Page 55 of 233
HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL
74
financiers, businessmen and a few lawyers. There is a woeful lack of social workers, and educationalists, as well as blue and white collar workers.
I suggest therefore that the Government's arguments in favour of indirect election are totally invalid, being aimed at preserving the status quo and not at democratisation.
As to how the so-called 'electoral and functional constituencies' are supposed to operate, the Green Paper is delightfully woolly. How will six seats be divided among 18 District Boards and the Urban Council? Is that not a formula for chaos, corruption and above all, factions? As to the functional constituencies, which of the professions will be included, and how will they choose six? And what about white and blue collar workers, including lower-income Government servants? Are they to have no voice in the future government of Hong Kong? The scheme is absurd and should be rejected forthwith.
I would now like to turn to the timing of the Green Paper. Like all Green Papers, it is intended that the green cover but not the contents will be changed. The British Government will then be informed that the people have all been consulted, and Britain will be satisfied, though we know well that our views are always ignored. We must not let it happen again!
A certain Government appointee who seems to be a Government spokesman nowadays, suggested that we should decide on the Green Paper before September so as to be uninfluenced by the results of the Sino-British negotiations. This is just another ploy to try to keep power in the hands of the present appointees, part of the power game. But it is absolutely necessary that we should know the scores concerning post 1997 before we commit ourselves to a plan for the next thirteen years and possibly a further 50 years after that. We must not fall into this colonial trap. Which brings us to the question of the timing of the Green Paper. Why was it brought out just as everyone interested in it was likely to be going on holiday? The Urban Council goes into recess in August, hence the lateness of this debate. More importantly, the British Parliament recesses from the end of July until mid-October, so they will be excluded from debating the subject. If the Hong Kong Government has one vestige of honesty, it will delay this Paper until the middle of 1985, and implement the first step in 1986, which will also give the enlarged elected side of the District Boards the right to express their views. This will also give all of us time to consider the Sino-British proposals in the context of the Green Paper.
Furthermore, I deplore the attempts being made by official and unofficial members of the Government to influence public thinking on what is supposed to be a Green Paper for public discussion. They like to claim that they reflect public opinion, so why do they spend so much time trying to influence public opinion?
HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL
75
In short, the Green Paper offers us nothing new in democracy. It is totally geared towards blocking the democratic process and preserving the position of the Government's partisans. A step by step move towards direct elections would introduce a fresh and more honest approach to representative government. I therefore suggest that half the appointees, that is, 15 members of the Legislative Council, be elected directly in colony-wide elections in 1986, 30 in 1989, and 40 in 1992. At the same time, British officials should on retirement be replaced by the Chinese officials who are doing the work in the background anyhow. Voting should not be by small constituency, to avoid malpractices, vote-rigging or corruption.
I have faith that our young people, many of whom have proved their sense of responsibility even during their school years, will produce a more crime-free, honest and better society than we can ever enjoy under the present system of rule by the privileged. Our future is bright if we can forget the turmoil created this year by appointed power-seekers, and get on with the business of 'Kong yan chi Kong.' I would like to end by quoting the words of an appointed member, Dr. Harry FANG. In July 1984, he said, "There will be no quicker road to instability and erosion of confidence than to subordinate the free will of men to the dictates of the Government'. May we therefore expect Dr. FANG's support for free and direct elections to the body which has this year caused an erosion of confidence?
I support the motion.
DR. DENNY M. H. HUANG (in Cantonese):-Mr. Chairman, on the 16th of last month in a public seminar, I expressed my views on the Green Paper and asked the Secretary of the Urban Council to distribute my speech to members, so I will not repeat what I had put down in the paper. I only want to reiterate one point that one-third of the members of the LegCo in Macau have been directly elected, if anyone would like to say again that we should not have the directly elected members then I think that is a very absurd point to make and an insult to the intelligence to the people of Hong Kong.
Mr. Chairman, I support the motion.
APPENDIX I
Since the publication of the Green Paper on Representative Government last month, many organizations and a wide cross-section of people in Hong Kong have expressed their opinions and a number of seminars have been held to discuss the proposals contained in the Green Paper. Today, I too wish to state my views as the future development of the system of government is crucial to the maintenance of stability and prosperity of Hong Kong and its more than five million people in the next 60-odd years.
The Green Paper really comes too late and the democratic rights it proposes to confer on the people are too little.
Page 55
Page 56
Page 56 of 233