1
MAIN POINTS ARISING FROM THE DEBATE IN THE HOUSE OF LORDS
1. DEMOCRACY
(a) Lord Fanshawe, opening the debate, supported an extension of
democracy in Hong Kong. He added that it would entail dangers and strains, especially with the inevitable formation of
political parties.
(b) Lord MacLehose said that democracy should develop as the Hong
Kong Government thought best.
(c) Lord Kennet believed that an extension of democracy was the only true way to ascertain the wishes of the people of Hong Kong,
even though the Chinese might have their doubts. Peking must agree, albeit tacitly, to such developments.
(d) Lord Oram said the growth of democracy should be given the
utmost encouragement. It should be developed from below. The Hong Kong Government would not be the best judge. We should give consideration to direct elections to EXCO and LEGCO. Democracy should be underpinned by the development of social and economic organisations such as unions, student organisations etc. The Chinese would not be against democracy as they were themselves initiating comparable developments.
2.
QUANTITY OF DETAIL
(a) Lord Fanshawe was in favour of a detailed agreement that would
create confidence. He added that the agreement should cover security, finance, law and freedoms of speech and religion. (b) Lord MacLehose said there must be enough detail for future
arrangements to be clear.
(c) Lord Rhodes, speaking for Lord Kadoorie, said it was impractical to ask for an agreement in specific terms. We should look for a clearly stated heads of agreement based on goodwill.
(d) Lord Geddes said that although Peking might brush aside the
importance of written details, there should be as much as possible as Hong Kong would then know where it stood. The agreement must cover dual Sino-Briitsh nationality.
(e) Lord Shepherd advocated broad agreement as there was not enough
time for much detail to be worked out.
(f) Lord Tanlaw agreed with Lord Shepherd. We should go for a heads
of agreement. After ratification a working committee including