1395
Hong Kong: Democracy After 1997
[29 JANUARY 1992]
promise? As in all compromises, the different provisions cannot be disentangled. If one side seeks to ignore or reinterpret one provision, then the other side will seek to ignore or reinterpret another. At this juncture that does not seem to be a useful way forward. Better to build on what we have.
In practice it means that neither the United Kingdom nor the People's Republic of China should at this stage of the proceedings do anything to rock the boat. By that I mean they should not seek to move unilaterally in a direction which they know in advance to be unacceptable to the other side.
If that sounds craven, let me invite noble Lords to consider what is actually happening on the ground in Hong Kong. In the weeks since agreement with China was reached over the airport, confidence has greatly improved. The stock market is at an all time high. Business is doing better-certainly much better than it is, for example, in this country. New investment is coming in, which means that there are jobs and prosperity for all. Why is that? It is not because the agreement is perfect but because the mere fact that an agreement exists between the two sides on a range of issues means that everyone knows, or thinks they know, where they stand and can plan accordingly. On the other hand, each time we are at public loggerheads with the Chinese tension rises, investment falls away, confidence drops and prosperity is at risk. If Hong Kong is not prospering in 1997 the Chinese will have no incentive to keep to the Joint Declaration.
The need to reach agreement with the Chinese does not mean that progress cannot be made towards a greater degree of democracy; towards improved arrangements in regard to the administration of justice or in other directions. What strikes all of us who have daily dealings with Hong Kong is the way in which the economies of Hong Kong and China are becoming not only interdependent—they always were—but that there is now in reality only one economy covering Hong Kong proper and the neighbouring provinces of China. The point has now been reached where it is impossible I repeat, impossible-for China to damage the economy of Hong Kong without inflicting serious, perhaps disastrous, damage on the economy of China itself.
When one thinks about it, in the real world China has much more to gain from the continued prosperity of Hong Kong than we do. That being so, the right way forward is the one that the British Government are following. My right honourable friend the Foreign Secretary has promised that he will continue to press on the Chinese our views on the best way to achieve the continuing prosperity of Hong Kong. Even more important, he will be pressing the views of the Hong Kong people.
I do not wish to repeat what noble Lords have said, but I wish to digress by saying that I too regret that my right honourable friend will no longer be assisted in that task by Sir David Wilson. This was no time to change the Governor. Those in this country who have campaigned against him have little to be proud of.
There is no point in striking attitudes. We believe in democracy for democracy's sake. The Chinese Government do not. So slanging matches on that
705 LD25/47 Job 7-6
1396
Hong Kong: Democracy After 1997
subject lead to a dead-end. That is the trouble with campaigns which merely have as their theme "more democracy must be good". Rather, let us use up our ammunition and our persuasive powers in getting the Chinese to move forward on specific issues--many of which have already been summarised by the noble Lord, Lord Wyatt of Weeford—not to win a political argument but in order to further the future well-being of the people of Hong Kong.
8.42 p.m.
Lord MacLehose of Beoch: My Lords, I too would like to thank the noble Lord, Lord Wyatt, for introducing this debate. Like many other noble Lords, he mentioned various things about the governor. I claim to have a special knowledge about gubernatorial matters. The point was made that the governor is now a kind of lame duck and that the Government have just about killed him off. He was here the other day and I have never seen any duck less lame. He was in exuberant form. It is delightful that he is going to be joining your Lordships in this House. He will make a great contribution.
There was strong criticism of the announcement that the governor is going to retire without a successor being named. Think of all the fun that it has given to journalists playing this game! I noticed your Lordships joining in the game of suggesting who will going to succeed him. My retirement was announced four months before I retired. The name of my successor was announced one month before I retired. I did survive and so did Hong Kong. However, I say this to those who are to appoint him: they will be hard put to find somebody as good as the person they are allowing to go.
It was a great pleasure to follow the noble Lord, Lord Derwent. I agreed with everything he said, and particularly with his presentation of one's attitude to China in these circumstances. He referred to the importance of not harking back to past agreements; the importance of not proceeding in a confrontational manner, and the importance of seeing things to some extent from the Chinese point of view. I am thinking of the question of democracy as being something which is European and utterly un-Asian. These matters have to be dealt with with great care.
I would like not to follow the noble Lord in all the points he made. I wish to proceed somewhat differently. I begin by saying what I believe people in Hong Kong would like to see. They are well-known for their pragmatism. They understand the political realities of their own situation. With only five years more of British responsibility, I believe that what they want to see is a strong and efficient public service. That they have. I believe they wish to see a political structure which will give them, on the one hand, assurance of a continuation of their personal freedom and, on the other, one that does not provoke Chinese suspicion and consequent instability.
A great deal has been said about that this evening. I entirely agree that more work has to be done on this matter. The people of Hong Kong want to see a system of justice which is fair and impartial. That they certainly have and there is every prospect of it