Page 95 of 606
116
PROVISIONAL URBAN COUNCIL
incident of the new airport has put frost on top of ice too. That is why I do not think we should make haste to complete the consultation in only 60 days and then complete the review before the Urban Council resumes in September. There should be no need to make a hasty decision. Full consultation and extensive collection of views are more important.
With the above remarks, I support the motion moved by the Chairman. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Tim S. MANUEL CHAN (in Cantonese):—Mr. Chairman, I remember seeing you on TV after the publication of the Consultation Document on Review of District Organisations in early June. I saw that you were very angry with a straight face and that you resented any proposal for restructuring of district boards. Later on, I saw that under your leadership, the One Council and One Department option was put forth. Although I do not endorse keeping appointed and the neither fish nor fowl ex-officio seats. I saw your progress. Today, I know clearly that I support your motion.
Since November or December last year, the Citizens Party and myself have made clear support for review and reorganisation. We have disclosed our definite support for merging the two tiers of representative government. However, that does not mean we support any of the options given in the Consultation Document. We feel that the Consultation Document has once again showed how shallow government officials at secretary level are becoming.
Mr. Chairman, before I vow support for your motion, I want to go into why there were suggestions to review district organisations and I must at the same time unveil the hypocrisy of the SAR Government. Many Members present here, including appointed ones, have been Urban Councillors for years and have contributed to the Council work,
We are all aware of problems with the two-tier system. For example, there are duplications of work for the Urban Council and various District Boards. The constituencies of District Boards are small so that District Board Members are narrow in prospective and unable to look at matters from the angle of benefit for the larger regions. In this way, District Boards fail to cultivate leaders. They lack actual power to do things. More often than not, whether you like it or not, views given after consultation are left as they are with government proceeding in the chosen way. Consultation is just like "plain talking". Some have criticised the Urban Council in its utilisation of financial resources, others have alleged it to be bloated with staff, yet others fail to see the merit in two costly district elections within a year.
In fact, the above are the basic reasons and motives for the Chief Executive (CE) to propose a review of district organisations in October last year. Regrettably, those in charge of the Constitutional Affairs Bureau considered pragmatic and practical before became scared of democracy and claimed they
£606.
Page 95
Page 96
Page 95 of 606
Page 95 of 606
116
PROVISIONAL URBAN COUNCIL
incident of the new airport has put frost on top of ice too. That is why I do not think we should make haste to complete the consultation in only 60 days and then complete the review before the Urban Council resumes in September. There should be no need to make a hasty decision. Full consultation and extensive collection of views are more important.
With the above remarks, I support the motion moved by the Chairman. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Tim S. MANUEL CHAN (in Cantonese):—Mr. Chairman, I remember seeing you on TV after the publication of the Consultation Document on Review of District Organisations in early June. I saw that you were very angry with a straight face and that you resented any proposal for restructuring of district boards. Later on, I saw that under your leadership, the One Council and One Department option was put forth. Although I do not endorse keeping appointed and the neither fish nor fowl ex-officio seats. I saw your progress. Today. I know clearly that I support your motion.
Since November or December last year, the Citizens Party and myself have made clear support for review and reorganisation. We have disclosed our definite support for merging the two tiers of representative government. However, that does not mean we support any of the options given in the Consultation Document. We feel that the Consultation Document has once again showed how shallow government officials at secretary level are becoming.
Mr. Chairman, before I vow support for your motion, I want to go into why there were suggestions to review district organisations and I must at the same time unveil the hypocrisy of the SAR Government. Many Members present here, including appointed ones, have been Urban Councillors for years and have contributed to the Council work,
We are all aware of problems with the two tier system. For example, there are duplications of work for the Urban Council and various District Boards. The constituencies of District Boards are small so that District Board Members are narrow in prospective and unable to look at matters from the angle of benefit for the larger regions. In this way. District Boards fail to cultivate leaders. They lack actual power to do things. More often than not, whether you like it or not, views given after consultation are left as they are with government proceeding in the chosen way. Consultation is just like "plain talking". Some have criticised the Urban Council in its utilisation of financial resources, other have alleged it to be bloated with staff, yet others fail to see the merit in two costly district elections within a year.
In fact, the above are the basic reasons and motives for the Chief Executive (CE) to propose a review of district organisations in October last year. Regrettably, those in charge of the Constitutional Affairs Bureau considered pragmatic and practical before became scared of democracy and claimed they
£606.
Page 95Page 96
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.