RESTRICTED

TIME BECAUSE THE EXPRESSION WAS NOT SCIENTIFIC AND THE IDEA

NEEDED TO BE WRITTEN OUT CLEARLY IF LEGAL LANGUAGE. HE SAID THAT

CADRES CURRENTLY IN HK WOULD NOT (NOT) BECOME THE PEOPLE TO

RULE HK EVEN IF THEY HAD LIVED IN HK FOR MORE THAN SEVEN YEARS BY

1997. HE SAID THEY SHOULD OBTAIN BOTH A PERMANENT HK ID CARD AND

HAVE THE RIGHT OF RESIDENCE IN HK BEFORE THEY COULD PE REGARDED AS

HK PEOPLE. LU WAS ALSO REPORTED AS SAYING THAT THE PHRASE HAD NOT

(NOT) BEEN INITIATED BY THE CHINESE LEADERSHIP, WHICH SPARKED

CLAIMS AND COUNTER-CLAIMS AS TO THE ORIGIN OF THE CONCEPT. SOME

PAPERS AND COMMENTATORS SAW IN LU'S WORDS AN ATTEMPT TO DISTANCE

THE CHINESE FROM THE PHRASE. THE EXPRESS SAID IN PROMINENT

FRONT-PAGE HEADLINES THAT PUBLIC CONFIDENCE WOULD BE SHAKEN IF

CHINA WENT BACK ON ITS PROMISE OF HK PEOPLE RULING HK''. THERE

WAS ALSO DISCUSSION ON THE MEANING OF THE AORD 'ACCOUNTABLE'',

FOLLOWING AN APPARENT DISAGREEMENT REPORTED BETWEEN LU AND CERTAIN

BLDC MEMBERS. LU DEFINED THE WORD AS ''HAVING AN OBLIGATION TO MAKE CLEAR, TO EXPALIN AND TO CONSULT''. HE REPORTEDLY ADDED THAT THE RELEVANT PART OF THE JOINT DECLARATION DID NOT NECESSARILY IMPLY

THAT THE LEGISLATURE WOULD BECOME THE CENTRE OF DECISION-MAKING

POWERS. AN FCO SPOKESMAN WAS REPORTED AS EXPLAINING TO MISS PAO THAT

THE WORD MEANT ''ANSWEPABLE'*. DOROTHY LIU AGPEED THAT THE WORD

WAS NOT DEFINED IN LITERATURE ON THE PRITISH CONSTITUTIONAL SYSTEM, AND THAT IT SHOULD THEREFOPE BE DEFINED BY THE CHINESE PARTICULAPLY

AS IT WAS FOUND IN ANNEX 1.

5. POLITICAL REFORMS: MING PAO RAN A SERIES ON THE SUBJECT. THE

PAPER SAID THAT ONLY ONCE HAD BRITAIF DISALLOWED LEGISLATION

PASSED BY LEGCO, SO LEGCO HAD REAL LEGISLATIVE POWER. THE PAPER

ARGUED THAT THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE ONE COUNTRY, TWO

SYSTEMS'' CONCEPT WOULD BE AFFECTED IF CHINA TRIED TO TUPN LEGCO

INTO A PURLEY ADVISORY BODY. THE PAPER ALSO REFERRED TO A REPORT

WHICH HAD APPEARED IN FINANCIAL DAILY SUGGESTING THAT CHINA HAD

ASKED THE HKG TO CONDUCT AN EMPTY REVIEW |

1 IN 1987 PROPOSING NO

CHANGES TO TO THE POLITICAL STRUCTURE. MING PAO SAID THAT A SOURCE

WITH KNOWLEDGE OF THE DIALOGUE BETWEEN CHINA AND HK HAD PEJECTED

THE REQUEST, AND TWO OTHER SOURCES DENIED THAT CHINA HAD OBTAINED

A VETO OVER POLITICAL DEVELOPMENT IN HK. ECONOMIC JOURNAL CUCTED

A SOURCE AS SAYING THAT THE 1987 REVIEW WOULD NOT PROPOSE ANY

CHANGE TO THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN LEGCO AND EXCC OR TO THE POSITION

OF THE GOVERNOR, BUT WOULD BE CONFINED TO THE COMPOSITION OF LEGCO AND THE QUESTION OF DIRECT ELECTIONS. THIS WAS INTENDED TO

STEER THE REVIEW AWAY FROM THE KEY PARTS OF THE POLITICAL STRUCTURE

AND SO AVOID A CONFLICT WITH PEKING, THE PAPER SAID. THE GOVERNOR IN SPEAKING TO JOURNALISTS STRESSED THAT NOTHING HAD BEEN DECIDED YET AND THAT THE NUB OF THE REVIEW WAS TO LISTEN TO THE VIEWS OF

HK PEOPLE.

6. LAND: THE LEADERS OF POTH SIDES OF THE LAND COMMISSION WEPE INTERVIEWED BY THE OVERSEAS EDITION OF THE PEOPLE'S DAILY. гoon

SAID THAT THE GOAL OF ALLOWING HK'S LAND ADMINISTRATION TO BE

CONDUCTED EFFICIENTLY HAD BEEN ACHIEVED BECAUSE OF THE SMOOTH

PROGRESS MADE IN THE LC. SUN CONFIRMED CHINA'S POSITION OF NOT BEING

RESTRICTED

INVOLVE

Share This Page