HKDF

Review of the Role and Functions of Public Sector Advisory and Statutory Bodies

Thursday 29 May, 2003

 

Special Duties Division
Home Affairs Bureau
31st Floor, Southorn Centre
130 Hennessy Road
Wan Chai, Hong Kong

 

Dear Sirs,

Review of the Role and Functions of Public Sector Advisory and Statutory Bodies

We take the view that the development of a healthy consultation system as a necessary and important part of Hong Kong's future political, social and economic development. It is also an important mechanism to forge consensus and unity amongst different sectors of the community.

However, my personal experience and observations from other members of the Hong Democratic Foundation (HKDF) lead us to think that, at present, the advisory committee system in Hong Kong is not performing its function of giving advice very well:

  1. We endorse the view taken by a research project partially sponsored by the HKDF (A Study on the Advisory and Statutory Bodies in Hong Kong - A Brief Report, http://www.hkdf.org/nl.asp?func=showarticle&type=5&article=204).

  2. The current system is also at risk of being used as a substitute for the democratic process - i.e. for the channeling of the people's wishes through elected representatives.

  3. Or being captured by special interests or populated by yes-men and inactive members who accept the Administration's views. A proper monitoring system is particularly important for those controlling vast sums of public funds or public resources.

  4. Many advisory committees, particularly the lower-level ones, are unnecessary. Some committees are not offering alternative and independent advice. Instead, there is a widespread culture of encouraging members to agree with the views of the administration and discouraging dissenting opinion that are opposite to that of the Administration.

  5. Members of the business community were given preference in the appointment process, while members from other sectors of the community, particularly those who have political affiliations or democratic aspirations were excluded.

Never-the-less, we were encouraged by the direction taken by the consultation document and we have no argument with the guiding principles outlined in the document, except that we would like to see the "Six Committee Rule" be changed to "Three Committee Rule". This way, members would be able to spend more time and give more serious considerations to the tasks they are given. To make the advisory committees more effective, they should also be made smaller.

We look forward to the second-stage review mentioned in the consultation and hope that the Home Affairs Bureau would be able to offer practical implementation steps to enacting the proposed reforms and building a mechanism to check that the reforms are actually carried out. This way, Hong Kong would be taken from the current unsatisfactory situation to what it should be, hopefully in the near future.

 

Sincerely yours,

 

Alan Ka-lun LUNG
Chairman, Hong Kong Democratic Foundation

 

Reproduction of this paper is permitted with proper attribution to the Hong Kong Democratic Foundation