1
2
3
4
5
that there is no justification for the failure on the
Mirn
part of this Government te give equal treatment to
signatures collected during signature campaigns, with identity card numbers and pre-printed letters without options, produced by pro-Chinese groups which opposed the introduction of direct elections this
•
The Government has chosen to continue to
}
ΛΙ
- L
A..
1131
give different treatments to these documents, contrary to experts' opinions, But without giving reasons to justify its position. I therefore suggest that
the Government should have stated in the White Paper instead: Among submissions to the Survey Office from individuals, groups and associations, more were
in favour than against the introduction of direct elections in 1988.*
6
7
year
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
le
19
20
21
22
2 2 2 2 2 2
23
24
Le 25
26
27
28
29.
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
Secondly, as to the figures given
for this Council, the Municipal Councils and the Pistrict Boards, we must bear in mind that Members
of this Council are not really representative of *the community as a whole, as has been emphasised? by so many Members. For none of us, Sir, whether
we like it or not, has been elected by our people.
And, likewise, in relation to the Municipal Councils and the pistrict Boards, again, the membership is
not entirely elected.
Sir, in this context, it is abundantly
clear then that the conclusion reached by the Government in the White Paper that taken as a whole, the public response to the Green paper showed that the community is divided over the timing of this movet, was based among other things, on the two surveys conducted by AGB McNair (Hong Kong) Limited, which, in the
view of the Hong Kong Government, had shown that
there were more against than in favour of the introduction
Lid.
い
ان