1998 — Page 260

Urban Council Proceedings 市政局議事錄 All AI Reviewed

Page 260

PROVISIONAL URBAN COUNCIL

255

democratization has already begun since the establishment of the HKSAR Government. The Democratic Party hopes that the people of Hong Kong will still be given the chance to participate in the formulation of policies. We hope that there will be an elected Municipal Council created entirely by election.

With these remarks, I support Mr. Lau Wah-ming's motion. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

MR. JOSEPH CHAN YUEK-SUT (in Cantonese): Mr. Chairman, the Government has not given the main reason for dissolving the two councils. The avian flu incident is but an excuse. Whether it is the avian flu incident or other problems involving food or hygiene, particularly the avian flu incident, the blame should not be on the Urban Council. The blame should be on the inter-departmental working group responsible for central coordination which is inefficient and on the lack of coordination between government departments. If someone must be blamed, it should be the government departments and not the Urban Council. If reforms are necessary, it is the government departments that should be reformed. The division of duties among various departments has resulted in poor coordination, eventually giving rise to such a situation. We have therefore recommended that there should only be one department. The best solution is to centralize the power and responsibilities in one department rather than dissolving the municipal councils. Hence this is only an excuse. If one accuses the Urban Council of committing mistakes (thereby calling for its elimination), what could these mistakes be? If the Urban Council is declared to be guilty, what could the charge be? The consultation paper on Review of District Organizations has not mentioned these at all. Neither has the Chief Executive's Policy Address mentioned them. On the contrary, the Urban Council's past contribution has been given due recognition in CE's Policy Address. Since its contribution is recognized while no charge can be named, why should it be removed?

Hence, Mr. Chairman, after careful deliberation, I discover that the avian flu incident is by no means the main reason. Rather the dissolution of the two Municipal Councils is due mainly to political reasons. The merge of the two Councils is not desired because the merged body would become a political entity with greater power, the right to make decisions and financial autonomy. The existence of a representative institution with the right to formulate and decide democratic policies would pose an enormous obstacle to centralization of power and the executive-led concept. The Government must therefore see to it that it is removed. That is the major reason.

Furthermore, the development of democracy might at times place the incumbent government in an embarrassing situation and if the Government could not tolerate this, then later or sooner it would, through the exercise of its power, effect the dissolution of this sort of democratic representative body. I clearly recall that when I visited London in 1984, the London City Council was

Page 260 of 606

Page 260

Page 261

Edit History

2026-05-16 06:44:00 · NVIDIA / meta/llama-4-maverick-17b-128e-instruct
Live
View comparison
AI Proofread
Page 260 PROVISIONAL URBAN COUNCIL 255 democratization has already begun since the establishment of the HKSAR Government. The Democratic Party hopes that the people of Hong Kong will still be given the chance to participate in the formulation of policies. We hope that there will be an elected Municipal Council created entirely by election. With these remarks, I support Mr. Lau Wah-ming's motion. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. MR. JOSEPH CHAN YUEK-SUT (in Cantonese): Mr. Chairman, the Government has not given the main reason for dissolving the two councils. The avian flu incident is but an excuse. Whether it is the avian flu incident or other problems involving food or hygiene, particularly the avian flu incident, the blame should not be on the Urban Council. The blame should be on the inter-departmental working group responsible for central coordination which is inefficient and on the lack of coordination between government departments. If someone must be blamed, it should be the government departments and not the Urban Council. If reforms are necessary, it is the government departments that should be reformed. The division of duties among various departments has resulted in poor coordination, eventually giving rise to such a situation. We have therefore recommended that there should only be one department. The best solution is to centralize the power and responsibilities in one department rather than dissolving the municipal councils. Hence this is only an excuse. If one accuses the Urban Council of committing mistakes (thereby calling for its elimination), what could these mistakes be? If the Urban Council is declared to be guilty, what could the charge be? The consultation paper on Review of District Organizations has not mentioned these at all. Neither has the Chief Executive's Policy Address mentioned them. On the contrary, the Urban Council's past contribution has been given due recognition in CE's Policy Address. Since its contribution is recognized while no charge can be named, why should it be removed? Hence, Mr. Chairman, after careful deliberation, I discover that the avian flu incident is by no means the main reason. Rather the dissolution of the two Municipal Councils is due mainly to political reasons. The merge of the two Councils is not desired because the merged body would become a political entity with greater power, the right to make decisions and financial autonomy. The existence of a representative institution with the right to formulate and decide democratic policies would pose an enormous obstacle to centralization of power and the executive-led concept. The Government must therefore see to it that it is removed. That is the major reason. Furthermore, the development of democracy might at times place the incumbent government in an embarrassing situation and if the Government could not tolerate this, then later or sooner it would, through the exercise of its power, effect the dissolution of this sort of democratic representative body. I clearly recall that when I visited London in 1984, the London City Council was Page 260 of 606 Page 260 Page 261
Baseline (Original)
Page zoo Page 260 of 606 PROVISIONAL URBAN COUNCIL 255 democratization has already begun since the establishment of the HKSAR Government. The Democratic Party hopes that the people of Hong Kong will still be given the chance to participate in the formulation of policies. We hope that there will be an elected Municipal Council created entirely by election. With these remarks, I support Mr. Lt Wah-ming's motion. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. MR. JOSEPH CHAN YUEK-SUT (in Cantonese): Mr. Chairman, the Government has not given the main reason for dissolving the two councils. The avian flu incident is but an excuse. Whether it is the avian flu incident or other problems involving food or hygiene, particularly the avian flu incident, the blame should not be on the Urban Council. The blame should be on the inter-departmental working group responsible for central coordination which is inefficient and on the lack of coordination between government departments. If someone must be blamed, it should be the government departments and not the Urban Council. If reforms are necessary, it is the government departments that should be reformed. The division of duties among various departments has resulted in poor coordination, eventually giving rise to such a situation. We have therefore recommended that there should only be one department. The best solution is to centralize the power and responsibilities in one department rather than dissolving the municipal councils. Hence this is only an excuse. If one accuses the Urban Council of committing mistakes (thereby calling for its elimination), what could these mistakes be? If the Urban Council is declared to be guilty, what could the charge be? The consultation paper on Review of District Organizations has not mentioned these at all. Neither has the Chief Executive's Policy Address mentioned them. On the contrary, the Urban Council's past contribution has been given due recognition in CE's Policy Address. Since its contribution is recognized while no charge can be named, why should it be removed? Hence, Mr. Chairman, after careful deliberation, I discover that the avian flu incident is by no means the main reason. Rather the dissolution of the two Municipal Councils is due mainly to political reasons. The merge of the two Councils is not desired because the merged body would become a political entity with greater power, the right to make decisions and financial autonomy. The existence of a representative institution with the right to formulate and decide democratic policies would pose an enormous obstacle to centralization of power and the executive-led concept. The Government must therefore see to it that it is removed. That is the major reason. Furthermore, the development of democracy might at times place the incumbent government in an embarrassing situation and if the Government could not tolerate this, then later or sooner it would, through the exercise of its power, effect the dissolution of this sort of democratic representative body. I clearly recall that when I visited London in 1984, the London City Council was Pa Page 260 of 606 Page 260Page 261
2026-05-16 06:44:00 · Baseline
View content

