HONG KONG PROVISIONAL URBAN COUNCIL
539
Firstly, when a motion is proposed, the Chairman should tell whether it is within the Council's ambit and makes his decision. The Democratic Party once proposed that a motion on the Diaoyu Island be moved at a monthly meeting. Owing to the Chairman's intervention, it was vetoed by the Standing Committee of the whole Council and consequently, the matter could not be discussed at any monthly meeting. Since the Chairman has included the motion in the agenda, discussion should be allowed. As far as I know, Mr. WONG Kwok-hing had given notice of moving a motion but as the number of motions had exceeded the limit, his motion was not included in the agenda in accordance with the points system. Mr. Chairman, as you rejected his request for moving a motion, he was deprived of the chance to do so and now, you ask that the fourth motion be dropped at the monthly meeting. This is very unfair to Mr. WONG Kwok-hing. I consider that the Chairman has committed a serious technical mistake. You should have made up your mind earlier. As you had allowed the motion to be included in the agenda, Mr. Li Wah-ming proposed amendments to it. If you had decided against it, we would not have considered amending it at all. I consider that the Chairman has made several technical mistakes. I hope that you, Mr. Chairman, will re-consider your decision.
Chairman (in Cantonese):—Here I would respond to Mr. Wong Chung-ki's citing of the 1995 case, that is, the one concerning abolition of the labour importation policy, and provide the rationale behind the current case which leads to my decision. I will explain in detail.
A case mishandled does not necessarily set a precedent. If we consider that non-Council issues should not be discussed at our monthly meetings, especially when Sections 24 and 25 and Standing Order 14(1) so stipulate, and find such a case, we should correct it instead of allowing the precedent to sustain. Having made an exception once does not mean that it has become a law.
About the way I handle this case. At first glance, the original motion, which is about the Council's matters and rates, does have something to do with the Council. If we proposed reduction of that portion of the rates revenue allocated to the Council, it would be something directly related to the Council, but the amendment motion proposes that reduction or freezing be considered for the 2.4% of the rates charge, which is by no means the portion allocated to the Council. I did consider that if necessary, the Council might discuss this but the legal advice was against it. Nevertheless, I had included it in the agenda because I wanted to let the public know that Members of the Council were genuinely concerned for the difficulties they were experiencing, in particular, that the proposer and seconder of the original motion, Mr. Chan Choi-hi and Mr. To Boon-man, as well as the proposer and seconder of the amended motion, Mr. Li Wah-ming and Mr. Wong Chung-ki, were deeply concerned for the rates issue and the difficulties in livelihood of the people. We should at least allow this to be covered by the press to let the public know that Members
Page 545 of 654
Page 545 of 654
Page 545
Page 546
Page 545 of 654
Page 545 of 654
HONG KONG PROVISIONAL URBAN COUNCIL
539
Firstly, when a motion is proposed, the Chairman should tell whether it is within the Council's ambit and makes his decision. The Democratic Party once roposed that a motion on the Diaoyu Island be moved at a monthly meeting Out because of the Chairman's intervention, it was vetoed by the Standing Committee of the whole Council and consequently, the matter could not be discussed at any monthly meeting. Since the Chairman has included the motion in the agenda, discussion should be allowed. As far as I know. Mr. WONG Kwok-hing had given notice of moving a motion but as the number of
■motions had exceeded the limit, his motion was not included in the agenda in accordance with the points system. Mr. Chairman, as you rejected his request for moving a motion, he was deprived of the chance to do so and now, you ask that the fourth motion be dropped at the monthly meeting. This is very unfair 10 Mr. WONG Kwok-hing. I consider that the Chairman has committed a serious technical mistake. You should have made up your mind earlier. As you had allowed the motion to be included in the agenda, Mr. Li Wah-ming proposed amendments to it. If you had decided against it, we would not have considered amending it at all. I consider that the Chairman has made several Technical mistakes. I hope that you, Mr. Chairman, will re-consider your
decision.
Chairman (in Cantonese):—Here I would respond to Mr. Wong Chung-ki's citing of the 1995 case, that is, the one concerning abolition of the labour importation policy, and provide the rationale behind the current case which heads to my decision. I will explain in detail.
A case mishandled does not necessarily set a precedent. If we consider that mon-Council issues should not be discussed at our monthly meetings, especially wwhen Sections 24 and 25 and Standing Order 14(1) so stipulate, and find such n case, we should correct it instead of allowing the precedent to sustain. Having made an exception once does not mean that it has become a law,
About the way I handle this case. At first glance, the original motion, which iss about the Council's matters and rates, does have something to do with the Council. If we proposed reduction of that portion of the rates revenue allocated to the Council, it would be something directly related to the Council, bout the amendment motion proposes that reduction or freezing be considered foor the 2.4% of the rates charge, which is by no means the portion allocated to the Council. I did consider that if necessary, the Council might discuss this but the legal advice was against it. Nevertheless, I had included it in the agenda because I wanted to let the public know that Members of the Council were genuinely concerned for the difficulties they were experiencing, in particular, that the proposer and seconder of the original motion, Mr. Chan Choi-hi and Mr. To Boon-man, as well as the proposer and seconder of the amended motion, Mr. Li Wah-ming and Mr. Wong Chung-ki, were deeply concerned for the rates issue and the difficulties in livelihood of the people. We should at least allow this to be covered by the press to let the public know that Members
Page 545 of 654
Page 545 of 654
Page 545Page 546
!
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.