Sonia Chan pictured yesterday at the AL
The Secretary for Administration and Justice, Sonia Chan, dodged lawmakers’ questions at the Legislative Assembly yesterday regarding her alleged influence over former top prosecutor Ho Chio Meng and whether this resulted in the hiring of at least one of Chan’s relatives.
Ng Kuok Cheong and Pereira Coutinho both queried the secretary on how the government would act to prevent such cases of nepotism and personal favoring from happening again.
“Regarding my case, I’ve made a public clarification already,” Chan replied, adding, “The CCAC [Commission Against Corruption] has also received a complaint that is under investigation, hence it is not convenient and I should not report to that case.”
Chan ‘shielded’ herself behind her prior statement in order to avoid replying to any questions, even those with a generalist scope, and based her reply on the recruitment laws and regulations as well as the rights and duties of civil servants.
The lawmakers persisted.
“I’m not pleased at all with your answer. I didn’t ask to know how civil servants are recruited. What I wanted you to tell me is how to prevent that such actions from high ranked officials,” Ng said. “The phenomena has already been proved by the actions of the two Secretaries [the current and former]. The government should regulate these acts to prevent a boycott to the access of jobs in the administration. Do you have any measure to tackle this?” Ng questioned, and further suggested that the secretary should publicly apologize for a situation that has “affected the image of the administration.”
Pereira Coutinho also regretted that the secretary had not apologized and advised that she resign.
“If I were you, I’d have [offered] my resignation. Instead you are pushing the problems for the director of the Public Administration and Civil Service Bureau [SAFP],” said Coutinho. He added, “Ng Kuok Cheong asked you three simple questions, please respond if you please,” and remarked that what is at issue in this case are “conflicting interests” that could be solved with a declaration “such as that existing in both Hong Kong and Taiwan.”
Gabriel Tong made a short remark to say; “[Whether] we should discuss or not the details since the case has entered in CCAC [is also] a matter that deserves discussion.”
As for the reply to Coutinho’s spoken enquiry, Chan questioned if it was necessary to reply since her response would be the same as she provided for Ng, before she followed with the reading of a similar reply document.
Coutinho remarked that according to the news aired from the previous day, this case [involving Sonia Chan and Florinda Chan] was “just the tip of an iceberg,” as reports stated at least another 14 similar cases are emerging all related to the Public Prosecutions Office (MP).
In his follow-up questions Coutinho said that different issues shouldn’t be amalgamated. “The CCAC has its duties and is investigating but how about the government? Keep the arms crossed without doing anything? There isn’t a need for disciplinary action?” he asked, pointing out that if the case had occurred with an inferior ranking official he was certain that such action would already be in process. Coutinho called once more, like Ng, for a clarification from the secretary on how to prevent future cases like these.
As such questions remained unanswered Ng decided to take a different approach and direct the questions to the director of the SAFP, Kou Peng Kuan, questioning him if the services had opened an internal inquiry.
In the reply Kou did not add much to the discussion either, remarking only on the competencies and constant efforts of the SAFP to improve its accountability regimes.
Lawmakers Leong Veng Chai and Au Kam San also made remarks. The first noted that such a case is a “bad example for the youngsters and the new generations,” and asked, “How are we going to clean that image?”
Au reaffirmed the need to “close the loopholes” that are proven to exist by the referred cases, and urged the secretary to steer away from commonplace answers and start to address the problem from the point-of-view of how to solve it.
Gov’t wants to expand territory southwards
A recent report from the Policy Research Office (GEP) on a so-called “4th Space” of the MSAR, presented last December to the Urban Planning Council, grabbed the attention of lawmaker Si Ka Lon. Si questioned the government about such a plan during yesterday’s Legislative Assembly plenary session.
The spoken enquiry sought clarification regarding the government’s intentions on this matter. In the reply of the Secretary for Transport and Public Works, Raimundo do Rosário acknowledged the existence of such a project which was to be included in the secretariat’s biggest task, the Master Plan, as mentioned by Raimundo do Rosário.
Rosário also mentioned that such an idea is a part of the long-
term future planning of the territory that takes into account the territory’s role within a more comprehensive regional plan.
For more details, the Secretary delegated further explanations to the representative of the GEP, Ma I Kin.
With noted difficulty, Ma tried to explain that for now the “4th Space” is a bit of an “abstract thing,” that is still in a conceptual state. Still, he noted that it “will be a space where the population can live.”
In response to the question of where exactly it is going to be located, Ma remarked: “There isn’t a full conclusion yet but the studies indicate that we will develop at [the south part] of Coloane Island in a first phase and potentially expand to [the] west.” He noted that such a project is not “in the hands of the MSAR” since there is a need to develop “lots of works,” which will necessarily be in cooperation with the Central Government.
“The descendants [of the current residents] are the ones that will enjoy this idea,” Ma remarked. He unveiled that such a place should be possibly dedicated to “technologies and more advanced industries, the financial sector and quality tourism” and remarked on the idea of “preparing the future” of Macau.
No Comments