· 10 -
At the moment the holding of peaceful political rallies, the holding of dignified vigils is clearly wholly within our law and our law reflects the Bill of Rights which reflects the application of the international covenants in Hong Kong. If the international covenants are to continue to apply to Hong Kong and our laws are to reflect that, then I can't see that there should be substantial changes in the way that people go about expressing their beliefs and expressing their own value systems.
Let me say something which is related to that. I read this morning and yesterday the transcript of Director Lu's remarks on an American television programme and I say straight away, without any qualification that reassuring remarks from Chinese officials are a lot more welcome to the community and to the international community than the opposite. But there were two or three points and one of them is very relevant to what the Honourable gentleman is saying, which caused me to have further thoughts when I read very carefully that text. First of all, if Chinese officials are keen on the development of democracy, what is wrong with the development of democracy represented by this Legislative Council today? I think that many members of the American audience as well as many members of the Hong Kong audience will puzzle a little about that. And if it is the case that democrats, or all parties, as the New China News Agency reminded us Director Lu had said, can play a part in Hong Kong after 1997, when is some sort of dialogue going to begin with those who will be part, apparently, of the political debate after 1997? Because sooner or later everybody knows that that dialogue will have to start.
But directly relevant to what the Honourable gentleman said is this, I noticed that Director Lu said democrats and other parties could take part in elections and the electoral process within the laws of Hong Kong. Well, what laws are we talking about? The Basic Law is perfectly clear, the laws today are perfectly clear. There are no laws today which stop democrats, whether democrats just one word or the Democratic Alliance for the Betterment of Hong Kong. No laws which stop them taking part in the electoral political life of Hong Kong.
So if we're to have the same freedoms and the same opportunities in the future, freedoms and opportunities guaranteed in the Joint Declaration that we have today, I see no reason why one should think in terms of constraints on the sort of activity which many democrats will be involved in over coming days.
Mr Lee Cheuk-yan (in Chinese): Mr Governor, you talk about the law and also what Mr Lu Ping said. Now Mr Governor, you only talk about the JD saying that all freedoms are guaranteed. But may I remind Mr Patten in the explanation given by Mr Shen Guofang, that is they will have to love the country and love Hong Kong. And so is there some difference between the JD and the Basic Law? Is there some difference, because in the Basic Law it says only those who love Hong Kong and love the country will be able to participate in elections?