9
Conclusion
Mr President, the Bill now before this Council represents the product of long and tortuous discussions with the Chinese side, stretching over 7 years. It is one of the most important Bills that the Council has been asked to pass, for it is nothing less than the touchstone for the rule of law in Hong Kong. The agreement that was struck last month has been widely welcomed and supported by, among others, the Chief Justice, the Law Society of Hong Kong, the 11 eminent Queen's Counsel I spoke of earlier, many representatives of the local and international business community, including the Federation of HK Industries, the HK General Chamber of Commerce, the British Chamber of Commerce, the American Chamber of Commerce, the foreign business associations and chambers in Hong Kong, and the China Hong Kong Economic and Trade Association. We have received support from many of our trading partners such as the United States, the European Union, Japan, Canada, Australia and South Korea, many sections of the media and, judging by recent opinion polls, the people of Hong Kong.
Those who speak in opposition to the Bill, those who speak in opposition to the agreement, to them I ask: What do you offer to the people of Hong Kong in their place. What you offer is continuing uncertainty, continuing anxiety, continuing doubt with the consequence of a loss of confidence. Members now have a clear choice before them. They can, by supporting the Administration's amendments and by rejecting all others, ensure the establishment of a proper Court of Final Appeal on 1 July 1997, with no judicial vacuum. If they support any amendments that are inconsistent with the JLG agreement, they will recreate damaging uncertainty, as to the form of the Court of Final Appeal to be established after 1 July 1997, with clear understanding that the Court to be set up after 1 July 1997 will not be better than the one provided for in the present Bill, and in full recognition of the probability of a judicial vacuum. There should be no doubt as to which approach is in the interests of the people of Hong Kong.
I therefore urge Members to support the Bill and my 13 technical amendments, which are based on the established principles and practices of the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council. They guarantee the establishment of a proper Court of Final Appeal in Hong Kong on 1 July 1997. We have made if clear that we cannot accept any amendments which breach the British Government's international obligations. 1 have to tell members that in the event that any amendments that are inconsistent with the JLG agreement are passed, I will have no alternative but to withdraw the Bill,
End/Wednesday, July 26, 1995