Press Release
 
 

 Email this articleGovernment Homepage

Transcript of the Q&A session by the CS at HKGCC luncheon

**************************************************

The following is the transcript of the question and answer session given by the Chief Secretary for Administration, Mr Donald Tsang, after addressing the Luncheon by the Hong Kong General Chamber of Commerce today (July 27):

Question: Sir, may I go to the earlier part of your speech when you said that one of your jobs is to find whether the problem is economic or social. Have you realized there is some social problem of racial discrimination and do you think this is the right time to have legislation against racial discrimination?

Mr Tsang: Well, racial discrimination exists in all societies. It is an evil. But sometimes it is very difficult to change what is in the minds of people in one generation or two. As a government, we are against it. I think it is counterproductive, it is inhibiting, it certainly does not sit well with the international character of Hong Kong. We can do well without it, and certainly we should stop it as much as we can.

The question, the real question is how we should go about it. Some communities, some societies, some countries, have tried legislation. Some other countries have tried education. Some countries have tried more to send out codes of practice. But we believe, in Hong Kong, the problem is there but it is not manifested in such a way that it is something which we should go write-up into outright legislation. But our mind is open on this, totally open on this, we want to listen to people's views on how we should tackle this.

But I can agree with you, sir, one very important point, social racial discrimination is an evil. We can do without it. And as an international community, we do not want it because it is inhibiting our growth. It does not sit well with the international character of Hong Kong. We want all people of this world, irrespective of creed, colour or religion, to come here and thrive and be part of us, to make this a really great city of the world.

Question: I hesitate to mention Singapore but as you did, I will. You might have noticed, anyone who went to work during the typhoon day would have noticed, that earlier this week, Brigadier George Yeo, the Minister for Trade and Industry in Singapore, announced a substantial package of measures to help keep Singapore companies competitive during the current slowdown in international trade and the regional economy. I was wondering if you could foresee any circumstances in the near-term future when Hong Kong might need to bring on a package of measures like that?

Mr Tsang: I will be very careful answering that question. My honourable, venerable press over there are watching every word related to economics and then rightly accuse me of overstepping my role. But I do have a memory of some Financial Secretary, back in 1999, did something of the kind - a package larger than what the Singaporeans have tried to do now. But whether or not we should do more, I'll give you a good recommendation, Ian. The Financial Secretary is likely to speak later this afternoon - ask him that question.

Question: The question I have is looking into your future administration, Mr Tsang. And the question is - and I wrote it down so I don't cock it up: When Mr Tung implements the ministerial system, would the Chief Secretary become a ministerial appointment or would he remain the head of the civil service? And which would you prefer?

Mr Tsang: Gerry is such a gentleman. He never hits below the belt - in the past. We are in the middle of going through a very serious discussion session internally with Mr Tung and many of my colleagues on the new accountability system. And in that, we are moving to look at how we make the upper echelons of this administration more accountable to the public. In that process, political appointments will be discussed, but in what shape and what kind, it is very difficult to say.

All I know, Gerry, is I know what I want to be. I want to be a public servant. I want to be of service to the public of Hong Kong and that is my lifelong commitment. Exactly what it would be is a matter for Mr Tung to decide, and it is a matter for the community to decide at the end of the day. God willing, I am there. But I think it would be premature for me to say exactly what I would be before I know what it is all about. So that is hedging a bit. But it is true that we do not know exactly what the final shape would be. But I will be with you, I'll be there, I'll be pulling my own weight and making sure: we have a robust civil service, as the one envisaged in the Basic Law; and again we are evolving into something where the administration which is much more accountable to the public, to the legislature, to the people at large.

Question: Thank you very much, Sir Donald, for a very inspirational speech. As a member of the public, I would like to ask if the administration has any views on the current dispute between Cathay Pacific and the pilots. It seems to me that the two sides need their heads banging together and clearly, this is protracting for a very long time. Is there any way that the administration can step in or have some sort of labour relations to step in, because this is clearly very, very damaging for our economy and for our reputation at a time when we are trying so hard to build our dragon image.

Mr Tsang: I cannot agree with you more, we can do without disputes of this kind. But I can assure you my colleagues in the Labour Department have been in the fray from the word go. But the success of the negotiations or a conciliatory process for a conciliator such as the Labour Department, they have to be very careful, they must not overstep, they must not profile themselves too prominently. But they are working there. They are working there, I can tell you, every day, trying to put the parties back on track.

But I am glad to see that Cathay Pacific is now recovering and most of the flights and most of the routes are now in operation. But I agree entirely with you, this community can do without disputes of this kind. And organizations as large as Cathay Pacific - anybody else should try to avoid this. But everyone must pull his weight, the pilots, the companies and so on. But this is a question which we must, as a government, try not to intervene too much. It is a commercial decision, it is a labour situation and what we have to do is to bring the parties together without pontificating or forcing any party to accept something which is not acceptable. For instance, asking the company, the management, to accept something which is commercially not viable, or ask the labour side or the pilots' side to accept something which is professionally unacceptable. So we must make sure that in here we have to be very, very neutral but very sympathetic, fairly active, but in the background. Thank you very much.

Question: I read in the newspaper, in the gossip column, this morning, that you prefer to use administrative guidelines rather than to legislate. And hearing what you have just said, that it takes a long time to legislate, maybe you can enlighten us how truthful this gossip is.

Mr Tsang: There is no need for gossip. Legislation should not be resorted to unless it is absolutely necessary. Legislation imposes unnecessary restrictions on the community at large, sometimes a sector of the community and sometimes it is the entire community. So it is something which binds a free society. We should not have legislation unless it is absolutely necessary, because it is also costly to the community as well, in that you have to make sure that the laws are being enforced, otherwise there is no point in doing so. What I am saying is not legislative guidelines, let's think in terms of what is best for Hong Kong; let's think in ways in which we can reduce the amount of argument, in whatever forum, including the Legislative Council, which is so important; and let's also think of ways of doing things. But don't pretend that there is such a thing as perfect legislation, perfect law and a perfect world in which we must achieve it. If you have this in mind, you will find that after perfection is achieved, somebody will invent other imperfections in the system and you have to improve it yet again, and again, and again. In my mind, at least as an administrator and also as part of the administration, I always believe legislation must be held as a last resort, but something we have to do occasionally, but not just the first and ready solution would be legislation. That would be wrong, in my view.

Thank you very much, all of you, in hearing me out. And I think, really, they are fed up with me, aren't they?

End/Friday, July 27, 2001

NNNN


Email this article