********************************************
Following is a question by the Hon James To and a reply by the Chief Secretary for Administration, Mrs Carrie Lam, in the Legislative Council today (October 17):
Question:
At a luncheon hosted by the Hong Kong Public Administration Association on September 27, 2012, the Chief Secretary for Administration (CS) said, "You just imagine the pressure that public services are put under with all these institutions, checks and balances, all that Ombudsman, ICAC, not that they are bad, as I said, sometimes these things are good. These are the safeguards of any civic society. But if they become a major hurdle because we don't know how to deal with them, then, at the end of the day what would suffer would be the Government's executive ability to deliver things". In this connection, will the Government inform this Council:
(a) whether it has assessed, apart from the Independent Commission Against Corruption and the Office of The Ombudsman, what other institutions are suitable for assuming the role of monitoring or providing checks and balances against the Government, and what others are not suitable for assuming such a role; if it has, of the outcome; and its explanation of the circumstances under which these monitoring institutions are good or otherwise;
(b) whether, in her remarks that "if they become a major hurdle because we don't know how to deal with them, then, at the end of the day what would suffer would be the Government's executive ability to deliver things", CS was referring to incidents which already happened or which have not yet happened, and which government officials do not know how to deal with the monitoring institutions; and
(c) given that it has been reported in the press that various sectors of the community have criticised that CS's aforesaid remarks undermined the independence of the monitoring institutions, whether the Government will request CS to withdraw the aforesaid remarks and apologise to the public?
Reply:
President,
The remarks concerning pressures on civil servants which I made at the luncheon hosted by the Hong Kong Public Administration Association (HKPAA) on September 27 have aroused concerns of some people and comments in the media. Although I have made clarifications immediately afterwards, I would still like to thank the Hon James To for raising a question on the matter at the Legislative Council (LegCo) meeting today as it gives me an opportunity to explain myself in more details and respond to further questions from LegCo Members.
I was invited by HKPAA to the event to share my views on challenges faced by this term of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region (HKSAR) Government. When I addressed the meeting, I said that the greatest challenge was to implement the election manifesto of the Chief Executive, and that it required effective governance and good public administration to translate the vision into action.
I then cited a few examples to illustrate the new Administration's determination to enhance the efficiency of governance. For example, the Chief Executive announced five measures to improve livelihood at the Legislative Council on July 16 - less than three weeks after his taking of office. Then there is the new policy to install lifts at walkways so as to create a "universally accessible" environment for all - a programme which has been put together by various bureaux and departments in response to community aspirations expressed during the new political team's district visits in July, and is a realisation of the Chief Executive's belief of "no livelihood issue is too trivial". The Chief Executive also advocates the resolution of district problems by district solutions, and therefore we have that project of opening a new open-air bazaar for residents in Tin Shui Wai.
With this illustration of a series of initiatives introduced within barely two months after the start of the new Administration, I assured the luncheon guests and academics that the Government remained very efficient as long as departments worked together and there was a very clear direction because, after all, our team of Principal Officials and civil servants all regarded being able to do good things for the people as the best reward for being public servants.
In the question-and-answer session that followed, one of the guests seemed to disagree with what I had said. He raised a question in English, saying that the HKSAR Government was notoriously conservative, short sighted and had a lack of innovation. He asked me how to transform the current bureaucracy to become a visionary team, a team that could serve the vision of the Chief Executive. I answered in English, mainly trying to explain that the civil service took rules and procedures very seriously and attached great importance to any possible advice from monitoring institutions. Civil servants are very careful in that regard indeed, which might give an impression that government operation is "bureaucratic" and conservative.
I must point out that in my answer I named two monitoring institutions, i.e. ICAC and the Office of the Ombudsman, simply as examples for the "rules, due process, checks and balances, and institutions" mentioned. I did not have the least intention to pinpoint or direct any negative comments against them. Notwithstanding, I still immediately added that such "rules, due process, checks and balances, and institutions" were the safeguards of a civic society. As we all know, for that matter, apart from ICAC and the Office of the Ombudsman, the Government is also monitored by the Legislative Council, the media and a host of other statutory bodies, and is subject to the checks and balances of the judicial system.
I should never go overboard with self-defence. However, as one can see from the context, the main point in my answer to that floor question is that the executive authorities have to know how to deal with the ever changing world as well as the rules, processes and checks and balances essential to a civic society. It was never my intention to consider the monitoring system and all its necessary rules and processes and institutions as hurdles to administration. Therefore, in the second half of my answer, I made a few suggestions for colleagues of the executive authorities to go for, namely, a clear direction for the work, co-ordinated action, and empowerment of frontline staff. I hope that these suggestions can offer some help to civil servants at all levels. If ever the Government's executive ability is affected by anxieties about the many forms of checks and balances or by the inability to deal with them, eventually it would be public interest that suffers.
The full transcript with audio-visual recordings of my speech and related remarks at the luncheon have been uploaded to the government website. In hindsight, my answer to the question was indeed simple in words, but apparently its intended meaning was well understood by all the guests and academics present. It is much regretted, and disturbing to me, that it was subsequently misinterpreted by some people and media. I waited no time to clear the misunderstanding. On September 28, the very next day after the luncheon, I set the record straight for my colleagues at the Heads of Departments' meeting in the morning; I issued a written statement to stress the huge importance I attached to the role of key institutions like ICAC and the Office of the Ombudsman in ensuring a clean, fair, just and effective government; and in the evening I phoned in a radio programme to offer my clarification again. On top of that, I wrote to the Commissioner of ICAC and the Ombudsman on October 4, and called Professor Felice Lieh-Mak, who had openly criticised the remarks in question, to explain and clarify the case.
This incident is a reminder that every comment and remark made by me, as Chief Secretary for Administration, should be devoid of room for misinterpretation. To avoid any misunderstanding whatsoever, I must be extra careful with my choice of words and presentation. This is a good lesson I shall take to mind and heart.
Ends/Wednesday, October 17, 2012
Issued at HKT 15:12
NNNN
