+
HONG KONG LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL — 14 March 1984
·
59
Hong Kong, and in no uncertain terms her strong disapproval for any
ting views, be they constructive or otherwise.
C
On the other hand the content of the talks was kept confidential. Although most of our people accepted the need for this in the process of finding an acceptable solution, we resented the fact that our future was taken out of our hands. Both parties in the negotiations claimed to represent our interest. Both emphasized and re-emphasized their intention at the end of the day to maintain our prosperity and stability. The British side would not say how although the general assumption was that they would negotiate for the continuation of the present administration and the retention of the constitutional relationship between Hong Kong and the U.K. The Chinese side was only too ready to present its plan, but it failed to win our confidence. For those of us who are Chinese by race, we were plagued by deep, complex and conflicting sentiments of loyalty, respect, nationalism and distrust for the two sides. Confidentiality made matters worse by breeding speculation, pessimism and a further erosion of confidence. Whatever hope that was aroused when substantive talks got under way last July was dashed quickly by rumours of discord on the negotiating table. By September the mood was one of despair, and pessimism snowballed to panic proportions which culminated in the Hong Kong dollar crisis on the 24th of the month, exactly one year to the day after the joint communique.
A conscious effort was made on all three sides to calm our nerves during the aftermath of the turbulence. However in spite of the use of such phrases as 'useful and constructive' at the end of each ensuing round, it was soon apparent that the talks were not progressing. 'No news is good news' was in this instance only another excuse for us to bury our heads in the sand. By the end of 1983 we did not seem to be nearer to a solution than we had been on the first day of the negotiation.
Since the beginning of this year the talks seemed to have taken a new turn. For the first time, some new ground seemed to have been broken. Rumours of a unilateral declaration by the Chinese intended for September this year have hung over us since the beginning of the talks. Recently such rumours have taken in the possibility of a joint statement by both countries in September, July or even June. There are also suggestions of Britain having already agreed to surrender sovereignty and administration of the territory in 1997 in exchange for satisfactory arrangements for the period beyond. These rumours seem all the more real when the Sunday Times front page article headlined, "THATCHER hands Hong Kong to China' on 22 January was not disputed or denied by Whitehall. The writing seems to be on the wall. The British may have already compromised on the issue of sovereignty. There may or may not be conditions attached. If this is the truth, then I believe the people of Hong Kong should be told of this shift in Britain's negotiating position. Furthermore China and Britain must now recognize that we have the right to know and express opinion on any proposed solution before it is signed and sealed by the British and Chinese government. The British government has reiterated its commitment to
Page 240Page 241