CONFIDENTIAL
Chinese would be working in co-operation to assure Hong Kong a stable and prosperous future, on the basis of the Joint Declaration, rather than any specific promises about democracy, which persuaded people support the Joint Declaration. The propsect of a development of representative government was a secondary and largely unrelated factor for the treat majority of Hong Kong people.
ii)
It is in any case quite unrealistic to suggest that the mere establishment of a more representative system of government in Hong Kong before 1997 would of itself enhance, let alone guarantee, its prospects for autonomy after 1997. What happens in Hong Kong after China resumes sovereignty will depend very largely on the good will of China itself and on the extent to which developments in Hong Kong before 1997, permit a smooth transition to the arrangements set out in the Joint Declaration and Basic Law.
iii) The basis of confidence in Hong Kong (both local and international) lies not so much in considerations about the pace of development of representative government as in perceptions of Chinese attitudes towards Hong Kong. Nothing could be more damaging to confidence than an open conflict with China over direct
elections.
This is what would certainly result if we were to take a decision to introduce them in 1988, before the promulgation of the
Basic Law, as Mr Lee proposes.
"BROKEN PROMISES"
4.
•
Mr Lee alleges that a number of specific promises were made and
broken by HMG:
(a)
a democratic system of government would be in place in Hong Kong by 1997.
Comment: this is a loose interpretation of a number of statements made by Ministers in 1984, which are quoted in Mr Lee's letter. Perhaps the most specific was Mr Luce's statement (5 December 1984) that we should build up "a firmly based democratic administration in Hong Kong in the years
between now and 1997".
But, there is no inconsistency between
CONFIDENTIAL