43
THURSDAY, OCTOBER 8, 1992
GOVERNOR:
I THINK MY RESPONSIBILITY IS TO TRY TO GAUGE WHAT THE MOOD IN HONG IS WHEN WE CONSIDER FURTHER DEMOCRATIC, FURTHER POLITICAL DEVELOPMENT. AND MY JUDGMENT IS, THOUGH I WILL OF COURSE EXPECT TO BE CRITICISED FROM BOTH SIDES, MY JUDGMENT IS THAT THE MIDDLE GROUND IN HONG KONG, THE CENTRE OF OPINION, IS SOMETHING LIKE THIS: I THINK PEOPLE WANT US TO BROADEN OUR INSTITUTIONS AND TO GIVE THEM MORE DEMOCRACY BUT I THINK YOU ARE QUITE RIGHT, MR LEE, TO SAY THAT PEOPLE WANT THAT TO BE DONE IN A WAY WHICH IS CONSISTENT WITH THE BASIC LAW AND THAT IS WHAT I TRIED TO DO WITH MY PROPOSALS YESTERDAY. A LOT OF PEOPLE SAY THAT'S NOT ENOUGH, WHAT WE SHOULD ACTUALLY HAVE IS AN INCREASE IN THE NUMBER OF DIRECTLY ELECTED SEATS, THAT'S SOMETHING PEOPLE ARGUE AND I UNDERSTAND THE ARGUMENT.
EVEN
CHINA HAS SAID WE CAN'T HAVE AN INCREASE IN THE NUMBER OF DIRECTLY ELECTED SEATS BECAUSE THAT WOULD MEAN A CHANGE IN THE BASIC LAW, SO WHAT I'VE SAID IS, IF WE'RE NOT TO HAVE AN INCREASE IN THE NUMBER OF DIRECTLY ELECTED SEATS LET'S LOOK AT AN ALTERNATIVE APPROACH, LET'S LOOK AT WAYS IN WHICH WE CAN INCREASE DEMOCRACY WITHIN THE BASIC LAW.
NOW SOME OF THE THINGS ON WHICH I'VE PUT FORWARD PROPOSALS, WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO TAKE DECISIONS ABOUT ANYWAY. IF CHRIS PATTEN HADN'T MADE A SPEECH YESTERDAY IN THE LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL FOR TWO HOURS, WE'D STILL BE HAVING TO MAKE PROPOSALS AND STILL BE HAVING то CONSIDER WHAT WE DO ABOUT FUNCTIONAL CONSTITUENCIES, WHAT WE DO ABOUT THE ELECTORAL COLLEGE AND SO ON, BETWEEN NOW AND 1997. I'VE PUT FORWARD THESE PROPOSALS WHICH I BELIEVE ARE CONSISTENT WITH THE BASIC LAW. IF OTHER PEOPLE HAVE GOT PROPOSALS, LET THEM PUT THEM FORWARD, BUT I THINK MY PROPOSALS ARE A COHERENT AND POSITIVE, AND I HOPE IMAGINATIVE, EFFORT, TO RESPOND ΤΟ WHAT I THINK IS THE OPINION OF HONG KONG, AND WHAT IS ALSO THE OPINION IN LONDON AND IN PEKING. IT'S VERY DIFFICULT TO HIT ALL CORNERS IN A WAY WHICH MAKES SENSE AND WHICH IS GOING TO ENSURE WE HAVE INSTITUTIONS THAT LAST.
BUT IF
THESE THAT
I CAN JUST ADD ONE OTHER POINT, BECAUSE YOU RAISE VERY, VERY IMPORTANT ISSUES ABOUT STABILITY. I THINK THAT IN ORDER ΤΟ ENSURE STABILITY ONE NEEDS NOT ONLY TO HAVE CONSISTENCY THROUGH 1997 AND BEYOND, BUT DO RATHER MORE TO GIVE PEOPLE A RATHER GREATER SAY IN THE WAY HONG KONG IS RUN. I THINK ONE HAS TO ACHIEVE BOTH THOSE THINGS IF WE'RE TO MAKE THE PROGRESS THAT WE ALL WANT TO SEE.
QUESTION:
GOVERNOR PATTEN, HELLO, HOW ARE YOU DOING? I'D LIKE TO ASK YOU A QUESTION. WHO COULD ENSURE THE STABILITY OF HONG KONG? WHO COULD, SHOULD ANYTHING HAPPEN?
GOVERNOR:
BETWEEN NOW AND 1997 THE STABILITY AND PROSPERITY OF HONG KONG ARE PRINCIPALLY MY CONCERN AND THE CONCERN OF THE HONG KONG GOVERNMENT BUT I'M SURE IT'S THE CASE THAT THE UNITED KINGDOM WHICH IS THE PRESENT SOVEREIGN POWER, AND CHINA WHICH IS THE FUTURE SOVEREIGN POWER, BOTH WANT THEMSELVES TO HELP IN THE TASK OF STABILITY AND PROSPERITY, IN ACHIEVING AND GUARANTEEING THOSE THINGS. I THINK THAT IT WOULD PERHAPS BE DE-STABILISING IF FOR INSTANCE I WAS TO SAY TO THE PEOPLE OF HONG KONG, "I'M NOT GOING TO TELL YOU WHAT I WANT TO TALK ABOUT IN PEKING ON 1995 AND YOU WON'T HEAR ABOUT THAT UNTIL I COME HOME"
I DON'T THINK PEOPLE WOULD REGARD THAT AS BEING A VERY WAY OF ENSURING STABILITY IN HONG KONG. WHAT DO YOU THINK?
GOOD
/QUESTIONER: I