N
WE HAVE HAD A FULL DISCUSSION OF THESE MATTERS. FOR THE MOST PART,
THEY DO NOT DIRECTLY CONCERN THE BILL. IT IS NOT THEREFORE NECESSARY TO GO OVER THIS GROUND AGAIN IN TODAY'S DEBATE. BUT I CAN ASSURE THE HOUSE THAT THE GOVERNMENT HAD THE CONCERNS RAISED IN THIS HOUSE AND IN HONG KONG FIRMLY IN VIEW, WE SHALL CONTINUE TO BEAR THEM IN MIND IN OUR FUTURE DISCUSSIONS WITH THE CHINESE, PARTICULARLY IN THE JOINT LIAISON GROUP,
A NUMBER OF HON MEMBERS SUGGESTED DURING THE DEBATE THAT THE GOVERNMENT SHOULD MAKE AN ANNUAL REPORT ON HONG KONG TO THE HOUSE AND THAT THERE SHOULD BE A DEBATE ON IT. I ENTIRELY ACCEPT THAT THE HOUSE WILL WISH TO BE INFORMED ABOUT DEVELOPMENTS IN HONG KONG FULLY AND SPEEDILY WHEN THEY OCCUR. 1 ASSURE HON MEMBERS THAT THE GOVERNMENT WILL TAKE CARE TO REPORT. TO THE HOUSE WHENEVER THERE IS ANYTHING SIGNIFICANT TO REPORT. THERE IS NO RELUCTANCE ON OUR PART. BUT FRANKLY DOUBT THE VALUE OF INSTITUTIONALISING AN ANNUAL REPORT AND DEBATE. IT IS MY FEAR THAT COULD WELL HAVE THE UNINTENDED EFFECT THAT IMPORTANT DEVELOPMENTS WERE NOT PROPERLY DE BATED AS AND WHEN THEY OCCURRED. THIS IS NOT WHAT WE WANT.
MR RUSSEL JOHNSTON, (LIBERAL): (ANNOUNCER SPEAKS OVER THE QUESTION)
SIR GEOFFREY: AM SAYING THAT THE GOVERNMENT IS VERY WELL AWARE OF THE NEED TO KEEP THE HOUSE INFORMED OF CHANGES AND DEVELOPMENTS IN HONG KONG. IT CERTAINLY DOESN'T WISH TO AVOID DEBATE ON THOSE MATTERS AS AND WHEN APPROPRIATE. IT IS MY IMPRESSION, HOWEVER, THAT IF ONE PROVIDES EXPRESSLY FOR AN ANNUAL REPORT AND AN ANNUAL DEBATE THAT TENDS ACTUALLY TO ACT AS A CONCENTRATOR AND A MEANS PERHAPS OF DIMINISHING THE PROSPECTS OF SENSIBLE REPORTS AND DEBATES WHEN IT IS IMPORTANT. I AM WARY OF THE INSTITUTIONALISATION OF ANYTHING OF THAT KIND BECAUSE THE REPORT TENDS TO BE A REPETITION OF THE PREVIOUS REPORT IN FORM AND SO ON. AND I THINK THAT THEY VARY OFTEN, ALTHOUGH DESIGNED WITH THE BEST INTENTIONS, THEY HAVE THE OPPOSITE EFFECT TO THAT INTENDED.
MR DENIS HEALEY (LABOUR): I AM A LITTLE (ANNOUNCER SPEAKS) BECAUSE WE DO HAVE ANNUAL REPORTS ABOUT THE ARMY, THE NAVY AND THE AIR FORCE, WHICH ARE DEBATED IN THIS HOUSE AND PRODUCE VERY USEFUL DEBATES BUT THEY DON'T PREVENT THE HOUSE FROM RAISING ANY MATTER CONCERNING THE ARMY, NAVY OR AIR FORCE, IN BETWEEN TIME IF THAT SEEMS APPROPRIATE. AND, INDEED, THERE ARE REGULAR REPORTS MADE TO THIS HOUSE BY THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITY ON VARIOUS DIFFERENT ASPECTS WHICH AGAIN DON'T PREVENT US FROM DEBATING OTHER MATTERS WHEN THAT SEEMS SUITABLE. THAT SEEMS TO BE A VERY TRANSPARENT REASON FOR, A VERY OPAQUE REASON, FOR OPPOSING A RECOMMENDATION WHICH HAS BEEN VERY WIDELY SUPPORTED BOTH IN THIS HOUSE AND IN ANOTHER PLACE.
+
/SIR GEOFFREY:
Page 20Page 21