Duty-bound to inform constituents of views

PUBLISHED : Thursday, 05 September, 1996, 12:00am
UPDATED : Thursday, 05 September, 1996, 12:00am

Anthony Lee (South China Morning Post, August 31) said he is confused by my letter of August 24. Allow me to reiterate my position.

I am not joining the Selection Committee, but I will not challenge the moral intentions of others who want to join. They must do what they think is best in difficult circumstances.

On August 24, I explained that some newspapers wrongly reported that I would consider asking my constituents about whether to join the Selection Committee. That was an incorrect report. However, my letter was clear, that I had considered giving an account to my constituents about my views on the provisional legislature. Perhaps Mr Lee can now see the difference.

Mr Lee claims that the only reason I want to clarify my position is 'your shifting stance'. Here he is also mistaken.

I have a duty to my electorate to account to them on a very important issue which could result in them being disenfranchised. The provisional legislature is no ordinary issue.

At least on such an important issue I feel duty-bound to inform my constituents of my views, and how I could continue to serve them out of office.

Mr Lee may have no time for this but my constituents may appreciate it.

Mr Lee might also wish to note that if I choose to take out advertisements in newspapers to inform my constituents, I won't be using 'taxpayers' dollars' as Mr Lee seems to think. I will be using private resources.

CHRISTINE LOH Legislative Councillor