TNAG-1718-FCO40-2398-Hong-Kong-1987-Review-of-Representative-Government-1988 — Page 69

999

There are

Hong Kong

20 JANUARY 1988

only nine years left before the transfer of

sovereignty and Hong Kong must cope quickly with change. I have no doubt that, because the Hong Kong

people

are

adaptable, they will be able to cope with that change. Direct elections will promote, rather than damage, the stability of Hong Kong. Some very able people recognise that it will be a matter of concern if such elections are not held.

The value of Hong Kong lies in the quality of its active people. They have the money and the passports, and they will literally fly away if they are denied an early democratic voice. An uneasy people is never a stable people. There is nothing to be lost, and everything to be gained, by both Hong Kong and China from having early direct elections.

Of equal, if not more, importance than those people, who are vital to Hong Kong, is the broader-based segment of active young people who will be the future leaders of Hong Kong. The future of Hong Kong lies with them. Their confidence is vital. However, as with a bank or stock ange, once confidence is shaken or eroded, it can slide

e

aw

with growing and unstoppable momentum. Lack of confidence could be an avalanche of disaster for Hong Kong.

Therefore, let us have early direct elections. If those young people are given a democratic voice and new hope for the future, they can raise Hong Kong to new heights of prosperity. They can be an asset of incalculable benefit to Hong Kong and to China if the right decisions are made

now.

5.41 pm

Mr. Hal Miller (Bromsgrove): I shall follow the remarks of the right hon. Member for Stoke-on-Trent, South (Mr. Ashley) on one country, two systems, in a moment, but I cannot allow his attack on my right hon. Friend the Member for Blackpool, South (Sir P. Blaker) to pass. I happened to be present at one of his meetings with Mr. Martin Lee. Orator of silken persuasiveness and practised reason, and successful advocate, that he is, he made the stark accusation that the Hong Kong and British ernments had acted in bad faith and had gone back their words and used the phrase,

"the survey report was a concoction."

One monitor of the report was one of my most esteemed colleagues in the Hong Kong Government, so I had better declare an interest. There is no question that Mr. Li Fook- Kow would be party to a "concoction" of the survey report. I find that a damaging and a bitter accusation. I am grateful for the fact that my right hon. Friend rebutted it so forcefully and conclusively.

I find it a little ungenerous that sources are quoted, such as Mr. Martin Lee or the representative of the embassy of the Peoples' Republic of China, but that little reference seems to have been made in the debate to the advice tendered by the Unofficial Members of the Executive and the senior Legislative Councils, and especially to Unofficial Member, Miss Lydia Dunn. I should have thought that some attention might be paid to the views which she and they have expressed, because they carry responsibility in a difficult situation.

As I walked to the Commons this morning there was the a light precipitation which, at this time of year approach to the Chinese new year is referred to in Hong Kong as Suet Sui. It is a propitious omen and guarantees prosperity in the forthcoming year.

517

-

Hong Kong

1000

I return to the joint declaration and the cement between the British and the Chinese Governments that consists of the prosperity and stability of Hong Kong because that is what this is all about. Direct elections are only part of that declaration.

I regarded as rather remiss the remarks of the right hon. Member for Manchester, Gorton (Mr. Kaufman), as I did those of my right hon. Friend the Member for Old Bexley and Sidcup (Mr. Heath). They seemed determined to impose the firm smack of Government on Hong Kong, which they were unable to exercise in this country. I cannot imagine anything that would be more likely to shake confidence in Hong Kong than the British Government suddenly starting to impose solutions there, upon which the people had not been consulted and to which they had not given manifest and majority consent. That has never been the way in which Hong Kong has been administered.

I am not going to take lessons in democracy. I was the returning officer at the first elections that were held in Hong Kong, to the urban council, in 1956. All the talk about direct elections ignores the fact that they have been taking place for some time and have been increased since the 1984 White Paper. That was the gravamen of the charge of my right hon. Friend for Old Bexley and Sidcup.

There have been elections to the district boards, and there has been a greater proportion of elected members on the urban council and regional council in the new territories. Therefore, progress is being made, although perhaps not as rapidly as some of us would naturally be disposed to advocate here. However, please let us remember, while we are still responsible for the administration of Hong Kong-until 1997-that that does not give us carte blanche to impose solutions that are injurious to Hong Kong or foreign to its interests.

However much we may regret that it was not possible to move towards a full democratic and independent Hong Kong, that is no reason for us to indulge in a last-minute flurry to salve our conscience by introducing a semblance of that at the last minute which might prove extremely damaging. Nor should we be tempted to try to establish a kind of outpost of a Western-style democracy to stem the advance of an alien creed-of an alien capitalist system —{ Interruption.]—of an alien Communist system.

Mr. Tony Banks (Newham, North-West): I liked it the first time.

Mr. Miller: As the right hon. Member for Stoke-on- Trent, South said, we must put this issue into the context of one country, two systems. It is still one country, not two countries, which is an important difference.

Mr. Ivan Lawrence (Burton): Why would it be damaging if there were direct elections, when the People's Republic of China has said that it is prepared to see direct elections?

Mr. Miller: We are all committed to direct elections. The argument turns on the timing of those direct elections, which is exactly the point to which I was coming. We are committed to direct elections, and I am glad that early in his speech my right hon. and learned Friend the Secretary of State gave the assurance that there would be full and faithful implementation by the British Government of the joint declaration. Nobody should accuse him or us of bad faith. However, we must consider the time scale. It is not 1988, 1991 or 1997. As has been said, it is 1997 plus 50 years.