I
2
in the H.M. Government for their consideration and that the
people in Hong Kong should have direct access to the supreme
bodies in the H.M. Government to voice their approval or
disapproval of H.M. Government's policy on Hong Kong. In
the recent past, there were some debates on matters concerning
Hong Kong in both Houses without any direct participation from
Hong Kong, and there were problems and issues about Hong Kong
raised in both Houses without someone from Hong Kong to put
them into proper perspective. For this unsatisfactory state
of affairs, I cannot express better than by quoting you, Sir,
when you addressed us two weeks ago in this Council
"When we criticise faults here, we do so to an
audience well aware also of the strengths and
achievements that make up the full picture of
Hong Kong. But this is not so overseas."
It is therefore imperative that we should have some direct
voices in the H.M. Government.
Since all M.Ps. in the Lower House are elected, it would be
difficult for Hong Kong to be represented in the House of
Commons and I therefore would like to see the current programme
for inviting M.Ps. to visit Hong Kong continued and expanded.
However, it is understood that there are no constitutional
difficulties for Hong Kong's representation in the House of
Lords. Since 1958 when the Life Peerages Act came into force,
many men and women, who have been prominent in public life or
have special qualifications which enable them to make a con-
tribution to the work of the Lords, are appointed by the Crown
as life peers and have taken their seats in the House of Lords.
Before its independence, West Indies also had direct represent-
ation in the House of Lords. Today, there are many nominees
whom H.M. Government has recommended for life peerages. It is
with this background that I suggest that the Hong Kong Govern-
ment consider nomination to the Crown for appointment as life
peers of prominent Hong Kong people who can ably speak on our
behalf in the Upper House.