MR PATTEN:
2
FRIDAY, OCTOBER 30, 1992
QUESTION FOR.
I'M
HOW LONG WOULD YOU LIKE ME TO ANSWER THE AFRAID YOUR QUESTION IS BASED ON A FAULTY PREMISE. BUT LET ME ANSWER IT IN THE MOST UP-TO-DATE POSSIBLE WAY. THE JOINT DECLARATION COMMITS US TO WORK FOR THE STEADY DEVELOPMENT OF DEMOCRACY AND DEMOCRATIC INSITUTITIONS IN HONG KONG. THAT IS WHAT WE'RE OBLIGED TO DO BY THE JOINT DECLARATION; THAT IS WHAT WE'RE OBLIGED TO DO IN ORDER, FOR EXAMPLE, TO CONVERGE WITH THE BASIC LAW. IT WASN'T THE GOVERNOR OF HONG KONG WHO MADE UP THE FACT THAT WE HAVE TO PUT FORWARD SPECIFIC PROPOSALS FOR THE 1995 ELECTIONS ON ISSUES WHERE THE BASIC LAW IS SILENT. I HAVE TO PUT FORWARD PROPOSALS ON THE VOTING METHOD FOR DIRECTLY ELECTED SEATS; I HAVE TO PUT FORWARD PROPOSALS ON THE COMPOSITION OF THE ELECTION COMMITTEE; I HAVE TO PUT FORWARD PROPOSALS ON THE COMPOSITION OF THE NEW FUNCTIONAL CONSTITUENCIES. SO UNDER THE EXISTING TEXT, TEXTS WHICH ARE SILENT ON THOSE SPECIFIC MATTERS, THE GOVERNOR OF HONG KONG HAS TO SUGGEST WAYS IN WHICH THE 1995 ELECTIONS SHOULD BE CONDUCTED. I'VE SAID BEFORE, AND I SAY AGAIN, THAT IF OTHERS HAVE ALTERNATIVE PROPOSALS WHICH THEY WISH TO PUT FORWARD I WOULD BE DELIGHTED TO HEAR WHAT THEY ARE. HONG KONG IS IN A DIFFERENT SITUATION TO OTHER TERRITORIES FOR WHICH THE UNITED KINGDOM HAS HAD RESPONSIBILITY. IT IS IN A DIFFERNT SITUATION, AND THIS IS A POSITION IN WHICH PORTUGAL HAS FOUND ITSELF AS WELL, IT'S IN A DIFFERENT SITUATION BECAUSE IT IS NOT A DEPENDENT TERRITORY WHICH IS GOING TO BECOME INDEPENDENT. THAT IS NOT HAPPENING AND IT'S NOT HAPPENING BECAUSE OF HISTORY, BECAUSE OF GEOGRAPHY AND BECAUSE OF INTERNATIONAL AGREEMENTS. THEREFORE, WHAT HAS HAPPENED TO TERRITORIES FOR WHICH WE WERE RESPONSIBLE ELSEWHERE; TERRITORIES LIKE SINGAPORE, MALAYSIA, DARE I MENTION CANADA, AUSTRALIA, NEW ZEALAND AND SO
ON. THAT IS NOT A
PROCESS WHICH IS BEING UNDERTAKEN IN THE SAME WAY IN HONG KONG. BUT I REPEAT THAT UNDER THE JOINT DECLARATION AND UNDER THE BASIC LAW, WE HAVE TO PROPOSE WAYS IN WHICH DEMOCRACY IS BROADENED IN HONG KONG AND THAT'S WHAT I'VE DONE.
THANK YOU.
NEW MEANS TEST FOR LEGAL AID
THE LEGAL AID DEPARTMENT HAS RECENTLY RELAXED THE MEANS TEST SO THAT MORE APPLICANTS ARE NOW ELIGIBLE FOR LEGAL AID.
IN THE PAST, THE MAXIMUM DISPOSABLE MONTHLY INCOME THAT A PERSON IS ALLOWED IN ORDER TO RECFIVE LEGAL AID WAS $2,200 AND THE MAXIMUM DISPOSABLE CAPITAL ASSETS AMOUNTED TO $15, 000.
THE
AS
IN
UNDER THE NEW MEANS TEST, THE ELIGIBILITY IS DETERMINED ON BASIS OF THE FINANCIAL RESOURCES OF AN APPLICANT RATHER
THAN, THE PAST, ON DISPOSABLE INCOME AND DISPOSABLE CAPITAL.
TO QUALIFY FOR LEGAL AID ON RESOURCES MUST NOT EXCEED $120,000.
MEANS, AN
APPLICANT'S
FINANCIAL
/THE FINANCIAL