Page zoo

Page 260 of 606

PROVISIONAL URBAN COUNCIL

255

democratization has already begun since the establishment of the HKSAR Government. The Democratic Party hopes that the people of Hong Kong will still be given the chance to participate in the formulation of policies. We hope that there will be an elected Municipal Council created entirely by election.

With these remarks, I support Mr. Lt Wah-ming's motion. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

MR. JOSEPH CHAN YUEK-SUT (in Cantonese): Mr. Chairman, the Government has not given the main reason for dissolving the two councils. The avian flu incident is but an excuse. Whether it is the avian flu incident or other problems involving food or hygiene, particularly the avian flu incident, the blame should not be on the Urban Council. The blame should be on the inter-departmental working group responsible for central coordination which is inefficient and on the lack of coordination between government departments. If someone must be blamed, it should be the government departments and not the Urban Council. If reforms are necessary, it is the government departments that should be reformed. The division of duties among various departments has resulted in poor coordination, eventually giving rise to such a situation. We have therefore recommended that there should only be one department. The best solution is to centralize the power and responsibilities in one department rather than dissolving the municipal councils. Hence this is only an excuse. If one accuses the Urban Council of committing mistakes (thereby calling for its elimination), what could these mistakes be? If the Urban Council is declared to be guilty, what could the charge be? The consultation paper on Review of District Organizations has not mentioned these at all. Neither has the Chief Executive's Policy Address mentioned them. On the contrary, the Urban Council's past contribution has been given due recognition in CE's Policy Address. Since its contribution is recognized while no charge can be named, why should it be removed?

Hence, Mr. Chairman, after careful deliberation, I discover that the avian flu incident is by no means the main reason. Rather the dissolution of the two Municipal Councils is due mainly to political reasons. The merge of the two Councils is not desired because the merged body would become a political entity with greater power, the right to make decisions and financial autonomy. The existence of a representative institution with the right to formulate and decide democratic policies would pose an enormous obstacle to centralization of power and the executive-led concept. The Government must therefore see to it that it is removed. That is the major reason.

Furthermore, the development of democracy might at times place the incumbent government in an embarrassing situation and if the Government could not tolerate this, then later or sooner it would, through the exercise of its power, effect the dissolution of this sort of democratic representative body. I clearly recall that when I visited London in 1984, the London City Council was

Pa

Page 260 of 606

Page 260Page 261

Comments

Approved members can add comments, bookmarks, and private notes.

No comments yet.

Private Research Note

Private notes are available after approval.