06
IV
PROVISIONAL URBAN COUNCIL
'Delicacies' (literal) was formed. Later on, in tackling the bird flu incident, an inter-departmental working group and then an inter-departmental committee were formed. Through these set-ups, administration and policy powers on food safety have been taken back by the Central Government. Our people should find out how the government is doing now that government departments are directly responsible for food safety and environmental hygiene matters. If there is no data for comparison given in the Consultation Document, how can the public be convinced that the two suggested directions to take are the correct ones?
(4) Can the Legislative Council substitute the two largely elected Municipal Councils in supervising the Government's food safety and environmental hygiene work effectively? In the Consultation Document, it is clearly listed out that in the year 97/98, the two Municipal Councils and Provisional Municipal Councils held a total of 629 meetings, discussed matters for 241 hours, and scrutinised 3944 documents. Will the Legislative Council be able to additionally take up such concrete and heavy workload to do with the livelihood of our people? Can the Legislative Council conduct meticulous monitoring and decision-making work in the same way as the Municipal Councils? The Consultation Document has not mentioned any feasibility study. Neither is there any opinion of Legislative Councillors on taking up the above work. Can we say it provides comprehensive information and is the product of full consultation?
(5) The Consultation Document has evaded a very important fact. The fact is that the Hygiene Services Committee, chaired by the Director of Health, has accepted the opinions of Councillors of the two Municipal Councils, including myself, to commission the Australian/New Zealand Food Authority or a similar professional organisation with advanced food safety and hygiene supervision facilities in the Asian Pacific region to assist us in conducting a comprehensive review of our food safety and hygiene laws and our supervisory structure. If the Government is so concerned to improve food safety and environmental hygiene in Hong Kong, why can't we wait until foreign hygiene experts have conducted scientific, comprehensive reviews before introducing reform in accordance with their opinions? Why must we let laymen lead insiders? Are we prepared to reform all over again if the conclusion of the experts does not match with that of the Review of District Organisations?
There is only one point to sum up. Yes, district organisations should be reviewed, but the review must be practical and realistic if we mean to implement the intention and target of the Chief Executive to ‘take a fresh look' and ensure the efficient and responsive delivery of services to our Community'.
Page 147
of 606
06
IV
PROVISIONAL URBAN COUNCIL
Delicacies' (literal) was formed. Later on in tackling the bird flu incident, an inter-departmental working group and then an inter departmental committee were formed. Through these set-ups, administration and policy powers on food safety have been taken back by Central Government. Our people should find out how government is doing now that government departments are directly responsible for food safety and environmental hygiene matters. If there is no data for comparison given in the Consultation Document, how can the public be convinced that the two suggested directions to take are correct ones?
(4) Can the Legislative Council substitute the two largely elected Municipal Councils in supervising Government's food safety and environmental hygiene work effectively? In the Consultation Document, it is clearly listed out that in the year 97/98, the two Municipal Councils and Provisional Municipal Councils held a total of 629 meetings, discussed matters for 241 hours and scrutinised 3944 documents. Will the Legislative Council be able to additionally take up such concrete and heavy workload to do with the livelihood of our people? Can the Legislative Council conduct meticulous monitoring and decision making work in the same way as the Municipal Councils? The Consultation Document has not mentioned any feasibility study. Neither is there any opinion of Legislative Councillors on taking up the above work. Can we say it provides comprehensive information and is the product of full consultation?
(5) The Consultation Document has evaded a very important fact. The fact is that the Hygiene Services Committee chaired by the Director of Health has accepted the opinions of Councillors of the two Municipal Councils including myself to commission the Australian/New Zealand Food Authority or a similar professional organisation with advanced food safely and hygiene supervision facilities in the Asian Pacific region to assist us in conducting a comprehensive review of our food safety and hygiene laws and our supervisory structure. If Government is so concerned to improve food safety and environmental hygiene in Hong Kong, why can't we wait until foreign hygiene experts have conducted scientific, comprehensive reviews before introducing reform in accordance with their opinions? Why must we let laymen lead insiders? Are we prepared to reform all over again if the conclusion of the experts does not match with that of the Review of District Organisations?
There is only one point to sum up. Yes, district organisations should be reviewed, but the review must be practical and realistic if we mean 10 implement the intention and target of the Chief Executive to ‘take a fresh look' and ensure the efficient and responsive delivery of services to our Community'.
Page 147 of 606
£606
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.