***********************************************************
Following is a question by the Hon Emily Lau and a written reply by the Secretary for Home Affairs, Mr Lau Kong-wah, in the Legislative Council today (June 29):
Question:
In recent years, there have been criticisms from time to time that the Executive Authorities have failed to adhere to the principle of making appointments on the basis of merits in appointing members to advisory and statutory bodies (ASBs). It has been reported that a Member of the Executive Council who is also a former Chairperson of the Equal Opportunities Commission has recently suggested the authorities to reform the mechanism for appointing members to ASBs (appointment mechanism), including (1) following the practice of the United Kingdom to appoint an independent commissioner to be responsible for monitoring whether appointments are made by the Executive Authorities under fair, impartial and transparent procedures, and (2) requiring that the appointments of some key positions be endorsed by a select committee upon conducting hearings for such purpose. In this connection, will the Executive Authorities inform this Council:
(1) of the number of persons appointed as non-official members of ASBs by the authorities since 2012 who were also members of the Election Committee for the selection of the Chief Executive, deputies of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region to the National People's Congress, Hong Kong members of the National Committee of the Chinese People's Political Consultative Conference or members of different political parties, and set out in a table the following in respect of each appointee: (i) background and political affiliations, (ii) the names of ASBs appointed to, (iii) the positions appointed to, and (iv) the persons who made the appointments;
(2) whether they have looked into and analysed the reasons why the appointment mechanism has often been criticised for failing to adhere to the principle of making appointments on the basis of merits; if they have, of the details and the specific improvement measures in place; and
(3) whether they will adopt the aforesaid suggestions to reform the appointment mechanism to enable people having different policy advocacies and expertise who are recognised as competent to join various ASBs, so as to take in different views effectively; if they will, when the new appointment mechanism will be rolled out; if not, of the reasons for that?
Reply:
President,
My reply to the Hon Lau's question is as follows:
As a key component in public administration, advisory and statutory bodies (ASBs) play an important role in assisting the Government in the formulation of policy objectives and performance of statutory functions. Through these bodies, various sectors of the community and relevant organisations may express their views at various stages in the making of policies and planning of public services by the Government and participate in public affairs. At present, there are about 470 ASBs in Hong Kong. The system of ASBs is multi-faceted, including various advisory boards and committees, public bodies, appeal boards, regulatory bodies.
The appointments of individuals by the Government as non-official members to ASBs are based on merits. When appointing a member to serve on an ASB, the relevant bureau or department takes into account the candidate's ability, expertise, experience, integrity and commitment to public service, with due regard to the functions and nature of business of the ASB as well as the statutory requirements for the membership of the statutory body concerned.
To gauge a wide range of public views, when appointing members to serve on these bodies, the Government will, apart from taking into account the needs of the bodies concerned, enlist people of different background and experience, such as professionals, academics, businessmen, representatives from districts and various sectors. Apart from those appointed directly by the Government, some members of ASBs are identified through nomination, recommendation, appointment or election by the relevant bodies and professional organisations.
The Central Personality Index maintained by the Home Affairs Bureau contains the personal particulars of most ASB members. As personal particulars are provided voluntarily by individual members, we do not require their provision or declaration of information about whether they are members of the Election Committee for the selection of the Chief Executive, deputies of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region to the National People's Congress, Hong Kong members of the National Committee of the Chinese People's Political Consultative Conference or members of political parties. Therefore, we do not have any comprehensive statistics on whether members appointed to ASBs hold the above offices.
We review from time to time the operation of the ASB system and take appropriate measures to improve the mechanism and operation after review. For instance, to enhance the transparency and public accountability of these bodies, ASBs have taken into account their functions and nature of business and adopted a number of measures, such as issuing press releases, making information and papers of the meetings available for public inspection, and uploading the relevant information onto the Internet.
We consider that the operation of the existing appointment system of ASB non-official members is generally smooth and efficient. That said, we will continue to monitor the operation of the relevant policy and mechanism to ensure that ASBs maintain their role as an important channel for people to participate in public policy formulation, thus effectively supporting the administration of the Government. We will encourage bureaux and departments to continue identifying more talents from different fields for participation in these bodies, using their strengths to help the Government gauge public views and achieve effective governance.
Ends/Wednesday, June 29, 2016
Issued at HKT 15:27
NNNN
