Councillor guidelines are a means to an end
- The dos and don’ts set out for district councillors are a way to show that they are more than just patriots supporting the government and that they can make a real difference in people’s lives
It says a lot about the changing political landscape when the performance of district councillors are subject to government monitoring and punishment.
The new guidelines governing the dos and don’ts for members of the revamped lower-tier structure are considered necessary steps to enhance district administration under the “patriots-only” governance approach.
Hopefully, it will help the councils live up to public expectations.
Some rules are just a given, such as an attendance rate of at least 80 per cent of the meetings and office opening of no fewer than 40 hours per week, including at least four hours during weekday evenings, weekends and public holidays.
Members are also required to submit annual work reports and participate in the weekly meet-the-public scheme and at least six activities organised or co-organised by the respective District Offices each year.
But the government is also targeting actions adopted by opposition members in the past, such as disrupting order, insulting members and officials and obstructing them from attending or leaving the meetings.
“Stirring up social conflicts” or “engaging in behaviour that falls short of the conduct expected of a councillor” is also deemed gross misconduct.
A review panel may be set up should breaches occur, with possible punishments including a verbal warning or suspension of duty.
Compared to the relatively liberal approach towards elected offices in the past, the new rules may seem all-encompassing and harsh. But it underlines the government’s determination to show that the revamped model can genuinely enhance governance and people’s livelihoods.
Members of the revamped Legislative Council are currently not subject to any guidelines on attendance rate or frequencies on speaking and tabling bills and motions.
Nor are they bound by any rule on liaising with their electorates.
Like their lower-tier counterparts, they too have to win broader trust and support from the community by adhering to higher standards.
The guidelines seeking to bring councillors’ performance up to public expectations are just a means to an end. The members must prove themselves more than just patriots supporting the government and make a real difference in people’s livelihood.
