1001
[Mr. Miller]
Hong Kong
20 JANUARY 1988
We have talked loosely about direct elections to the legislature, but it is important to remember that nobody has begun to examine the structure of government that is to ensue. Is a full ministerial system expected, with a Government formed from an elected legislature, or is a separation of powers, on the United States model. between the Executive and the legislature envisaged? Such things need careful definition before we start talking loosely about a directly elected legislature. It is important to understand what system of government is being envisaged.
Mr. Heath: My hon. Friend has touched on an important point about continuing developments in the 50 years, but Hong Kong understands that the position at the time of hand over will be carried on for 50 years under the guarantee of Beijing, which is different. My hon. Friend is arguing that Hong Kong should accept that it should go on developing in the way that it wants during those 50 years, but I do not think that that is justified by the understanding in the agreement.
Mr. Miller: I do not accept that the stage of development reached in 1997 will be frozen in aspic. That presupposes that there will be no development in China. either. The form of government must be thought out before direct elections can be meaningfully held. Although China is committed under the joint declaration to an elected legislature, as far as I know no one has produced evidence to the contrary so far this evening there is no document that sets out the Chinese view of the elected legislature.
Mr. Foulkes: Yes, there is.
Mr. Miller: I think I am correct in saying that we do not yet have the first draft of the Basic Law, which will be subject to widespread consultation among the people of Hong Kong-a consultation which, I can well imagine. might exceed that undertaken by the Survey Office. I can see grave difficulties if movement has begun on a directly elected legislature in a direction that is not envisaged in the draft of the Basic Law, which, when it appears. will be subject again to a widespread public consultation exercise, followed by final confirmation and enactment some time in 1990. Those are facts of life, and they must be carefully taken into consideration.
our
Then there is the comparatively minor matter of getting the sequence of elections as between the district boards. the urban councils and Legislative Council right, but the Basic Law is the thing, and our task this evening is to ram home our commitment to direct elections and to seek to influence the content of the Basic Law. We shall influence its content only if we show a real understanding of the position in China and Hong Kong, reaffirm commitment to the prosperity and stability of Hong Kong and do nothing to undermine them by introducing unknown quantities and possibilities--for example, the formation of political parties and an opposition. We might have been pleased to see those things were Hong Kong to remain independent, but the thought of such formalised opposition being established before the introduction of the SAR in 1997 would be most damaging to confidence and stability, and would do away with the whole reason for
1002
Hong Kong No let us be clear what we mean when we talk so loosely about direct elections, and let us concentrate on their timing
We must remember the importance of maintaining the authority of the Government of Hong Kong right up to 1997. The issue of stability has been raised only briefly by my hon. Friend the Member for Weston-super-Mare (Mr. Wiggin), but we must give it, and the enforcement of law and order, serious attention. I make a plea to my right hon. and learned Friend the Foreign Secretary in the context of the defence costs agreement with the Hong Kong Government. They are having to assume the considerable burden of strengthening the police force to take over that part of the responsibility for internal security that is currently borne by our troops, who are paid for by the defence costs agreement. The Chinese Government have made it plain in the documents that they are not expecting any contribution from Hong Kong towards defence forces, as opposed to internal security forces. I would ask for more generous consideration to be given to Hong Kong in this regard than has thus far been given.
We want the realisation of one country, two systems of Hong Kong people governing Hong Kong. There is no doubt of our commitment to that, but I warn that it will have to be a Hong Kong system and that that will take some time to evolve.
I end as I began. We may well feel that the people of Hong Kong are in a difficult position between the dragon and the deep blue sea. but I remind the House that, according to the principles of geomancy, a position between the arms of the dragon and the sea is a most desirable place in which to dwell.
5.57 pm
Dr. Jeremy Bray (Motherwell. South): The hon. Member for Bromsgrove (Mr. Miller) has long experience of the Foreign Office and of the Government in Hong Kong, and we are always interested in what he has to say, although we need to correct some of the tendencies in his remarks in the light of the background against which he speaks. So it is for all of us.
It is now 25 years since I raised the future of Hong Kong in this House on the Easter Adjournment. That was the first debate on Hong Kong since the war. As a newly elected hon. Member I was surprised to be summoned to the office of the newly elected leader of the Labour party, Lord Wilson as he now is, and still more surprised to find in his office the Lord Privy Seal in the person of the right hon. Member for Old Bexley and Sidcup (Mr. Heath). The Lord Privy Seal told me that the Foreign Office and the governor were worried about debating the future of Hong Kong publicly, and asked me to call off the debate. Lord Wilson asked me what I was planning to say that could have such a remarkable effect.
I explained that the essential continuity in whatever settlement was reached about 1997 depended on a reasonable continuity of economic development across the border between Hong Kong and its hinterland, and that that would take time to establish. If it grew, there would be a political basis for a settlement that would safeguard the essential future and the interests of the people of Hong Kong. So it has proved. But the sensitivity of the Foreign Office and of Foreign Office Ministers about stability in Hong Kong is not new. I hope that the Foreign Secretary
518
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.