risk of such persuasion being totally counter-productive. But in a world in which governments more frequently engage in international competition for mobile resources such as money and manpower, Hong Kong should not be silly enough to refuse considering the importation of labour when it is so obvious that we shall be losing more people to emigration in any event, see a reducing birth-rate, and already feel the existing labour shortage as a real constraint on the potential for continued strong economic growth. Internationalisation also means that one has to be more aware of what happens on the outside, and has to try to stay ahead or at least manage to readily adapt to the changes occurring elsewhere in the world. Increasing economic interdependence and personal mobility are a fact of life and Hong Kong perhaps more than quite a few other countries cannot afford the luxury of being oblivious to reality or maintain the status quo. The labour shortage is the most serious problem in Hong Kong today and will tend to discourage overseas investment interest if not resolved somehow.
Some of you may remember that when constitutional reform proposals were debated in Hong Kong during the past few years, I was often described as one of the "arch-conservatives" when suggesting that changes should be gradual and practical rather than radical and idealistic. I never actually promoted a policy of "no change", although some of those unhappy with my pragmatism claimed that this was what I advocated. Clearly even without the certainty of a change in sovereignty over Hong Kong, economic and social developments affecting Hong Kong will require reforms to the colonial structure of our government and to the ways it has traditionally operated. But these modifications should not be made only to satisfy the lofty ideals or political aspirations of a minority but should always be result-oriented, give reasonable expectations of being workable, and be undertaken against a background of what the community at large needs to achieve to retain its principal advantage: in Hong Kong's case this must be, as I already mentioned, its overall ability to be useful to China. We do not need the whole panopoly of democratic institutions that have developed over long periods of time in other countries because we do have a free society in Hong Kong - possibly freer than in most other democracies. The people of Hong Kong have more freedom than just about anybody else in the world because they face relatively fewer restraints in deciding what to do with their lives and how to allocate their earnings.
There is plenty of room for those keen on participating in the governance of the territory without necessarily having universal suffrage, direct elections, or political parties - indeed there is a need for the grooming of local political leadership which is still in pitifully short supply. But I
- 4-