Source: Hong Kong Government special administrative region – 4
​Following is a question by the Hon Mrs Regina Ip and a written reply by the Secretary for Home and Youth Affairs, Miss Alice Mak, in the Legislative Council today (June 25):
Question:
There are views that the current practice of the Government repeatedly appointing the same group of individuals to its advisory and statutory bodies (ASBs) has failed to engage new members, including foreign nationals who are Hong Kong permanent residents. This approach runs counter to the principle stated by the State President in 2022 at the meeting to celebrate the 25th anniversary of Hong Kong’s return to the motherland and the inaugural ceremony of the sixth-term Government of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region that everyone in Hong Kong who genuinely supports the principle of “one country, two systems”, loves Hong Kong, and abides by the Basic Law and the laws of the special administrative region, can do his or her bit for the region’s development. In this connection, will the Government inform this Council:
(1) of the respective numbers of non-official members serving on various government ASBs in each of the past 10 years, together with a breakdown by ASB;
(2) of (i) the number of non-official members appointed by the Government in each of the past 10 years and, among them, the respective numbers of those who were (ii) re-appointed and (iii) appointed for the first time;
(3) of the respective numbers of (i) foreign nationals being Hong Kong permanent residents, (ii) ethnic minorities holding Chinese nationality, and (iii) other foreign nationals being non-Hong Kong permanent residents who were appointed by the Government as non-official members of ASBs in each of the past 10 years, together with a breakdown by the ASB to which they belonged;
(4) as there are views that foreign nationals who are Hong Kong permanent residents have unique advantages (e.g. enhancing the Government’s understanding of the Islamic culture so as to attract Islamic tourists to visit Hong Kong, etc.) in assisting the Government in taking forward policy initiatives under specific portfolios, but such persons are often excluded from the lists of candidates for non-official members due to their illiteracy in Chinese, what specific measures the Government has put in place to enhance the participation of such persons in ASBs;
(5) given that the Government has all along been adopting the “six-year rule” (i.e. a non-official member should not serve on the same ASB in the same capacity for more than six consecutive or cumulative years) and the “six-board rule” (i.e. a non-official member should not serve on more than six ASBs at any one time), so as to ensure a reasonable turnover of members and distribution of work, yet as at June 30 last year, 12 non-official members have been appointed to more than six ASBs and 227 non-official members have served in the same capacity of an ASB for over six years, of (i) the average number of ASBs to which such persons have been appointed as non-official members, (ii) the highest number of appointment as non-official members made to such persons, (iii) the average duration of such persons serving in the same capacity in an ASB, and (iv) the maximum duration of such persons serving in the same capacity in an ASB; whether the Government has assessed if the appointments concerned have violated the six-year rule; and
(6) given that in its reply to a question raised by a Member of this Council on 3 July, 2024, the Government indicated that some non-official members also possessed experiences in other professional areas and these diverse experiences enhanced and broadened the discussion at ASBs, but there were views that these diverse experiences might constitute potential conflicts of interest, how the Government ensures that the business undertaken by such persons in their professional areas does not constitute a direct conflict of interest with the duties of the relevant ASBs when appointing non-official members to ASBs?
Reply:
President,
Advisory and statutory bodies (ASBs), being an integral part of public administration, play a significant role in assisting the Government in the consultation with stakeholders, formulation of policy objectives and performance of functions. There are currently 525 ASBs in Hong Kong, including advisory boards and committees, appeal boards, public bodies and regulatory bodies, etc.
In response to the question raised by the Hon Mrs Regina Ip, the reply is as follows:
(1) From 2015 to 2024, the number of non-official members appointed by the Government to ASBs is as follows:
| Year |
Number of Appointed Non-official Members
(by post) |
| 2015 |
6 433 |
| 2016 |
6 407 |
| 2017 |
6 653 |
| 2018 |
6 939 |
| 2019 |
7 030 |
| 2020 |
7 135 |
| 2021 |
7 195 |
| 2022 |
7 099 |
| 2023 |
7 281 |
| 2024 |
7 480 |
Note: Figures for 2015 to 2023 are as of December 31, and the figure for 2024 is as of June 30.
