Page 74
HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL
reiterate here that I support the amended motion by Mr. Christopher CHUNG Shu-kun.
MR. WONG KWOK-HING (in Cantonese):—I think the intention of the original motion is good, but its direction is wrong. Both the direction and the intention of the amended motion are correct. I am saying this not because both Mr. Christopher CHUNG and I are members of the Democratic Alliance for the Betterment of Hong Kong, but based on a logical analysis of the matter. If it is improper and inappropriate administration of the Housing Authority or Housing Department you are talking about, I think you should complain to the Commissioner for Administrative Complaints. That is the main direction. On a smaller scale, we can, as suggested by a Member just now, follow up in the Estate Management Advisory Committees of different estates. Or, cases can be followed up at the District Boards too. By so doing, one cannot say that we are discarding our trump card, but that we are following a correct channel in monitoring public health and hygiene.
It just amazes me we are not taking up the correct channel but instead sort of fighting a battle between departments. For example, when we talked about unlicensed cinemas just now, some colleagues criticised the Fire Service Department for adhering to standards of the forties and fifties in licensing. I wonder if we are supposed to classify the performance of that Department! No, that would not be possible. Therefore, I think the proposal made in Mr. CHUNG's amended motion is a practical and practicable way to handle the matter. I call on my colleagues to put aside party position and support the amended motion.
As for a colleague putting forth his survey, I think as a sign of respect and to win us over, we should be distributed with the survey findings before the meeting. It seems kind of funny that many of us have not received the survey details and classification details referred to. I think that is disrespect to our Members. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
MR. WU CHI-WAI (in Cantonese):—Having listened to speeches for so long, I get the impression that my colleagues see ourselves invariably as District Board Members too. That is just not true. Many problems can be resolved at the District Board level, but not all. The duty of the Urban Council is to see that the Municipal Services Ordinance is enforced. If we keep telling ourselves that such and such matters are the responsibility of the District Board and such and such that of the Estate Management Advisory Committees, I wonder what role we should take.
The motion moved by Mr. Lai Hok-lim ultimately wants to bring our objective criteria for an enforcement body to take actions. With a clear set of criteria, the enforcement body will know what step to take next. Let me quote a simple example. We have a 3-tier system for street cleansing because when we know which streets are frequented by more people, we know how to plan and
Page 72
01 054
74 of 654
Page 74
Page 74 01 054
74 of 654
Page
72
HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL
reiterate here that I support the amended motion by Mr. Christopher CHUNG Shu-kun.
MR. WONG KWOK-HING (in Cantonese):—I think the intention of the origina motion is good, but its direction is wrong. Both the direction and the intention of the amended motion are correct. I am saying this not because both Mr Christopher CHUNG and I are members of the Democratic Alliance for the Betterment of Hong Kong, but based on a logical analysis of the matter. If t is improper and inappropriate administration of the Housing Authority o Housing Department you are talking about, I think you should complain 1: the Commissioner for Administrative Complaints. That is the main direction On a smaller scale, we can, as suggested by a Member just now, follow up i the Estate Management Advisory Committees of different estates. Or, case can be followed up at the District Boards too. By so doing, one cannot say tha we are discarding our trump card, but that we are following a correct channe in monitoring public health and hygiene.
It just amazes me we are not taking up the correct channel but instead sor of fighting a battle between departments. For example, when we talked abo unlicensed cinemas just now, some colleagues criticised the Fire Service Department for adhering to standards of the forties and fifties in licensing. wonder if we are supposed to classify the performance of that Departmen! No, that would not be possible. Therefore, I think the proposal made in M CHUNG's amended motion is a practical and practicable way to handle th matter. I call on my colleagues to put aside party position and support th amended motion.
As for a colleague putting forth his survey, I think as a sign of respect an to win us over, we should be distributed with the survey findings before th meeting. It seems kind of funny that many of us have not received the surve details and classification details referred to. I think that is disrespect to o Members. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
MR. WU CHI-WAI (in Cantonese):-Having listened to speeches for so long.! get the impression that my colleagues see ourselves invariably as District Boar: Members too. That is just not true. Many problems can be resolved at th District Board level, but not all. The duty of the Urban Council is to see the the Municipal Services Ordinance is enforced. If we keep telling ourselves thr such and such matters are the responsibility of the District Board and such an: such that of the Estate Management Advisory Committees, I wonder what rok we should take.
The motion moved by Mr. Lai Hok-lim ultimately wants to bring our objective criteria for an enforcement body to take actions. With a clear set of criteria, the enforcement body will know what step to take next. Let me quote a simple example. We have a 3-tier system for street cleansing because when we know which streets are frequented by more people, we know how to plan and
654
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.