In these circumstances, Sir, it
becomes necessary for us to find out from the Government
whether it accepts, as valid the numerous criticisms
so preinte
1
of direct elections in 1988.
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
that have been levied against these two McNair surveys.
I, therefore, lodged the motion before this Council
sometime last week for a debate on the 9th March
1988 in advance of this debate. And the motion m
would have been: "That this Council regrets the
Government's failure to answer the detailed and cogent
criticisms made in public, which demonstrated the invalidity of the findings of the two surveys of public opinion, conducted by AGB McNair (Hong Kong) Limited, on behalf of the Survey Office on the question
of whether or not direct elections should be introduced
to the Legislative Council in 1988, published in the Survey Office Report on the 29th October 1987, And, accordingly, urges the Government to answer
these criticisms in detail before this Council debates
the Government's decision of not introducing direct
elections in 1988, as announced in paragraph 28 of 23 the White Paper, published on 10th February 1988. 24
22
25
2 2 2 2 2 2
26
27
28
Unfortunately, Sir, you ruled
Sir, if you had ruled
the motion to be out of order.
it out of order because it was too long, I could.
There you your say nothing about it. But, unfortunately, you ruled that it was out of order because it had anticipated 30 this debate. With great respect, Sir, although
29
31
32
33
34
35
36
ན
<
I did bow to your ruling, I would respectfully submit
Kr
right that the ruling was perhaps not that accurate, because there was no mention in the White Paper of any criticisms
of the two McNair surveys and, therefore, my motion which called upon the Government to say one way or the other whether it accepts those criticisms or