34
HONG KONG LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL — 14 March 1984
motion is not moved to change the status of Hong Kong in the negotiation it merely affords an opportunity for well considered opinions to be expres n this Council.
The motion was also suspected to be moved for the purpose of mobilizing public opinion to exert pressure on the negotiating countries. The allegation is also groundless. The U.K. Government has repeatedly stated that the solution to Hong Kong's future is a matter between the Chinese and British govern- ments, with the final arrangements acceptable to Hong Kong. A debate in the open Legislative Council chamber is therefore useful and timely. The Unofficial Members of the Legislative Council are obliged to duly inform the government of the public's reactions to and assessments on all significant factors. We also feel that we are fully accountable to the Hong Kong populace and will be remiss in our responsibilities if we do not reflect the views and preferences of the public on this important issue. Based on the numerous representations from individuals and groups to UMELCO and on our personal contacts with members of the public, we are confident that we can effectively and accurately transmit the wishes of the masses in respect of the future of Hong Kong. The Chinese Government has been actively collecting views and opinion of the Hong Kong residents by either inviting groups and individuals to visit the capital or screening written representations. The British Government is also in the process of monitoring local views about the future. The open debate in this Council can be used by the negotiating governments as an additional source of information input.
Furthermore, it is hoped that the debate on the motion can serve as a catalyst in spearheading more discussions, in formal as well as in informal settings, among the widest cross-section of the people, that is by professional associations, interest groups, grass-roots organizations, civic groups, district boards and student bodies. It should be noted that the motion has two other significant implications. The points made in Members' speeches this afternoon will go on public record and be accessible to any person interested. Some Official Members, I expect, will speak on the motion and the people of Hong Kong will also be able to hear the views of the Government.
However, to render the debate on the Hong Kong future more effective and realistic, certain conditions must be observed. Certain aspects of the talks must be released to the public. There has been speculation that the contents of the talks in the recent rounds were about technical and administrative matters. If this is the case, then I think they can be made known in broad outline forms. Only in this manner can public discussions be made constructive and pragmatic.
An effective consultation machinery must be devised to monitor, to collate and compile views and preferences expressed. This information can be readily used for assessing the solution to be forged out of the Sino-British negotiations. With the knowledge that the British Government will take into consideration local opinions and aspirations when ratifying the agreement on Hong Kong future, the people in Hong Kong will be encouraged to express themselves.