I
2
FRIDAY, SEPTEMBER 3, 1993
FAIR,
SOMETIMES PEOPLE GET THE NATURE OF THE ARGUMENT OR THE DEBATE RATHER WRONG. THEY SUGGEST THAT IT'S ABOUT THE PACE OF DEMOCRATISATION IN HONG KONG, AND OF COURSE THERE ARE THOSE WHO THINK THAT THE ARGUMENT SHOULD BE ABOUT THAT. THERE ARE A NUMBER OF LEGISLATORS WHO ARGUE THAT THAT IS WHAT WE SHOULD BE IN DEBATE ABOUT. BUT THE DISCUSSION ISN'T ACTUALLY ABOUT THAT, IT'S ABOUT WHETHER THE DEMOCRATISATION WHICH HAS ALREADY BEEN AGREED SHOULD BE CREDIBLE AND SHOULD PROVIDE US WITH A LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL AND IN DUE COURSE WHICH IS CREDIBLE, OR SHOULD BE DESIGNED TO PRODUCE A LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL WHICH IS MERELY A PUPPET. NOW, I KNOW WHICH
OF THOSE IS IMPORTANT IF WE'RE SERIOUS ABOUT MAINTAINING THE RULE OF LAW, AS WE SHOULD BE, IF WE'RE SERIOUS ABOUT IMPLEMENTING THE JOINT DECLARATION, AS WE SHOULD BE, IF WE'RE SERIOUS, FOR INSTANCE, ABOUT PREVENTING THE GROWTH OF CORRUPTION IN HONG KONG, AS WE SHOULD BE. SO MY FIRST POINT IS THAT OUR OBJECTIVE IN THESE TALKS IS TO SECURE ARRANGEMENTS FOR THE 1994/95 ELECTIONS WHICH ARE CLEAN AND FAIR.
195
SECONDLY, AS WE'VE SAID AGAIN AND AGAIN, IT DOESN'T MAKE ALL THAT MUCH SENSE TO AGREE WITH CHINA ARRANGEMENTS FOR THE '94 AND ELECTIONS, IF WE HAVEN'T ALSO GOT FROM CHINA CLEAR AND OBJECTIVE CRITERIA ON THE SO-CALLED THROUGH TRAIN. THERE IS A PARALLELISM, THERE IS AN EQUATION BETWEEN THOSE TWO POINTS WHICH I THINK IS OBVIOUS TO THE WHOLE COMMUNITY, SO I REPEAT AGAIN WHAT OUR OBJECTIVES ARE IN THOSE TALKS. THE FOREIGN MINISTERS OF THE UNITED KINGDOM AND CHINA HAD A HELPFUL MEETING IN THE SUMMER, AND I HOPE THAT CAN PRODUCE THE SORT OF PROGRESS THIS AUTUMN WHICH I BELIEVE ALL OF US SHOULD WANT TO SEE.
THE THIRD POINT I'D LIKE TO MAKE, MORE BRIEFLY, IS THAT OVER THE LAST FEW WEEKS THERE HAS BEEN A CONSIDERABLE CONTROVERSY BUT I THINK IT [S NOW, I HOPE IT IS NOW, STARTING TO EBB AWAY TO SOME EXTENT, ABOUT THE LOCALISATION POLICY WHICH WE HAVE BEEN PURSUING WITH ENTHUSIASM AND ENERGY, AND THE REQUIREMENT THAT THAT LOCALISATION POLICY SHOULD BE IMPLEMENTED IN A WAY WHICH IS COMPATIBLE WITH THE BILL OF RIGHTS AND THE LAW OF THE LAND. I WANT TO STATE ONCE AGAIN, UNEQUIVOCABLY, OUR COMMITMENT TO LOCALISATION, WHICH MAKES SENSE FOR HONG KONG AND MAKES SENSE FOR THE PUBLIC SERVICE IN HONG KONG. WE'VE MADE CONSIDERABLE PROGRESS BUT THERE ARE STILL SOME PROBLEMS TO TACKLE.
I THINK THERE ARE 10 DEPARTMENTS IN PARTICULAR, OUT OF 73, WHERE THERE ARE PARTICULAR ISSUES THAT WE NEED TO CRACK AND WHERE WE NEED TO WORK PARTICULARLY HARD TO MAKE SURE THAT WE GET ON TOP OF THEM.
GOVERNMENT IS FULL ANNOUNCED AT THE END LOCALISATION POLICY
BUT THAT POLICY ON LOCALISATION HAS TO BE PURSUED, I REPEAT, IN .. WAY WHICH IS IN LINE WITH THE BILL OF RIGHTS. OF DIFFICULT DECISIONS AND THE DECISIONS THAT WE OF JULY/BEGINNING OF AUGUST, TO ENSURE THAT OUR WAS IN LINE WITH THE BILL OF RIGHTS, THOSE WEREN'T EASY DECISIONS, BUT I BELIEVE THAT WE WERE RIGHT TO TAKE THEM. WHAT THEY AMOUNTED TO WAS AN INTERIM MEASURE, BECAUSE THE LONG TERM ISSUE IS ONE WHICH I BELIEVE THE ASSOCIATION OF EXPATRIATE CIVIL SERVANTS IDENTIFIED IN THE STATEMENT THAT THEY MADE YESTERDAY, AND IT'S A STATEMENT THAT Ι WELCOME. I THINK WE WANT TO GET ON NOW WITH THE TASK OF FINDING A PERMANENT LONG TERM SOLUTION, WHICH I HOPE WILL EMBRACE REMOVING THE DISTINCTIONS BETWEEN LOCAL AND OVERSEAS TERMS IN OUR PUBLIC SERVICE.
/NOW, THAT