2
66
""
are few overt signs that they wish for change either. Unique in being an indus- trial colony, Hong Kong is also a colony without a popular movement for inde- pendence. Independence in Hong Kong is a word that has no meaning, for the presence of mainland China emascu- lates the political development of the Colony. Political realities dictate that Hong Kong is either a British colony or an integral part of China under control from Peking. Nor can it be claimed that social and industrial conditions are a cause of organised labour unrest. For over twenty years the number of man-days lost through strikes has been extremely low. A recent report of the Hong Kong American Chamber of Commerce points out that between 1969 and 1973, an aver- age of 32 working days a year were lost per 1,000 employees in Hong Kong. The equivalent figures for other countries were: Canada 1,722, the USA 1,372, Britain 1,036, Japan 238, Sweden 62. But the threat of disorganised violence is never far below the surface and riots and street demonstrations occur from time to time. The last serious outbreak, in 1967, owed something to labour conditions but was mainly inspired by the Cultural Re- volution in China. Only 13 per cent of workers are trade union members, and the unions themselves are politically divided, fragmented, and still weak in bargaining consciousness.
For socialists-indeed for any liberal British observer-the patent injustices and exploitation in Hong Kong are un- acceptable and the response of govern- ments and people inexplicable. This pamphlet is an attempt to inform a wider public about conditions in Hong Kong, to explain the real difficulties which inhibit change, and to suggest some areas of practicable reform. For change there must be. In 1869 Sir Graves MacDonnell, then Governor of Hong Kong, referred to the "special, exceptional circumstances of this very peculiar place, its very peculiar inhabitants and most peculiar geographical position." These peculiari- ties, real or imagined, have for too long been used as an excuse for betraying those values which have made the British at home the most liberal of industrial
peoples. Some day China will take over responsibility for Hong Kong. Between now and then Britain has a chance to promote those values. If we cannot do that, what are we doing there?