Page 254 of 606
PROVISIONAL URBAN COUNCIL
249
public have actively participated in. In handing over the management of matters concerning the livelihood of six million people to a completely new and bureaucratic framework, isn't it simply creating a more serious crisis?
In fact, can the Government guarantee that the newly proposed framework will work much better than the Councils? Can it guarantee that it will operate more efficiently? Unfortunately the Government has not given us any assurance in this respect. The Government keeps dwelling on the killing of chickens in the avian flu incident and has used this as the pretext for dissolving the Councils. This is merely because the government departments concerned are trying to shirk their responsibilities. Shouldn't they too be held responsible?
Since the incident, the two Municipal Councils have introduced a lot of coordinating measures and reviews. Of late we have also worked towards the concept of 'One Council, One Department' to improve our coordinating mechanism with a view to avoiding any recurrence of similar incidents. Regrettably, instead of giving us any support, the Government is bent on having its own way. Furthermore, it has destroyed the chance for merging the two Councils. It is simply turning from opportunity to adversity', isn't it?
Furthermore, as Mr. Li Wah-ming pointed out just now, the Government's approach of public opinion assessment adopted in the consultation on the Review of District Organizations is indeed dubious, or even misleading. This has indeed disgraced the development of democracy in Hong Kong and created an irony in which the Councils, elected representative institutions with the longest history, should be destroyed by such an undemocratic consultation mechanism. The people of Hong Kong had been yearning for a new airport which they thought would represent a new milestone in the economic development of Hong Kong. Eventually, amidst rash planning with low transparency, the new airport turned out to have brought tremendous loss to Hong Kong in terms of both international reputation and economy. The Government should therefore learn its lesson that haste makes waste and that all that is new is not necessarily good. We recall that the Director of Civil Aviation once said that Kai Tak had completed its mission and in the closing ceremony in July, he said something like 'Kai Tak, see you again'. I believe that most citizens are hesitant to hear similar remarks again. Neither do they want to hear Hong Kong officials saying 'Municipal Councils, see you again.'
Mr. Chairman, with these remarks, I support the motion.
THE HON. AMBROSE CHEUNG (in Cantonese):-First of all, I wish to show my appreciation to Mr. Li Wah-ming for putting forward the motion today and his efforts in presenting the facts after taking pains to analyze and supplement the information given in the Government's 'Review of District Organizations - Compendium of Public Views', so that Members may comment on the issue.
Page 254 of 606
Page 254 of
Page 254 of 606
PROVISIONAL URBAN COUNCIL
249
public have actively participated in. In handing over the management of matters concerning the livelihood of six million people to a completely new and bureaucratic framework, isn't it simply creating a more serious crisis?
In fact, can the Government guarantee that the newly proposed framework will work much better than the Councils? Can it guarantee that it will operate more efficiently? Unfortunately the Government has not given us any assurance in this respect. The Government keeps dwelling on the killing of chickens in the avian flu incident and has used this as the pretext for dissolving the Councils. This is merely because the government departments concerned are trying to shirk their responsibilities. Shouldn't they too be held responsible?
Since the incident, the two Municipal Councils have introduced a lot of coordinating measures and reviews. Of late we have also worked towards the concept of One Council, One Department' to improve our coordinating mechanism with a view to avoiding any recurrence of similar incidents. Regrettably, instead of giving us any support, the Government is bent on having its own way. Furthermore, it has destroyed the chance for merging the two Councils. It is simply turning from opportunity to adversity', isn't it?
Furthermore, as Mr. Li Wah-ming pointed out just now, the Government's approach of public opinion assessment adopted in the consultation on the Review of District Organizations is indeed dubious, or even misleading. This has indeed disgraced the development of democracy in Hong Kong and created an irony in which the Councils, elected representative institutions with the longest history, should be destroyed by such an undemocratic consultation mechanism. The people of Hong Kong had been yearning for a new airport which they thought would represent a new milestone in the economic development of Hong Kong. Eventually, amidst rash planning with low transparency, the new airport turned out to have brought tremendous loss to Hong Kong in terms of both international reputation and economy. The Government should therefore learn its lesson that haste makes waste and that all that is new is not necessarily good. We recall that the Director of Civil Aviation once said that Kai Tak had completed its mission and in the closing ceremony in July, he said something like 'Kai Tak, see you again'. I believe that most citizens are hesitant to hear similar remarks again. Neither do they want to hear Hong Kong officials saying 'Municipal Councils, see you again.'
Mr. Chairman, with these remarks, I support the motion.
THE HON. AMBrose Cheung (in Cantonese):-First of all, I wish to show my appreciation to Mr. Li Wah-ming for putting forward the motion today and his efforts in presenting the facts after taking pains to analyze and supplement the information given in the Government's 'Review of District Organizations -Compendium of Public Views', so that Members may comment on the issue.
Page 254 of 606
Page 254 of
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.