XN000022-1994-01-25 — Page 3

-

TUESDAY, JANUARY 25, 1994

WHEN

NO. GOVERNOR

OUR STEP BY STEP APPROACH IS DOING TWO THINGS.

I DON'T FIRST OF ALL, IT IS RECOGNISING THE LEGISLATIVE REALITIES. THINK THE LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL WOULD WELCOME IT IF WHILE THEY'RE CONSIDERING THIS BILL, WE WOULD BRING FORWARD ANOTHER BILL. SECONDLY, IT'S GIVING THE CHINESE SIDE THE TIME IF THEY WISH TO TAKE IT TO HAVE SECOND OR THIRD THOUGHTS, YOU MAY RECALL THAT FROM OCTOBER 1992 I FIRST PUT FORWARD PROPOSALS FOR POLITICAL DEVELOPMENT FOR DISCUSSION WITH CHINA, IT HAS BEEN MADE CLEAR AT THAT TIME AND DISCUSSION IN COMMUNITY, FROM THEN UNTIL APRIL WE WERE TOLD BY THERE COULDN'T BE TALKS UNLESS WE DROPPED THE PROPOSALS. WELL, WE DIDN'T AND THERE WERE TALKS. ROUNDS OF TALKS. ALAS, ALL THE ONLY THING WE AGREED IN 17 ROUNDS WAS THE VOTING AGE.

THE

THE CHINESE SIDE SO-CALLED PATTEN THERE WERE 17

QUESTION : WHAT OPTION HAVE YOU GOT IN MIND WHEN THERE IS MENTION ABOUT THE OPTIONS THAT YOU ARE GOING TO DECIDE ?

GOVERNOR

LEGISLATION

TALKS, THE OUTCOME,

FOR

WE CAN

PUT

TWO.

: I THINK YOU KNOW WHAT THE OPTIONS FOR

ARE. FIRST OF ALL, WE CAN LEGISLATE ON LINES OF THE ORIGINAL PROPOSALS THAT WERE PUT FOR THE LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL. SECONDLY, WE CAN LEGISLATE ON

BASIS OF THE

THE THE PROPOSALS THAT WE OFFERED DURING THAT CONCESSIONS

WE MADE CONDITIONAL ON A SUCCESSFUL EXAMPLE, ON AN AGREEMENT ON THE THROUGH TRAIN. THIRDLY, FORWARD SOME PROPOSALS THAT ARE BASED ON THE AMALGAM OF THE THOSE ARE THE OPTIONS. THEY WERE THE OPTIONS LAST WEEK AND THEY WILL REMAIN THE OPTIONS NEXT WEEK. BUT WE KNOW PRETTY CLEARLY WHICH DIRECTION WE ARE INTENDING TO GO IN.

QUESTION: MR PATTEN. WHEN YOU WERE AWAY FROM HONG KONG, ACTUALLY SOMETHING HAPPENED IN HONG KONG ABOUT THE FREEDOM OF THE PRESS. THE FOREIGN CORRESPONDENTS CLUB SHOWED THE MAO'S FILM YESTERDAY BUT THEY

CHINESE SIDE AND THE GOT PRESSURE FROM THE

HONG KONG OFFICIALS SUCH AS THE ENTERTAINMENT AND LICENSING AUTHORITY. THEY PUT PRESSURE ON THE CLUB TO BAN THE FILM. SO, WHAT DO YOU THINK ABOUT THAT?

PEOPLE HAVE

GOVERNOR: WELL, NOBODY FROM THE HONG KONG GOVERNMENT HAS PUT PRESSURE

PUBLIC ON ANYBODY TO BAN THE FILM. THE FILM'S ALREADY HAD

SHOWINGS.

WHERE

GONE THROUGH THE EXISTING LEGAL CHANNELS, 1 UNDERSTAND THAT WAS ALL THAT WAS REQUIRED ON THIS PARTICULAR OCCASION. BUT

TO IF THE POINT OF THOSE WHO WISH TO SHOW THE FILM WAS

INDICATE THAT THAT LAW, LIKE OTHER LAWS ON PRESS FREEDOM NEED TO BE LOOK AT AND REVIEWED TO SEE IF THEY ARE NECESSARY, THEN THEY HAVE MADE THEIR OF POINT. AS I HAVE SAID BEFORE, WE HAVE ALREADY DECIDED ON A NUMBER PIECES OF LEGISLATION WHICH NEED TO BE, IN OUR VIEW, CHANGED. AND WE ARE VERY HAPPY TO DISCUSS WITH THE JOURNALISTS ASSOCIATION AND OTHERS INDEED ARE, I THINK, DOING SO. OTHER LEGISLATIVE CHANGES WHICH NEED TO BE MADE IN ORDER TO ENSURE THAT FREEDOM OF THE PRESS IS AS SECURED IN HONG KONG AS IT SHOULD BE AND NEED TO BE. THE FILM TO WHICH

WHICH YOU

REFERRED

BEEN HAS NOW BEEN SEEN BY QUITE A LOT OF PEOPLE. IT'S AMONG OTHERS, BY THE GOVERNOR OF HONG KONG, AND I'M NOT QUITE SURE

THINK I

MANY OF YOU WILL REACH THAT CONCLUSION. I'M NOT QUITE WHAT ALL THE FUSSES ARE ABOUT.

SEEN

AS

SURE

QUESTION: WHAT REALLY ARE THE CHANCES NOW FOR SMOOTH HANDOVER OF KONG? WE GOT THIS CONTINUAL ROW IF YOU LIKE BETWEEN BRITAIN AND CHINA, BOTH SIDE ARE NOT GIVING IN. SURELY, WE ARE DESTINED TO BE PROPPED.

HONG

/GOVERNOR