TNAG-1596-FCO40-2181-Constitutional-development-in-Hong-Kong-1988 — Page 19

- 6 -

Wishing to avoid confrontation and retain their leadership aspirations, and wanting to be seen as credible and open-minded contributors to the debate have prompted a number of my honourable colleagues as well as so-called "establishment groups" to withdraw their earlier reservations and to espouse the concept of partial direct elections as an acceptable compromise, subject only to timing. As a member of the so-called establishment I am naturally expected to fall in line. But I continue to regard this limited acceptance of direct elections only as the lessor of two evils and not as the better alternative that is still available to us. It is also a somewhat dishonest compromise made on the assumption that, if implemented, it will do little harm to the existing distribution of power but will instead act as a useful safety valve for regulating the ambitions of the political activists in the community, and allow Hong Kong to show a democratic face to the outside world in terms more readily understood than our existing system of consensus government run by civil servants. It looks like a neat solution but suffers from the deficiencies I already highlighted: it will not be possible to hold the directly- elected element static over time nor will policy clashes be avoidable. Despite the foresight and political acumen and power with which the business community is so often creditted, particularly when our local reformers and the world press talk about the great" conspiracy 'between Beijing and Hong Kong notables

to keep the people of Hong Kong deprived of their democratic rights, the so-called establishment may also turn out to be overly idealistic.

It is of course not all that surprising that there is some congruence of views between the Chinese Government and Hong Kong business leaders as to the necessity to preserve investor confidence and local prosperity; starting from different premises, both sides. look to the longer term from a higher vantage point and both unwish political instability or ineffective government to interfere with these goals. They therefore prefer gradual and evolutionary change to more abrupt reforms and need more convincing proof that the tangible benefits achievable from a move towards more representative government now will outweigh the drawbacks of a