-
The honourable gentleman would be amazed if I didn't add that of course there would be more time for the Government's legislation if there were slightly fewer private members' bills, but that's an old argument and the honourable gentleman has heard me say it before.
There is an issue which is relevant to all this and I am sure that in view of the honourable gentleman's position it is something he will have been interested in himself. I always find one of the most interesting things to read each week is the Asian Executives Poll which appears in the Far Eastern Economic Review, probably the foremost economic journal in this part of the world, and they have done a review, a series of questions this week with their sample right across the region, asking executives about the relationship between good government and a strong opposition. And here are Asian executives asked, for example, would a country's economic progress be hindered by a strong opposition to its government? Across the region 64.5 per cent say no it would not be hindered, 35.5 per cent think it would be. In Hong Kong, apparently, 79.3 per cent said that they didn't think a strong opposition to government would hinder economic progress, and I imagine, given the comprehensive ubiquity of the honourable gentleman's organisation, at least some of that 79.3 per cent must be members of the Hong Kong General Chamber of Commerce.
I also think it is worth noting in that Asian Executives Poll that in Hong Kong 72.4 per cent thought that the opposition to government was too weak. Now I want you to know that Secretaries and the Governor are not going to be quoting that figure as we try to get our legislation through in the coming weeks. But it does actually suggest that the view of most executives, of most businessmen, to some of the arguments that we have had, to the discussion we are having now, is far more sophisticated than is customarily suggested by some of the newspaper headlines.
Mr James Tien: Governor. thank you very much for your answer. Now to my real question. In the very likely event that a substantial part of these bills or ordinances might not be passed before July 1, 1997, would your Administration be willing to have your civil servants co-operate, persuade, the provisional legislature after July 1, so that some of the work that is left over, that is not passed before next year, could be passed as soon as possible? Or is your feeling that this should actually wait until the first SAR legislature is elected all the way in 1998 before all this good work that you have started be finalised?
Governor: I think the answer I give is one that the honourable gentleman might anticipate and my view is that the best way of completing any legislation which is not completed during the second annual session of this Legislative Council would be to complete it in the third annual session of this Legislative Council after July 1, 1997. It is a very good argument for continuity, provided of course that legislators go through some objective test such as taking an oath to the Basic Law and the Special Administrative Region. But that would be the best way through that particular conundrum and if we can have the honourable gentleman's support for that solution, I think we will all be jolly grateful, and surprised.