​Given that the functions or work of individual ASBs may be dissolved, merged or reorganised in response to the development needs of different policy areas, the number of ASBs varies each year. Besides, the scope of functions of some ASBs may be adjusted, making it difficult to ensure that long-term comparisons based on individual ASBs could accurately reflect the overall changes in the Government’s appointment of non-official members. In light of the above, the number of non-official members by ASBs since the current term of the Government from 2022 to 2024 is provided (at Annexes 1 to 3) for more timely reference.
(2) Furthermore, as the composition and appointment of members of individual ASBs are taken care of by the respective bureaux and departments (B/Ds), we do not compile and maintain breakdown figures for non-official members reappointed and those newly appointed.
(3) The Central Personality Index maintained by the Home and Youth Affairs Bureau (HYAB) contains personal information of most members of ASBs. Since personal information is voluntarily provided by individual members and we do not mandatorily require them to provide nationality details, the HYAB is unable to provide figures on the nationality and ethnicity of non-official members of ASBs.
(4) The basic principle of the appointments of individuals by the Government as non-official members to ASBs is “merits”, so as to ensure that the appointed members are the most suitable candidates who are capable of meeting the specific requirements of the ASBs and will actively participate in their work. When making an appointment, the relevant B/Ds will take into account the candidate’s ability, expertise, experience, integrity and commitment to public service, with due regard to the functions and nature of the business of the ASB concerned. For statutory bodies, it is also necessary to take into account the relevant statutory requirements. Since the objectives, functions and nature of individual ASBs are different, the respective B/Ds are responsible for taking care of the composition, operation and appointment of members of respective ASBs. In addition to taking into account the operational needs of the ASBs under their purview, B/Ds will also consider appointing individuals with diverse backgrounds and experiences, including Hong Kong permanent residents of foreign nationalities, ethnic minorities, or those familiar with Islamic culture, to ensure that the ASBs can effectively fulfil their duties while providing opportunities for individuals from different sectors of the community to participate in public service.
(5) According to relevant government guidelines, under the principle of appointment based on “merits”, B/Ds should, as far as possible, avoid non-official members to serve on more than six ASBs at any one time, or to serve in the same ASB for more than six years whether continuously or cumulatively in the same capacity, so as to ensure a reasonable distribution of workload and turnover of membership. Generally, B/Ds will adhere to these guidelines as far as possible when making appointments. However, there are instances where, based on actual needs, individuals may serve on more than six committees or have their terms extended beyond six years. As at June 30, 2024, 12 non-official members who were appointed to more than six ASBs served in approximately seven ASBs on average, with the highest number of appointments being eight ASBs. As for 227 non-official members who had served in the same capacity in ASBs for more than six years, the average tenure in the same capacity is 8.5 years, with the longest tenure being 37 years. It is worth noting that the appointment arrangement is based on the background of the establishment of relevant statutory body, which is related to commemorating the late husband of the member, representing a special exception.
(6) The Government has established a mechanism for handling situations involving conflicts of interest which may be faced by members of ASBs. While some statutory bodies have a declaration of interest system which is specified in their enabling legislation, two different systems for declaring interests, namely a “one-tier reporting system” and a “two-tier reporting system” are in place for ASBs. Under the “one-tier reporting system”, it is the responsibility of each member to judge and decide whether he/she should declare his/her interests, and members should declare interests in the meetings of the boards or committees during which the matters concerned are discussed and determined. For the “two-tier reporting system”, members should declare their interests on appointment to those boards and committees, in addition to the declaration of interests in meetings. Such declarations should be recorded. The B/Ds concerned should decide which system of declaration of interests is to be adopted having regard to the terms of reference of the ASBs concerned.
The HYAB has issued guidelines on declaration of interests on the recommendation of the Independent Commission Against Corruption for adoption by ASBs, and reminds B/Ds now and then that it is necessary to introduce a system of declaration of interests for each of the ASBs under their purview and to review from time to time the systems of declaration of interests adopted by the bodies concerned, in order to ensure that the systems meet their needs.
Appointing individuals of different professional areas to various ASBs under the principle of merits has, over the years, provided the Government with valuable insights in formulating various policies and measures, which have proven effective in practice. We believe that the aforementioned mechanism can effectively address actual or potential conflict of interest.