SWB
FE/7441/A3/1
3. FAR EASTERN RELATIONS
China Quotes Hongkong Press Exposure of British "Hypocrisy'
Xinhua in English 1500 gmt 15 Sep 83
Text of report:
17 Sep 83
CL/HK
Various Hongkong newspapers and publications have carried articles exposing the hypocrisy of the Hongkong British authorities in playing the "public opinion card" on the question of Hongkong's future.
>
The Hongkong British authorities have recently launched a drive to solicit "public opinion," and two or three newspapers have also vigorously created public opinion by preaching things like "there should be a further 20 or 30 years of transition after 1997", there should be separation of sovereignty and administrative power (meaning that, when the time comes, sovereignty over Hongkong will return to China but Britain will continue to administer the place)", "Hongkong people cannot administer Hongkong", "two different social systems cannot fuse", and "Hongkong cannot prosper without the British taking part in its administration".
A 28th August editorial in "Tien Tien Jih Pao' entitled "public opinion' and 'national consciousness" ", said that recently Hongkong officials have suddenly been. declaring in various ways that they "respect public opinion". If they hope that by their "respect for public opinion", the citizens of Hongkong will give more views on the future of Hongkong, as "an ace to play at the talks", then the Chinese citizens will immediately think: "Am I Chinese? Should the opinion I give today be responsible to the nation and be justifiable to posterity? For the sake of a few more years of temporary ease and comfort, should I forget to whom sovereignty over Hongkong belongs? This is the arous- ing of national consciousness, under hardly any so-called political influence. Will this public opinion be given similar importance? We hope it will be."
An article in the latest issue of 'Kuang Chiao Ching' monthly points out that according to an investigation published last October by the New Hongkong Society', about two-thirds of those interviewed accepted the scheme of Hongkong people admin- istering Hongkong. An investigation published in the middle of this year by the university and college student social research group also showed that the majority of people held that Hongkong people administering Hongkong was the most likely eventuality, and that the percentage of people supporting this scheme is gradually increasing. As for the Governor sent to Hongkong by Britain, and the Hongkong Executive and Legislative Councils, every single one of them can only represent the interests and voice of Britain. The average Hongkong citizen understands this.
An article published in the 14th September 'Chung Pao' said that sovereignty and administrative powers cannot be separated. If administrative powers remain in British hands, how can China be said to have recovered sovereignty? In what sovereign state in the world is administrative power in the hands of foreigners? This absolutely cannot be determined by "public opinion" of any kind. No matter what "public opinion" says, if there is separation of sovereignty and administrative power, then there is no sovereignty. The article said: We believe that prosperity and freedom are the greatest aspirations of the people of Hongkong, but we also believe that the Chinese people of Hongkong also have national integrity, and will not be fooled by you in this way.
Various papers have also cited facts pointing out that the Hongkong British authorities have ignored public opinion for a long time. For instance, they have turned a deaf ear to Hongkong people's cries of opposition to tax and price increases, and so on. 'Tien Tien Jih Pao' pointed out in an editorial entitled "the Hongkong government is ‘a thirsty well-digger'", that "Britain wants to assume the pose of representing public opinion on the question of Hongkong's future, but they have ignored public opinion for a long time, and it seems that 'digging a well when thirsty' will not help much."
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.