Page 88 of 233
140
HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL
I welcome and wholeheartedly support the fundamental principles which provide the basis for the parameters now being drawn up through the Sino-British talks in Beijing for the future of Hong Kong. I refer specifically to China's resumption of sovereignty of Hong Kong in 1997, the governing of Hong Kong as a Special Administrative Region with a high degree of autonomy by the people of Hong Kong, the preservation of the existing way of life of the people of Hong Kong for 50 years beyond 1997; and the maintenance of two systems, socialist and capitalist, within one country.
The exact details of these parameters have yet to be made known officially by China and Britain---and I understand that this will be done very soon when the negotiating parties sign the draft agreement. It is obvious, however, that the first two principles mentioned above (namely, China's resumption of sovereignty and the governing of Hong Kong by the people of Hong Kong) require significant changes in our existing governmental structure to prepare for the new situation. On the other hand, the other two principles (namely, the co-existence of two systems within one country and the preservation of our present way of life) demand that the changes should be moderate and also introduced at a moderate pace.
The relatively conservative approach of the Green Paper's proposals offers a practicable way of achieving the necessary changes gradually. I do not dispute that there can be other practicable alternatives, but the Green Paper's proposals are sound and should be acceptable.
The one reservation I have relates to the seats in the Legislative Council to be occupied by members elected by the electoral college of Urban Council, Regional Council and District Board members starting in 1985. Final detailed arrangements should ensure that each of the three components of this electoral college should be represented. As the District Boards gradually assume a more positive role as the basic units in our system of local administration, a direct link should be established between each board and the Legislative Council. Thus, consideration should be given to increasing at a later stage the number of seats for the geographical electoral college to 23, of which 19 would be occupied by District Board members and 2 each by Urban Council and Regional Council members. Seats for functional constituencies should also be increased progressively, though not necessarily in the same proportion.
If there is unequivocal predominance of public opinion, supported by cogent arguments, in favour of greater velocity towards an even more representative government than that envisaged by the Green Paper, consideration should be given to reviewing the position in 1987 instead of 1989 as proposed. This review should include the issue of direct election.
With these brief comments, Mr. Chairman, I support your motion.
HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL
Page 88 of 233
141
MR. AUGUSTINE S. K. CHUNG (in English):—Mr. Chairman, Hong Kong is a dynamic society featured by rapid changes and development. It is quite correct and realistic for Government to admit in the Green Paper that the existing system of Government could not reflect authoritatively the views of the people of Hong Kong.
The Green Paper thus proposed in effect that the best features of the existing system should be preserved while the unsuitable and untimely parts should be improved upon.
However, it is not only the views of the people that are important because the views can be abundant and unanimous but incorrect. For instance, if invitation is made for public opinions on the level of income and profit tax, the average result of the opinion poll may be miles away from what the level ought to be realistically. In such a case, the best way is not to gather public opinion but to supply facts and figures to a group of professionals who have won the respect and confidence of the people by reason of their past performance of being just, fair, reasonable and capable of representing the best interest of the people. Therefore, the question of representation depends on the functions of the Governmental bodies in which representation is sought. If the function is merely the collection and channelling of public views, opinions and information, the representatives' qualifications are based on their ability and opportunities of collecting such information as correctly as possible. Professional skill, experience, analytical power and skill of sharp judgment are desirable but not absolutely required.
On the other hand, if the functions of the bodies, such as Executive Council, Legislative Council and Urban Council, require
(a) analysis of information, facts and figure;
(b) judgment on their correctness;
(c) making of decision on the basis of such information and analysis thereof.
then, qualifications required of the people's representatives in such bodies have to be very high and far above the qualification of knowledge and ability to collect information.
The people's representatives to those bodies should have the following qualifications:--
(a) He should be like a 'walking encyclopaedia' at least in respect of the field for which he is supposed to represent. His knowledge must be so wide and deep in respect of that field and his intellectual power is so high and he is so logical that he can screen, audit and detect any mistake and errors in the materials passed to him.
(b) when facts and figure before him can be corrected to the degree as near to perfection as possible, he can then make correct decision on the basis of those correct facts and figures.