If two leading state agencies say they're not going to look into this, then why should I? It gets frustrating looking at this over and over again.

The laws are different and up for interpretation but I wasn't venturing into a discussion about something that wasn't on the agenda. A conversation on a forensic audit was brought up under 'budget.' You tell me how that fits in.

Essentially Mel and Bill complained that I wasn't doing what the majority of the committee wanted. To claim that I'm not doing what the majority is asking is incorrect. It was obvious by the [no confidence] vote that I was.

There will probably be personnel involved and they also have rights under the open meetings law. I'm not going to close the door on it (forensic audit) but it would have to happen in executive session.

Both the central government and this administration are actively leading this community towards universal suffrage in an orderly fashion. I am 60 years of age. I certainly want to see universal suffrage taking place in Hong Kong in my time.

Healthy disagreement, debate, leading to compromise has always been the American way.