NEW AIRPORT PROJECT
Twelve papers in 25 editorials commented on the new airport project during the past week, focusing mainly on the Legco debate on the issue, the impasse in the Sino-British airport talks and the possibility that the project might be shelved.
Wah Kiu Yat Po (18.4) and Sing Tao Jih Pao (18.4) said that the outcome of the Legco debate showed that most councillors were aware of the importance of maintaining good relations with China while retaining HK's administrative authority. Sing Tao called the passage of Selina Chow's motion on the airport issue a victory for the moderates.
HK
The HK Economic Times (18.4) said that after the Legco debate, people should be psychologically prepared that there would be Chinese representatives sitting on the Airport Authority and that a certain amount of reserves would be set aside for the SAR Government.
The paper, together with the Express (18.4), Sing Pao (19.4 & 21.4) and Tin Tin Daily News (21.4) called on both Britain and China to disclose the details of the airport talks and their proposals on the project. The Economic Times said that since HK people's money would be spent on the project, they had the right to know.
However, the Express (19.4 & 23.4) felt that it would be naive to believe that China and Britain would tell HK people everything about the airport talks.
Commenting on the deadlock in the talks, Wen Wei Po (18.4 & 23.4) refuted the British side's argument that Chinese scrutiny of the airport plans would undermine the administrative authority of the British administration in HK. The paper held that HK matters such as land sales, civil service pensions and the territory's participation in international organisations were already being resolved through scrutiny rather than consultation, and that Annex II to the Joint Declaration had stipulated clearly what matters should be scrutinised jointly by China and Britain.
It could not be regarded as co-operation if the British on the one hand asked China to express support on major issues straddling 1997, but on the other, refused to let China scrutinise those issues, the paper (18.4) said. This view was shared by the HK Commercial Daily (18.4), which added that those people who made use of the airport issue to accuse China of interfering with HK affairs were really going too far.
In another editorial (23.4), the Commercial Daily continued to lash out at those people who, it said, tried to stir up a storm when an agreement on the new airport was within reach. The paper said that the tension created by those people had caused a plunge in share prices.
Ta Kung Pao (22.4) said that Britain's shifting attitude towards the airport issue and the fact that Legco member Martin Lee had been asked to convey British views called into question Britain's sincerity in the airport talks.