artist has his own style. Objects of art are most valuable. Take the example of the famous painting Mona Lisa. Can you think of a country or place that bans exhibiting it? Are Beethoven's orchestral works banned in any country at all? The calligraphy of Liu Gongquan and Yan Zhenqing were greatly admired by royalties of past dynasties.
As to whether works admired by the artist himself only and those to attain certain benefits like commercial benefits can be called works of art, I am not a professional and therefore I cannot attest to it. In Hong Kong, we have a professional accreditation body. The objective opinions of this body should be respected. Art should not be polluted by politics.
The original motion by the Democratic Party links art with politics. It is dangerous and it is an insult to art workers. There are no prerequisites in the existing hiring criteria for Council venues, but the original motion singles out politics and at the same time fails to mention race, religion, sex, age, woccupation, ability and education. The original motion asks for protection of the freedom of arts and expression and urges the Council not to refuse to hire out venues on political grounds without mentioning other conditions. Is this tantamount to saying that a refusal on racial ground is all right? Or, a refusal con religious, sexual or other grounds? Mr. Chairman, I find the original motion a clear discrimination in the aspects of religion, race, sex, age etc.
Page 188 of 654
Page 188 of 654
Page 188 of 654
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.