-
2 -
people here to make positive rather than negative choices and to opt, when this becomes necessary, for compromise and consensus. After all, this approach has done wonders for Hong Kong and all its inhabitants so far: as a community we have become rich and famous and managed to secure a special deal from China as a
result. We have not missed democratic institutions until the
1984 Green Paper was published; indeed, their absence has largely facilitated the success of Hong Kong's economic and social systems.
So when faced with a choice of saying "yes" or "no" to a proposal, especially when that proposal or its consequences are only dimly understood by a population prone to political apathy but are held out to be an acceptable, or the only, solution to an otherwise confrontational development, the answer is fairly predictable. Opinion polls will have limited value since they will not be able to probe the full circumstances behind the choices made by the respondents. This is not to downgrade the survey effort, simply to point out the existing quantity-quality problem.
Sir, if the question of constitutional reform was not so seriously important for all of us, one might be tempted to be amused by some of the convoluted reasoning being applied by all sides to impress the gullible. The naive assertions, for example, that Government would lose all credibility and that Hong Kong's future will be imperilled if we do not accept more radical change at an early stage are as misleading as the arguments that only direct elections mean democracy, or that the Joint Declaration's reference to an "elected" legislature could only have meant direct elections. If this was the case, then why did the Joint Declaration not say so, and why is there an argument about interpretation between the British and Chinese governments? Where is the "pressing social need" now so frequently mentioned as a reason for rushing into further reforms, and what really are the serious deficiencies of the present system, and the tangible advantages of the new one? Which guarantees can the proponents of more radical reform offer that changes to our
political structure will make the transition to Chinese
sovereignty in 1997 smoother rather than more difficult? And
Page 15Page 16